BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windows
    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


    Tetra Tech-U.S. Cleanup Dispute in San Francisco Grows

    Court of Appeal Puts the “Equity” in Equitable Subrogation

    Rhode Island Sues 13 Industry Firms Over Flawed Interstate Bridge

    New York Converting Unlikely Buildings into Condominiums

    London Shard Developer Wins Approval for Tower Nearby

    Jury Instruction That Fails to Utilize Concurrent Cause for Property Loss is Erroneous

    Arizona Supreme Court Confirms a Prevailing Homeowner Can Recover Fees on Implied Warranty Claims

    Cal/OSHA Approves COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards; Executive Order Makes Them Effective Immediately

    Venue for Suing Public Payment Bond

    New Plan Submitted for Explosive Demolition of Old Tappan Zee Bridge

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    Peckar & Abramson Once Again Recognized Among Construction Executive’s “Top 50 Construction Law Firms™”

    California’s Fifth Appellate District Declares the “Right to Repair Act” the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    US Attorney Alleges ADA Violations in Chicago Cubs Stadium Renovation

    Blue Gold: Critical Water for Critical Energy Materials

    Significant Issues Test Applies to Fraudulent Claims to Determine Attorney’s Fees

    Lessons Learned from Implementing Infrastructure BIM in Helsinki

    America’s Bridges and the Need for Bridge Infrastructure Investment

    Manhattan Home Sales Rise at Slower Pace as Prices Jump

    Canada’s Largest Homebuilder Sets U.S. Growth Plan

    Four Common Construction Contracts

    Construction Defect Journal Seeks Article Submissions Regarding SB800 and Other Builders Right to Repair Laws

    California’s Wildfire Dilemma: Put Houses or Forests First?

    Injury to Employees Endorsement Eliminates Coverage for Insured Employer

    Recovering Time and Costs from Hurricane Helene: Force Majeure Solutions for Contractors

    Federal Court Reiterates Broad Duty to Defend in Additional Insured Cases

    Alaska Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C-" Grade

    In Kansas City, a First-Ever Stadium Designed for Women’s Sports Takes the Field

    New York Court Permits Asbestos Claimants to Proceed Against Insurers with Buyout Agreements

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    The “Up” House is “Up” for Sale

    Labor Intensive

    Quick Note: Do Your Homework When it Comes to Selecting Your Arbitrator

    Erasing Any Doubt: Arizona FED Actions Do Not Accrue Until Formal Demand for Possession is Tendered

    Best Practices: Commercial Lockouts in Arizona

    Another Smart Home Innovation: Remote HVAC Diagnostics

    Subcontractors Essential to Home Building Industry

    Slavin Doctrine and Defense from Patent Defects

    What Types of “Damages Claims” Survive a Trustee’s Sale?

    What Happens When a Secured Creditor Files a Late Claim in an Equity Receivership?

    Providing “Labor” Under the Miller Act

    Appraiser Declarations Inadmissible When Offered to Challenge the Merits of an Appraisal Award

    Industry News: New Partner at Burdman Law Group

    Breaking Down Homeowners Association Laws In California

    Insurer Must Pay for Matching Siding of Insured's Buildings

    Construction in the Time of Coronavirus

    Duty to Defend Sorted Between Two Insurers Based Upon Lease and Policies

    Why Ethiopia’s $5 Billion Dam Has Riled Its Neighbors

    Undercover Sting Nabs Eleven Illegal Contractors in California

    Uniform Rules Governing New York’s Supreme and County Courts Get An Overhaul
    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

    Third Circuit Follows Pennsylvania Law - Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship Does Not Arise from an Occurrence

    May 10, 2013 —
    The Third Circuit followed Pennsylvania law in determining that damage caused by faulty workmanship did not arise from an occurrence. Zurich Am. Ins. Co. v. R. M. Shoemaker Co., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 6093 (3d Cir. March 27, 2013). The County sued R. M. Shoemaker, alleging faulty construction of an addition to a correctional institution. The County alleged Shoemaker negligently supervised its subcontractor, thereby permitting the subcontractor to engage in willful misconduct, resulting in damage to structural elements of the correctional institution. The County alleged that Shoemaker's negligence permitted water to intrude, damaging the electrical systems, acoustic ceilings and miscellaneous equipment. Zurich sought a declaratory judgment that it was not required to defend or indemnify Shoemaker. The district court granted Zurich summary judgment. Relying on Pennsylvania law, the district court found that the allegations in the underlying action did not arise from an occurrence. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Another Colorado City Passes Construction Defects Ordinance

    February 18, 2015 —
    Lone Tree, Colorado’s City Council passed an ordinance to distinguish its construction defect laws from the state’s, according to the Denver Business Journal. The city of Lakewood passed a similar ordinance last October. The Denver Business Journal reported that the new “ordinance makes changes such as establishing time frames for notifying the builder of a construction defect, allowing the builder to inspect the property and allowing the builder to repair the problem, with the homeowners' agreement.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    NY State Appellate Court Holds That Pollution Exclusions Bar Duty to Defend Under Liability Policies for Claims Alleging Exposure to PFAS

    February 01, 2022 —
    On January 6, 2022, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, held that the “sudden and accidental” pollution exclusion (SAPE) and “absolute” pollution exclusion (APE) in liability policies relieved two insurers of a duty to defend the insured-manufacturer in connection with claims alleging damages as a result of exposure to perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), which are man-made chemicals within the group of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). See Tonoga, Incorporated v. New Hampshire Insurance Company, No. 532546, 2022 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 105 (App. Div. 3rd Dep’t Jan. 6, 2022). In Tonoga, starting in 1961, the insured and its predecessors owned and operated a manufacturing facility in Petersburg, New York that produced materials coated with polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE). Until 2013, the manufacturing process involved the use of PFOA and/or PFOS. In early 2016, excessive PFOA and/or PFOS concentrations were detected in Petersburg’s municipal water supply. Later that year, the New York Department of Environmental Conversation designated the insured’s facility a Superfund site, and the insured entered into a consent agreement that required it to assist in remedial measures. 2022 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 105, at *1-2. Reprinted courtesy of Robert F. Walsh, White and Williams LLP and Paul A. Briganti, White and Williams LLP Mr. Walsh may be contacted at walshr@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Briganti may be contacted at brigantip@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

    July 06, 2011 —

    Last November, mold problems were discovered at the Siena Condominiums in Montclair, New Jersey, which had been described by their developers as “an enclave of luxury in an urban village setting.” The owners have filed a lawsuit against Pinnacle Companies, Kohl Parnters, and Herod Development, seeking “compensatory damages, interest, reasonable attorney’s fee and costs, and for such other, further, and different relief as the Court may deem just and proper.”

    According to the article on Baristanet.com, an engineering report commissioned by the condominium association revealed many problems, including improperly installed windows and siding. The developers commissioned two engineering reports themselves and found evidence of water pounding on the roof. Despite these reports and repeated promises, no repairs have been made.

    Read the full story…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    PSA: Virginia DOLI Amends COVID Workplace Standard

    October 18, 2021 —
    As the governmental response to COVID-19 evolves, so do the various standards that apply to employers. Effective September 8, 2021, the Virginia Department of Labor and Industry superseded its earlier permanent workplace standard with a new standard. In many ways, the new standard simplifies compliance because it gets rid of what I believed to be overly confusing workplace classifications into risk levels and simply applies the new standard to all workplaces regardless of how they would have been classified. Some key points to keep in mind regarding the new standard are the following (with the recommendation that all employers read and understand the text of the standard):
    • Masks: All unvaccinated employees must wear masks in all public, common, or shared workspaces with certain exceptions. These exceptions include when an employee is alone in a room/office, when eating, certain medical conditions, and where it is important that the mouth can be seen (such as communication with the deaf). Vaccinated employees need not mask up unless working in a high or substantially transmission area per the CDC Data Tracker.
    • Vaccination Requirement: As of now, the DOLI does not require employee vaccinations. However, employers will need to have a way to determine vaccination status to comply with other parts of the standard.
    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

    Partner Jason Taylor and Senior Associate Danielle Kegley Successful in Appeal of Summary Disposition on Priority of Coverage Dispute in the Michigan Court of Appeals

    December 11, 2023 —
    In this appeal brought before the Michigan Court of Appeals, the appellate court ruled in favor of Traub Lieberman’s insurance carrier client (the “Carrier” or “Client”), affirming an award of summary disposition in favor of the Carrier in a coverage lawsuit. The coverage lawsuit involved a priority dispute between the Carrier and another insurer over which company’s policy had responsibility to cover the defense of their mutual insured, a heating and cooling contractor (the “Insured”) in an underlying lawsuit alleging carbon monoxide poisoning. The Carrier issued a contractor’s pollution liability policy and the other insurer issued a commercial general liability policy to the Insurer. Both the Carrier and the other insurer filed cross-motions for summary disposition in the trial court on the priority of coverage issue. The trial court granted the Client’s motion, holding that the CGL carrier was the primary insurer based on the language in the policies’ “other insurance” clauses. The trial court rejected the CGL carrier’s argument to apply the “total policy insuring intent” or “closest to the risk” tests—tests which Michigan courts have not adopted. Specifically, the court rejected the CGL carrier’s argument that the Client’s contractor’s pollution liability policy was more specifically tailored to the loss in the underlying lawsuit. The trial court also rejected CGL carrier’s alternative argument that the “other insurance” clauses in the policies were irreconcilable, requiring a pro rata allocation based on the respective limits of the policies. Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman and Danielle K. Kegley, Traub Lieberman Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com Ms. Kegley may be contacted at dkegley@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    East Coast Evaluates Damage After Fast-Moving 'Bomb Cyclone'

    March 06, 2022 —
    Coastal areas in the northeast US are assessing damage from a fast-moving “bomb cyclone” that caused temperatures to plummet, triggered heavy flooding and high winds, and dumped 2 ft of snow in some New England areas. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Van Voorhis, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    WSHB Expands to Philadelphia

    July 28, 2016 —
    Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP (WSHB) announced “the opening of its newest regional office at One Liberty Place, 1650 Market Street, 36th Floor, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103,” according to a press release. Elizabeth Chalik will be the managing partner at the new location. Chalik is “a highly regarded litigator with close to 15 years of trial experience” and her practice has focused on products liability, casualty, toxic tort and transportation litigation. Furthermore, Chalik is admitted to practice law in both New Jersey and Pennsylvania. “It is fitting that as we celebrate WSHB’s 19th year, we are opening our 19th office,” said Daniel Berman, Firm Chairman and Co-founder. “With this expansion, we continue our pattern of strategic long term growth. That, coupled with Liz’s proven track record and many years in Philadelphia, further expands our ability to better serve our clients in the Northeast.” Chalik has been recognized on the Super Lawyers List of Rising Stars for three years running. “I am thrilled to be joining Wood Smith Henning & Berman. WSHB’s long-standing reputation and dedication to their clients drew me to them and I knew that this would be the right place for me,” said Chalik. “I could not be more excited about the opportunity to manage WSHB’s new Philadelphia office!” WSHB also has offices located in Connecticut, Denver, Fresno, Glendale, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, New Jersey, New York, Northern California, Orange County, Phoenix, Portland, Rancho Cucamonga, Riverside, San Diego, Seattle and Tampa. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of