BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim 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


    Multiple Construction Errors Contributed to Mexico Subway Collapse

    Grenfell Fire Probe Faults Construction Industry Practices

    Alaska District Court Sets Aside Rulings Under New Administration’s EO 13795

    10 Safety Tips for General Contractors

    Where Breach of Contract and Tortious Interference Collide

    House Approves $715B Transportation and Water Infrastructure Bill

    Kahana Feld LLP Senior Attorney Rachael Marvin and Partner Dominic Donato Obtain Complete Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Labor Law Claims on Summary Judgment

    Construction Defects and Warranties in Maryland

    Soldiers Turn Brickies as U.K. Homebuilders Seek Workers

    Environmental and Regulatory Law Update: New Federal and State Rulings

    Damages in First Trial Establishing Liability of Tortfeasor Binding in Bad Faith Trial Against Insurer

    Sinking Buildings on the Rise?

    Condo Developers Buy in Washington despite Construction Defect Litigation

    Plaza Construction Negotiating Pay Settlement for Florida Ritz-Carlton Renovation

    Motion to Dismiss Insurer's Counterclaim for Construction Defects Is Granted

    Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell Recognized in 2024 Best Law Firm® Rankings

    Strategic Communication Considerations for Contractors Regarding COVID-19

    Quick Note: Notice of Contest of Claim Against Payment Bond

    My Construction Law Wish List

    Impaired Property Exclusion Bars Coverage When Loose Bolt Interferes with MRI Unit Operation

    Think Twice Before Hedging A Position Or Defense On A Speculative Event Or Occurrence

    "Ongoing Storm" Rules for the Northeast (Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York & Rhode Island)

    Extrinsic Evidence, or Eight Corners? Texas Court Sheds Light on Determining the Duty to Defend

    Electrical Subcontractor Sues over Termination

    South Carolina Court of Appeals Diverges from Damico Opinion, Sending Recent Construction Defects Cases to Arbitration

    South Carolina Couple Must Arbitrate Construction Defect Claim

    Corps Issues Draft EIS for Controversial Alaskan Copper Mine

    Building Group Has Successful 2012, Looks to 2013

    Eleventh Circuit Upholds Coverage for Environmental Damage from Sewage, Concluding It is Not a “Pollutant”

    ASCE Joins White House Summit on Building Climate-Resilient Communities

    How Tech Is Transforming the Construction Industry in 2019

    No Coverage for Co-Restaurant Owners Who Are Not Named In Policy

    Freddie Mac Eases Mortgage Rules to Limit Putbacks

    Another Case Highlighting the Difference Between CGL Policies and Performance Bonds

    Insurers Get “Floored” by Court of Appeals Regarding the Presumptive Measure of Damages in Consent Judgments

    Construction Case Alert: Appellate Court Confirms Engineer’s Duty to Defend Developer Arises Upon Tender of Indemnity Claim

    Include Materials Price Escalation Clauses in Construction Clauses

    "Occurrence" May Include Intentional Acts In Montana

    After Pittsburgh Bridge Collapse, Fast-Rising Replacement Emerges

    Brad Pitt’s Foundation Sues New Orleans Architect for Construction Defects

    Ensuring Arbitration in Construction Defect Claims

    6,500 Bridges in Ohio Allegedly Functionally Obsolete or Structurally Deficient

    No Duty to Indemnify Where No Duty to Defend

    Deck Police - The New Mandate for HOA's Takes Safety to the Next Level

    Navigate the New Health and Safety Norm With Construction Technology

    Floors Collapse at Russian University in St. Petersburg

    Pipeline Safety Violations Cause of Explosion that Killed 8

    MGM Begins Dismantling of the Las Vegas Harmon Tower

    Clearly Determining in Contract Who Determines Arbitrability of Dispute

    Construction Contract Basics: Attorney Fee Provisions
    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

    No Bad Faith In Filing Interpleader

    August 19, 2015 —
    The Eighth Circuit determined that filing an interpleader action in the face of multiple claims against the policy holder did not constitute bad faith. Purscell v. Tico Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10438 (8th Cir. June 22, 2015). Ben Purscell's vehicle collided with another vehicle, in which Tim and Amy Carr were riding. The Carrs were injured, and Purscell's passenger, Amy Priesendorf, was killed. Before the accident, Priesendorf had stretched her leg over and put her foot on the accelerator, on top of Purscell's foot. As the other car approached, Purscell swerved to avoid an accident, but the two vehicles collided. Purscell had a policy with Infinity Assurance Insurance Company. The policy limited liability to $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident for bodily injury. Infinity put the full $50,000 per accident limits on reserve, with $25,000 designated to Priesendorf's fatality and $25,000 designated to the Carrs. 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

    Remote Work Issues to Consider in Light of COVID-19

    March 23, 2020 —
    Many employers have elected to implement a remote work policy in light of the COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak. If you are one of them, you should consider the following as you transition your workforce to a remote working environment. Preliminary Steps The first step prior to implementation is ensuring that you have sufficient technological infrastructure and capabilites. You should assess what types of equipment (e.g., desktop computers, laptops, phones, printers, and office supplies) your employees will need to work remotely, and ensure that there is sufficient inventory and that employees can gain access to the equipment. You should also confirm that you have data security measures in place and brief employees on best practices for security and protection of data. You should refer employees to your organization’s technology policy regarding the safeguarding of data. If none exist, you should strongly consider creating and implementing one. One of the more important aspects of any policy is restrictions on where employees may work remotely. For example, some employers prohibit employees from working remotely on public wifi networks due to security concerns. Whether these or other policies are right for your organization depends on the nature of your work and data, security measures you have in place, and your risk tolerance. Beyond technology issues, you should prepare a checklist of necessary work items and materials that employees will need to perform their jobs remotely. You should also clearly communicate to employees which items may be removed from the workplace and taken home and which should remain. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Philip K. Lem, Payne & Fears
    Mr. Lem may be contacted at pkl@paynefears.com

    Washington State Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision on Spearin Doctrine

    September 29, 2021 —
    The Washington State Supreme Court’s recent decision in Lake Hills Invs., LLC v. Rushforth Constr. Co. No. 99119-7, slip op. at 1 (Wash. Sept. 2, 2021) marks the first time in over 50 years that it has ruled on the Spearin doctrine. The Court’s opinion clarified the contractor’s burden when asserting a Spearin defense and affirmed the jury’s verdict in favor of contractor AP Rushforth Construction Company (AP). The decision is a major win for Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC attorneys Scott Sleight, Brett Hill, and Nick Korst, who represented AP throughout its long-running dispute with Lake Hills Investments, LLC (LH), including the two-month jury trial and the appeal. Leonard Feldman of Peterson | Wampold | Rosato | Feldman | Luna and Stephanie Messplay of Van Siclen Stocks & Firkins also represented AP on appeal. At trial, the owner—Lake Hills Investments, LLC (LH)—asserted it was entitled to $3 million in liquidated damages and $12.3 million for defects it alleged were caused by AP’s deficient workmanship. AP denied responsibility for the delays and most of the defects and requested payment of $5 million. Regarding LH’s defect claims, AP argued as an affirmative defense that the defects were caused by deficiencies in the plans and specifications provided by LH. This affirmative defense was rooted in the Spearin doctrine, which states that when the contractor follows plans and specifications provided by the owner, the contractor is not responsible for defects caused by the plans and specifications. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cameron Sheldon, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Ms. Sheldon may be contacted at cameron.sheldon@acslawyers.com

    Winners Announced in Seattle’s Office-to-Residential Call for Ideas Contest

    July 10, 2023 —
    On June 7, 2023, the City of Seattle announced three winners of its Office to Residential: Call for Ideas contest for which it received a total of 13 submissions. Hybrid Architecture, LLC, took first place; Gensler, Seattle Office Project Team took second; and the Miller Hull Partnership took third. Seattle’s Department of Construction and Inspections will study the submissions and determine what legislative and regulatory modifications would be necessary to support and further these proposals and other future office-to-residential conversion projects. Seattle will also be holding a series of exhibitions over the coming weeks where project submissions will be available to the public. On June 14, 2023, from 5:30 PM to 7:30 PM, a reception will be hosted by the Seattle Architecture Foundation and the City at the American Institute of Architects. The gallery will also be open to the public from 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM on June 21, 28, and July 5. After June 14, 2023, those interested can access contest submissions at the project website. Seattle’s primary goal with this contest was to provide a vision for the future of downtown and begin charting a concrete path to getting there. Since working from home has become more common following the COVID-19 pandemic, vacancy rates in many office buildings have risen sharply, while housing availability and affordability remain ongoing issues. If Seattle can show a realistic—and profitable—path to converting commercial office spaces into residences, it would be addressing both problems, killing two birds with one stone. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryanne Mathisen, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Ms. Mathisen may be contacted at ryanne.mathisen@acslawyers.com

    Plan Ahead for the Inevitable Murphy’s Law Related Accident

    August 06, 2019 —
    For this week’s Guest Post Friday here at Construction Law Musings, we welcome back Melissa Dewey Brumback. Melissa (@melissabrumback) is a construction attorney and partner in the firm Ragsdale Liggett, PLLC in Raleigh. Melissa has spent over a decade representing engineers and architects, advising them on contract proposals to limit risks, and defending them when litigation does arise. She is the author of the award-winning Construction Law in North Carolina a blog dedicated to the A/E community. Melissa is rated AV, the best rating of the Martindale Hubbell lawyer rating system, is a certified LEED Green Associate, and serves as President of the RL Mace Universal Design Institute. She is also signed up to take a cruise this summer with her family (!). The recent cruise ship fiasco, in which thousands were stranded at sea for an entire week with no running water or toilet facilities, visibly brought to mind the old axiom to “Be Prepared.” As Chris likes to say, Murphy was an optimist. What does this have to do with your construction company? Plenty. Since time is money and a downed project extremely expensive, you should plan in advance for likely emergency situations. Some things to consider: 1. Emergency Contacts: Do you only have a cell number for your key project manager? You should have at least two ways to reach all key employees and subcontractors, as well as owner representatives and the designers of record. Consider that in a large emergency, sometimes entire cell phone towers are out of commission from overuse. A land line comes in awfully handy in such a situation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Partner Vik Nagpal is Recognized as a Top Lawyer of 2020

    June 29, 2020 —
    Please join us in congratulating San Diego Partner Vik Nagpal for being recognized as a Top Lawyer of 2020 by San Diego Magazine! San Diego Magazine works with Martindale-Hubbell to choose top lawyers who have reached the highest level of ethical standards and professional excellence. Vik Nagpal was evaluated and given the highest ratings by the colleagues using a peer reviewed Vik Nagpal is the managing partner of Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara LLP’s San Diego offices, as well as directing the firm’s business development. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Examining Best Practices for Fire Protection of Critical Systems in Buildings

    July 16, 2023 —
    Protecting building occupants and first responders is critically important when designing and constructing commercial buildings. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), devoted to eliminating death, injury, property and economic loss from fire, electrical and related hazards, was formed in 1896. Shortly afterward, in 1897, the National Electrical Code (NEC) was established to standardize electrical safety for wiring, alarms and related equipment. Since the birth of these two important standardizing organizations, fire codes have been constantly modified to meet the changing safety needs of new infrastructure. In 1996, the NEC identified key circuits for fire survivability, including emergency systems, fire pumps and fire alarms. Per the 1996 code, these circuits needed to be able to survive for one hour in case of fire. However, in the late 1990s and early 2000s, these requirements began to shift to demand two hours of survivability. Reprinted courtesy of Jon Jones, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Tightens Requirements for Co-Worker Affidavits in Asbestos Cases

    November 26, 2014 —
    In Krauss v. Trane US Inc., 2014 Pa. Super. 241, --- A.3d --- (October 22, 2014), the Superior Court of Pennsylvania held that a witness affidavit does not create a genuine issue of fact to defeat summary judgment when it reflects only a presumption and belief that certain products contained asbestos. Moreover, when an affidavit fails to demonstrate plaintiff’s frequent, regular, and proximate exposure to a specific defendant’s asbestos-containing product, summary judgment will be granted. The Executor of the Estate of Henry M. Krauss filed two lawsuits against forty-nine defendants in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. Plaintiff alleged that Mr. Krauss, a bricklayer from 1978 to 1983, was occupationally exposed to asbestos and developed mesothelioma. Various defendants moved for summary judgment based on insufficient product identification. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants because the co-worker affidavits failed to show that: (1) Mr. Krauss worked in proximity to the defendants’ products; (2) the products contained asbestos during the relevant period; or (3) Mr. Krauss inhaled asbestos fibers from the products. Reprinted courtesy of Jerrold P. Anders, White and Williams LLP and Tonya M. Harris, White and Williams LLP Mr. Anders may be contacted at andersj@whiteandwilliams.com; Ms. Harris may be contacted at harrist@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of