BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windows
    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


    Colorado’s Need for Condos May Spark Construction Defect Law Reform

    Designing a Fair Standard of Care in Design Agreements

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    Repairs Commencing on Defect-Ridden House from Failed State Supreme Court Case

    COVID-19 Is Not Direct Physical Loss Or Damage

    Want to Build Affordable Housing in the Heart of Paris? Make It Chic.

    Boston Contractor Faces More OSHA Penalties

    Flint Water Crisis Prompts Call for More Federal Oversight

    Florida Passes Tort Reform Bill

    40 Year Anniversary – Congratulations Ed Doernberger

    Court of Appeal Shines Light on Collusive Settlement Agreements

    Savannah Homeowners Win Sizable Judgment in Mold Case against HVAC Contractor

    Short on Labor, Israeli Builders Seek to Vaccinate Palestinians

    AAA Revises Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Plaintiffs’ Claims in Barry v. Weyerhaeuser Company are Likely to Proceed after Initial Hurdle

    Is it time for a summer tune-up?

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Advances to Debris Removal Phase

    Default, Fraud, and VCPA (Oh My!)

    Create a Culture of Safety to Improve Labor Recruitment Efforts

    Florida Adopts Daubert Standard for Expert Testimony

    Exponential Acceleration—Interview with Anders Hvid

    How Many New Home Starts are from Teardowns?

    Utility Contractor Held Responsible for Damaged Underground Electrical Line

    Lewis Brisbois Successfully Concludes Privacy Dispute for Comedian Kathy Griffin Following Calif. Supreme Court Denial of Review

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Kept Climbing in January

    New Jersey Supreme Court Ruled Condo Association Can’t Reset Clock on Construction Defect Claim

    Crossrail Audit Blames Busted Budget and Schedule on Mismanagement

    Court Affirms Summary Adjudication of Bad Faith Claim Where Expert Opinions Raised a Genuine Dispute

    Oregon Supreme Court Confirms Broad Duty to Defend

    Insurer Must Defend Insured Against Construction Defect Claims

    Oklahoma Finds Policy Can Be Assigned Post-Loss

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: Colorado Supreme Court Upholds Declarant Consent Provision to Amend Arbitration Out of Declarations

    Trump Tower Is Now One of NYC’s Least-Desirable Luxury Buildings

    Understanding the Miller Act

    California Contractor Spills Coffee on Himself by Failing to Stay Mechanics Lien Action While Pursuing Arbitration

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    Will Future Megacities Be a Marvel or a Mess? Look at New Delhi

    In Appellate Division First, New York Appellate Team Successfully Invokes “Party Finality” Doctrine to Obtain Dismissal of Appeal for Commercial Guarantors

    Lewis Brisbois’ Houston Office Selected as a 2020 Top Workplace by the Houston Chronicle

    Between Scylla and Charybids: The Mediation Privilege and Legal Malpractice Claims

    Cameron Pledges to Double Starter Homes to Boost Supply

    No Indemnity After Insured Settles Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability Claims

    Insured's Complaint Against Flood Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Obtains Pre-Answer Motion to Dismiss in Favor of Defendant

    Record Keeping—the Devil’s in the Details

    Judge Gives Cintra Bid Protest of $9B Md. P3 Project Award New Life

    Building the Secondary Market for Reclaimed Building Materials

    South Adams County Water and Sanitation District Takes Proactive Step to Treat PFAS, Safeguard Water Supplies

    Solutions To 4 Common Law Firm Diversity Challenges
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Indiana Court Enforces Contract Provisions rather than Construction Drawing Markings

    January 14, 2015 —
    Timothy J. Abeska, a vice-chair of Barnes & Thornburg LLP’s Construction Law Practice Group, analyzed Goodrich Quality Theaters, Inc. v. Fostcorp Heating and Cooling, Inc., 16 N.E.3d 426 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), which “provides an example of a court enforcing contract provisions rather than markings on construction drawings that are inconsistent with contract requirements.” The case evolved from a dispute on a construction of an IMAX theater, when the general contractor did not understand the architect’s markings for non-standard joist girders, and ordered standard joist girders, per the contract. The error created delays and other problems, which led to payment disputes and mechanic’s liens against the project. Abeska stated that “[t]his case shows the importance of making sure all documents which comprise a construction contract are consistent with each other, as courts will enforce contracts negotiated by the parties. The case also demonstrates that litigation is not a quick process, as the Court of Appeals Opinion was issued more than seven years after the project was completed.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A New Study on Implementing Digital Visual Management

    July 31, 2024 —
    A new paper, “Implementing Digital Visual Management: A Case Study on Challenges and Barriers,” discusses situational management in complex infrastructure projects. It’s worth reading for anyone interested in improving project management with digital tools. A complex infrastructure project The authors interviewed nine project management professionals who worked for the client on constructing the western part of the Metro in Helsinki and Espoo, Finland. The project lasted eight years and had a budget of 1,200 million euros. The project used a Digital Visual Management (DVM) tool, and the paper discusses the challenges and barriers faced during the tool’s implementation. At the time of the study, the system was used to manage the final documentation and testing status. KPI management The project management team was involved in developing a system for combining collected data into a central dashboard and using it to manage the whole project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    New York Appellate Division: Second Department Contradicts First Department, Denying Insurer's Recoupment of Defense Costs for Uncovered Claims

    March 01, 2021 —
    New York law has historically allowed insurers to recoup defense costs paid on behalf of an insured if there is ultimately no coverage for the underlying action, provided that the insurer reserved its rights to seek reimbursement. On December 30, 2020, the New York Appellate Division, Second Department declined to follow this longstanding principle in American Western Home Insurance Co. v. Gjonaj Realty & Mgt. Co.,1 by holding that the insurer was not entitled to recoup defense costs, even where it was determined that the claim was not covered under the insurance policy. In American W. Home Ins. Co., the insureds were named as defendants in an underlying personal injury action. More than four years after the accident, and a $900,000 default judgment against the insureds, they tendered the lawsuit to their commercial general liability insurer, American Western Home Insurance Company (“American”). American denied coverage based on untimely notice, but after the default judgment was subsequently vacated, it agreed to defend the underlying action subject to a reservation of rights. The reservation of rights specifically reserved American’s right to deny coverage if the vacatur of the default judgment against the insureds was reversed. Further, American reserved its right to recover the costs of defending the underlying litigation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jasjeet K. Sahani, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Sahani may be contacted at JSahani@sdvlaw.com

    The Hidden Price of Outdated Damage Prevention Laws: Part I

    November 21, 2018 —
    Excavators know that dialing 811 triggers a process that requires all utilities operating in the service area to find and mark the location of their underground facilities so that they are not damaged during the excavation process. In addition, marking the location of the utilities is intended to keep the public safe, for instance by preventing an excavator from striking a gas line. But excavators also know that in most states, the laws and regulations that govern these procedures are weak and that enforcement is even weaker. It’s an unfortunate fact that excavators and the public – typically the least culpable parties – suffer the consequences of weak damage prevention laws and lack of strong enforcement regimes. Reprinted courtesy of Brigham A. McCown, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    AB 1701 – General Contractor Liability for Subcontractors’ Unpaid Wages

    November 08, 2017 —
    Contractors will soon find themselves on the frontline of wage disputes on projects if laborers working on behalf of their subcontractors or vendors are unpaid. On October 14, 2017, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law AB 1701, which will allow laborers to seek direct compensation from the general contractors on private projects, if their wages remain unpaid. The legislative mandate requires direct contractors—defined as contractors who have a direct contractual relationship with an owner—to assume liability for any debt incurred by a subcontractor, at any tier, for a wage claimant’s performance of labor included in the subject of the original contract between the general contractor and the owner. The California bill will apply to all private construction contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2018. Previously, all laborers could maintain a mechanic’s lien claim against private property, without needing to serve a 20-day preliminary notice, but there was no statutory obligation on the “direct contractors” to reimburse the laborers their unpaid wages. Reprinted courtesy of Peckar & Abramson, P.C. attorneys Alex Baghdassarian, Eric M. Gruzen and Kerri Sakaue Mr. Baghdassarian may be contacted at abaghdassarian@pecklaw.com Mr. Gruzen may be contacted at egruzen@pecklaw.com Ms. Sakaue may be contacted at ksakaue@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hurricane Claim Cannot Survive Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause

    May 15, 2023 —
    The court upheld the insurer's denial of coverage for hurricane damage caused by storm surge. Heritage Motorcoach Resort & Marina Condominium Association, Inc v. Axis Ins. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58931 (S.D. Ala. April 4, 2023). Heritage operated a resort with a marina, dock and clubhouse. Hurricane Sally caused damage to the property. Heritage submitted a claim to its insurer, Axis. Axis investigated the claim. One investigator reported that the marina structures sustained damage caused by storm tide forces, wave action and debris impact. He opined that the marina structures did not sustain wind damage. When deposed, he testified that there was a combination of vessels and wave action causing damage to the marina. A second investigator found that the storm drove boats and other debris into the marina area causing much of the damage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    South Adams County Water and Sanitation District Takes Proactive Step to Treat PFAS, Safeguard Water Supplies

    November 28, 2022 —
    DENVER, Colo., Nov. 15, 2022 — The South Adams Country Water and Sanitation District (District) is enhancing its water treatment process to meet EPA Health Advisory Levels (HALs) for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in drinking water supplies. Deemed “forever chemicals,” PFAS is a group of human-made chemicals used in many applications, including stain- and water-resistant fabrics and carpeting, cleaning products, paints, and firefighting foams. PFAS are resistant to grease, oil, water, and heat and may enter water supplies from landfills, the use of firefighting foam (e.g., at airports, fire training facilities, petroleum fires, etc.), industrial sites, and wastewater treatment plant discharge. The District’s water supply, serving over 67,000 residents in Commerce City and parts of unincorporated Adams County, comes primarily from 13 groundwater supply wells. As it continues to meet all federal and state drinking water requirements, the District has been proactively pursuing PFAS reduction strategies since it first discovered a low-level presence in its water supply through voluntary testing in 2018. Upon discovery, the District stopped drawing from its most impacted wells and has been purchasing additional treated water to blend into its supply to reduce PFAS levels along with optimizing use of their existing granular activated carbon treatment system. “Ever since the District first began voluntarily testing for PFAS, we have been monitoring for these compounds and working to reduce their impact on our customers,” said District Manager Abel Moreno. “The EPA has moved the goalposts, and we are taking steps to reduce the presence of PFAS even further. We are committed to finding long-term, sustainable solutions to offer our community high-quality drinking water.” To tackle the challenge, the District has hired leading environmental and construction services firm Brown and Caldwell to design a new 18 million gallons per day (MGD) ion exchange (IX) process at its Klein Water Treatment Facility. IX treatment is currently the most effective technology in removing PFAS/PFOA, consisting of a highly porous resin that acts as a powerful magnet to adsorb and hold onto the substances. The new system at the Klein facility will consist of seven IX treatment trains, a 375,000-gallon equalization tank, and six vertical turbine pumps to feed the IX trains from the District’s 13 groundwater supply wells. Furthermore, nine 5-micron cartridge filters will be installed to remove particulate matter in the water before reaching the IX trains, thus increasing the efficacy of the treatment process. Scheduled for completion by the end of 2026, the new IX treatment facility will provide a peak combined capacity of 26 MGD. About South Adams County Water and Sanitation District The South Adams County Water and Sanitation District is a special district providing water and sanitary sewer service to over 67,000 residents in Commerce City and parts of unincorporated Adams County. For more information about the District, please visit www.sacwsd.org About Brown and Caldwell Headquartered in Walnut Creek, California., Brown and Caldwell is a full-service environmental engineering and construction services firm with 52 offices and 1,800 professionals across North America and the Pacific. For 75 years, our creative solutions have helped municipalities, private industry, and government agencies successfully overcome their most challenging water and environmental obstacles. As an employee-owned company, Brown and Caldwell is passionate about exceeding our clients’ expectations and making a difference for our employees, our communities, and our environment. For more information, visit www.brownandcaldwell.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Federal Court Upholds Professional Services Exclusion to Preclude Duty to Defend

    March 16, 2020 —
    In Project Surveillance, Inc. v. The Travelers Indemnity Company, No. 4:19-CV-03324, 2020 WL 292247 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 21, 2020), a Texas federal court held that a professional services exclusion in a commercial general liability policy precluded Travelers’ duty to defend its insured. The underlying lawsuit was a wrongful death action brought by the family of a worker killed on a construction site. Project Surveillance was present at the construction site “to provide safety supervision or other services.” The underlying lawsuit alleged that Project Surveillance negligently failed to inspect or adequately inspect the project and failed to warn or adequately warn the decedent of a dangerous condition. The underlying lawsuit also alleged that Project Surveillance was negligent in failing to stop work. At the time of the incident, Project Surveillance had commercial general liability insurance through Travelers and professional liability insurance through RLI. RLI agreed to defend Project Surveillance in the underlying lawsuit. Travelers, however, denied owing a duty to defend or indemnify based on an exclusion for “bodily injury” arising out of the rendering or failure to render any “professional service.” The Traveler policy defined the term “professional services” to mean any service requiring specialized skill or training, including “failure to prepare [. . .] any warning,” “supervision,” “inspection,” “control,” “surveying activity or service,” “job site safety,” “construction administration,” and “monitoring [. . .] necessary to perform and of [those] services.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy S. Macklin, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Macklin may be contacted at jmacklin@tlsslaw.com