BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildings
    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


    Last Call: Tokyo Iconic Okura Hotel Meets the Wrecking Ball

    Court Rejects Efforts to Limit Scope of Judgment Creditor’s Direct Action Under Insurance Code Section 11580

    OSHA Releases COVID-19 Guidance

    BHA has a Nice Swing: Don’t Forget to Visit BHA’s Booth at WCC to Support Charity

    Resulting Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Illinois Supreme Court Limits Reach of Implied Warranty Claims Against Contractors

    Multiple Construction Errors Contributed to Mexico Subway Collapse

    South Adams County Water and Sanitation District Takes Proactive Step to Treat PFAS, Safeguard Water Supplies

    Anti-Fracking Win in N.Y. Court May Deal Blow to Industry

    Guarantor’s Liability on Partially Secured Debts – The Impacts of Pay Down Provisions in Serpanok Construction Inc. v. Point Ruston, LLC et al.

    New York City Construction: Boom Times Again?

    What Construction Firm Employers Should Do Right Now to Minimize Legal Risk of Discrimination and Harassment Lawsuits

    Be Careful with Mechanic’s Lien Waivers

    New York Court Holds That the “Lesser of Two” Doctrine Limits Recoverable Damages in Subrogation Actions

    Contractor Jailed for Home Repair Fraud

    Prevailing HOAs Not Entitled to Attorneys’ Fees in Enforcement Actions Brought Under Davis-Stirling

    There is No Claims File Privilege in Florida, Despite What Insurers Want You to Think

    Former SNC-Lavalin CEO Now Set for Trial in Bribe Case

    Be Wary of Construction Defects when Joining a Community Association

    Concerns About On-the-job Safety Persist

    Endorsements Do Not Exclude Coverage for Wrongful Death Claim

    Claims for Negligence? Duty to Defend Triggered

    New York Court Rules on Architect's Duty Under Contract and Tort Principles

    Flood Policy Does Not Cover Debris Removal from Property

    Partner Lisa M. Rolle and Associate Vito John Marzano Obtain Dismissal of Third-Party Indemnification Claims

    Insurance Company Must Show that Lead Came from Building Materials

    Lewis Brisbois Ranked Tier 1 Nationally for Insurance Law, Mass Tort/Class Actions Defense, Labor & Employment Litigation, and Environmental Law in 2024 Best Law Firms®

    Request for Stay Denied in Dispute Over Coverage for Volcano Damage

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

    Condo Association Settles with Pulte Homes over Construction Defect Claims

    Specification Challenge; Excusable Delay; Type I Differing Site Condition; Superior Knowledge

    Congratulations to Associate Madeline Arcellana on Her Selection as a Top Rank Attorney in Southern Nevada!

    Construction Defect Reform Bill Passes Colorado Senate

    Justice Didn’t Ensure Mortgage Fraud Was Priority, IG Says

    Prevent Costly Curb Box Damage Due on New Construction Projects

    Housing Inventory Might be Distorted by Pocket Listings

    Surplus Lines Carriers Cannot Compel Arbitration in Louisiana

    Kaylin Jolivette Named LADC's Construction and Commercial Practice Chair

    Florida Lien Law and Substantial Compliance vs. Strict Compliance

    Florida Insurance Legislation Alert - Part I

    Eleventh Circuit Set to Hear Challenge to Florida Law Barring Foreign Citizens From Buying Real Property

    Best Practices: Commercial Lockouts in Arizona

    Structural Problems May Cause Year-Long Delay Opening New Orleans School

    Seattle Council May Take a New Look at Micro-Housing

    Colorado Passes Construction Defect Reform Bill

    Leaning San Francisco Tower Seen Sinking From Space

    Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Supports Coverage

    Federal Interpleader Dealing with Competing Claims over Undisputed Payable to Subcontractor

    Maryland Finally set to Diagnose an Allocation Method for Progressive Injuries

    No Coverage for Restoring Aesthetic Uniformity
    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

    Last Parcel of Rancho del Oro Masterplan Purchased by Cornerstone Communties

    August 06, 2014 —
    According to San Diego Source, “A partnership controlled by Ure Kretowicz's Cornerstone Communities has paid a reported $25 million for a 28-acre residential parcel located on the northwest corner of College Avenue and Old Grove Road in the Rancho del Oro masterplan in Oceanside,” California. Cornerstone plans to create a “338-unit luxury apartment development,” with amenities including “resort-level clubhouse with an Olympic size swimming pool, spa, barbecue area, conferencing center” and more. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Arizona Supreme Court Leaves Limits on Construction Defects Unclear

    August 27, 2013 —
    The Arizona Supreme Court has determined that “non-contracting parties may bring negligence claims for construction defects because such claims are not barred by the economic loss doctrine,” as Richard Erikson writes in a Snell & Wilmer Legal Alert. In the case of Sullivan v. Pulte Home, Pulte had built the home in 2000. The original buyer sold it to the Sullivans in 2003. The Sullivans discovered construction defects in a retaining wall in 2009. The lost their original lawsuit, but the appeals court found that if the Sullivans filed within two years of finding the damage, they could sue. The case then progressed to the Arizona Supreme Court. Erikson points out that in an amicus brief, a number of parties in the Arizona homebuilding industry argued that “the appellate court’s ruling was commercially irreconcilable with expectations of builders, homeowners, homebuyers, engineers and architects in the construction industry.” Nevertheless, the Sullivans prevailed at court. Erikson asks what the actual limit on construction defects must be, given that the court found for plaintiffs who discovered construction defects nine years after the home was built. “How many years after the builder finishes a home does it have to plan on defending defect claims—10, 20, 30 years?” He proposes that the Arizona legislature needs to clarify the specific limits. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Claims for Bad Faith and Punitive Damages Survive Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    August 02, 2017 —
    The court denied the insurer's motion for partial summary judgment seeking to dismiss claims for bad faith and for punitive damages. Van Der Weide v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101735 (N.D. Iowa June 30, 2017). The homeowner sued the insured general contractor after water was found leaking into the home, causing significant water damage. Cincinnati rejected the general contractor's tender and denied any duty to defend, contending that the alleged defects were discovered after Cincinnati's policy period had ended. Cincinnati was advised that two experts for the insured would testify that the property damage occurred due to construction defects and that the damage began shortly after completion of the home. Cincinnati still refused to defend. 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

    Working Safely With Silica: Health Hazards and OSHA Compliance

    January 17, 2022 —
    About 2.3 million American workers are exposed to silica, including those in construction, oil and gas, agriculture and manufacturing. Silica is commonly found in a range of construction materials and when this material breaks apart, small particles are released into the air, creating what’s known as respirable crystalline silica. These particles can get into a person’s respiratory tract, which can lead to a range of serious and potentially fatal illnesses including silicosis, lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and kidney diseases. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has set clear regulations for working with this substance, so construction workers and managers can know the risks of inhaling this substance and protect themselves on the job site. What is Silica? Crystalline silica is a mineral that forms naturally in the earth. Raw construction materials such as sand, stone, concrete and mortar often contain deposits of crystalline silica, which can put employees at risk. Silica becomes a danger to workers when it is released into the air and breathed in. Reprinted courtesy of Rick Pedley, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Big Bertha Lawsuits—Hitachi Zosen Weighs In

    January 31, 2018 —
    In a recent article published by Seattle Business Magazine, the Japanese manufacturer of the much-maligned tunnel machine (nicknamed “Bertha”) provided its version of events and its position to the public. The interview took place after executives from Hitachi Zosen were not invited to the ceremony celebrating Bertha’s breakthrough at the end of its two-mile journey underground Seattle. Ultimately, apparently, Seattle Tunnel Partners (“STP”), the general contractor for the project, and Washington State Department of Transportation (“WSDOT”) agreed that Hitachi Zosen executives could attend the event, but they were not allowed to stand with other dignitaries on a specially-built viewing platform. The $3.2 billion Alaska Way Viaduct replacement project is embroiled in a number of legal controversies. Now that the tunnel is finished, Hitachi Zosen has finally decided to tell its side of the story. Hitachi’s problems started on December 5, 2013, three days after the tunnel-boring machine (“TBM”) hit a 120-foot long, eight-inch diameter steel well casing (the project DRB has determined that the pipe was a differing site condition), the TBM overheated and ground to a halt. The project was shut down almost two years while the TBM was being repaired. According to Hitachi Zosen, it always worked hard to get the job done. “We wanted to finish the tunnel and make Seattle happy with the results,” said Hidetoshi Hirata, the general manager for Hitachi Zosen. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at john.ahlers@acslawyers.com

    DC Circuit Upholds EPA’s Latest RCRA Recycling Rule

    September 23, 2019 —
    On July 2, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decided the case of California Communities Against Toxics, et al. v. EPA. In this decision, the court rejected the latest petition to strike or vacate EPA’s 2018 revisions to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste recycling rules. In 1985, EPA promulgated a new regulatory definition of “solid waste,” which is the linchpin of the agency’s very stringent hazardous waste management rules. (See the rules located at 40 CFR Sections 260-268.) Unless a material is a “solid waste” as defined by the rules, it cannot also be a hazardous waste. The 1985 rules grappled with the challenges posed by recycling practices, and attempted to distinguish between legitimate recycling which is not subject to hazardous waste regulation, and other more suspect forms of recycling. The rules are complex and replete with nuance. In doing so, EPA was adhering to RCRA’s statutory mandate that it develop appropriate rules to govern the treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous waste, while also promoting “properly conducted recycling and reuse.” The DC Circuit reviewed the 1985 rules in the seminal case of American Mining Congress v EPA, 824 F.2d 1177 (1987), (AMC) and stressed that only those materials that were truly discarded could be regulated as solid waste; for instance, those materials that were destined for immediate recycling or recovery in an ongoing production process were not discarded and hence were not solid waste. Over the years, the court has struggled to clarify the basic holding of AMC in numerous cases while EPA has frequently revised and amended the RCRA rules, and in particular the definition of solid waste, in an attempt to balance the policies mandated by the statute. 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

    Investigators Explain Focus on Pre-Collapse Cracking in Florida Bridge

    June 06, 2018 —
    The National Transportation Safety Board's preliminary report on the fatal collapse in March of a pedestrian bridge at Florida International University in Sweetwater focuses attention on the widely discussed pre-collapse cracking in the main span. The report also confirms accounts about what the construction crew working on the bridge was doing before the structure fell. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Judy, ENR and Richard Korman, ENR Mr. Judy may be contacted at judys@enr.com Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Blog Completes Fifteenth Year

    December 13, 2022 —
    Insurance Law Hawaii completes its fifteenth year of existence this month. We began posting in December 2007, 1656 posts ago. We strive to keep readers abreast of new developments in insurance-related cases from Hawaii and across the country. Coverage issues in the past year have again been dominated by COVID-19, business interruption, construction defect, and cyber claims. This trend will likely continue over the next year and we will do our best to track developments. Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of