BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing 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


    Ohio: Are Construction Defects Covered in Insurance Policies?

    California Supreme Court Declines to Create Exception to Privette Doctrine for “Known Hazards”

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

    Acquisition, Development, and Construction Lending Conditions Ease

    What If There Is a Design Error?

    Empire State Building Owners Sue Photographer for Topless Photo Shoot

    Sixth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Property Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Hawaii Federal Court Grants Insured's Motion for Remand

    Modern Tools Are Key to Future-Proofing the Construction Industry

    Client Alert: California’s Unfair Competition Law (B&P §17200) Preempted by Federal Workplace Safety Law

    'Perfect Storm' Caused Fractures at San Francisco Transit Hub

    After the Fire, Should Some Parts of Los Angeles Never Rebuild?

    Designers Face Fatal Pedestrian Bridge Collapse Fallout

    Justin Clark Joins Newmeyer & Dillion’s Walnut Creek Branch as its Newest Associate

    AB 685 and COVID-19 Workplace Exposure: New California Notice and Reporting Requirements of COVID Exposure Starting January 1, 2021

    Right to Repair Reform: Revisions and Proposals to State’s “Right to Repair Statutes”

    Autovol’s Affordable Housing Project with Robotic Automation

    Explore Legal Immigration Options for Construction Companies

    Federal District Court Addresses Anti-concurrent Cause Language in Property Policy

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Partner John Van Vlear Named to Board Of Groundwater Resources Association Of California

    One Way Arbitration Provisions are Enforceable in Virginia

    Construction in Indian Country – What You Need To Know About Sovereign Immunity

    Alleged Negligent Misrepresentation on Condition of Home is Not an Occurrence Causing Property Damage

    Virginia Families Hope to Sue over Chinese Drywall

    Insurers' Communications Through Brokers Not Privileged

    Do Not Lose Your Mechanics Lien Right Through a Subordination Agreement

    Design Immunity of Public Entities: Sometimes Designs, Like Recipes, are Best Left Alone

    Congratulations to Wilke Fleury’s 2024 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!!

    Defense Owed to Directors and Officers Despite Insured vs. Insured Exclusion

    General Indemnity Agreement Can Come Back to Bite You

    Tests Find Pollution From N.C. Coal Ash Site Hit by Florence Within Acceptable Levels

    EPA Seeks Comment on Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification Rule

    Indictments Issued in Las Vegas HOA Scam

    If Passed, New Bill AB 2320 Will Mandate Cyber Insurance For State Government Contractors

    Digitalizing Cross-Laminated Timber Construction

    ASCE Releases New Report on Benefits and Burdens of Infrastructure Investment in Disadvantaged Communities

    Court of Appeals Confirms that King County Superior Court’s Jury Selection Process Satisfies Due Process Requirements

    Gaps in Insurance Created by Complex Risks

    Construction of New U.S. Homes Declines on Plunge in South

    "My Bad, I Thought It Was in Good Faith" is Not Good Enough - Contractor Ordered to Pay Prompt Payment Penalties

    Account for the Imposition of Material Tariffs in your Construction Contract

    It Has Started: Supply-Chain, Warehouse and Retail Workers of Essential Businesses Are Filing Suit

    DC Metro Extension’s Precast Supplier Banned from Federal Contracts

    Professor Senet’s List of 25 Decisions Every California Construction Lawyer Should Know:

    Preparing For and Avoiding Residential Construction Disputes: For Homeowners and Contractors

    Landowners Try to Choke Off Casino's Water With 19th-Century Lawsuit

    Interior Designer Licensure

    Damp Weather Not Good for Wood

    You Are on Notice: Failure to Comply With Contractual Notice Provisions Can Be Fatal to Your Claim

    Legal Fallout Begins Over Delayed Edmonton Bridges
    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

    Suppliers of Inherently Dangerous Raw Materials Remain Excluded from the Protections of the Component Parts Doctrine

    December 02, 2015 —
    In Brady v. Calsol, Inc. 2015 No. B262028, the California Court of Appeal, Second District, reversed summary judgment for a raw materials supplier where there was a triable issue of fact as to whether the benzene levels contained in the supplier’s mineral spirits could have caused plaintiffs’ leukemia. Plaintiffs were mechanics Ernest Brady and David Gibbs, who used Safety-Kleen solvent to degrease automotive parts. Brady and Gibbs were diagnosed with leukemia allegedly caused by exposure to Safety-Kleen solvent during the course of their employment. In 2008, Plaintiffs sued Calsol, Inc., a distributor of mineral spirits for the ultimate manufacturer, Safety-Kleen Systems, Inc. Plaintiffs asserted negligence and strict products liability claims. Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that benzene, a carcinogen found in mineral spirits, caused their leukemia. Benzene is only carcinogenic to humans at certain levels. The parties dispute the levels of benzene found in the mineral spirits supplied to Safety-Kleen. Calsol contended the benzene levels were present only in low concentrations. Plaintiffs alleged the benzene levels were capable of causing injury. Reprinted courtesy of Leah B. Mason, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Michael J. Worth, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Mason may be contacted at lmason@hbblaw.com Mr. Worth may be contacted at mworth@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Blackstone to Buy Apartments From Greystar in $2 Billion Deal

    December 10, 2015 —
    Blackstone Group LP agreed to buy 32 multifamily properties for about $2 billion from Greystar Real Estate Partners LLC as the private equity giant expands its push into the U.S. apartment market. The buildings, with a total of 10,399 units, are spread throughout the country in states such as California, Florida, Washington and New York, Greystar said in a statement Tuesday. The Charleston, South Carolina-based company, the largest U.S. apartment manager, will continue to oversee the properties. Peter Rose, a Blackstone spokesman, declined to comment on the transaction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sarah Mulholland, Bloomberg

    All Aboard! COVID-19 Securities Suit Sets Sail, Implicates D&O Insurance

    April 27, 2020 —
    In a prior post, we predicted that novel coronavirus (COVID-19) risks could implicate D&O and similar management liability coverage arising from so-called “event-driven” litigation, a new kind of securities class action that relies on specific adverse events, rather than fraudulent financial disclosures or accounting issues, as the catalyst for targeting both companies and their directors and officers for the resulting drop in stock price. It appears that ship has sailed, so to speak, as Kevin LaCroix at D&O Diary reported over the weekend that a plaintiff shareholder had filed a securities class action lawsuit against Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings, Ltd. alleging that the company employed misleading sales tactics related to the outbreak. The lawsuit alleges that the cruise line made false and misleading statements or failed to disclose in its securities filings sales tactics by the company that purported to provide customers with unproven or blatantly false statements about COVID-19 to entice customers to purchase cruises. Those allegations rely on two news articles reporting on the company sales practices in the wake of COVID-19: a March 11, 2020 Miami New Times article quoting leaked emails in which a cruise employee reportedly asked sales staff to lie to customers about COVID-19 to protect the company’s bookings; and a March 12, 2020 Washington Post article entitled, “Norwegian Cruise Line Managers Urged Salespeople to Spread Falsehoods about Coronavirus.” The lawsuit alleges that the company’s share price was cut nearly in half following these disclosures. Reprinted courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth attorneys Lorelie S. Masters, Michael S. Levine and Geoffrey B. Fehling Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Fehling may be contacted at gfehling@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Seattle’s Audacious Aquarium Throws Builders Swerves, Curves, Twists and Turns

    January 08, 2024 —
    Patrick Nation describes the reinforcing steel for the main tank of the 50,000-sq-ft Seattle Aquarium Ocean Pavilion as a “monster” job for CMC Rebar. In his mind, it was like bending 496 tons of bars “on a golf ball.” In reality, the operation was more like weaving a giant steel basket. Ironworkers had to painstakingly hand-thread the reinforcing steel for the doubly curved and slanted concrete walls of the 350,000-gallon saltwater exhibit—one bar at a time—to create the dense latticework for the 41-ft-tall basket. Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Key Takeaways For Employers in the Aftermath of the Supreme Court’s Halt to OSHA’s Vax/Testing Mandate

    January 24, 2022 —
    Political pundits and legal scholars have been engaged in frenzied debate trying to decipher the fallout of the United States Supreme Court’s decision that stopped stopped the Occupational Safety and Hazard Administration (OSHA) from enforcing its Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) which mandated that employers with 100 or more employees require workers to show proof of vaccination against COVID-19 or submit to weekly testing. The Court’s decision prevents OSHA from enforcing its ETS until all legal challenges have been heard. Because the Court concluded that those legal challenges are “likely to succeed on the merits” of their argument that OSHA does not have the statutory authority to issue its vaccine and testing mandates, there is significant doubt that they will ever come to fruition. While the pundits and scholars have now had their say, employers, who are struggling to manage a highly contagious variant, a tight labor market, and employees with divergent and staunch views on vaccination, are also left wondering what the Court’s decision means for them and what they should be doing. Here are some key takeaways for employers in the aftermath of the Court’s decision. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Laura H. Corvo, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Corvo may be contacted at corvol@whiteandwilliams.com

    School District Practice Bulletin: Loose Lips Can Sink More Than Ships

    April 08, 2014 —
    We all understand how idle conversation and gossip can negatively impact relationships and workplace morale. But can they cause a school district to lose their lawyer? It is black-letter law that confidential communications between attorney and client are privileged, inadmissible, and cannot be later used against that client by third parties. However, under many circumstances confidential communications that occurred just outside the traditional attorney-client relationship can result in disqualification of counsel. In an environment when many educators become lawyers and education lawyers go from job to job and from client to client, care must be given to the context in which such communications occur. I. The Ethical Duty of Confidentiality Is Broader Than the Attorney-Client Privilege. Generally, every lawyer has a duty to refuse to disclose, and to prevent another from disclosing, a confidential communication between the attorney and client. (Fox Searchlight Pictures, Inc. v. Paladino (2001) 89 Cal. App .4th 294, 309; Evid. Code § 954.) The attorney-client privilege is statutory and permits the holder of the privilege to prevent disclosure, including testimony by the attorney, as to communications that are subject to the privilege. (Evid. Code §§ 952-955.) The attorney’s ethical duty of confidentiality under Business & Professions Code section 6068(e) is broader than the attorney-client privilege. It extends to all information gained in the professional relationship that the client has requested be kept secret or the disclosure of which would likely be harmful or embarrassing to the client. (See Cal. State Bar Formal Opns. No. 1993-133, 1986-87, 1981-58, and 1976-37; Los Angeles County Bar Association Formal Opns. Nos. 456, 436, and 386. See also In re Jordan (1972) 7 Cal.3d 930, 940-41.) However, if the status of the person and the purpose of the conversation is unclear to the attorney, highly negative outcomes may result. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gregory J. Rolen, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
    Mr. Rolen may be contacted at grolen@hbblaw.com

    It Has Started: Supply-Chain, Warehouse and Retail Workers of Essential Businesses Are Filing Suit

    June 22, 2020 —
    Supply-chain businesses that are appropriately characterized as “essential” have remained open for the delivery of critical supplies while everyone else has been told to close up shop and stay home. Now essential-business employees are contracting COVID-19 and filing suit. Following up on our earlier piece — “Is a Violation of a COVID-19 Order the Basis For Civil Liability?” — it is important to recognize that government directives, oftentimes couched as “recommendations,” can come to define what it means to provide a reasonably safe workplace that protects employees from COVID-19. While common law negligence defenses consider the reasonableness of conduct, these directives will likely become the standard. The cases that have been filed are overwhelmingly premised upon the timeless negligence construct. The negligence construct, simply put, imposes a duty to act as a reasonable person would under the circumstances. Nonetheless, while the negligence construct lives in the ordinary world of “reasonableness,” infection-control guidance lives in the rapidly developing world of the science of COVID-19. Guidance on seemingly basic questions, such as the methods of transmission (e.g., personal contact, mucus membrane only, airborne transmission) or even the virus’s shelf life on different surfaces, of particular interest packaging and material handling equipment, can change by the day. All of this provides challenges for the supply-side business looking to protect its workforce. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys James Burger, Robert Devine and Douglas Weck Mr. Burger may be contacted at burgerj@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Devine may be contacted at deviner@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Weck may be contacted at weckd@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado Drillers Show Sensitive Side to Woo Fracking Foes

    September 03, 2014 —
    A fight over fracking is looming in Texas. Another stand-off is shaping up in Colorado. Yet drillers’ reactions couldn’t be more different. In Texas, drillers are doing their noisy in-your-face fracking as usual. Meanwhile, on a small farm about an hour from the Colorado Rocky Mountains, the oil industry is giving fracking a makeover, cutting back on rumbling trucks and tamping down on pollution. Oil companies in Colorado are responding to a rising tide of resentment as local communities and environmental activists vie to impose measures to ban fracking or restrict drilling. A series of ballot initiatives and other grass roots opposition around the country is seen as threatening the booming shale industry, even in oil-friendly Texas, where the U.S. energy renaissance began. Reprinted courtesy of Zain Shauk, Bloomberg and Bradley Olson, Bloomberg Mr. Shauk may be contacted at zshauk@bloomberg.net; Mr. Olson may be contacted at bradleyolson@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of