BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure 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


    Norristown, PA to Stop Paying Repair Costs for Defect-Ridden Condo

    Spain Risks €10.6 Billion Flood Damage Bill, Sanchez Says

    Illinois Court Addresses Coverage Owed For Subcontractor’s Defective Work

    Court of Appeals Discusses Implied Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Public Works Contracting

    Insurer Wrongfully Denies Coverage When Household Member Fails to Submit to EUO

    New Executive Order: Revitalizing Our Nation’s Commitment to Environmental Justice for All

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

    Restrictions On Out-Of-State Real Estate Brokers Being Challenged In Nevada

    Appraisal Can Go Forward Prior to Resolution of Coverage Dispute

    Lenders and Post-Foreclosure Purchasers Have Standing to Make Construction Defect Claims for After-Discovered Conditions

    Advice to Georgia Homeowners with Construction Defects

    Georgia Passes Solar CUVA Bill

    Caterpillar Forecast Tops Estimates as Construction Recovers

    The A, B and C’s of Contracting and Self-Performing Work Under California’s Contractor’s License Law

    New York Construction Practice Team Obtains Summary Judgment, Dismissal of Labor Law §240(1) Claim Against Municipal Entities

    House of the Week: Spanish Dream Home on California's Riviera

    Colorado Court of Appeals Finds Damages to Non-Defective Property Arising From Defective Construction Covered Under Commercial General Liability Policy

    The Case For Designers Shouldering More Legal Responsibility

    Will the Hidden Cracks in the Bay Bridge Cause Problems During an Earthquake?

    Building Group Has Successful 2012, Looks to 2013

    Brown Paint Doesn’t Cover Up Construction Defects

    Designers Face Fatal Pedestrian Bridge Collapse Fallout

    Application of Frye Test to Determine Admissibility of Expert

    City Drops Impact Fees to Encourage Commercial Development

    Statute of Limitations Bars Lender’s Subsequent Action to Quiet Title Against Junior Lienholder Mistakenly Omitted from Initial Judicial Foreclosure Action

    As California Faces Mandatory Water Use Reductions How Will the Construction Industry be Impacted?

    #6 CDJ Topic: Construction Defect Legislative Developments

    Reinsurer's Obligation to Provide Coverage Determined Under English Law

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/2/24) – Increase in Commercial Property Vacancy Rates, Trouble for the Real Estate Market and Real Estate as a Long-Term Investment

    Illinois Supreme Court Finds Construction Defect Claim Triggers Initial Grant of Coverage

    Mercury News Editorial Calls for Investigation of Bay Bridge Construction

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

    Brooklyn’s Industry City to Get $1 Billion Modernization

    Massachusetts Clarifies When the Statute of Repose is Triggered For a Multi-Phase or Multi-Building Project

    Jury Awards 20 Million Verdict Against Bishop Abbey Homes

    I’m Sorry Ms. Jackson, I [Sovereign Immunity] am For Real

    The Risk of A Fixed Price Contract Is The Market

    Construction Defects Up Price and Raise Conflict over Water Treatment Expansion

    No Duty to Defend Suit That Is Threatened Under Strict Liability Statute

    Home Construction Thriving in Lubbock

    Hunton Insurance Lawyer, Adriana Perez, Selected to the National Association of Women Lawyers’ 2023 Rising List

    Flint Water Crisis and America’s Clean Water Access Failings

    EPA Looks to Reduce Embodied Carbon in Materials With $160M in Grants

    Texas Supreme Court to Review Eight-Corners Duty-to-Defend Rule

    Connecticut Supreme Court to Review Several Issues in Asbestos Coverage Case

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    Haight’s John Arbucci and Kristian Moriarty Selected for Super Lawyers’ 2020 Southern California Rising Stars

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: ERIN CANNON-WELLS

    Rescission of Policy for Misrepresentation in Application Reversed

    Homebuilders See Record Bearish Bets on Shaky Recovery
    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

    California Supreme Court Declines to Create Exception to Privette Doctrine for “Known Hazards”

    September 13, 2021 —
    In Gonzalez v. Mathis (Aug. 19, 2021, S247677) __ Cal.5th___, the California Supreme Court reversed an appellate decision holding that a landowner may be liable to an independent contractor, or the contractor’s workers, for injuries resulting from “known hazards,” as running contrary to the Privette doctrine. In Gonzalez, the contractor, who specialized in washing skylights, slipped and fell while accessing the landowner’s particularly hard to reach skylight from a narrow retaining wall that was allegedly covered in loose gravel and slippery. (Slip opn., p. 3.) While the trial court initially granted the landowner summary judgment pursuant to the Privette doctrine, the appellate court reversed and held that the landowner had a responsibility to take reasonable safety precautions where there was a known safety hazard on the landowner’s premises. (Id. at p. 6.) Whether the landowner could have taken various safety precautions also raised disputed issues of material fact precluding summary judgment. (Ibid.) However, the California Supreme Court concluded that no broad, third exception to the Privette doctrine lies; “unless a landowner retains control over any part of the contractor’s work and negligently exercises that retained control in a manner that affirmatively contributes to the injury [citation], it will not be liable to an independent contractor or its workers for an injury resulting from a known hazard on the premises.” (Slip opn., p. 2.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tracy D. Forbath, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Forbath may be contacted at Tracy.Forbath@lewisbrisbois.com

    South Carolina Law Clarifies Statue of Repose

    July 11, 2011 —

    A new law in South Carolina, H 3375, fixes a loophole in that state’s statute of repose. State law puts a cap of eight years on construction defects, but the 2008 law that set that limit had a loophole that would allow for construction defect claims to start thirteen years after construction. The law also provides a cap on punitive damages.

    The measure was backed by the Carolinas Association of General Contractors. Their spokesperson said that the legislation “increases our state’s ability to be economically competitive and helps protect our members from frivolous lawsuits.”

    Read the full story…

    Read South Carolina H 3375…

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

    A Race to the Finish on Oroville Dam Spillway Fix

    October 09, 2018 —
    The Lake Oroville spillway’s 400-acre construction site is an intense flurry of activity. In one corner, an excavator driver uses an old tire as a squeegee to clean away loose rock and prep a foundation. In the steeply sloping spillway chute, a crane operator flies in a rebar cage to workers who tie it into neighboring chute wall segments. Everywhere, dump trucks buzz around the circuitous roadways while rock crushers and batch plants keep pace with dozens of dozers and excavators. Drones hover in the sky photographing and surveying the site, while inspectors pour over every detail of the finished assets. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott Blair, ENR
    Mr. Blair may be contacted at blairs@enr.com

    Vertical vs. Horizontal Exhaustion – California Supreme Court Issues Ruling Favorable to Policyholders

    May 11, 2020 —
    For years, when faced with damage or injury spanning several policy periods, excess general liability insurers have argued that all potentially applicable underlying policies must be exhausted before the excess drops down to provide coverage (“horizontal exhaustion”). Insureds, on the other hand, insist that they are entitled to immediately access an excess policy for any given policy year, if that year’s underlying policy has exhausted (“vertical exhaustion”). Vertical exhaustion not only enables insureds to directly tap into the excess insurance for which they paid substantial premiums, but also enables the insured to moderate risk given that different lower level policies might (1) be needed for other claims, (2) have larger self-insured retentions, or (3) have other less favorable coverage provisions. Allowing an insured to proceed via vertical exhaustion would also eliminate the heavy administrative and logistical burden that could result from having to pursue and exhaust all underlying coverage on multi-year claims. In Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Superior Court, 2020 WL 1671560 (April 6, 2020), the California Supreme Court has come down in favor of policyholders and vertical exhaustion. The Montrose case involved contamination that allegedly occurred between 1947 and 1982 and different liability insurance towers (comprised of primary and excess layers) for each year. The insured, Montrose, maintained a tower of insurance coverage, year by year, and faced claims asserting damage that spanned several decades. Montrose sought coverage from excess insurers under a vertical exhaustion approach. Not surprisingly, Montrose’s excess insurers insisted that horizontal exclusion was required and that Montrose was required to exhausted all other policies with lower attachment points in every single involved policy period. The California Supreme Court ruled in Montrose’s favor, holding that the insured may insist upon full coverage from an excess insurer once the layer directly below it has exhausted. The Court reasoned that the burden of spreading the loss among insurers is one that is appropriately borne by insurers, not insureds. Reprinted courtesy of Alan H. Packer, Newmeyer Dillion and James S. Hultz, Newmeyer Dillion Mr. Packer may be contacted at alan.packer@ndlf.com Mr. Hultz may be contacted at james.hultz@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    CISA Clarifies – Construction is Part of Critical Infrastructure Activities

    April 20, 2020 —
    After ongoing confusion by many over whether construction should be considered part of the “essential business,” during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) issued an updated Coronavirus Guidance for America on March 28, 2020 to clarify construction’s critical role in supporting essential infrastructure. CISA’s initial advisory list referenced construction in regard to some areas such as energy and wastewater treatment, but it was unclear as to the whole of the construction industry. CISA’s update clarified that construction activities are included in its list of essential critical infrastructure workers. This new federal guidance should remove the ambiguity that led to varying responses by state and local officials halting some construction. The guidance clarifies that construction and related activities – including the manufacture and supply/delivery of supplies and equipment, permitting, safety, and inspections of projects – are covered as part of the critical infrastructure and economic activities. The ongoing challenge will be for construction activities to proceed in a way that protects workers and the general public from the spread of coronavirus. However, contractors are always resourceful and have been implementing safety measures effectively on projects with an unwavering commitment to safety and are ready to meet this challenge. In addition to following the guidance from the CDC, we recommend that contractors implement a comprehensive safety program for their employees as well as for all parties that come onto the jobsite. It is critical that contractors have clear a clear plan for communications with their teams to ensure compliance with the CDC recommendations. This should include what has recently become standard protocol or social distancing, not hosting large group meetings and conducting meetings online or via conference call, maintaining a six-foot distance between people, discouraging hand-shaking or other contact, not sharing tools, and sanitizing reusable PPE. Contractors also should also be sure to place safety posters about “How to Protect Yourself” where they can be readily seen and encourage staying home when sick, cough and sneeze etiquette, and hand hygiene at the entrance of a jobsite. We also recommend heightened site security including interviewing anyone coming to the jobsite. Reprinted courtesy of Brenda Radmacher, Gordon & Rees and Ernest Isola, Gordon & Rees Ms. Radmacher may be contacted at bradmacher@grsm.com Mr. Isola may be contacted at eisola@grsm.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Over 70 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 4th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    September 25, 2023 —
    (August 17, 2023) – 75 Lewis Brisbois attorneys across 25 offices have been named to the 4th edition of "Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America." Congratulations to the following attorneys on this recognition! You can see the full list of Lewis Brisbois attorneys named to Best Lawyers' 30th edition of The Best Lawyers in America here. Akron, OH
    • Associate Meleah M. Skillern – Commercial Litigation
    Atlanta, GA
    • Partner Candis R. Jones - Insurance Law, Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants, and Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
    Boston, MA
    • Partner Amanda Mathieu - Labor and Employment Law – Management
    Charleston, WV
    • Partner Sophie L. Johns - Product Liability Litigation - Defendants
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    The Four Forces That Will Take on Concrete and Make Construction Smart

    September 17, 2018 —
    When it comes to building a bridge, what prevents it from having the most enduring and sustainable life span? What is its worst enemy? The answer is, simply, the bridge itself—its own weight. Built with today’s construction processes, bridges and buildings are so overly massed with energy and material that they’re inherently unsustainable. While concrete is quite literally one of the foundations of modern construction, it’s not the best building material. It’s sensitive to pollution. It cracks, stainsand collapses in reaction to rain and carbon dioxide. It’s a dead weight: Take San Francisco’s sinking, leaning Millennium Tower as an example. Reprinted courtesy of Massimiliano Moruzzi, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Economic Loss Rule and the Disclosure of Latent Defects: In re the Estate of Carol S. Gattis

    January 15, 2014 —
    In a recent case of first impression, the Colorado Court of Appeals determined that the economic loss rule does not bar a nondisclosure tort claim against a seller of a home, built on expansive soils which caused damage to the house after the sale. The case of In re the Estate of Carol S. Gattis represents a new decision regarding the economic loss rule. Because it is a case of first impression, we must wait to see whether the Colorado Supreme Court grants a petition for certiorari. Until then, we will analyze the decision handed down on November 7, 2013. The sellers of the home sold it to an entity they controlled for the purpose of repairing and reselling the home. Before that purchase, Sellers obtained engineering reports including discussion of structural problems resulting from expansive soils. A structural repair entity, also controlled by Sellers, oversaw the needed repair work. After the repair work was completed, Sellers obtained title to the residence and listed it for sale. Sellers had no direct contact with Gattis, who purchased the residence from Sellers. The purchase was executed through a standard-form real estate contract, approved by the Colorado Real Estate Commission: Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate, to which no changes were made. Several years after taking title to the residence, Gattis commenced action, pleading several tort claims alleging only economic losses based on damage to the residence resulting from expansive soils. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brady Iandiorio, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Iandiorio may be contacted at iandiorio@hhmrlaw.com