BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Connecticut Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Fairfield Connecticut

    License required for electrical and plumbing trades. No state license for general contracting, however, must register with the State.


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders & Remo Assn of Fairfield Co
    Local # 0780
    433 Meadow St
    Fairfield, CT 06824

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Eastern Connecticut
    Local # 0740
    20 Hartford Rd Suite 18
    Salem, CT 06420

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of New Haven Co
    Local # 0720
    2189 Silas Deane Highway
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Hartford Cty Inc
    Local # 0755
    2189 Silas Deane Hwy
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of NW Connecticut
    Local # 0710
    110 Brook St
    Torrington, CT 06790

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Connecticut (State)
    Local # 0700
    3 Regency Dr Ste 204
    Bloomfield, CT 06002

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Fairfield Connecticut


    Wood Product Rotting in New Energy Efficient Homes

    OSHA Updates: You May Be Affected

    Contractors: Revisit your Force Majeure Provisions to Account for Hurricanes

    Insured's Remand of Bad Faith Action Granted

    Matthew Graham Named to Best Lawyers in America

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Los Angeles Tier 1 “Best Law Firm” and Tier 2 for Los Angeles and Orange County by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2022

    OSHA COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing ETS Unveiled

    SB800 Is Now Optional to the Homeowner?

    Trial Victory in San Mateo County!

    Home Prices Up, Inventory Down

    Terminating Notice of Commencement Without Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    Major Change to Residential Landlord Tenant Law

    South Carolina Legislature Redefining Occurrences to Include Construction Defects in CGL Policies

    Builders Seek to Modify Scaffold Law

    EPA Announces that January 2017 Revised RMP Rules are Now Effective

    Let’s Give ‘Em Sutton to Talk About: Tennessee Court Enforces Sutton Doctrine

    Contractor Walks Off Job. What are the Owner’s Damages?

    Implications for Industry as Supreme Court Curbs EPA's Authority

    Federal Judge Refuses to Limit Coverage and Moves Forward with Policyholder’s Claims Against Insurer and Broker

    New York Restrictions on Flow Through Provision in Subcontracts

    Flint Water Suits Against Engineers Will Go to Trial, Judge Says

    Chambers USA Names Peckar & Abramson to Band 1 Level in Construction Law; 29 P&A Lawyers Recognized as Leading Attorneys; Six Regions and Government Contracts Practice Recognized

    Housing Bill Threatened by Rift on Help for Disadvantaged

    Doctrine of Merger Not a Good Blend for Seller of Sonoma Winery Property

    Settlement Conference May Not Be the End in Construction Defect Case

    Part of the Whole: Idaho District Court Holds Economic Loss Rule Bars Tort Claims Related to Water Supply Line that was Part of Home Purchase

    Now Available: Seyfarth’s 50 State Lien Law Notice Requirements Guide (2023-2024 Edition)

    Reminder: Pay if Paid Not All Encompassing (but Could it be?)

    Design Immunity Does Not Shield Public Entity From Claim That it Failed to Warn of a Dangerous Condition

    Client Alert: Michigan Insurance Company Not Subject to Personal Jurisdiction in California for Losses Suffered in Arkansas

    Pancakes Decision Survives Challenge Before Hawaii Appellate Court

    Engineering Report Finds More Investigation Needed of Balconies at New Jersey Condo

    National Engineering and Public Works Roadshow Highlights Low Battery Seawall Restoration Project in Charleston

    Alabama Court Determines No Coverage For Insured's Faulty Workmanship

    The Conscious Builder – Interview with Casey Grey

    Hovnanian Reports “A Year of Solid Profitability”

    A Matter Judged: Subrogating Insurers Should Beware of Prior Suits Involving the Insured

    New OSHA Vaccination Requirements For Employers With 100 Or More Employees (And Additional Advice for California Employers)

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    Colorado Court of Appeals Decides the Triple Crown Case

    Nevada Judge says Class Analysis Not Needed in Construction Defect Case

    Buyer Beware: Insurance Agents May Have No Duty to Sell Construction Contractors an Insurance Policy Covering Likely Claims

    Two Firm Members Among the “Best Lawyers in America”

    Subcontractors Must be Careful Providing Bonds when General Contractor Does Not

    Motion to Dismiss COVID Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    “A No-Lose Proposition?”

    You Can Take This Job and Shove It!

    Even Toilets Aren’t Safe as Hackers Target Home Devices

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2023 New York – Metro Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    Third Circuit Follows Pennsylvania Law - Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship Does Not Arise from an Occurrence
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Construction Termination Issues for the Architect and Engineer: Part 1– Introduction to the Series

    July 24, 2023 —
    Earlier this year, I was asked to talk to other construction lawyers on the topic of termination. My first question was– whose termination are we talking about here– the architect / engineer? The contractor? Is someone wanting to “fire” the owner? The answer, as it turns out, is — yes. That is, yes, any and all of the above termination topics were on the table. As you may have suspected, even the threat of a termination is bad, bad news. It is the “nuclear option” for a construction project. Everyone risks getting harmed. As the design professional administering a contract, you run a risk of being dragged into litigation no matter what you do. So, how should you proceed? Carefully. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    The Colorado Supreme Court affirms Woodbridge II’s “Adverse Use” Distinction

    December 20, 2021 —
    Last year, I posted regarding the Colorado Court of Appeals’ decision in Woodbridge II, which concluded that the “adverse use” element for prescriptive easement claims only requires the claimant to “show a nonpermissive or otherwise unauthorized use of property that interfered with the owner’s property interests.” Viento Blanco, LLC, 2020 COA 34 (Woodbridge II), ¶ 2. Thus, Woodbridge II concluded, the claimants acknowledgement or recognition of an owner’s title alone is insufficient to defeat “adverse use” in the prescriptive easement context. Id. That decision was up for review by the Colorado Supreme Court at the time of my prior post. It has now been affirmed, thereby settling an arguable appellate decision split created by Woodbridge II. See Lo Viento Blanco, LLC v. Woodbridge Condo. Ass’n, Inc., 2021 CO 56 (“Woodbridge”). “Like the division below, and for much the same reasons,” the Colorado Supreme Court affirmed in Woodbridge “that under Colorado law, a claimant’s acknowledgement or recognition of the owner’s title during the claimant’s asserted prescriptive period does not interrupt the prescriptive use or undermine the claimant’s adverse use.” Woodbridge, ¶ 2. Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Gabriel’s opinion agreed with the Court of Appeals’ reasoning “that although Woodbridge recognized that it did not hold title, no evidence indicated that it had acted in subordination to the owner’s title.” Id. ¶ at 13. The Court further agreed with Woodbridge II’srejection of Lo Viento’s “permissive use” argument because “the permission offered … was conditional and Woodbridge never agreed to any of the conditions set forth therein.” Id. On that basis, Woodbridge confirmed that “a claimant seeking to establish a prescriptive easement need not show that it asserted exclusive ownership of the property during the prescriptive period,” but only “that its use was without permission or otherwise unauthorized and that it interfered with the owner’s property interests.” Id. at ¶ 23. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    Fire Raging North of Los Angeles Is Getting Fuel From Dry Winds

    June 17, 2024 —
    A wildfire raging north of Los Angeles has sent smoke billowing south and forced more than 1,000 people to evacuate — and with dry winds raking the hills, the blaze is poised to intensify. A red flag fire warning has been raised in the area around the Post Fire, which is forecast to be whipped with winds reaching at least 20 miles (32 kilometers) per hour, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, commonly called Cal Fire. The flames, which have burned more than 14,000 acres (5,700 hectares), are only about 8% contained and the smoke has prompted air quality alerts in parts of Los Angeles County and Ventura County. “Crews are working to establish perimeter fire lines around the fire’s edges,” Cal Fire said in a report. “Aircraft are being utilized to halt the fire’s forward progress but are facing challenges due to limited visibility.” Along with the Post Fire, crews are battling 10 other blazes throughout the state that flared up over the weekend in an ominous start to wildfire season. While California had heavy snow and rain this past winter, that doesn’t mean a respite from fires. The moisture that kept drought away allowed for grasses and brush to grow, meaning more wildfire fuel as California enters its driest months. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian K Sullivan, Bloomberg

    Massachusetts High Court to Decide if Insurers Can Recoup Defense Costs

    February 07, 2018 —
    The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) is set to hear argument on February 6 in a case that will decide whether insurers can recoup defense costs if it is later determined that they owed no duty to defend an underlying claim. At issue in Holyoke Mut. Ins. Co. v. Vibram USA, Inc., No SJC-12401, is Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig O'Neill, White and Williams, LLP
    Mr. O'Neill may be contacted at oneillc@whiteandwilliams.com

    Remote Trials Can Control Prejudgment Risk

    September 07, 2020 —
    While courts across the country are largely unavailable to litigants demanding a jury trial, pre-judgment interest rules present an increasing penalty risk to a defendant wanting its day in court and may not always make a plaintiff whole. The COVID-19 pandemic has altered the manner in which people and industries operate across the board. In light of the need to maintain social distancing whenever possible, the use of technology to replace in-person appearances is becoming more commonplace. As more attorneys become comfortable with the remote platform, the willingness to consider a remote trial grows. With in-person jury trials suspended until further notice, it is important for attorneys and parties to consider the attendant consequences of the indefinite delay in waiting for a traditional jury trial. Aside from general inconvenience, continued delays may have a substantial financial impact, particularly with regard to the accumulation of pre-judgment interest. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys Robert G. Devine, Victor J. Zarrilli and Kimberly M. Collins Mr. Devine may be contacted at deviner@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Zarrilli may be contacted at zarrilliv@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Collins may be contacted at collinsk@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Portion of Washington State’s Prevailing Wage Statute Struck Down … Again

    July 04, 2023 —
    In 2018, the Washington Legislature amended its prevailing wages statute adopting S.S.B 5493 and codified as RCW 39.12.015(3). RCW 39.12.015(3) changed how the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries’ industrial statistician set the prevailing wages for employees on public works projects, from a county-by-county basis to a “geographic jurisdiction” basis established in collective bargaining agreements (“CBA”) or if multiple CBAs, the CBA with the higher wage would prevail. This change proved problematic for contractors since it allowed a minority of employees to determine the prevailing wage through side agreements and limited meaningful wage negotiations by industry trade groups. Contrary to the previous rule wherein wages were set by the average or majority wage rate in a certain county (which was normally the collectively bargained wage) and provided some flexibility to the industrial statistician in determining the prevailing wage, now, RCW 39.12.015(3)(a) directs the industrial statistician to “establish the prevailing rate of wage by adopting the hourly wage … paid for the geographic jurisdiction established in [CBAs],” removing flexibility, and requiring the inclusion of CBA (which could encompass multiple counties) wage rates as a part of the prevailing wage formula. Reprinted courtesy of Brett Hill, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight and Mason Fletcher, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight Mr. Hill may be contacted at brett.hill@acslawyers.com Mr. Fletcher may be contacted at mason.fletcher@acslawyers.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Homeowner Sues Brick Manufacturer for Spalling Bricks

    October 22, 2013 —
    A Columbia, South Carolina homeowner has sued Kinney Brick Co., alleging that the bricks used in his home were defective and are now crumbling. The lawsuit alleges that the manufacturer and the distributor were both aware that the bricks would retain moisture and crumble. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer Must Defend Claims of Negligence and Private Nuisance

    July 10, 2018 —
    The court determined there was a duty to defend negligence and private nuisance claims for dumping materials on the plaintiffs' property. Peters Heavy Construction, Inc. v. X-Pert One Tracking Corp., 2018 Wisc. App. LEXIS 358 (Wis. Ct. App. March 29, 2018). Peters Heavy Construction sued X-Pert One for negligently depositing shingle materials, tires, and other solid materials on Peters' property, causing damage to Peters, including loss of use of portions of the property. Peters also alleged that X-Pert One's actions negligently created a private nuisance causing harm to Peters' property. X-Pert One's insurer, Northfield Insurance Company, was also sued. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com