BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect 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


    Australian Developer Denies Building Problems Due to Construction Defects

    2023 Construction Law Update

    NLRB Broadens the Joint Employer Standard

    Congratulations to Partner Alex Giannetto for Being Named to San Diego Business Journal’s Top 100 Leaders in Law List

    Product Liability Economic Loss Rule and “Other Property” Damage

    Ackman Group Pays $91.5 Million for Condo at NYC’s One57

    Washington State Enacts Law Restricting Non-Compete Agreements

    District Court Allows DBE False Claims Act Case to Proceed

    Art Dao, Executive Director of the Alameda County Transportation Commission, Speaks at Wendel Rosen’s Infrastructure Forum

    Ownership is Not a Conclusive Factor for Ongoing Operations Additional Insured Coverage

    Wilke Fleury Secures Bid Protest Denial

    Know Whether Your Course of Business Operations Are Covered Or Excluded By Your Insurance

    COVID-19 Business Interruption Claims Four Years Later: What Have We Learned?

    New Braves Stadium Is Three Months Ahead of Schedule, Team Says

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds that Subrogation Waiver Does Not Violate Statute Prohibiting Limitation on Tort Liability in Construction Contracts

    Not a Waiver for All: Maryland Declines to Apply Subrogation Waiver to Subcontractors

    Seven Key Issues for Construction Professionals to Consider When Dealing With COVID-19

    Business Risk Exclusions Dismissed in Summary Judgment Motion

    Why You Should Consider “In House Counsel”

    Structural Failure of Precast-Concrete Span Sets Back Sydney Metro Job

    Eleventh Circuit Finds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Claims

    St. Mary & St. John Coptic Orthodox Church v. SBS Insurance Services, Inc.

    Construction Contract Basics: No Damages for Delay

    Carrier Has Duty to Defend Claim for Active Malfunction of Product

    How the Parking Garage Conquered the City

    The “Up” House is “Up” for Sale

    Will On-Site Robotics Become Feasible in Construction?

    Appeals Court Affirms Carrier’s Duty to Pay Costs Taxed Against Insured in Construction Defect Suit

    I.M. Pei, Architect Who Designed Louvre Pyramid, Dies at 102

    Boston Tower Project to Create 450 Jobs

    What You Need to Know to Protect the Project Against Defect Claims

    Trump Soho May Abandon Condos to Operate Mainly as Hotel

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules that Insurance Salesman had No Fiduciary Duty to Policyholders

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa Rolle Obtains Summary Judgment in Favor of Defendant

    Background Owner of Property Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate Construction Defects

    Quick Note: Third-Party Can Bring Common Law Bad Faith Claim

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    Insured's Motion for Reconsideration on Denial of Coverage Unsuccessful

    Colorado Passes Construction Defect Reform Bill

    Multiple Construction Errors Contributed to Mexico Subway Collapse

    Suffolk Pauses $1.5B Boston Tower Project for Safety Audit After Fire

    Brooklyn Atlantic Yards Yields Dueling Suits on Tower

    North Carolina Federal Court Holds “Hazardous Materials” Exclusion Does Not Bar Duty to Defend Under CGL Policy for Bodily Injury Claims Arising Out of Direct Exposure to PFAs

    What to Know Before Building a Guesthouse

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twenty White and Williams Lawyers

    Williams v. Athletic Field: Hugely Important Lien Case Argued Before Supreme Court

    Homeowner may pursue negligence claim for construction defect, Oregon Supreme Court holds

    Mechanic’s Liens and Leases Don’t Often Mix Well

    Seeking the Urban Lifestyle in the Suburbs

    No Coverage for Sink Hole Loss
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Hard to Believe It, Construction Law Musings is 16

    January 07, 2025 —
    On this date back in 2008 (wow, that seems so long ago), I began Construction Law Musings on the Blogger platform with a brief announcement. Little did I know that this corner of the internet (or is it Blawgosphere?) would still be around in 2024! In the time since I made that short entry 16 years ago (I know, I can’t believe it either), I’ve met several construction lawyers here in Virginia who refer to me as the “blog guy.” To be recognized for the work I do here at Construction Law Musings, something that benefits me (and I hope the readers), and which I do for the fun of it, is an honor. The blog has since taken on a life of its own in many respects, allowing me to meet some of the great construction pros who have provided a guest post or two for Musings and added their different perspectives. Musings also kept me up on at least most of the trends in Virginia construction law by making me post consistently (though sometimes less consistently than others). Now, around 975 posts and 16 years later, I find it hard to believe that so much time has passed and effort has been put into what started on a whim and the plan that I’d post thoughts on the legal landscape and construction from the perspective of a Virginia construction lawyer. 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

    Issuing Judgment After Confirmation of Appraisal Award Overturned

    May 01, 2023 —
    The Florida Court of Appeal reversed and remanded the trial court's judgment in favor of the insured because after confirming the appraisal award, judgment was issued before the insurer could offer policy defenses. State Farm Florida Ins. Co. v. Hochreiter, 2023 Fla. App. LEXIS 743 (Fla. Ct. App. Feb. 3, 2023. After a dispute arose over the scope and amount of damage suffered by the insureds' roof, they sued State Farm. State Farm responded to the complaint by demanding an appraisal, a stay of litigation, and an extension of time to respond to the complaint. The trial court granted the demand and retained jurisdiction regarding post-appraisal matters once the appraisal was complete. The court further ordered State Farm to respond to the complaint within twenty days of the conclusion of the appraisal "if any issues remain." The order did not specify whether the issues that remained had to relate to the initial appraisal stage of the litigation or the subsequent stage during which the trial court had jurisdiction to adjudicate disputed issues related to coverage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    More Construction Defects for San Francisco’s Eastern Bay Bridge Expansion

    October 01, 2014 —
    According to SF Gate, almost “every one of the 423 steel rods that anchor the tower of the new Bay Bridge eastern span to its base has been sitting in potentially corrosive water, Caltrans officials said Tuesday — one of the most serious construction defects found yet on the $6.4 billion project.” About a year ago, “steel rods crucial to seismic-stabilizing structures on the bridge snapped when they were tensioned.” Fixing those rods cost $25 million, while an additional $20 million had been spent determing if “additional rods and bolts are at risk of failing.” In regards to the latest construction defects discovered, Caltrans’ chief engineer on the project, Brian Maroney, stated, “It’s not acceptable, and we’re going to fix it.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Thousands of London Residents Evacuated due to Fire Hazards

    June 29, 2017 —
    Nearly 4,000 residents were ordered by municipal authorities to “urgently evacuate apartments in five London high-rise buildings…after fire inspectors warned that the safety of the residents could not be guaranteed,” reported the New York Times. Displaced families were urged to find shelter with family or friends, but temporary accommodations were offered. Repairs may take up to four weeks. The five London towers that were evacuated all contain the same exterior cladding and insulation that is similar to what was used in Grenfell Tower, where 79 people died in fire only the preceding week, according to the New York Times. Camden Council stated that the cladding material would be removed. They had ordered noncombustible cladding, but later learned that combustible cladding had been installed. “Preliminary tests on the insulation samples from Grenfell Tower show that they combusted soon after the test started,” Detective Superintendent McCormack said in a televised statement, as quoted by the New York Times. “Cladding tiles had also failed initial tests,” she continued. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is the Manhattan Bank of America Tower a Green Success or Failure?

    April 15, 2014 —
    Construction Digital reported that the Bank of America tower in Manhattan, New York, “has been conversely hailed as both the greenest skyscraper in the world and an energy-guzzling toxic tower that exposes the charade of the LEED rating system.” It is the first skyscraper to ever achieve the highest LEED Platinum rating. However, a critic alleged that the eighty-year old Empire State Building “uses half the energy” of the new Bank of America tower. The Bank of America tower, designed by architects Cook and Fox, was built with “local and recycled materials,” as well as “floor-to-floor insulated glazing” that maximizes “natural light and traps heat, and lights are automatically dimmed in daylight.” Rainwater is captured for reuse, and “waterless urinals save an estimated 8,000,000 US gallons of water per year.” However, Construction Digital reported that Sam Roudman in New Republic Magazine “pointed out that buildings contribute more to global warming than any other sector of the economy, consuming more energy and producing more greenhouse gas emissions in America than every car, bus, jet, and train combined; and furthermore, than every factory combined.” Joel Levy writing for Construction Digital declared, “We can call LEED a failed artifice and even suggest abandoning it as a pointless charade, but unless we want to live in caves and go back to using candles for light, we must accept the fact that the 155,000,000 people that make up America’s workforce power the country and indeed the world’s economy…need somewhere to work.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ahlers & Cressman Presents a Brief History of Liens

    August 20, 2014 —
    Brad Westmoreland on Ahlers & Cressman PLLC’s blog, presented the history of liens in the U.S., going back to 1789. In fact, the lien was created in response to the need of swift and extensive construction in Washington D.C. “Although it had an abundance of land at the time, America was short on labor and capital,” Westmoreland wrote. “Knowing the state of things, builders were hesitant to provide labor and materials without guarantees that owners would be able to pay.” According to the Ahlers & Cressman PLLC blog, Thomas Jefferson solved the issue by urging “the Legislature of Maryland to pass a law giving builders ‘a lien upon newly created values of [their] labors.’ The new law would provide builders with the assurance that contracts would not result in a total loss should the owners fail to pay.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Second Circuit Finds Potential Ambiguity in Competing “Anti-Concurrent Cause” Provisions in Hurricane Sandy Property Loss

    November 28, 2018 —
    The Second Circuit recently held that competing “anti-concurrent cause” provisions in a commercial property policy present a potential ambiguity that could result in favor of coverage for losses sustained by Madelaine Chocolate after storm surge from Hurricane Sandy combined to cause substantial damage to Madelaine’s property and a resulting loss of income. Madelaine was insured under an all-risk insurance policy issued by Chubb subsidiary Great Northern Insurance Company. By endorsement, Madelaine’s policy added “windstorm” as a covered peril and defined “windstorm” as “wind… regardless of any other cause or event that directly or indirectly contributes concurrently to, or contributed in any sequence to, the loss or damage.” The policy also included a common flood exclusion that removed coverage for loss or damage caused by or resulting from waves, tidal water, or tidal waves, or the rising, overflowing, or breaking of any natural harbors, oceans, or any other body of water, whether driven by wind or not. Like the windstorm endorsement, the flood exclusion contained concurrency language that broadened the exclusion to any loss to which flood contributed, regardless of any other cause or event that directly or indirectly contributed to the loss. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Tae Andrews, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Andrews may be contacted at tandrews@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Court-Side Seat: Clean Air, Clean Water, Citizen Suits and the Summer of 2022

    November 01, 2022 —
    This is a selection of significant environmental and regulatory law cases decided by the federal courts after the Supreme Court’s 2021 Term concluded. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit National Association of Broadcasters v. Federal Communications Commission On July 12, 2022, the DC Circuit held that an order of the FCC requiring radio broadcasters to follow a prescribed five-step process to verify the identity of program sponsors was not authorized by the Communications Act. According to the court, the FCC “decreed a duty that the statute does not require, and that the statute does not empower the FCC to impose.” Here, the agency failed to identify the statutory authority it needed to authorize the issuance of such an order. While certainly not as significant as the Supreme Court’s ruling in West Virginia v. EPA, decided only a few days before this decision was released, it is a strong reminder that the courts want to know if a challenged rule is authorized by law. Humane Society of the U.S., et al., v. U.S. Department of Agriculture On July 22, 2022, the court decided a case involving the steps the Administrative Procedure Act and the Federal Register Act require to be taken before a final agency rule is legally promulgated. Customarily, when there has been a change in Presidential administrations, the incoming administration “quietly” withdraws rules awaiting Federal Register publication without much ceremony. The majority of this panel agreed that public notice should have been provided to the regulated community to comment on the new administration’s action to pull back a new rule which had been made available for public inspection before Federal Register publication that would have strengthened the protections afforded “show horses,” as now required by law. The court noted that “it seems clear that filing with the Federal Register constituted promulgation of a regulation even though publication may not occur until a later date.” Circuit Judge Rao filed a strong dissent. “By cutting off agency discretion at public inspection, the majority imposes judicial burden on agency procedures that conflicts with circuit precedent, the statutory framework and a longstanding regulation permitting withdrawals prior to publication.” There could be a further review of this unique ruling. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com