BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction project management 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


    Hurdles with Triggering a Subcontractor Performance Bond

    ASCE Statement on Passage of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2022

    Beware of Personal-Liability Clauses – Even When Signing in Your Representative Capacity

    Newmeyer Dillion Named One of "The Best Places To Work In Orange County" by Orange County Business Journal

    You Don’t Have To Be a Consumer to Assert a FDUTPA Claim

    Appellate Court Reinforces When the Attorney-Client Relationship Ends for Purposes of “Continuous Representation” Tolling Provision of Legal Malpractice Statute of Limitations

    Brief Discussion of Enforceability of Anti-Indemnity Statutes in California

    The Drought Is Sinking California

    A Court-Side Seat: As SCOTUS Decides Another Regulatory “Takings” Case, a Flurry of Action at EPA

    Amazon Hits Pause on $2.5B HQ2 Project in Arlington, Va.

    Fourth Circuit Confirms Scope of “Witness Litigation Privilege”

    Haight Attorneys Selected to 2018 Southern California Rising Stars List

    Los Angeles Could Be Devastated by the Next Big Earthquake

    ADP Says Payrolls at Companies in U.S. Increase 200,000

    Texas Jury Awards $5.3 Million to Company Defamed by Union: Could it work in Pennsylvania?

    Texas Court of Appeals Conditionally Grant Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Anderson

    Economic Waste Doctrine and Construction Defects / Nonconforming Work

    Construction Law Breaking News: California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Beacon Residential Community Association

    Virginia Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C" Grade

    Florida Condos Bet on Americans Making 50% Down Payments

    Heavy Rains Cause Flooding, Mudslides in Japan

    Michigan: Identifying and Exploiting the "Queen Exception" to No-Fault Subrogation

    Another Reminder that Your Construction Contract Language Matters

    The Law of Patent v Latent Defects

    Unfortunate Event Test Leads to Three Occurrences

    LAX Runway Lawsuit a Year Too Late?

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

    Happy Thanksgiving from CDJ

    Reports of the Death of SB800 are Greatly Exaggerated – The Court of Appeal Revives Mandatory SB800 Procedures

    Construction Contract Basics: Venue and Choice of Law

    Architectural Democracy – Interview with Pedro Aibéo

    Plehat Brings Natural Environments into Design Tools

    ASCE Statement on Biden Administration Permitting Action Plan

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Just Hanging Around”

    Hovnanian Reports “A Year of Solid Profitability”

    The Administrative Procedure Act and the Evolution of Environmental Law

    Indemnity Provision Prevails Over "Other Insurance" Clause

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Based Upon Exclusion for Contractual Assumption of Liability

    Manhattan Home Prices Top Pre-Crisis Record on Luxury Deals

    Insurance for Defective Construction Now in Third Edition

    Nondelegable Duties

    When Does a Claim Against an Insurance Carrier for Failing to Defend Accrue?

    Can I Be Required to Mediate, Arbitrate or Litigate a California Construction Dispute in Some Other State?

    Mental Health and Wellbeing in Construction: Impacts to Jobsite Safety

    Quick Note: Discretion in Determining Prevailing Party for Purposes of Attorney’s Fees

    Workers Compensation Insurance: Dangers of the Audit Process

    Steven Cvitanovic Recognized in JD Supra's 2017 Readers' Choice Awards

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

    West Virginia Wild: Crews Carve Out Corridor H Through the Appalachian Mountains

    FDOT Races to Re-Open Storm-Damaged Pensacola Bridge
    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. Drawing 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

    You Are Not A “Liar” Simply Because You Amend Your Complaint

    March 14, 2022 —
    In litigation, it is common for a plaintiff to amend their complaint. They may amend to add additional parties. To add new claims. To change the factual allegations. Or, to change the theme of their case. Most of the time, complaints are not verified by the plaintiff. Instead, complaints are drafted and signed by the plaintiff’s counsel. A question becomes: how prior reiterations of a complaint can be used against the plaintiff to show they are a bunch of “liars” by making amendments to their complaint. Sounds prejudicial to the plaintiff, right? Particularly if there is a jury. The reality is that amending complaints for various reasons is routine. Doing so does NOT make the plaintiff a liar and is not a vehicle that a defendant should use to create this inference. A defendant that tries to do so simply wants to detract from the substantive facts and issues. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Revisiting OSHA’s Controlling Employer Policy

    December 21, 2017 —
    The United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit has been asked to review OSHA’s twenty year old “controlling employer” policy. As many contractors are surprised to learn, under OSHA’s controlling employer policy, you can be given an OSHA citation even when your own employee is not exposed to the alleged hazard. A. The Controlling Employer Policy OSHA’s current controlling employer policy has been effective since 1999. That policy applies to multi-employer worksites, which means virtually all construction sites. Under the policy, OSHA can cite the creating, exposing, correcting, or controlling employer. A creating employer is one who creates the hazard to which workers are exposed. The exposing employer is one who permits his employees to be exposed to the hazard, whether it created the hazard or not. The correcting employer is one who is responsible with correcting known hazards. Finally, the controlling employer is one “who has general supervisory authority over the worksite, including the power to correct safety and health violations itself or require others to correct them.” Most general contractors and CM’s are controlling employers. Under OSHA’s policy, a contractor’s OSHA safety obligations hinges on whether it is a creating, exposing, correcting, or controlling employer. The creating, exposing, and correcting contractors obligations are fairly straightforward. However, the controlling contractors obligations are more nuisanced. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    Water Backup Payment Satisfies Insurer's Obligation to Cover for Rain Damage

    February 16, 2017 —
    The insured's attempt to secure additional coverage beyond a $10,000 payment for water damage after a rain storm damaged the interior of its building failed. Bible World Christian Ctr. v. Colony Insurance Co, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175766 (M.D La. Dec. 20, 2016). The interior of Bible World's building was damaged by water that leaked in from the roof after a heavy rain storm. Bible World's officials met with Robert Chandler, an employee of Omni Insurance Group, the day after the rain event. Chandler had assisted Bible World in procuring its commercial property policy with Colony Insurance Company. Chandler told Bible World to fix the property and that its costs would be covered under the policy. Bible World spent $79,876.81 in repairs. 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

    In South Carolina, Insurer's Denial of Liability Does Not Waive Attorney-Client Privilege for Bad Faith Claim

    October 14, 2019 —
    Determining the scope of discovery can be challenging, particularly when an insurance bad faith claim is involved. Courts often face the difficult decision of weighing the importance of preserving attorney-client privilege with the public policy rationale of protecting an insured against their insurer’s bad faith behavior. The Supreme Court of South Carolina recently recognized this dilemma by rejecting a hardline approach to bad faith discovery disputes and adopting a case-by-case analysis. The case, In re Mt. Hawley Ins. Co.,1 arose out of a construction defect claim. ContraVest Construction Company (“ContraVest”) constructed a development in South Carolina and was later sued for alleged defective construction. ContraVest sought coverage for the lawsuit from its insurers, including Mount Hawley Insurance Company (“Mount Hawley”), which had provided excess commercial liability insurance to ContraVest during the relevant timeframe. Mount Hawley denied the claim, which prompted ContraVest to sue it for bad faith, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment. Reprinted courtesy of Ashley L. Cooper, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Bethany L. Barrese, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Cooper may be contacted at alc@sdvlaw.com Ms. Barrese may be contacted at blb@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    How to Build a Coronavirus Hospital in Ten Days

    April 20, 2020 —
    If the coronavirus pandemic continues to spread in the United States as it has in other countries, drastic expansions of hospital and quarantine facility capacity are likely to be necessary. In the hard-hit Seattle area, several temporary facilities are already under construction, including a 200-bed temporary quarantine and isolation center built on a soccer field. China’s response to the initial outbreak in the city of Wuhan demonstrates how rapidly authorities can add capacity in an emergency. As thousands of citizens became ill with COVID-19, China built two hospitals in Wuhan over the span of just days. Time-lapse videos such as this one show how remarkably quickly the hospitals were built. Construction on the Huoshenshan Hospital (shown in the prior linked video) began on January 23 and finished eight days later. A second hospital, Leishenshan Hospital, began construction on January 25 and finished 12 days later. Square footage information on both hospitals has been inconsistently reported, but Huoshenshan Hospital has a capacity for 1,000 beds, while Leishenshan Hospital has a capacity for 1,600 beds. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Elaine Lee, Pillsbury
    Ms. Lee may be contacted at elaine.lee@pillsburylaw.com

    Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

    February 10, 2012 —

    A judge has ruled that a plaintiff can go forward with her suit that she was injured by a defective archway during a birthday party. A three-judge panel of the California Court of Appeals issued this ruling on January 23, 2012, in the case of Trujillo v. Cosio.

    Ms. Trujillo attended a birthday party at the home of Maria Cosio and Joel Verduzco. A piñata was hung between a tree and a brick archway. Ms. Trujillo went to get candy that had fallen from the piñata, during which the archway fell on her hand. Subsequent examination of the archway showed that it had not been “properly anchored to the supporting pillars to protect the arch from falling.”

    Ms. Cosio and Mr. Verduzco argued that they could not have been aware of the defective nature of the archway’s construction, as it had been built at the request of the prior property owner. The structure was constructed without building permits. Mark Burns, a civil engineer testifying for the plaintiff, said that “a reasonable property owner would have thoroughly tested the archway to ensure it was capable of withstanding such horizontal forces before allowing children to enter into the area.” Mr. Burns noted that twenty rope pulls would have been sufficient to demonstrate the structure’s instability.

    The trial court rejected Mr. Burn’s statements, finding that the respondents did not have any knowledge of the defect and that a visual inspection should have sufficed. The court noted that this a triable issue, whether visual inspection suffices, or whether the property owners should have done as Mr. Burns suggested and yank a rope twenty times. The court noted that “although a jury may ultimately disagree with Burn’s opinion, it was supported by sufficient foundation and was not speculative.”

    The opinion was written by Judge Flier, with Judges Rubin and Grimes concurring.

    Read the court’s decison…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Designers George Yabu and Glenn Pushelberg Discuss One57’s Ultra-Luxury Park Hyatt

    July 30, 2014 —
    One57 might just be the hottest -- or at least the most expensive -- address in New York City. 

The $375 million skyscraper currently piercing its blue-glass presence into Manhattan's midtown skyline is home not only to 94 private condos (two of which have already sold for $90 million); it also hosts a brand new Park Hyatt hotel, which opens this August. 

 Eight years in the making, this Hyatt is the first ultra-luxury hotel New York has seen since the Mandarin Oriental opened in 2003. It's intended to be a New York icon. So, naturally, Hyatt hired two Canadian guys to design it. 

Meet George Yabu and Glenn Pushelberg, the dynamic couple who met as college students in Toronto in 1972, and decided to launch design firm YabuPushelberg. Now, they're earning millions per project to design luxury hotels, restaurants, and residences all over the world. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jennifer Parker, Bloomberg

    Renee Zellweger Selling Connecticut Country Home

    August 06, 2014 —
    You had me at seven fireplaces (and a bread oven). Actress Renee Zellweger’s Connecticut country home, on the market for $1.6 million, is hardly roughing it. The luxury farmhouse, built in 1770 and updated in 2004, is a stylish and luxurious country getaway. Set on 38 acres overlooking the Quinebaug River in rural Pomfret Center, the retreat at 96 Cotton Rd is 3,463 square feet with a top-of-the-line kitchen, a bread oven in the family room and a swimming pool. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Emily Heffter, Zillow