BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut construction safety expert
    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


    The Little Ice Age and Delay Claims

    A Primer on Suspension and Debarment for Federal Construction Projects

    Application of Frye Test to Determine Admissibility of Expert

    Barratt Said to Suspend Staff as Contract Probe Continues

    A Recap of the Supreme Court’s 2019 Summer Slate

    Construction Defect Attorneys Call for Better Funding of Court System

    London's Walkie Talkie Tower Voted Britain's Worst New Building

    Shutdowns? What A Covid-19-Safe Construction Site Looks Like

    Philadelphia Voters to Consider Best Value Bid Procurment

    Res Judicata Bars Insured from Challenging Insurer's Use of Schedule to Deduct Depreciation from the Loss

    COVID-19 Business Interruption Lawsuits Begin: Iconic Oceana Grill in New Orleans Files Insurance Coverage Lawsuit

    Court Finds Duty To Defend Environmental Claim, But Defense Limited to $100,000

    Why A Jury Found That Contractor 'Retaliated' Against Undocumented Craft Worker

    Use of Dispute Review Boards in the Construction Process

    CDC Issues Moratorium on Residential Evictions Through 2020

    Blackouts Require a New Look at Backup Power

    Napa Quake, Flooding Cost $4 Billion in U.S. in August

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

    Solicitor General’s Views to Supreme Court on Two Circuit Court Rulings that Groundwater Can be Considered “Waters of the United States”

    Kiewit-Turner Stops Work on VA Project—Now What?

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    Green Buildings Could Lead to Liabilities

    Global Insurer Agrees to Pay COVID-19 Business Interruption Claims

    Construction Defect Headaches Can Be Avoided

    New York's New Gateway: The Overhaul of John F. Kennedy International Airport

    Homebuilders Are Fighting Green Building. Homeowners Will Pay.

    The Problem With Building a New City From Scratch

    "Decay" Found Ambiguous in Collapse Case

    California Supreme Court Rejects Insurers' Bid for Horizontal Exhaustion Rule in New Montrose Decision

    New Jersey Court Upholds Registration Requirement for Joint Ventures Bidding on Public Works Contracts

    Minimum Wage on Federal Construction Projects is $10.10

    Contractor Given a Wake-Up Call for Using a "Sham" RMO/RME

    California Supreme Court Holds that Requirement of Prejudice for Late Notice Defense is a Fundamental Public Policy of the State for Choice of Law Analysis

    Things You Didn't Know About Your Homeowners Policy

    National Engineering and Public Works Roadshow Highlights Low Battery Seawall Restoration Project in Charleston

    Lauren Motola-Davis Honored By Providence Business News as a 2021 Leader & Achiever

    Nine Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    Illinois Couple Files Suit Against Home Builder

    PFAS and the Challenge of Cleaning Up “Forever”

    Supreme Court Set to Alter Law on Key Project, Workforce Issues

    It’s All a Matter of [Statutory] Construction: Supreme Court Narrowly Interprets the Good Faith Dispute Exception to Prompt Payment Requirements in United Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron & Steel Co.

    Residential Construction Surges in Durham

    How is Negotiating a Construction Contract Like Buying a Car?

    Where Breach of Contract and Tortious Interference Collide

    COVID-izing Your Construction Contract

    At Long Last, the Colorado Legislature Gets Serious About Construction Defect Reform – In a Constructive Way

    Second Circuit Denies Petitions for Review of EPA’s Final Regulations to Establish Requirements for Cooling Water Intake Structures

    Road to Record $199 Million Award Began With Hunch on Guardrails

    Illinois Federal Court Determines if Damages Are Too Remote

    New Standard Addresses Wind Turbine Construction Safety Requirements and Identifies Hazards
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Found In South Dakota

    October 11, 2017 —
    The South Dakota Supreme Court found coverage in favor of the general contractor who was sued for alleged faulty workmanship. Owners Ins. Co. v. Tibke Constr., Inc., 2017 S.D. LEXIS 106 (S.D. Aug. 23, 2017). The homeowners hired Tibke Construction Inc. as general contractor to build a new house. Tibke hired Jerry's Excavating Inc. as a subcontractor to prepare the soil and perform excavation work. After the project was completed, the homeowners sued Tibke and Jerry's Excavating for negligent construction and breach of contract. The homeowners alleged that Jerry's Excavating failed to conduct soil-compaction testing before construction. They alleged that the home was built upon highly expansive soils, resulting in damage to the home by "excessive settlement, cracking, structural unsoundness and other damages." The complaint further alleged that damages existed only on portions of the home not worked on by Jerry's Excavating. 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

    Montana Supreme Court Tackles Decade-Old Coverage Dispute Concerning Asbestos Mineworker Claims

    December 20, 2021 —
    On November 23, 2021, the Montana Supreme Court issued an almost unanimous decision in National Indemnity Company v. State of Montana, a ten-year-old coverage dispute arising from claims against the State of Montana alleging it had failed to warn of asbestos dust conditions at vermiculite mining and milling operations in and around Libby, Montana (the Libby Mine) run by W.R. Grace & Company and its predecessors. Affirming in part and reversing in part rulings by the trial court that culminated in a $98 million judgment against the State’s CGL insurer from 1973 to 1975, the court addressed issues including the duty to defend/estoppel, the number of occurrences, “trigger of coverage,” and, in a case of first impression, allocation under Montana law. Whether the Insurer Breached the Duty to Defend Depended Upon the Timeframe The court looked at whether (1) the insured provided sufficient information to bring the claims within the possibility of coverage under the subject policy and (2) the insurer gave “the necessary substance to” fulfilling its duty to defend at four points in the relevant timeframe:
    1. The insurer did not breach its duty at the time the State initially tendered the Libby Mine claims because the State defended the claims through its self-insurance program, hired its own counsel, managed the litigation, made its own defense decisions, and took the position with the insurer that the matter was “under control” and “nothing was left to be done[.]”
    Reprinted courtesy of Patricia B. Santelle, White and Williams and Paul A. Briganti, White and Williams Ms. Santelle may be contacted at santellep@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Briganti may be contacted at brigantip@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The “Unavailability Exception” is Unavailable to Policyholders, According to New York Court of Appeals

    September 10, 2018 —
    The New York Court of Appeals recently upheld a prior appellate division decision finding that policyholders facing environmental claims, spanning multiple years, cannot force their insurers partially on the risk to provide coverage for years where the insurers did not issue policies, even though pollution insurance was unavailable in the marketplace. In Keyspan Gas E. Corp. v. Munich Reins. Am., Keyspan Gas East Corporation (“Keyspan”) argued other insurers should cover the period when pollution property insurance was unavailable in the marketplace, according to their pro-rata share of coverage. 31 N.Y.3d 51 (2018). In a unanimous decision, the Court emphasized the Appellate Division’s prior ruling that stated, “spreading risk should not by itself serve as a legal basis for providing free insurance to an insured.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William S. Bennett, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Bennett may be contacted at wsb@sdvlaw.com

    PFAS and the Challenge of Cleaning Up “Forever”

    July 31, 2023 —
    From a stream of legal challenges, to ever-expanding regulations on things like cosmetics and drinking water, PFAS are the “forever chemicals” keeping companies and consumers on high alert. While industries scramble to remove the synthetic compounds from products, scientists are researching new techniques for scrubbing PFAS from the environment. There is money to be had for those who can find a more streamlined method of purging the substances—the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has an $800 million contract on the table for the handling, destruction and replacement of PFAS-laden fire-fighting foam—leaving technology companies racing to create solutions. The three main PFAS cleaning techniques currently relied upon can be very effective but are also costly and may leave questionable byproducts in their wake. The established approaches include:
    • Granular Activated Carbon. As one of the most studied treatments for PFAS removal, granular activated carbon is often used in water treatment plants. Large beds of carbon essentially soak up the unwanted chemicals. After the Sweeney Water Plant in North Carolina, whose water source is downstream from a fluorochemical-producing Chemours plant, was found to be contaminated with PFAS, the plant invested around $46 million into upgraded activated carbon systems. Once installed, these systems cost roughly $2.9 million to operate yearly, as the carbon needs to be replaced each time it reaches capacity. Though pricey, the plant says that the process now clears close to 100% of PFAS.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of PFAS Team, Pillsbury

    Nobody Knows What Lies Beneath New York City

    August 10, 2017 —
    Before a single raindrop fell, Alan Leidner knew the waters could rise and throw the city into darkness. On this point, the maps were as clear as a crystal ball. All you had to do was look. It was 2010, and Leidner was consulting for the government services company Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., contracted by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to identify potential threats and vulnerabilities in the nation’s critical infrastructure. Leidner was examining a region that included New York and New Jersey. One day he was thinking about the area’s electrical power grid. He consulted some flood projection maps the Federal Emergency Management Agency had prepared. Then he stared at a map of the grid maintained by Consolidated Edison Inc., the region’s power supplier. And it just jumped out at him: The substation at East 13th Street, on the banks of the East River, was smack in the middle of a flood zone. Leidner voiced his concerns with utilities, hospitals, and other major facilities. “The reaction was mostly, ‘Eh,’ ” he recalls, as we sit in the Tribeca offices of the Fund for the City of New York, where he directs the nonprofit organization’s Center for Geospatial Innovation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Greg Milner, Bloomberg

    California Insurance Commissioner Lacks Authority to Regulate Formula for Estimating Replacement Cost Value

    April 15, 2015 —
    In Assn. of Cal. Insurance Companies v. Jones ( No. B248622, filed 4/8/15), a California appeals court held that California’s Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones lacked the authority to promulgate California Code of Regulations, title 10, section 2695.183, which set out specific requirements for estimating replacement cost as part of any application or renewal for homeowners insurance. The regulation was promulgated in 2010 in response to complaints from homeowners who lost their homes in the wildfires in Southern California in 2003, 2007, and 2008, and who discovered that they did not have enough insurance to cover the full cost of repairing or rebuilding their homes because the insurers’ estimates of replacement value were too low when they purchased the insurance. Reprinted courtesy of Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Negligence Claim Not Barred by Gist of the Action Doctrine

    February 18, 2015 —
    The Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that the insureds' negligence claim survived because it was not based upon breach of a duty created by the policy, but upon the alleged breach of a duty imposed by tort law. Bruno v. Erie Ins. Co,, 2014 Pa. LEXIS 3319 (Dec. 15, 2014). After purchasing their home, the insureds obtained a homeowner's policy from Erie. A separate endorsement covered loss to the property caused by "fungi," which was included as any form of mold. The endorsement obligated Erie to pay up to $5,000 for loss caused by mold. The policy required Erie to pay the cost of testing the air to confirm the absence or presence of mold. If mold was present, Erie was to pay for the cost of removal, including the cost of tearing out any part of the property needed to gain access to the mold. While renovating the basement, the insureds discovered two areas of black mold in close proximity to leaking water pipes. Erie was notified and sent an adjuster to view the mold. The adjuster took no action, but returned a couple of days later with an engineer. The adjuster and engineer informed the insureds that the mold was harmless and that health problems associated with mold were a media frenzy and overblown. 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

    Corps Proposes $4.6B Plan to Steel Miami for Storm Surge

    June 22, 2020 —
    A $4.6-billion U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposal to protect Miami from future storm surge, largely by building massive sea walls and elevating infrastructure systems, is the latest of such plans the agency has developed for East Coast communities. Pam Radtke Russell, Engineering News-Record Ms. Russell may be contacted at Russellp@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of