BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut concrete 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


    Brenda Radmacher to Speak at Construction Super Conference 2024

    No Additional Insured Coverage Under Umbrella Policy

    Hurricane Harvey Victims Face New Hurdles In Pursuing Coverage

    Eleventh Circuit Affirms Jury Verdict on Covered Property Loss

    Second Circuit Upholds Constitutionality of NY’s Zero Emissions Credit Program

    Part of the Whole: Idaho District Court Holds Economic Loss Rule Bars Tort Claims Related to Water Supply Line that was Part of Home Purchase

    Extrinsic Evidence, or Eight Corners? Texas Court Sheds Light on Determining the Duty to Defend

    AB 685 and COVID-19 Workplace Exposure: New California Notice and Reporting Requirements of COVID Exposure Starting January 1, 2021

    Texas Jury Awards $5.3 Million to Company Defamed by Union: Could it work in Pennsylvania?

    Show Me the Money: The Good Faith Dispute Exception to Prompt Payment Penalties

    Seven Coats Rose Attorneys Named to Texas Rising Stars List

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

    Lenders Facing Soaring Costs Shutting Out U.S. Homebuyers

    When a Construction Lender Steps into the Shoes of the Developer, the Door is Open for Claims by the General Contractor

    Tokyo Building Flaws May Open Pandora's Box for Asahi Kasei

    Value In Being Deemed “Statutory Employer” Under Workers Compensation Law

    Happenings in and around the 2016 West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Colorado Governor Polis’s Executive Order D 2020 101: Keeping Up with Colorado’s Shifting Eviction Landscape during COVID-19

    Drawing the Line: In Tennessee, the Economic Loss Doctrine Does Not Apply to Contracts for Services

    NTSB Issues 'Urgent' Recommendations After Mass. Pipeline Explosions

    The Power of Team Bonding: Transforming Workplaces for the Better

    No Duty to Defend Faulty Workmanship Under Hawaii Law, but All is not Lost for Insured Contractor

    ASHRAE Seeks Comments by May 26 on Draft of Pathogen Mitigation Standard

    U.S. Building Permits Soared to Their Highest Level in Nearly Eight Years

    Security on Large Construction Projects. The Payment Remedy You Probably Never Heard of

    Factual Issues Prevent Summary Judgment Determination on Coverage for Additional Insured

    New Law Raises Standard for Defense Experts as to Medical Causation

    Unjust Enrichment Claims When There Is No Binding Contract

    Supply Chain Delay Recommendations

    Little Known Florida Venue Statue Benefitting Resident Contractors

    How Do You Get to the Five Year Mark? Some Practical Advice

    Coffee Beans, Mars and the 50 States: Civil Code 1542 Waivers and Latent Defects

    Disappointment on an Olympian Scale After Rio 2016 Summer Games

    Granting of Lodestar Multiplier in Coverage Case Affirmed

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Named 2019 Super Lawyers

    Lumber Liquidators’ Home-Testing Methods Get EPA Scrutiny

    City Sues over Leaking Sewer System

    New York Appellate Court Affirms 1966 Insurance Policy Continues to Cover WTC Asbestos Claims

    "Multiple Claims" Provisions on Contractor's Professional Liability Policy Creates a Trap for Policyholders

    ‘The Ground Just Gave Out’: How a Storm’s Fury Ravaged Asheville

    NYPD Investigating Two White Flags on Brooklyn Bridge

    New Jersey Appellate Court Reinstates Asbestos Action

    No Coverage for Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship

    Statutory Time Limits for Construction Defects in Massachusetts

    Benefits and Pitfalls of Partnerships Between Companies

    How to Survive the Insurance Claim Process Before It Starts –Five Tips to Keep Your Insurance Healthy

    The G2G Year in Review: 2020

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 6: Ensuring Availability of Insurance and State Regulations

    Is New York Heading for a Construction Defect Boom?

    Fargo Shows Record Home Building
    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. Drawing 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

    Chambers USA 2022 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    July 18, 2022 —
    White and Williams is once again recognized by Chambers USA as a leading law firm in Pennsylvania for achievements and client service in the areas of insurance law and real estate finance law. The firm has also been recognized for achievements and client service in banking and finance law in Philadelphia and the surrounding area. In addition, seven lawyers received individual honors: two for their work in insurance, two for their work in real estate finance, another for his work in real estate, one for her work in bankruptcy and restructuring and one for his work in commercial litigation. White and Williams is acknowledged for our renowned practice offering expert representation to insurers and reinsurers across an impressive range of areas including coverage, bad faith litigation and excess liability. The firm is recognized for notable strength in transactional and regulatory matters, complemented by the team's adroit handling of complex alternative dispute resolution proceedings. Chambers USA also acknowledged the firm's broad trial capabilities include handling data privacy, professional liability and toxic tort coverage claims. White and Williams’ lawyers have further expertise in substantial claims arising from bodily injury and wrongful death suits. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    Edward Beitz and William Taylor Recognized by US News – Best Lawyers as a "Lawyer of the Year"

    August 31, 2020 —
    White and Williams is proud to announce that Edward Beitz and William Taylor have been recognized by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® as a “Lawyer of the Year” in their respective practices in Philadelphia. Ed was named in the area of Medical Malpractice and Bill was named in Construction Law. "Lawyer of the Year" recognitions are awarded to individual lawyers with extremely high overall peer-feedback for a specific practice area and geographic location. Ed is a member of the Healthcare Group and focuses his practice on medical malpractice defense, defending doctors, nurses, physician assistants and hospitals at the trial and appellate court levels, as well as general liability matters. He has successfully defended numerous medical malpractice cases at trial involving complex issues of the human anatomy, such as cardiac surgery, neurosurgery, orthopedic surgery, nursing care, obstetrical complications, nerve injury and vascular injury. Ed has authored briefs on appellate issues in healthcare and coverage matters to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, the New Jersey Appellate Division and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. Reprinted courtesy of Edward Beitz, White and Williams and William Taylor, White and Williams Mr. Beitz may be contacted at beitze@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Taylor may be contacted at taylorw@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    If Passed, New Bill AB 2320 Will Mandate Cyber Insurance For State Government Contractors

    September 07, 2020 —
    Earlier this year, Assemblyman Edwin Chau (D-Monterey Park) introduced Assembly Bill 2320. AB 2320, if passed, would require any business that contracts with the state and has access to records containing personal information protected under the state’s Information Practices Act (IPA) to maintain cyber insurance coverage. Information covered under the IPA includes names, social security numbers, physical descriptions, home addresses, home telephone numbers, education, financial matters, and medical or employment history. Requiring contractors to maintain cyber insurance will likely both shift the costs of cyberattacks from taxpayers to the private sector, while also encouraging robust cyber security practices among businesses of all sizes. While the bill has not yet passed, businesses will be best served by implementing and improving cybersecurity practices now in order to attain lowest premium rates in the future. Incentivizing Best Practices With the adoption of AB 2320, businesses will be incentivized to increase their security posture in order to receive lower premiums from insurers. Simultaneously, insurers will be incentivized to mandate best practices from their insureds in order to mitigate their risk of having to pay out on cyber insurance policies. Thus, cyber insurance will work as a vehicle to increase best practices in businesses and subsequently decrease vulnerabilities to cyberattacks. Reprinted courtesy of Makenna Miller, Newmeyer Dillion and Jeffrey Dennis, Newmeyer Dillion Ms. Miller may be contacted at makenna.miller@ndlf.com Mr. Dennis may be contacted at jeff.dennis@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Asbestos Client Alert: Court’s Exclusive Gatekeeper Role May not be Ignored or Shifted to a Jury

    February 07, 2014 —
    In Estate of Henry Barabin v. AstenJohnson, Inc., - F.3d -, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 774, 2014 WL 129884 (9th Cir., Jan. 15, 2014) en banc, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a $10.2 million judgment in the Plaintiffs’ favor in a case where Plaintiff alleged that occupational exposure to asbestos from dryer felts caused his mesothelioma. The Ninth Circuit held that the district court abused its discretion by neglecting its duty as a “gatekeeper” under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S. Ct. 2786, 125 L. Ed. 2d 469 (1993), and Federal Rule of Evidence 702, by improperly admitting expert testimony at trial without first determining its reliability. The en banc court held that admitting the testimony on the debated theory that “each asbestos fiber causes mesothelioma” was prejudicial error and the court remanded the case for a new trial. The court also held that a reviewing court has the authority to make Daubert findings based on the record established by the district court, but in the instant case, the record was “too sparse” to determine whether the expert testimony was relevant and reliable or not. This ruling is a victory for the defense in that it reaffirms the federal court’s exclusive gatekeeper role and holds that the role may not be ignored or shifted to a jury. Unfortunately, the court did not go so far as to evaluate the inherent reliability of expert opinions based on the theory that “each asbestos exposure causes mesothelioma.” As such, it did not provide guidance as to what specific foundational requirements are required to admit, or exclude, these types of opinions under a Daubert analysis. In Barabin, Plaintiff alleged he was exposed to asbestos while working at a paper mill with dryer felts manufactured and supplied by Defendants. The issue was whether the dryer felts substantially contributed to Barabin’s development of mesothelioma, a determination that required expert testimony. Reprinted Courtesy of Lee Marshall, Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP and Chandra L. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP Mr. Lee may be contacted at lmarshall@hbblaw.com and Ms. Moore may be contacted at cmoore@hbblaw.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Quarter Four a Good One for Luxury Homebuilder

    December 20, 2012 —
    Toll Brothers has announced that their fourth-quarter net income is $2.35 per share, which they attribute in part to an income tax benefit. Their revenue, at $632.8 million, easily exceeded analysts’ projections of $565.1 million. Additionally, their number of signed contracts jumped seventy percent while their cancellation rate dropped nearly half to 4.9 percent. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Structural Engineer Found Liable for Defects that Rendered a Condominium Dangerously Unsafe

    June 22, 2016 —
    On May 3, 2016, the Washington State Court of Appeals affirmed a jury’s verdict in favor of a condominium HOA against a structural engineer for $1,149,332 in damages.[1] The project in question was The Pointe, an upscale condominium building in Westport, Washington. The developer was Dodson-Duus, LLC. The architect was Elkins Architects (“Elkins”). The structural engineer was Engineers Northwest, Inc. (“ENW”). ENW contracted with Elkins for the structural engineering work. Birds flying past 3 construction cranesBoth the design and construction of the building suffered from defects. In particular, the lateral force resistance system was insufficient to withstand a large seismic event. The defects included improperly nailed shear walls, weak connections between shear walls and floor joists, improperly-sized floor sheathing, a weak second-floor diaphragm, and omitted hold-downs connecting shear walls to a steel beam. The use of gypsum sheathing also created a risk of corrosion to the building’s steel structure. Evidence tied each of these defects to some aspect of ENW’s structural calculations and designs. Evidence also tied omission of the hold-downs to the contractor’s construction decisions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Paul R. Cressman, Jr., Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Mr. Cressman may be contacted at pcressman@ac-lawyers.com

    Not If, But When: Newly Enacted Virginia Legislation Bans “Pay-If-Paid” Clauses In Construction Contracts

    August 22, 2022 —
    Recently passed legislation in Virginia is likely to dramatically change contractual relationships between prime contractors and subcontractors in the Commonwealth. Abrogating well-established common-law principles set forth by the Supreme Court of Virginia, on April 27, 2022, the Virginia General Assembly, after receiving input from Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin, passed Senate Bill 550 banning “pay-if-paid” clauses in public and private construction contracts. Contractors performing work in Virginia should take note of the new law, which goes into effect next year and will apply to any contracts executed after January 1, 2023. The History Of Pay-if-Paid Clauses In Virginia Broadly speaking, “pay-if-paid” clauses are a commonly used tool by prime contractors on construction projects to shift the risk to subcontractors in the event that the owner does not pay the prime contractor for work. Such clauses usually include language creating an express condition precedent to the subcontractor’s right to be paid for work under a subcontract, stating that the prime contractor shall be under no obligation to pay the subcontractor for work unless and until the prime contractor first receives payment for that work by the project owner. The “pay-if-paid” clause also has a less extreme cousin, the “pay-when-paid” clause, which merely delays the time in which the prime contractor is obligated to pay the subcontractor to the time in which the prime contractor is paid by the owner. It does not, however, extinguish the prime contractor’s ultimate obligation to pay the subcontractor. Reprinted courtesy of Joseph A. Figueroa, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar, & Fitzgerald, LLP (ConsensusDocs) and Thomas E. Minnis, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar, & Fitzgerald, LLP (ConsensusDocs) Mr. Figueroa may be contacted at jfigueroa@watttieder.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    GAO Sustains Unsupported Past Performance Evaluation and Unequal Discussion Bid Protest

    November 23, 2016 —
    Rotech Healthcare, Inc., a healthcare contractor, recently successfully protested the award of a home oxygen and durable medical equipment contract by the Department of Veterans Affairs to Lincare, Inc. based on an unsupported past performance evaluation and allegations of an unequal discussion. See GAO Protest File Number: File: B-413024 (August 17, 2016). The Request for Proposals (“RFP”) provided that award would be made on a “best value” basis to the offeror whose proposal was most favorable to the government[…] Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lindsay K. Taft, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC Construction Law Blog
    Ms. Taft may be contacted at ltaft@ac-lawyers.com