BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut consulting engineers
    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


    Fraud, the VCPA and Construction Contracts

    Miller Act Bond Claims Subject to “Pay If Paid”. . . Sometimes

    The ARC and The Covenants

    San Francisco Airport’s Terminal 1 Aims Sky High

    As Single-Family Homes Get Larger, Lots Get Smaller

    Do You Have A Florida’s Deceptive And Unfair Trade Practices Act Claim

    Another Worker Dies in Boston's Latest Construction Accident

    Fourth Circuit Holds that a Municipal Stormwater Management Assessment is a Fee and Not a Prohibited Railroad Tax

    Construction Contracts Need Amending Post COVID-19 Shutdowns

    Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- A Wrap Up

    Equities Favor Subrogating Insurer Over Subcontractor That Performed Defective Work

    U.S. Department of Defense Institutes New Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification

    Hudson Tunnel Plan Shows Sign of Life as U.S. Speeds Review

    Appraisal May Include Cause of Loss Issues

    Federal District Court Finds Coverage Barred Because of Lack of Allegations of Damage During the Policy Period and Because of Late Notice

    “If It Walks Like A Duck . . .” – Expert Testimony Not Always Required In Realtor Malpractice Cases Where Alleged Breach Of Duty Can Be Easily Understood By Lay Persons

    Construction Law Firm Opens in D.C.

    Homeowners Not Compelled to Arbitration in Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Supreme Court’s New York Harbor Case Isn’t a ‘Sopranos’ Episode

    When OSHA Cites You

    No Duty to Defend Under Pollution Policy

    Appraisal Award for Damaged Roof Tiles Challenged

    Subcontractor Strength Will Drive Industry’s Ability to Meet Demand, Overcome Challenges

    As Climate Changes, 'Underwater Mortgage' May Take on New Meaning

    Don't Count On a Housing Slowdown to Improve Affordability

    New York Nonprofit Starts Anti-Scaffold Law Video Series

    Attorneys' Fee Clauses are Engraved Invitations to Sue

    Google, Environmentalists and University Push Methane-Leak Detection

    Inability to Confirm Coverage Supports Setting Aside Insured’s Default Judgment on Grounds of Extrinsic Mistake

    Labor Shortages In Construction

    History of Defects Leads to Punitive Damages for Bankrupt Developer

    Wall Street Is Buying Starter Homes to Quietly Become America’s Landlord

    Man Pleads Guilty in Construction Kickback Scheme

    DOE Abruptly Cancels $13B Cleanup Award to BWXT-Fluor Team

    The G2G Mid-Year Roundup (2022)

    Failure to Meet Code Case Remanded to Lower Court for Attorney Fees

    Will the AI Frenzy Continue in 2025?

    Mediation v. Arbitration, Both Private Dispute Resolution but Very Different Sorts

    From the Ground Up

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Nebraska Court of Appeals Vacates Arbitration Award for Misconduct

    Prospective Additional Insureds May Be Obligated to Arbitrate Coverage Disputes

    You Are on Notice: Failure to Comply With Contractual Notice Provisions Can Be Fatal to Your Claim

    Partner John Toohey is Nominated for West Coast Casualty’s Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence!

    Insurer Awarded Summary Judgment on Collapse Claim

    Protect Workers From Falls: A Leading Cause of Death

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    That’s not the way we’ve always done it! (Why you should update your office practices)

    Foreign Entry into the United States Construction, Infrastructure and PPP Markets

    U.S. Home Prices Rose More Than Estimated in February

    US Civil Rights Tools Are Failing the Most Polluted Black Communities
    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

    Hunton Insurance Team Wins Summary Judgment on Firm’s Own Hurricane Harvey Business Income Loss

    March 23, 2020 —
    A Texas judge has ruled that Hunton Andrews Kurth is entitled to coverage from Great Northern Insurance Co., a unit of Chubb, Ltd. (“Chubb”), for losses its predecessor firm suffered when Hurricane Harvey closed its Houston office and disrupted business in 2017. The court agreed with Hunton’s position that the policy, written specifically for a law firm, covered its business income loss until the firm’s operations were restored to their pre-loss levels. The court rejected in its entirety Chubb’s argument that coverage lasted only until the physical damage that closed the building had been repaired. Rather, siding with Hunton, the court found that the policy language affords, in addition to ordinary business income coverage during the damage period, “extended period” coverage that commences after the damaged property is repaired and after the firm’s operations resume. From August 27 to August 31, 2017, the firm was forced to close its Houston office due to flooding and damage caused by Hurricane Harvey. While employees were permitted to return to the office on August 31, income did not return to its pre-loss level until September 14, 2017. The firm submitted a claim to Chubb for the loss sustained from August 27 to September 14, but Chubb paid only for income loss suffered during the 3-day closure period, and refused to cover the loss suffered after the building reopened. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Michelle M. Spatz, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Ms. Spatz may be contacted at mspatz@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Henkels & McCoy Pays $1M in Federal Overtime-Pay Case

    July 19, 2021 —
    In a consent judgment in a federal labor case, major specialty contractor Henkels & McCoy Inc. has paid about $1.1 million in back pay and damages for allegedly not paying required overtime wages to 362 current and former workers in five states, the U.S. Dept. of Labor says. Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    San Diego’s NFL Stadium Dream Counts on Munis for Chargers’ Home

    June 10, 2015 —
    San Diego, still dealing with the legacy of a pension crisis that led politicians to consider bankruptcy a decade ago, may throw taxpayer money behind municipal bonds for a football-stadium bidding war. The city and the National Football League’s Chargers are negotiating on a proposed $1.3 billion coliseum to keep the team from leaving for Los Angeles. A plan backed by a city panel would have San Diego pay $121 million of the new stadium’s debt, even though it still owes $52 million for the Chargers’ current home. San Diego County would chip in, too. The quest to keep the team has triggered a debate over whether to finance professional football as the city deals with $2 billion of deferred maintenance brought about in part by mounting pension costs. The city’s retirement system has a shortfall just as large, which led voters three years ago to approve reducing benefits for city workers. Reprinted courtesy of James Nash, Bloomberg and Darrell Preston, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Undocumented Debris at Mississippi Port Sparks Legal Battle

    July 26, 2017 —
    Undocumented underground debris fields at a Gulf of Mexico port project are at the heart of a contractor’s nearly $50-million federal lawsuit against the Mississippi Development Authority and eight engineering and construction consultants. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Home Construction Slows in Las Vegas

    November 27, 2013 —
    Although home builders in the Las Vegas area are doing better than they were in 2012, growth is still slow and October saw a decline in the sale of new homes. However, as with other areas, the average home price actually increased over prior months, despite the cooling off the actual number of sales. Taken as a whole though, 2013 looks a lot better than 2012, with 44% more homes sold this year. Dennis Smith, the president of Home Builders Research said that 2013 “will be remembered as ‘the year of recovery,’” but added that “there is still a long path ahead for everyone to feel a sense of comfort.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Tension Over Municipal Gas Bans Creates Uncertainty for Real Estate Developers

    February 07, 2022 —
    On November 15, 2021, the New York City Council approved a bill banning gas hookups in new buildings, making the biggest city in the U.S. the latest in a string of municipalities to prohibit natural gas infrastructure in new homes and buildings. In the two-and-a-half years since Berkeley, California, passed its then-novel municipal ban on new natural gas infrastructure, numerous cities have found themselves at odds with state governments and industry groups on the issue of full electrification in residential and commercial real estate. The resulting disputes, litigation and regulatory uncertainty have created headaches for the real estate industry. Although not all view the restrictions as negative, and many developers have embraced the push for more climate-neutral buildings, these bans introduce complexity to the real estate market, raising additional legal and commercial challenges. Background According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the use of natural gas in homes and businesses accounts for 13 percent of annual U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. For that reason, advocacy groups have pushed cities to prohibit natural gas infrastructure in new construction and encourage full electrification of newly constructed buildings. In addition to New York and Berkeley, cities that have either passed or considered such ordinances include San Francisco, Sacramento, Seattle and Denver, as well as numerous smaller cities. New York City’s newly passed gas ban, in particular, prohibits natural gas hookups in new buildings under seven stories by 2024, and in taller buildings by 2027, but exempts hookups in commercial kitchens. Reprinted courtesy of Sidney L. Fowler, Pillsbury, Robert G. Howard, Pillsbury and Emily Huang, Pillsbury Mr. Fowler may be contacted at sidney.fowler@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Howard may be contacted at robert.howard@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Huang may be contacted at emily.huang@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Expert Medical Science Causation Testimony Improperly Excluded under Daubert; ID of Sole Cause of Medical Condition Not Required

    April 15, 2014 —
    On April 4, 2014, in Messick v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's summary judgment in favor of Defendant Pharmaceutical Corporation because the district court improperly excluded expert testimony. The three-judge panel held that the district court erred by excluding causation testimony offered by Plaintiff's expert it found to be irrelevant and unreliable. Plaintiff was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2000. In response to her development of osteoporosis after chemotherapy, Plaintiff treated with the drug Zometa for several months in 2002. Zometa is a bisphosphonate, a class of drug commonly used to treat multiple myeloma. Such drugs are generally used to reduce or eliminate the possibility of skeletal-related degeneration and injuries to which cancer patients are particularly susceptible. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation produces Zometa, which was approved by the FDA in 2001 and 2002. In 2005 after encountering issues with her jaw, it was discovered that Plaintiff had osteonecrosis near three of her teeth. The oral specialists treating Plaintiff did so under the assumption that she was suffering from bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw ("BRONJ"), a condition recognized by the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons ("AAOMS"). Plaintiff's BRONJ healed in 2008 - three years after beginning treatment. Thereafter, Plaintiff brought suit against Novartis for strict products liability, negligent manufacture, negligent failure to warn, breach of express and implied warranty, and loss of consortium. In support of her claims, Plaintiff offered her expert's testimony on ONJ and BRONJ, and on the causal link between plaintiff's bisphosphonate treatment and later development of BRONJ. Novartis filed a Daubert motion to exclude the specific causation testimony of Plaintiff's experts and a motion seeking summary judgment. The district court granted both motions on the basis that Plaintiff's expert testimony was irrelevant and unreliable. Reprinted courtesy of R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Whitney L. Stefko, 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

    MSJ Granted Equates to a Huge Victory for BWB&O & City of Murrieta Fire Department!

    May 30, 2022 —
    BWB&O Partner Tyler D. Offenhauser and Senior Associate Kevin B. Wheeler prevailed on their Motion for Summary Judgment (“MSJ”) on behalf of a public entity, the City of Murrieta Fire Department today! As a matter of background, authorities were first called to a residence in Murrieta after a report of a gas line rupture. Firefighters and Southern California Gas Company responded to the call. As a crew from SoCalGas was trying to shut off the gas an explosion happened, leveling the home and killing 31-year-old SoCalGas employee Wade Kilpatrick. 30 surrounding homeowners have now alleged personal injuries, including TBI, as a result of the explosion. News agencies reported that Plaintiff Anthony Borel sustained a severe head injury and was placed in a coma. Plaintiff’s injuries included an epidural hematoma, subarachnoid hemorrhage, bilateral corneal abrasions, right orbital fracture, right temporal fracture, right maxillary fracture, frontal skull fracture, 18% partial-thickness burns to the face, abdomen, arms and legs, and a severe TBI with cognitive deficiencies. Plaintiff claimed damages in excess of $20,000,000.00. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP