BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut structural engineering 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


    Montrose III: Vertical Exhaustion Applies in Upper Layers of Excess Coverage

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    What’s in a Name? Trademarks and Construction

    Adobe Opens New Office Tower and Pledges No Companywide Layoffs in 2023

    Environmental Justice: A Legislative and Regulatory Update

    Contractor Gets Benched After Failing to Pay Jury Fees

    Colorado Introduces Construction Defect Bill for Commuter Communities

    Differing Site Conditions: What to Expect from the Court When You Encounter the Unexpected

    United States Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in EEOC Subpoena Case

    NTSB Issues 'Urgent' Recommendations After Mass. Pipeline Explosions

    No Coverage for Negligent Misrepresentation without Allegations of “Bodily Injury” or “Property Damage”

    How is Negotiating a Construction Contract Like Buying a Car?

    Construction Contract Provisions that Should Pique Your Interest

    Navigating the Hurdles of Florida Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Home Prices Beat Estimates With 0.8% Gain in November

    California’s Housing Costs Endanger Growth, Analyst Says

    Some Construction Contract Basics- Necessities and Pitfalls

    Acquisition, Development, and Construction Lending Conditions Ease

    Hunton Andrews Kurth Promotes Insurance Recovery Lawyer Andrea (Andi) DeField to Partner

    Biden Administration Focus on Environmental Justice Raises Questions for Industry

    Remodel Leads to Construction Defect Lawsuit

    New York Considering Legislation That Would Create Statute of Repose For Construction

    From Both Sides Now: Looking at Contracts Through a Post-Pandemic Lens

    More Clear, But Not Yet Crystal: Virginia Amends its Prompt Payment Law and Legislation Banning “Pay-If-Paid Clauses in Construction Contracts Effective July 1, 2023

    When Construction Contracts Go Sideways in Bankruptcy

    Veolia Agrees to $25M Settlement in Flint Water Crisis Case

    Insurance Coverage Litigation Section to Present at Hawaii State Bar Convention

    Be Careful with Good Faith Payments

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

    Pandemic-Related Construction Materials Pricing Poses Challenges in Construction Lawsuits

    Ex-Turner Exec Gets 46 Months for Bloomberg Construction Bribes

    Occurrence Definition Trends Analyzed

    A Court-Side Seat: Clean Air, Clean Water, Endangered Species and Deliberative Process Privilege

    Defining Construction Defects

    Can You Really Be Liable For a Product You Didn’t Make? In New Jersey, the Answer is Yes

    Will a Notice of Non-Responsibility Prevent Enforcement of a California Mechanics Lien?

    Products Liability Law – Application of Economic Loss Rule

    Umbrella Policy Must Drop Down to Assist with Defense

    Strict Liability or Negligence? The Proper Legal Standard for Inverse Condemnation caused by Water Damage to Property

    Insurance Law Alert: California Appeals Court Allows Joinder of Employee Adjuster to Bad Faith Lawsuit Against Homeowners Insurer

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/18/23) – Zillow’s New Pilot Program, Production Begins at Solar Panel Plant in Georgia, and More Diversity on Contracts for Buffalo Bills Stadium

    California Home Sellers Have Duty to Disclose Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Lithium for Batteries from Geothermal Brine

    Court finds subcontractor responsible for defending claim

    A Look at Business and Professions Code Section 7031

    Suzanne Pollack Elected to Lawyers Club of San Diego 2021 Board of Directors

    California Supreme Court Endorses City Authority to Adopt Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

    The Devil is in the Details: The Texas Construction Trust Fund Pitfalls Residential Remodelers (and General Contractors) Should Avoid

    Chinese Lead $92 Billion of U.S. Home Sales to Foreigners

    How to Build a Coronavirus Hospital in Ten Days
    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

    Someone Who Hires an Independent Contractor May Still Be Liable, But Not in This Case

    April 18, 2023 —
    In Allstate Veh. & Prop. Ins. Co. v. Glitz Constr. Corp., 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1180, 2023 NY Slip Op 01171, the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department (Appellate Court), considered whether a contractor could be found liable for its subcontractor’s alleged negligence in causing injury to a homeowner’s property. The homeowner’s insurer, as subrogee of the homeowner, sought to recover damages from the contractor despite an allegation that the subcontractor – an independent contractor – caused the injury to the homeowner’s property. Finding that there was no evidence that any of the exceptions to the non-liability rule related to hiring independent contractors applied, the Appellate Court affirmed the lower court’s decision granting judgment in favor of the contractor. In this case, the homeowner hired the contractor (defendant) to convert her garage area into a bedroom and an office. The defendant later hired a subcontractor to perform the electrical rough-in work. At trial, the homeowner’s insurer (plaintiff) presented evidence that the subcontractor, who damaged an existing wire with a drill bit, caused an electrical failure that resulted in a fire. The defendant argued that it could not be held liable for the subcontractor’s alleged negligence because the subcontractor was an independent contractor and, on appeal, the Appellate Court agreed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Katherine Dempsey, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Dempsey may be contacted at dempseyk@whiteandwilliams.com

    Standard of Care

    December 16, 2019 —
    One of the key concepts at the heart of Board complaints and civil claims against a design professional is whether or not that design professional complied with the applicable standard of care. In order to prevail on such a claim, the claimant must establish (typically with the aid of expert testimony) that the design professional deviated from the standard of care. On the other side of the coin, to defend a design professional against a professional malpractice claim, defense counsel attempts to establish that – contrary to the claimant’s allegations – the design professional, in fact, complied with the standard of care. Obviously, it becomes very important in such a claim situation to determine what the standard of care is that applies to the conduct of the defendant design professional. Often, this is easier said than done. There is no dictionary definition or handy guidebook that identifies the precise standard of care that applies in any given situation. The “standard of care” is a concept and, as such, is flexible and open to interpretation. Traditionally, the standard of care is expressed as being that level of service or competence generally employed by average or prudent practitioners under the same or similar circumstances at the same time and in the same locale. In other words, to meet the standard of care a design professional must generally follow the pack; he or she need not be perfect, exemplary, outstanding, or even superior – it is sufficient merely for the designer to do that which a reasonably prudent practitioner would do under similar circumstances. The negative or reverse definition also applies, to meet the standard of care, a practitioner must refrain from doing what a reasonably prudent practitioner would have refrained from doing. Although we have this ready definition of the standard of care, in any given dispute it is practically inevitable that the parties will have markedly different opinions as to: (1) what the standard of care required of the designer; and (2) whether the defendant design professional complied with that requirement. The claimant bringing a claim against a design professional typically will be able to find an expert reasonably qualified (at least on paper) who will offer an opinion that the defendant failed to comply with the standard of care. It is just as likely that the counsel for the defendant design professional will be able to find his or her own expert who will counter the opinion of the claimant’s expert and maintain that the defendant design professional, in fact, complied with the standard of care. What’s a jury to think? The concept of standard of care is intertwined with the legal concept of negligence. In the vast majority of law suits against design professionals, a claimant (known as the plaintiff) will assert a claim for negligence against the design professional now known as the defendant.1 As every first year law student learns while studying the field of “Torts,” negligence has four subparts. In order for a defendant to be found negligent, the claimant must establish four elements: (1) duty; (2) breach; (3) causation; and (4) damages. In other words, to establish a claim against a defendant design professional, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care but breached that duty and, as a result, caused the plaintiff to suffer damages. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jay Gregory, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Mr. Gregory may be contacted at jgregory@grsm.com

    The Starter Apartment Is Nearly Extinct in San Francisco and New York

    October 28, 2015 —
    So you’re looking for a one-bedroom apartment in San Francisco, and you have about $2,000 a month to spend. You know the city’s median rent is more than $4,200 a month, but median means half the apartments cost less. Surely there are larger, more expensive apartments pulling up the midpoint. Perhaps. But there’s a reason Google employees are sleeping in their trucks. Ninety-one percent of one-bedroom apartments in San Francisco cost more than $2,000 a month. Perhaps more surprising is the number of apartments that occupy the high end of rental rates: In Manhattan, a fifth of one-bedrooms rent for more than $4,000. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Clark, Bloomberg

    How Will Artificial Intelligence Impact Construction Litigation?

    September 12, 2023 —
    In the first half of 2023, artificial intelligence (“AI”) caught the public’s imagination. Attorneys have not been immune from the fever-pitch of commentary regarding the possible applications. While early adopters have had varying degrees of success, commentators have proposed various potential impacts on construction projects and disputes. This article discusses potential areas where AI can assist in preventing and resolving disputes from the pre-bid stage through project completion and close-out. What is AI? Artificial intelligence entered the popular zeitgeist accompanied by both optimistic and pessimistic predictions about the future. Internet searches on AI exploded in December 2022, reflecting a rapid and widespread public interest in the topic. The term “AI” itself is often loosely used to refer to a machine or computer software with the ability to conduct machine learning.[1] Whereas “automation” is the simple process of computing inputs, artificial intelligence refers to the ability to learn without additional programming from a human being. Now, increased computing power is finally helping some of the potential applications of this technology come into focus. Nonetheless, artificial intelligence is still maturing and is subject to “hallucinations” where the technology essentially generates erroneous nonsense. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick McKnight, Fox Rothschild LLP
    Mr. McKnight may be contacted at pmcknight@foxrothschild.com

    Recommencing Construction on a Project due to a Cessation or Abandonment

    October 26, 2017 —
    There are instances where the owner of a construction project terminates its general contractor prior to the completion of the project. There are instances where the owner suspends the work prior to the completion of the project, meaning there is a cessation in the construction. And, there are instances where the project is simply abandoned. I have been involved in all instances, and the owner’s reasons vary…from an owner claiming a termination for default, termination for convenience, or a suspension or abandonment due to the market or financial factors. Regardless of the owner’s reasoning, at some point—hopefully—the owner will want to resume or, more properly stated, recommence construction and complete the project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at Dadelstein@gmail.com

    Builder Exposes 7 Myths regarding Millennials and Housing

    January 12, 2015 —
    Builder Magazine discussed seven myths regarding Generation Y and housing, and stated whether it was fact or fiction. First, they answered whether “Millennials Carry Historically High Student Debt Levels,” (True), and second they concluded it was true that “Millenials Can’t Afford Down Payment at Today’s Standards.” However, Builder was split on whether “Millennials Will Pay a Premium for Green and Tech Features.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment in Pinellas County Circuit Court

    November 29, 2021 —
    On September 20, 2021, Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian secured summary judgment in Pinellas County Circuit Court in St. Petersburg, Florida, on behalf of a Homeowner who invited an acquaintance to his house to assist him with hanging a gutter on his roof. While he was assisting the Homeowner installing the gutter, the Plaintiff fell from a ladder and sustained a comminuted left intertrochanteric (hip) fracture. The Plaintiff was taken to the hospital, where he underwent open reduction, internal fixation of his left hip fracture. He was hospitalized for five days and released in wheelchair. He incurred more than $70,000 in medical bills and was confined to a wheelchair for two months. The Plaintiff filed a negligence action against the Homeowner alleging he improperly set up the ladder causing it to become unstable, thereby creating a dangerous condition on the premises which proximately caused his fall. The Plaintiff claimed the Homeowner breached the duty he owed the Plaintiff to provide safe and stable equipment for his use. After engaging in discovery, Mr. Guldalian moved for summary judgment arguing that because the Plaintiff could not explain in his deposition why he fell from the ladder, the Plaintiff could not establish—as a matter of law—the Homeowner was negligent, did anything, or failed to do something, that proximately caused his injury. In support of his argument, Mr. Guldalian submitted the affidavit of an investigator who inspected the ladder after the Plaintiff’s fall and found no defect in, on, or about the ladder, and affirmed that the area where the ladder was set up had no raised or defective areas which could have caused the ladder to become unstable. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bradley T. Guldalian, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Guldalian may be contacted at bguldalian@tlsslaw.com

    Construction Defect Specialist Joins Kansas City Firm

    January 13, 2014 —
    David Schatz, whose practice specializes in construction disputes and defects, has joined the Kansas City, Missouri firm Spencer Fane Britt & Brown LLP in their litigation practice group. Mr. Schatz’s expertise also includes banking and finance, banking litigation, commercial disputes, insurance, surety, employment, contract claims, and personal injury. Pat Whalen, Chairman of Spencer Fane Britt & Brown, said that Schatz “brings great experience across a range of industries, but many of us in Kansas City are particularly pleased by his construction and general litigation credentials, which will fit will with the resources we’re building in those areas.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of