BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating 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


    Breaking with Tradition, The Current NLRB is on a Rulemaking Tear: Election Procedures, Recognition Bar, and 9(a) Collective Bargaining Relationships

    Index Demonstrates Increase in Builders’ Sentiment

    No Coverage for Building's First Collapse, But Disputed Facts on Second Collapse

    Colorado HB 13-1090: Concerning Payment of Amounts Due Under a Construction Agreement

    Lewis Brisbois Promotes 35 to Partnership

    Newark Trial Team Obtains Affirmance of Summary Judgment for General Contractor Client

    Untangling Unique Legal Issues in Modern Modular Construction

    Celebrities Lose Case in Construction Defect Arbitration

    Gene Witkin Celebrates First Anniversary as Member of Ross Hart’s Mediation Team

    Traub Lieberman Partner Ryan Jones Provides Testimony Before Florida Senate Committees

    Japan Quake Triggers Landslides, Knocks Power Plant Offline

    Restrictions On Out-Of-State Real Estate Brokers Being Challenged In Nevada

    TARP Funds Demolish Homes in Detroit to Lift Prices: Mortgages

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

    Indemnity Provision Prevails Over "Other Insurance" Clause

    Techniques for Resolving Construction Disputes

    Subcontractors Eye 2022 with Guarded Optimism

    Sureties do not Issue Bonds Risk-Free to the Bond-Principal

    Fraud, the VCPA and Construction Contracts

    Tennessee High Court Excludes Labor Costs from Insurer’s Actual Cash Value Depreciation Calculations

    Updates to AIA Contract Applications

    Congratulations to Arezoo Jamshidi & Michael Parme Selected to the 2022 San Diego Super Lawyers Rising Stars List

    Standard of Care

    Federal Miller Act Payment Bond Claim: Who Gets Paid and Who Does Not? What Are the Deadlines?

    Construction Defect Claim over LAX Runways

    Project Team Upgrades Va. General Assembly

    Janus v. AFSCME

    Request for Stay Denied in Dispute Over Coverage for Volcano Damage

    Client Alert: Court Settles Conflict between CCP and Rules of Court Regarding Demurrer Deadline Following Amended Complaint

    Veterans Day – Thank You for Your Service

    Can We Compel Insurers To Cover Construction Defect in General Liability Policies?

    Helsinki is Building a Digital Twin of the City

    Picketing Threats

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces New Partner Bahaar Cadambi

    While Construction Permits Slowly Rise, Construction Starts and Completions in California Are Stagnant

    Quick Note: Independent Third-Party Spoliation Of Evidence Claim

    Social Engineering Scams Are On the Rise – Do I Have Insurance Coverage for That?

    How the New Dropped Object Standard Is Changing Jobsite Safety

    Monitoring Building Moisture with RFID – Interview with Jarmo Tuppurainen

    Colorado “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    What You Don’t Know About Construction Law Can Hurt Your Engineering Firm (Law Note)

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (12/07/22) – Home Sales, EV Charging Infrastructure, and Office Occupancy

    The Legal Landscape

    Contractor Sues Construction Defect Claimants for Defamation

    Executive Insights 2024: Leaders in Construction Law

    Georgia Amends Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Gru Was Wrong About the Money: Court Concludes that Lender Owes Contractor “Contractually, Factually and Practically”

    #7 CDJ Topic: Truck Ins. Exchange v. O'Mailia

    Claim Against Broker Survives Motion to Dismiss
    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

    Attorney-Client Privilege in the Age of Cyber Breaches

    October 18, 2021 —
    Investigations and forensic reports relating to a cybersecurity breach may not always be protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product protection. Companies seeking such reports after a data breach must take caution to protect them from a possible waiver of privilege in the event of subsequent litigation relating to a data breach. The following recent cases highlight the potential waiver of privilege in light of the preparation of a forensic report.
    1. In re Capital One Consumer Data Security Breach Litigation, 2020 WL 3470261 (E.D. Va. June 25, 2020)
    • After a data breach occurred, Capital One retained a law firm that later entered into an agreement with Mandiant for various cyber-related services (including incident remediation), which required that Mandiant provide deliverables to the firm, rather than to Capitol One. In re Capital One Consumer Data Security Breach Litigation, 2020 WL 2731238, at *1 (E.D. Va. June 25, 2020). Plaintiffs sought release of the report created by Mandiant (regarding the factors leading to the breach), arguing that it was prepared for business and regulatory purposes and therefore was not privileged, while Capital One argued that the report was privileged because it was prepared in anticipation of litigation. Ibid. The Court determined that Capital One did not carry its burden of establishing that the report was protected by the attorney work-product doctrine and ordered that Capital One produce the report. Id. at *7. In its reasoning, the Court stated that the fact that there is litigation does not, by itself, provide prepared materials with work-product protection. Ibid. The work-product protection applies when a party faces a claim following an event that may result in litigation, and the work product would not have been prepared in a substantially similar form but for the prospect of that litigation. Ibid.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shaia Araghi, Newmeyer Dillion
    Ms. Araghi may be contacted at shaia.araghi@ndlf.com

    10-story Mass Timber 'Rocking' Frame Sails Through Seismic Shake Tests

    June 19, 2023 —
    A 10-story mass timber “rocking” frame, designed to be resilient enough to withstand powerful earthquakes with little or no structural damage, proved its worth May 9 during seismic simulations at the largest high-performance outdoor shake table, located at the University of California San Diego. 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

    Senate Committee Approves Military Construction Funds

    June 29, 2011 —

    With a decrease in funding, as compared to the House bill, the Military Construction and Veteran’s Affairs subcommittee of the Senate moved on a $72 billion construction bill. The House version had approved an additional half billion dollars in funding. Senator Tim Johnson, Democrat of South Carolina, said that he expected easy reconciliation with the House version. The Senate bill will move to the full Senate Appropriations Committee on June 30.

    The bill, S 1255, includes funding for construction and remodeling of military housing, as well as construction and remodeling of base facilities.

    Read the full story…

    Read S1255

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

    Hirers Must Affirmatively Exercise Retained Control to be Liable Under Hooker Exception to Privette Doctrine

    September 12, 2023 —
    Don’t drink and drive people. I mean seriously. It’s been over 40 years since California native Candace Lightner formed Mothers Against Drunk Driving in 1980 after her 13-year-old daughter, Candace, was killed by a drunk driver who later served just 9 months in jail before getting out and getting into his sixth (yes, sixth) drunk driving accident. It hurts the victims and their families, makes a mess for the offender (and their family), and, as the next case, Marin v. Department of Transportation, 88 Cal.App.5th 529 (2023), illustrates, can needlessly draw out the pain as the victim’s family seeks financial recourse for their emotional loss from others. Miguel Angel Rodriguez De La Cruz, a highway construction worker, was killed by a drunk driver. I’m not sure what his family did on the legal front after his death – perhaps sued the drunk driver – but among possible others they sued the California Department of Transportation. And they lost. Although there is no such thing as “winning” and “losing” in these types cases. It’s just losing and losing. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Triable Issue of Fact Exists as to Insurer’s Obligation to Provide Coverage Under Occurrence Policy

    March 08, 2021 —
    In Guastello v. AIG Specialty Ins. Co. (No. G057714. filed 2/19/21 ord. pub. 2/23/21), a California appeals court held that triable issues of material fact exist which precluded summary judgment for an insurer seeking to disclaim coverage on the basis that the “occurrence” pre-dated the policy period where a dispute exists as to the timing of the subject “occurrence.” In Guastello, a subcontractor built retaining walls from 2003 to 2004 for a housing development in Dana Point, California. In 2010, one of these retaining walls collapsed causing damage to a residential lot owned by Thomas Guastello. Reprinted courtesy of Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Kathleen E.M. Moriarty, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Ms. Moriarty may be contacted at kemoriarty@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Facts about Chinese Drywall in Construction

    September 10, 2014 —
    Most of us have heard that there are problems with Chinese drywall, but do not really know what specifically is wrong with it when it comes to construction in the United States. Let’s begin with a brief overview about why Chinese drywall came to be used in the United States in the first place. Chinese drywall was first imported into the United States beginning in 2001. Most of the homes that have Chinese drywall were built between 2001 and 2008. During the construction boom, Chinese drywall was being imported into the U.S. partly due to the shortage of American-made drywall as a result of several hurricanes that devastated Florida in 2004-2005, and the damage caused by Hurricane Katrina. Hundreds of millions of pounds of Chinese drywall were imported into the United States during that time period. While this is only a fraction of the percentage of drywall used in American homes, the problem has been concentrated in certain regions of the country, mostly the South. So what is the problem with Chinese Drywall? To understand it, we must first explore what constitutes drywall. Drywall is a building material made of a gypsum-based sheet of plaster covered with heavy paper on both sides. Drywall is also referred to as plasterboard or sheetrock. Testing of Chinese drywall has found unusually high instances of pyrite. There is speculation that the pyrite oxidation results in sulfur compounds being released by the drywall during periods of high heat and humidity. The combination of high temperatures and humidity is ripe for bringing out problems associated with Chinese drywall. That is why most cases associated with Chinese drywall are found in the Southeastern United States. Reports show that homeowners typically complain of corroding copper in their homes, and a rotten egg odor emanating from copper surfaces that, in turn, turn black and exhibit a powdery ash type substance. Experts opine that this is a result of a reaction of the copper with hydrogen sulfide. Much of wiring or piping found in homes is made of copper. Exposure to Chinese drywall can result in nose bleeds, headaches, coughs, upper respiratory or sinus problems, rashes, and difficulty breathing. There have also been cases reported of pets dying due to exposure to Chinese drywall. Reprinted courtesy of William M. Kaufman, Lockhart Park LP Mr. Kaufman may be contacted at wkaufman@lockhartpark.com, and you may visit the firm's website at www.lockhartpark.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court of Appeal Holds Only “Named Insureds” May Sue for Bad Faith Under California FAIR Plan Policy

    May 10, 2021 —
    In Wexler v. California Fair Plan Association (No. 303100, filed 4/14/21), Brooke Wexler’s parents insured their residence, which was located in a mountainous high-fire risk area, with a California FAIR Plan Association owner-occupied dwelling policy. The policy only listed Wexler’s parents and did not name Wexler, their adult child, under the policy’s “Insured Name” section. The FAIR Plan expressly disclaimed coverage for “unnamed people,” referred to by the court as the “no-coverage-for-unnamed-persons clause.” FAIR Plan was created by the Legislature in 1968 and is a joint reinsurance association created to give homeowners in high risk areas access to basic property insurance and is a self-described “insurer of last resort.” Reprinted courtesy of Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Kathleen E.M. Moriarty, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Ms. Moriarty may be contacted at kemoriarty@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    DC Circuit Rejects Challenge to EPA’s CERCLA Decision Regarding Hardrock Mining Industry

    September 23, 2019 —
    In a decision that will likely be welcomed by the electrical power, chemical manufacturing, and petroleum and coal products manufacturing industries, on July 19, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held in the case of Idaho Conservation League et al., v. Wheeler, that EPA acted reasonably in deciding not to issue CERCLA financial responsibility regulations for the hardrock mining industry. CERCLA (a.k.a., Superfund) was enacted in 1980 and amended in 1986, and Section 108(b) of CERCLA provides that EPA shall promulgate requirements that classes of facilities establish and maintain evidence of financial responsibility “consistent with the degree and duration of risk” associated with the production, transportation, treatment, storage or disposal of hazardous substances. However, no action was taken to implement Section 108(b) until 2009, and then only as the result of litigation challenging EPA’s failure to act. EPA and the petitioners agreed to a schedule by which the agency would propose financial responsibility rules for the hardrock mining industry—which was the initial class of industry facilities selected for the possible application of these rules—and the DC Circuit approved this schedule in 2016, which contained the court’s caveat that EPA retained the discretion not to issue any rule at the conclusion of the rulemaking. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com