BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect 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


    Generally, What Constitutes A Trade Secret Is A Question of Fact

    McDermott International and BP Team Arbitrate $535M LNG Site Dispute

    More (and Simpler) Options Under New Oregon Retention Law

    Proximity Trace Used to Monitor, Maintain Social Distancing on $1.9-Billion KCI Airport Project

    Mark Van Wonterghem To Serve as Senior Forensic Consultant in the Sacramento Offices of Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc.

    Court’s Ruling on SB800 “Surprising to Some”

    Mississippi Supreme Court Addresses Earth Movement Exclusion

    Factories Boost U.S. Output as Builders Gain Confidence: Economy

    Manhattan Homebuyers Pay Up as Sales Top Listing Price

    U.S. Architecture Firms’ Billing Index Faster in Dec.

    The Secret to an OSHA Inspection

    Palo Alto Considers Fines for Stalled Construction Projects

    After Sixty Years, Subcontractors are Back in the Driver’s Seat in Bidding on California Construction Projects

    PATH Station Designed by Architect Known for Beautiful Structures, Defects, and Cost Overruns

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured In Northern California Super Lawyers 2021!

    Powering Goal Congruence in Construction Through Smart Contracts

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    A Matter Judged: Subrogating Insurers Should Beware of Prior Suits Involving the Insured

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Excess Can Sue Primary for Equitable Subrogation

    Toll Brothers Report End of Year Results

    Eleventh Circuit Holds that EPA Superfund Remedial Actions are Usually Entitled to the FTCA “Discretionary Function” Exemption

    24th Annual West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar A Success

    Slump in U.S. Housing Starts Led by Multifamily: Economy

    French Government Fines National Architects' Group $1.6M Over Fee-Fixing

    Damron Agreement Questioned in Colorado Casualty Insurance v Safety Control Company, et al.

    Condo Developers Buy in Washington despite Construction Defect Litigation

    Amid the Chaos, Trump Signs Executive Order Streamlining Environmental Permitting and Disbands Infrastructure Council

    Chinese Telecommunications Ban to Expand to Federally Funded Contracts Effective November 12, 2020

    Let it Shine: California Mandates Rooftop Solar for New Residential Construction

    NIST Florida Condo Collapse Probe Develops Dozens of Hypotheses

    Labor Shortages In Construction

    Colorado Senate Revives Construction Defects Reform Bill

    Chicago’s Bungalows Are Where the City Comes Together

    Illinois Supreme Court Announces Time Standards for Closing Out Cases

    Like Water For Chocolate: Insurer Prevails Over Chocolatier In Hurricane Sandy Claim

    NYC Luxury-Condo Buyers Await New Towers as Sales Slow

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

    Federal Court Holds that Demolition Exclusion Does Not Apply and Carrier Has Duty to Defend Additional Insureds

    COVID-19 Impacts on Subcontractor Default Insurance and Ripple Effects

    Framework, Tallest Mass Timber Project in the U.S., Is On Hold

    Connecticut’s New False Claims Act Increases Risk to Public Construction Participants

    New Home Construction Booming in Texas

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

    Renovate or Demolish Milwaukee’s Historic City Hall?

    April Rise in Construction Spending Not That Much

    Auburn Woods Homeowners Association v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    Delaware Court Holds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    SunCal Buys Oak Knoll Development for the Second Time

    Gaps in Insurance Created by Complex Risks

    Of Pavement and Pandemic: Liability and Regulatory Hurdles for Taking It Outside
    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

    Social Distancing and the Impact on Service of Process Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic

    April 13, 2020 —
    Service of process usually requires person-to-person contact and is an essential part of civil procedure. It notifies the defendant of the legal proceedings against him/her and establishes jurisdiction. “Process” refers to the documents that must be served on a defendant. If service of process is not performed pursuant to the governing rules of civil procedure, a lawsuit cannot proceed. Service of Process in NJ and PA Personal service is required to be the first attempted means of service in New Jersey. If personal service is not successful, then service may be made by mailing a copy of the process via registered or certified mail with return receipt requested to the defendant’s usual place of abode or business/place of employment, or to an authorized agent. The party attempting to serve the defendant by mail can choose to mail the process by regular mail as well, and if the defendant refuses to accept or claim the registered or certified copy, and the regular mail copy is not returned, then service is considered effectuated. Pennsylvania allows for a defendant to be served via personal service by handing a copy to the defendant or by delivering a copy to an adult family household member at the defendant’s residence. Pennsylvania also permits service of process by mail. Process can be served by mail requiring a signature of the defendant. If the mail is unclaimed, alternative service must be attempted. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams attorneys Robert Devine, James Burger and Susan Zingone Mr. Devine may be contacted at deviner@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Burger may be contacted at burgerj@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Zingone may be contacted at zingones@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Investigation Continues on Children Drowning at Construction Site

    August 13, 2014 —
    Two months ago, in Hobart, Illinois, two young boys (brothers) “drowned in an unsecured, excavated pit that filled with water” on a site owned by Goldschmidt Construction Services LLC of Hobart. The Post-Tribune reported that “Police Chief Richard Zormier said the department is waiting on reports from other agencies as it continues to investigate circumstances surrounding” the accident. “We want to be thorough. The young boys deserve it. Their family deserves it,” Zormier told the Post-Tribune. The family of the victims has filed a $60 million lawsuit against Goldschmidt Construction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Thank You for Seven Years of Election to Super Lawyers

    May 01, 2023 —
    It is with humility and a sense of accomplishment that I announce that I have been selected for the seventh straight year to the Virginia Super Lawyers in the Construction Litigation category for 2023. Add this to my recent election to the Virginia Legal Elite in Construction and I’ve had a pretty good year. As always, I am thrilled to be included on these peer-elected lists. So without further ado, thank you to my peers and those on the panel at Virginia Super Lawyers for the great honor. I feel quite proud to be part of the 5% of Virginia attorneys that made this list for 2023. The full lists of Virginia Super Lawyers will appear in the May edition of Richmond Magazine. Please check it out. 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

    Drought Dogs Developers in California's Soaring Housing Market

    September 17, 2015 —
    California’s already tight housing market is facing another long-term complication: drought. The state’s dry spell is creating challenges for developers at a time when home prices are soaring because of limited inventory. The metropolitan areas of San Jose, San Francisco and San Diego had the nation’s biggest gap between the number of new jobs and residential building permits from 2012 to 2014, according to a report Wednesday by the National Association of Realtors. Now the drought, into its fourth year, stands to curb affordability further. “It’s contributing to price appreciation by restricting supply,” said Mark Boud, founder of Real Estate Economics, a housing-consulting firm based in Irvine, California. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Gittelsohn, Bloomberg

    Awarding Insurer Summary Judgment Before Discovery Completed Reversed

    August 29, 2022 —
    The Florida Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's awarding of summary judgment to the insurer because discovery was not completed. Sacramento v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 4292 (Fla. Ct. App. June 22, 2022). The insured filed a claim under the all-risk policy for water damage caused by Hurricane Irma. Citizens denied the claim based upon a policy exclusion. The insured filed suit on March 8, 2019. On April 24, 2020, Citizens moved for summary judgment. A hearing was set for August 10, 2020. Citizens filed a notice for a deposition of a Mitigation Company representative scheduled to occur on December 1, 2020. On August 14, 2020, the insured filed an opposition to the summary judgment motion arguing that it would be premature to grant the motion because there were still pending depositions. The insured specifically requested that the trial court not enter summary judgment until the mitigation company's representative was deposed because he was a key witness who would be testifying regarding the cause of loss. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Eighth Circuit Rejects Retroactive Application of Construction Defect Legislation

    September 17, 2014 —
    The Eighth Circuit refused to retroactively apply an Arkansas statute establishing coverage for faulty workmanship. J-McDaniel Const. Co., Inc. v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 14911 (8th Cir. Aug. 4, 2014). The homeowners sued J-McDaniel for faulty workmanship in constructing their home. The defective construction work was performed by subcontractors. Mid-Continent refused to defend or indemnify J-McDaniel. The insured sued Mid-Continent. The district court dismissed the claim pursuant to Essex Ins. Co. v. Holder, 261 S.W. 3d 456, 460 (Ark. 2008). In Essex, the Arkansas Supreme Court held that defective workmanship resulting in damages only to the work product itself was not an occurrence. Although The Arkansas legislature overruled Essex by statute, the district court found that the Arkansas case law barred retroactive application of the statute. 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

    Ninth Circuit Finds Policy’s Definition of “Policy Period” Fatal to Insurer’s “Related Claims” Argument

    April 10, 2019 —
    Professional liability policies often include some form of a “related claims” or “related acts” provision stating that if more than one claim results from a single wrongful act, or a series of related wrongful acts, such claims will be treated as a single claim and deemed first made during the policy period in which the earliest claim was made. These provisions can have significant implications on the applicable policy and policy limits, retroactive date issues, and whether such claims were first made and reported during a particular policy period. Recently, the Ninth Circuit issued a stern reminder of how the particular policy language can effect, and in this case thwart, the intended scope of the carrier’s “related claims” provision. In Attorneys Ins. Mut. Risk Retention Grp., Inc. v. Liberty Surplus Ins. Corp., 2019 WL 643442 (9th Cir. Feb. 15, 2019), the Ninth Circuit construed a “related claims” provision included in two consecutive lawyers professional liability policies. During both the 2009–2010 and 2010–2011 insurance policy periods, attorney J. Wayne Allen (“Allen”) was insured through his employer by Liberty Surplus Insurance Corporation’s (“Liberty”) professional liability insurance. Third parties filed suit against Allen during the 2009–2010 policy period in a probate case, and a second, related civil suit during the 2010–2011 policy period. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason M. Taylor, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com

    California Contractor License Bonds to Increase in 2016

    December 02, 2015 —
    The post, which originally appeared on The Surety Bond Insider, was written by Jon Gottschalk, a member of the SuretyBonds.com Educational Outreach team. on SuretyBonds.com helps contractors fulfill their bonding requirements. The Contractors State License Board (CSLB) is requiring all California contractors to purchase a $15,000 bond by January 1, 2016— a $2,500 increase from the $12,500 amount that was previously required. The additional $2,500 was previously accounted for by an additional requirement to obtain a contractor’s license. Those applying for the license had to post the $12,500 surety bond and proof of financial solvency in the amount of $2,500. Essentially, contractors were required to show that their current assets were greater than their liabilities by no less than $2,500. By increasing the bond amount to include that additional $2,500, the CSLB has removed the burden of proving financial solvency from those who wish to obtain their license. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com