BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expert
    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


    Milhouse Engineering and Construction, Inc. Named 2022 A/E/C Building a Better World Award Winner

    Determining Occurrence for Injury Under Commercial General Liability Policy Without Applying “Trigger Theory”

    Defect Claims Called “Witch Hunt”

    Brooklyn’s Industry City to Get $1 Billion Modernization

    Trump Sues Casinos to Get Conditions Fixed or Name Off

    Insurer Could Not Rely on Extrinsic Evidence to Circumvent Its Duty to Defend

    First Suit Filed for Losses Caused by COVID-19

    Patriarch Partners Decision Confirms Government Subpoenas May Constitute a “Claim” Under D&O Policy; Warns Policyholders to Think Broadly When Representing Facts and Circumstances to Insurers

    Mandatory Attorneys’ Fee Award for Actions Brought Under the Underground Utility Damage Prevention Act

    Federal Court Strikes Down 'Persuader' Rule

    Here's How Much You Can Make by Renting Out Your Home

    A General Contractor’s Guide to Additional Insured Coverage

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at Slower Pace in May

    Floating Crane on Job in NYC's East River Has a Storied Past of Cold War Intrigue

    Dispute Over Amount Insured Owes Public Adjuster Resolved

    Unit Owners Have No Standing to Sue under Condominium Association’s Policy

    Illinois Appellate Court Address the Scope of the Term “Resident” in Homeowners Policy

    Fannie-Freddie Elimination Model in Apartments: Mortgages

    The Small Stuff: Small Claims Court and Limited Civil Court Jurisdictional Limits

    N.J. Appellate Court Confirms that AIA Construction Contract Bars Insurer's Subrogation Claim

    An Expert’s Qualifications are Important

    New Jersey Court Washes Away Insurer’s Waiver of Subrogation Arguments

    Should I Pull the Pin? Contractor and Subcontractor Termination for Cause

    Eleven Payne & Fears Attorneys Honored by Best Lawyers

    Protecting Expert Opinions: Lessons Regarding Attorney-Client Privilege and Expert Retention in Construction Litigation

    In Colorado, Repair Vendors Can Bring First-Party Bad Faith Actions For Amounts Owed From an Insurer

    Couple Claims Poor Installation of Home Caused Defects

    Mitsubishi Estate to Rebuild Apartments After Defects Found

    No Coverage for Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship

    What the FIU Bridge Collapse Says About Peer Review

    California Court of Appeal: Inserting The Phrase “Ongoing Operations” In An Additional Endorsement Is Not Enough to Preclude Coverage for Completed Operations

    Downtown Sacramento Building Riddled with Defects

    Year and a Half Old Las Vegas VA Emergency Room Gets Rebuilt

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You Left Out a Key Ingredient!”

    The 2019 ISO Forms: Additions, Revisions, and Pitfalls

    Women Make Their Mark on Construction Leadership

    New Report Reveals Heavy Civil Construction Less Impacted by COVID-19 Than Commercial Construction

    New Jersey Appeals Court Ruled Suits Stand Despite HOA Bypassing Bylaw

    New Addition to the ASCE/SEI 7-22 Standard Protects Buildings from a 500-year Flood Event

    No Coverage for Alleged Misrepresentation Claim

    Construction in the Time of Coronavirus

    Colorado Senate Bill 15-177: This Year’s Attempt at Reasonable Construction Defect Reform

    Ex-Corps Worker Pleads Guilty to Bribery on Afghan Contract

    Finding of No Coverage Overturned Due to Lack of Actual Policy

    Chinese Millionaire Roils Brokers Over Shrinking Mansion

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    Will Claims By Contractors on Big Design-Build Projects Ever End?

    A Loud Boom, But No Serious Injuries in World Trade Center Accident

    Harmon Tower Demolition on Hold

    Automated Weather Insurance Could Offer Help in an Increasingly Hot World
    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

    Application of Frye Test to Determine Admissibility of Expert

    April 03, 2019 —
    Florida went back to the Frye test/standard, instead of the Daubert test utilized in federal court, to determine the admissibility of expert testimony. The Frye test is more favorable to plaintiffs because it applies when an expert renders an opinion based on new or novel scientific principles. See D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Heron’s Landing Condominium Ass’n of Jacksonville, Inc., 44 Fla.L.Weekly D109b (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (“The supreme court has described the Frye test as one in which the results of mechanical or scientific testing are not admissible unless the testing has developed or improved to the point where the experts in the field widely share the view that the results are scientifically reliable as accurate. Stated differently, under Frye, the proponent of the evidence has the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence with the general acceptance of the underlying scientific principles and methodology. However, as stated, the Frye standard only applies when an expert attempts to render an opinion that is based upon new or novel scientific principles.”). In D.R. Horton, Inc., a condominium association sued the developer and general contractor (same entity) for construction defects that included claims in negligence, violation of building code, and breach of statutory warranties. The developer/general contractor moved in limine / to strike the association’s experts under, at the time, a Daubert analysis, but which became a Frye analysis during the pendency of the appeal. The expert opined as to construction defects and damage and the appropriate repairs – really, no different than any construction defect dispute, from what it appeared. The trial court denied the motion and during trial the experts testified and a sizable damages judgment was entered against the developer/contractor prompting the appeal. One issue on appeal was the admissibility of the expert’s opinion. The appellate court noted that a Frye analysis is not necessary because the experts used a scientifically reliable and peer-reviewed methodology. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/02/22) – Flexible Workspaces, Sustainable Infrastructure, & Construction Tech

    November 15, 2022 —
    This week’s round-up dives into digital transformation in the construction industry, renewed interest in flexible workspaces, and how the infrastructure sector can become more resilient and sustainable, both economically and environmentally.
    • Digital transformation in the construction industry is top of mind for many firms, but most are still in the beginning and intermediate phases of implementing new digital capabilities. (Ursula Cullen, PBC Today)
    • Companies could mitigate climate hazards and build resilience into the life cycle of their infrastructure and capital projects by facilitating a comprehensive approach to understanding risk. (Brodie Boland and Daphne Luchtenberg, McKinsey & Company)
    • The use of drones in project planning, as well as the incorporation of other technology, is proposed as an alternative solution to addressing the construction industry’s labor shortage. (Shaun Passley, For Construction Pros)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Lewis Brisbois Ranks Among Top 25 Firms on NLJ’s 2021 Women in Law Scorecard

    July 25, 2021 —
    Lewis Brisbois has been ranked among the top 25 law firms included in the National Law Journal's (NLJ) 2021 Women in Law Scorecard (Women’s Scorecard), moving up from 27th place to 23rd place this year. In addition, of the top 25 firms in the Women’s Scorecard, Lewis Brisbois had the highest number of female minority partners. The Women’s Scorecard is produced as part of the annual NLJ 500 firm head count report, and only the largest 350 firms are eligible to be included on the scorecard. A firm’s score is determined by adding the percentage of female attorneys and percentage of female partners. Diversity staffing counts were based on a firm’s average full-time attorneys in 2020, excluding contract and temporary attorneys. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jana Lubert, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Lubert may be contacted at Jana.Lubert@lewisbrisbois.com

    And the Winner Is . . . The Right to Repair Act!

    February 15, 2018 —
    Civil litigation attorneys often talk about “damages.” Because without damages . . . well . . . you’re out of luck. But damages come in different flavors. In construction litigation, when it comes to defective construction, there are two basic flavors: actual damages and economic damages. Actual damages include property damage and personal injury, such as a defective roof that causes water damage into the interior of the structure or collapses causing injury to someone inside the structure. In contrast, economic damages would be the cost to repair or replace the defective roof, without any resulting property damage or personal injury. 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

    Florida Condo Collapse Shows Town’s Rich, Middle-Class Divide

    August 04, 2021 —
    The condo tower collapse in Surfside could exacerbate the division that already exists between the tiny Florida town’s new luxury buildings built for the global elite and those constructed decades ago for the middle class. It is already creating headaches for some small businesses. The town has seen the construction of numerous new condos in recent years, where large oceanfront units exceeding 3,000 square feet (280 square meters) with modern amenities can fetch $10 million and up. Meanwhile, small units of 800 square feet (75 square meters) in neighboring condo buildings constructed decades ago can be had for $400,000. Ana Bozovic, a South Florida real estate broker, said the June 24 collapse of the 40-year-old, middle-class Champlain Towers South will exacerbate this division. At least 46 people were killed and more than 90 remain missing. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg

    Client Alert: Naming of Known and Unknown Defendants in Initial Complaints: A Cautionary Tale

    September 24, 2014 —
    On September 12, 2014, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Butler v. National Community Renaissance of California, upheld a district court's dismissal of certain defendants named in amended complaints, affirming the necessity of naming those known and unknown defendants in Plaintiff's original complaint. In April 2009, Plaintiff Zina Butler filed an action in federal district court, naming a single defendant, National Community Renaissance Corporation ("National"), for an alleged warrantless search of Plaintiff's apartment on April 18, 2007. The single page complaint asserted that the apartment manager provided a Section 8 investigator, a City employee and Sherriff deputies keys to Plaintiff's apartment and conducted a search in violation of her Fourth Amendment rights. Shortly after, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint, with the only change being the addition of defendant, the Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles ("HACoLA") in the caption. In May 2009, the court (on its own accord) dismissed the first amended complaint with leave to amend as "it [was] unclear whom Plaintiff intend[ed] to sue." In June 2009, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint, identifying National and HACoLA in the caption as defendants, but separately identifying several other individuals and entities allegedly involved in the incident occurring in April of 2007 in the complaint's statement of facts. The Court, once again, dismissed the second amended complaint with leave to amend for the same reasons it dismissed Plaintiff's first amended complaint. Reprinted courtesy of R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Whitney L. Stefco, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com; Ms. Stefko may be contacted at wstefko@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Canadian Developer Faces Charges After Massive Fire on Construction Site

    August 27, 2014 —
    A fire leveled an apartment construction site in Canada last December, which resulted in almost two dozen charges relating to fire safety precautions and lack of cooperation with the Ministry of Labour’s investigation, according to CKWS TV. The Ministry of Labour has recently “laid 22 charges against three individuals and two companies—Jay Patry Enterprises Inc. and Steimach Property Management Inc.” CKWS TV reported that “[c]harges include failing to provide adequate space for workers to evacuate during an emergency, failing to protect the health and safety of workers and failing to inspect every fire extinguisher for defects or deterioration.” Jason Patry, Nathan Patry and Troy Stelmach have been charged with “obstructing and providing false information to a ministry of labour inspector, as well as failing to make the inspection process an easy one.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    SCOTUS, Having Received Views of Solicitor General, Will Decide Whether CWA Regulates Indirect Discharge of Pollutants Into Navigable Water Via Groundwater

    April 17, 2019 —
    Prior to deciding whether to review an important February 1, 2018, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decision involving the jurisdictional reach of the Clean Water Act (CWA), Hawai’i Wildlife Fund, et al., v. County of Maui, the Supreme Court asked the Solicitor General for the views of the U.S. on the holdings of this case and the April 12, 2018 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decision, Upstate Forever, et al., v. Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P., et al. On February 19, the Supreme Court confirmed that certiorari was granted to Question 1 presented by the Petition,
    Whether the CWA requires a permit when pollutants originate from a point source but are conveyed to navigable waters by a nonpoint source, such as groundwater. (33 U.S.C. § 1362 (12)
    In County of Maui , the Ninth Circuit held that indirect discharges to navigable waters through groundwater may be subject to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) CWA the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting authority, and in Kinder Morgan, the Fourth Circuit held that such an indirect discharge may be subject to regulation under the CWA when there is a direct hydrological connection between the discharge into groundwater and the direct discharge into navigable, surface waters. 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