BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnesses
    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


    Don’t Sign a Contract that Doesn’t Address Covid-19 (Or Pandemics and Epidemics)

    Texas EIFS Case May Have Future Implications for Construction Defects

    Contractor Prevails in Part Against CalOSHA in Valley Fever Case

    Nine Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch 2021

    Multifamily Building Pushes New Jersey to Best Year since 2007

    No Interlocutory Appeals of "Garden-Variety" Contract Disputes

    LEED Certified Courthouse Square Negotiating With Insurers, Mulling Over Demolition

    James R. Lynch Appointed to the Washington State Capital Project Review Committee

    Patagonia Will Start Paying for Homeowners' Solar Panels

    3 Common Cash Flow Issues That Plague The Construction Industry

    Electronic Signatures On Contracts: Are They Truly Compliant?

    COVID-19 Business Interruption Lawsuits Begin: Iconic Oceana Grill in New Orleans Files Insurance Coverage Lawsuit

    One Word Makes All The Difference – The Distinction Between “Pay If Paid” and “Pay When Paid” Clauses

    Understand Agreements in Hold Harmless and Indemnity Provisions

    Subcontractors Essential to Home Building Industry

    Hunton Insurance Lawyer, Adriana Perez, Selected to the National Association of Women Lawyers’ 2023 Rising List

    Chicago Makes First Major Update to City's Building Code in 70 Years

    Another Colorado District Court Refuses to Apply HB 10-1394 Retroactively

    Federal Courts Keep Chipping Away at the CDC Eviction Moratorium

    How to Fix America

    Another Guilty Plea In Nevada Construction Defect Fraud Case

    Stop by BHA’s Booth at WCC and Support the Susan G. Komen Foundation

    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment

    The U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Rules on Greystone

    Cal/OSHA’s Toolbox Has Significantly Expanded: A Look At Senate Bill 606

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    While Starts Fall, Builder Confidence and Permits are on the Rise

    Mediation Fails In Federal Lawsuit Seeking Damages From Sureties for Alleged Contract Fraud

    Public-Employee Union Fees, Water Wars Are Key in High Court Rulings

    Insurers May Not Be Required to Defend Contractors In a Florida §558 Proceeding

    Insurers' Motion to Determine Lack of Occurrence Fails

    Commercial Construction in the Golden State is Looking Pretty Golden

    Terms of Your Teaming Agreement Matter

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Named to Hudson Valley Magazine’s 2022 Top Lawyers List

    Consider Manner In Which Loan Agreement (Promissory Note) Is Drafted

    Additional Insured is Loss Payee after Hurricane Damage

    Top 10 Take-Aways: the ABA Forum's 2024 Mid-Winter Meeting

    Not So Unambiguous: California Court of Appeal Finds Coverage for Additional Insured

    Bertha – The Tunnel is Finished, but Her Legacy Continues

    The (Jurisdictional) Rebranding of The CDA’s Sum Certain Requirement

    Preservationists Want to Save Penn Station. Yes, That Penn Station.

    Court Again Defines Extent of Contractor’s Insurance Coverage

    Drones Used Despite Uncertain Legal Consequences

    Bridges Crumble as Muni Rates at Least Since ’60s Ignored

    Direct Contractors In California Should Take Steps Now To Reduce Exposure For Unpaid Wages By Subcontractors

    Courts Will Not Second-Guess Public Entities When it Comes to Design Immunity

    Florida Condos Bet on Americans Making 50% Down Payments

    AAA Revises Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    New York Public Library’s “Most Comprehensive Renovation” In Its History

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Fairfield's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Flow-Down Clauses Can Drown Your Project

    August 26, 2015 —
    Flow-Down or pass-through clauses obligate downstream contractors to certain provisions contained in the up up-stream contractor contracts, such as the contract between the general contractor and the owner. These clauses are contained in every major form subcontract and they can expand the scope of your potential liability. This blog will look at typical language of a flow-down clause, what it means and how you can deal with them. Typical Flow-Down Clause A simple flow down clause might provide:
    “The Subcontractor agrees to be bound to the Contractor by the terms of the prime contract and to assume to the Contractor all the obligations and responsibilities that the Contractor by those documents assumes to the Owner, except to the extent that the provisions contained therein are by the terms or by law applicable only to the Contractor.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    Immigrants' Legal Status Eyed Over Roles in New York Fake Injury Lawsuits

    January 07, 2025 —
    Edison Fernando Pesantez Ramon says that early on the morning of Sept. 29, 2021, while working on a building renovation project on 96th Street in Manhattan, he tripped and fell badly on a staircase. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, ENR
    Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com

    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

    Courts Are Ordering Remote Depositions as the COVID-19 Pandemic Continues

    August 10, 2020 —
    The COVID-19 pandemic has generally put a stop to in-person depositions nationwide. Many litigants and their attorneys have also resisted attempts to proceed with remote video depositions, some holding out for the pandemic to subside and for the return of in-person business as usual while others are resistant to using new or unfamiliar virtual video technology. However, with COVID-19 cases still increasing nationwide, courts are beginning to mandate that depositions proceed remotely regardless of these apprehensions. It looks like remote video depositions may become part of a new set of best practices and perhaps mandatory in some circumstances for the foreseeable future. The Supreme Court of New Jersey, for example, has ordered that “[t]o the extent practicable . . . depositions should continue to be conducted remotely using necessary and available video technology.” The court has not explicitly mandated remote depositions, but has certainly encouraged trial courts to do so, indicating in orders litigants are “strongly encouraged” to depose witnesses remotely. Other jurisdictions, such as Philadelphia’s First Judicial District, have given trial court’s similar authority and flexibility. Recently, a trial court in Middlesex County, New Jersey granted a motion to compel a defense deposition of the plaintiff to proceed remotely, if not in person, over the objection of plaintiff’s counsel in a slip-and-fall case. This is one of the first such rulings in this area. The plaintiff’s counsel objected to the remote deposition on the grounds that his client was elderly with a heavy accent, had no technology knowledge, and had no internet access. That would seem to be a pretty good argument that a remote deposition would be impracticable. However, the defendant bolstered their case with an offer to cover the cost of renting and delivering a remote deposition technology package to the plaintiff, complete with a tablet, phone, speaker, internet hotspot and remote training beforehand. Although the trial court acknowledged the plaintiff’s “significant hardship,” the court ordered that the deposition proceed remotely if not in person. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams attorneys Robert Devine, Douglas Weck and Victor Zarrilli Mr. Devine may be contacted at deviner@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Weck may be contacted at weckd@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Zarrilli may be contacted at zarrilliv@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Home Buyer May Be Third Party Beneficiary of Property Policy

    July 19, 2017 —
    The Oklahoma Supreme Court reversed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to the insurer, finding that the purchaser may have third party beneficiary rights under the seller's property policy. Hensley v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 2017 Okla. LEXIS 59 (June 20, 2017). In May 2000, Hensley sold his property and a mobile home located thereon to Douglas using a contract for deed. The contract for deed required Douglas to keep the premises insured, and the monthly payments made by Douglas to Hensley included the premiums. Hensley had a policy with State Farm on the property. Hensley continued to make the premium payments and the policy continued to be renewed. Further, State Farm was informed of the change in the property's status. 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

    Federal Court Holds That Other Insurance Analysis Is Unnecessary If Policies Cover Different Risks

    September 28, 2020 —
    In Greater Mutual Insurance Company v. Continental Casualty Company, 2020 WL 5370419 (S.D.N.Y. September 8, 2020), the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York had occasion to consider the “other insurance” provisions of a commercial general liability policy, issued by Greater Mutual Insurance Company (“GNY”), and a directors and officers (“D&O”) policy, issued by Continental, to the same insured. The GNY policy covered, inter alia, property damage caused by an occurrence, as well as “personal advertising injury,” defined to include “[t]he wrongful eviction from, wrongful entry into, or invasion of the right of private occupancy of a room, dwelling or premises that a person occupies, committed by or on behalf of its owner, landlord or lessor.” The Continental D&O policy covered claims for wrongful acts, including “wrongful entry or eviction, or other invasion of the right to private occupancy. . . .” Unlike the GNY policy, however, the Continental policy expressly excluded coverage for damage to tangible property. In the underlying action, the plaintiffs alleged that the insured engaged in construction work to fix a leak from a terrace on the seventeenth floor. In doing so, the insured accessed the plaintiffs’ roof terrace. The plaintiffs alleged that the construction workers installed and stored construction materials on the roof terrace, making the plaintiffs unable to access the terrace. Plaintiffs also alleged that their deck furniture may have suffered damage, and that the workers had a “direct line of sight” into their unit, resulting in the plaintiffs having to leave their unit frequently. Causes of action were for property damage, constructive eviction, partial constructive eviction, and invasion of privacy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com

    Is Construction Defect Notice under Florida Repair Statute a Suit?

    September 03, 2015 —
    In Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co., “the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida addressed what constitutes a ‘suit’ within the context of Florida’s right-to-repair procedure for construction defect disputes,” according to Keith Moskowitz, Michael Barnes, J. Stephen Berry, and Cynthia Liu of Dentons. The district court “held that a notice under Chapter 558 of the Florida statutes, the ‘notice and repair’ statute, ‘does not constitute a “civil proceeding”’ and thus ‘is not a “suit”’ triggering an insurer’s duty to defend under Altman’s Crum & Forster commercial general liability (CGL) policies.” The article states that “[w]hether the 11th Circuit affirms the district court’s decision or not, its opinion will be important to insurers questioning when insurance coverage is triggered by an event other than a formal proceeding initiated in a court of law.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Thousands of London Residents Evacuated due to Fire Hazards

    June 29, 2017 —
    Nearly 4,000 residents were ordered by municipal authorities to “urgently evacuate apartments in five London high-rise buildings…after fire inspectors warned that the safety of the residents could not be guaranteed,” reported the New York Times. Displaced families were urged to find shelter with family or friends, but temporary accommodations were offered. Repairs may take up to four weeks. The five London towers that were evacuated all contain the same exterior cladding and insulation that is similar to what was used in Grenfell Tower, where 79 people died in fire only the preceding week, according to the New York Times. Camden Council stated that the cladding material would be removed. They had ordered noncombustible cladding, but later learned that combustible cladding had been installed. “Preliminary tests on the insulation samples from Grenfell Tower show that they combusted soon after the test started,” Detective Superintendent McCormack said in a televised statement, as quoted by the New York Times. “Cladding tiles had also failed initial tests,” she continued. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of