BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimony
    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


    Philadelphia Enacts Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (C-PACE) Program

    Manhattan Bargain: Condos for Less Than $3 Million

    Eleventh Circuit Upholds Coverage for Environmental Damage from Sewage, Concluding It is Not a “Pollutant”

    Contract Provisions That Help Manage Risk on Long-Term Projects

    Hawaii Federal District Rejects Another Construction Defect Claim

    Withholding Payment or Having Your Payment Withheld Due to Disputes on Other Projects: Know Your Rights to Offset

    Manhattan to Get Tall, Skinny Tower

    Guarantor’s Liability on Partially Secured Debts – The Impacts of Pay Down Provisions in Serpanok Construction Inc. v. Point Ruston, LLC et al.

    Gain in Home Building Points to Sustained U.S. Growth

    Loss of Use From Allegedly Improper Drainage System Triggers Defense Under CGL Policy

    Proposed Changes to Federal Lease Accounting Standards

    Google’s Floating Mystery Boxes Solved?

    Can Businesses Resolve Construction Disputes Outside of Court?

    #6 CDJ Topic: Construction Defect Legislative Developments

    In Texas, a General Contractor May be Liable in Tort to a Third-Party Lessee for Property Damage Caused by a Subcontractor’s Work

    Drones Used Despite Uncertain Legal Consequences

    Rejection’s a Bear- Particularly in Construction

    $48 Million Award and Successful Defense of $135 Million Claim

    Are “Green” Building Designations and Certifications Truly Necessary?

    How Small Mistakes Can Have Serious Consequences Under California's Contractor Licensing Laws.

    Improper Means Exception and Tortious Interference Claims

    Construction Law Alert: Unlicensed Contractors On Federal Projects Entitled To Payment Under The Miller Act

    David M. McLain to Speak at the CLM Claims College - School of Construction - Scholarships Available

    “Freelance Isn’t Free” New Regulations Adopted in New York City Requiring Written Contracts with Independent Contractors

    Insured's Claim for Replacement Cost Denied

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/03/21)

    Insurance Law Alert: California Supreme Court Limits Advertising Injury Coverage for Disparagement

    Treasure Island Sues Beach Trail Designer over Concrete Defects

    The Insurance Coverage Debate on Construction Defects Continues

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/16/24) – Chevron Ruling’s Impact on Construction Industry, New Kind of Public Housing and Policy Recommendations from Sustainable Building Groups

    Construction Defects and Second Buyers in Pennsylvania

    Florida Law: Interplay of SIR and the Made-Whole Doctrine

    Hunton Insurance Partner Syed Ahmad Named to Benchmark Litigation’s 2019 40 & Under Hot List

    Architectural Democracy – Interview with Pedro Aibéo

    Force Majeure and COVID-19 in Construction Contracts – What You Need to Know

    California Trial Court Clarifies Application of SB800 Roofing Standards and Expert’s Opinions

    Why A.I. Isn’t Going to Replace Lawyers Anytime Soon

    Maryland Court Affirms Condo Association’s Right to Sue for Construction Defects

    You Don’t Have To Be a Consumer to Assert a FDUTPA Claim

    Appraisal Panel Can Determine Causation of Loss under Ohio Law

    Preserving Your Construction Claim

    Chinese Lead $92 Billion of U.S. Home Sales to Foreigners

    A Homeowner’s Subsequent Action is Barred as a Matter of Law by way of a Prior “Right to Repair Act” Claim Resolved by Cash Settlement for Waiver of all Known or Unknown Claims

    Los Angeles Could Be Devastated by the Next Big Earthquake

    Columbus, Ohio’s Tallest Building to be Inspected for Construction Defects

    Even Where Fraud and Contract Mix, Be Careful With Timing

    Bel Air Mansion Construction Draws Community Backlash

    Sureties and Bond Producers May Be Liable For a Contractor’s False Claims Action Violation

    Labor Shortage Confirmed Through AGC Poll

    Rhode Island Sues 13 Industry Firms Over Flawed Interstate Bridge
    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

    A Trio of Environmental Decisions from the Fourth Circuit

    August 28, 2018 —
    Within the past few weeks, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has issued some very significant rulings regarding the construction of new natural gas pipelines. These cases are Berkley, et al. v. Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, decided July 25; Sierra Club, Inc., et al., v. U.S. Forest Service, The Wilderness Society, et al., v. U.S. Forest Service, and Sierra Club, Inc. et al. v. U.S. Department of the Interior, decided July 27, 2018; and Sierra Club v. U.S. Department of the Interior and Defenders of Wildlife, et al., v. U.S. Department of the Interior, decided August 6, 2018. The first two cases involve the Mountain Valley Pipeline, and the last case involves the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. 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

    Arctic Roads and Runways Face the Prospect of Rapid Decline

    July 19, 2021 —
    Melting permafrost across Arctic regions has already caused highways to buckle and homes to sink. A new study conducted in the north of Alaska helps explain why rising temperatures are hitting roads, airports and other infrastructure particularly hard. Researchers who monitored temperatures and melting near Prudhoe Bay on Alaska’s North Slope documented how the thawing of frozen ground beneath a highway tended to spread laterally to the side of the road, with the melting process accelerated by snow accumulations and puddling. Those interactions led to more rapid thawing than in areas of undisturbed permafrost. Researchers also found that melting in their test area, alongside a highway that runs atop permafrost, followed a two-phase process — a gradual initial thaw, followed by an accelerated process once warming exceeded a critical point. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tony Frangie Mawad, Bloomberg

    Substituting Materials and Failure to Comply with Contractual Requirements

    November 19, 2021 —
    It is important to remember that if you are going to substitute materials from those specified, you need to make sure there is proper approval in doing so–make sure to comply with the contractual requirements to substitute materials. Otherwise, you could be in a situation where you are contractually required to remove the installed substituted materials and replace with the correct specified materials. This is not the situation you want to find yourself in because this is oftentimes a costly endeavor. This was the situation in Appeal-of-Sauer, Inc., discussed below, on a federal project. The best thing that you can do is comply with the contractual requirements if you want to substitute materials. If you are in the situation where it is too late, i.e., you already installed incorrect materials, you want to demonstrate the substituted materials are functionally equivalent to the specified materials and/or come up with an engineering solution, as required, that could be less costly then ripping out the installed material and replacing with the correct material. Even doing so, however, is not a “get out of jail free card” and does not necessarily mean there is not a strong basis to require you to install the correct specified material. In Appeal of- Sauer, Inc., ASBCA 61847, 2021 WL 4888192 (ASBCA September 29, 2021), a federal project’s engineering requirements required cast iron piping for the above ground sanitary system. However, the prime contractor installed PVC piping instead of cast iron piping. The prime contractor believed it had the appropriate approval through its submittal. The government, through its contracting officer, directed the prime contractor to remove installed PVC piping to replace with cast iron. The government did not believe PVC piping was the functional equivalent of cast iron piping for the above ground sanitary system due to its concern with the noise level of waste materials flowing through the piping. The prime contractor submitted a claim for its removal and replacement costs which was denied by the contracting officer. On appeal with the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, the Board agreed with the contracting officer explaining: “While we agree that a design change could be approved by the designer of record and brought to the attention of the government before being incorporated into the design documents, the [prime contractor’s] task order required that such a design change meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation and accepted proposal. The plumbing submittal [the prime contractor] issued here, showing the use of PVC instead of cast iron for the above ground waste piping, did not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.” Appeal of-Sauer, Inc., supra. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Arezoo Jamshidi Selected to the 2023 San Diego Super Lawyers List

    April 03, 2023 —
    Congratulations to Arezoo Jamshidi who has been selected to the 2023 San Diego Super Lawyers list. Each year, no more than five percent of the lawyers in the state are selected by the research team at Super Lawyers to receive this honor. Super Lawyers, part of Thomson Reuters, is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The annual selections are made using a patented multiphase process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, an independent research evaluation of candidates and peer reviews by practice area. The result is a credible, comprehensive and diverse listing of exceptional attorneys. The Super Lawyers lists are published nationwide in Super Lawyers magazines and in leading city and regional magazines and newspapers across the country. Super Lawyers magazines also feature editorial profiles of attorneys who embody excellence in the practice of law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Arezoo Jamshidi, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
    Ms. Jamshidi may be contacted at ajamshidi@hbblaw.com

    Exponential Acceleration—Interview with Anders Hvid

    December 01, 2017 —
    Anders Hvid is a Danish consultant, speaker, and author. He talks about digital disruption, exponential acceleration, and paradigm shifts that are taking place in a world that is moving from local and linear into global and exponential. “I have a background in social studies. My interest is in humans, and systems in which they work together. I’ve always had a deep fascination with technology and how it influences our society, our jobs, our democracies, and systems,” Anders says. He visited Singularity University back in 2010, and that experience made a lasting impression on him. “It freaked me out, to be honest, and it opened my eyes to how important technology is.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at info@aepartners.fi

    Texas Supreme Court Holds Anadarko’s $100M Deepwater Horizon Defense Costs Are Not Subject To Joint Venture Liability Limits

    February 27, 2019 —
    Reversing a Texas Court of Appeals decision that allowed Anadarko’s Lloyd’s of London excess insurers to escape coverage for more than $100 million in defense costs incurred in connection with claims from the Deepwater Horizon well blowout, the Supreme Court of Texas held that the insurers’ obligations to pay defense costs under an “energy package” liability policy are not capped by a joint venture coverage limit for “liability” insured. Anadarko Petroleum Corp. et al. v. Houston Casualty Co. et al., No. 16-1013 (Tex. Jan. 25, 2019). While the Lloyd’s of London insurers had agreed to pay Anadarko $37.5 million for damages, they declined to cover $100 million-plus in defense fees, arguing that both Anadarko’s liability and defense expenses are subject to the $37.5 million joint venture limit for “liability” insured. Anadarko asserted that only amounts paid as damages to third parties are subject to that limit. Defense costs, however, are not amounts paid as damages to a third party and, thus, are not a “liability.” Those amounts, therefore, are not subject to the joint venture limit and are instead subject to the policy’s $150 million coverage limit. Reprinted courtesy of Sergio F. Oehninger, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Oehninger may be contacted at soehninger@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Court of Appeal Vacates $30M Non-Economic Damages Award Due to Failure to Properly Apportion Liability and Attorney Misconduct During Closing Argument

    February 08, 2021 —
    On January 20, 2021, the California Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Six (Ventura), in Plascencia v. Deese (B299142), vacated a $30 million non-economic damages award in a highway fatality case because: (1) the award did not properly apportion non-economic damages among everyone at fault in violation of Proposition 51; and (2) the amount of the award appeared to have been influenced by plaintiffs’ counsel’s misconduct and prejudicial remarks during closing argument. In Plascencia, the plaintiffs sued several defendants for the wrongful death of their daughter arising from a highway fatality accident. All the defendants settled or were dismissed before trial except the trucking defendants. The highway fatality was caused when one defendant driver made an illegal U-turn on a highway as she left another defendant’s fruit stand. The plaintiffs’ daughter swerved to avoid the U-turn driver, lost control of her car, and crashed into the back of the trucking defendants’ diesel tractor-trailer. The truck driver had parked the truck on the side of the highway near the fruit stand, which the trucking defendants’ expert conceded fell below the standard of care. Reprinted courtesy of Krsto Mijanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP, Peter A. Dubrawski, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP, Arezoo Jamshidi, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Catherine M. Asuncion, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Mijanovic may be contacted at kmijanovic@hbblaw.com Mr. Dubrawski may be contacted at pdubrawski@hbblaw.com Ms. Jamshidi may be contacted at ajamshidi@hbblaw.com Ms. Asuncion may be contacted at casuncion@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Dynamics of Managing Professional Liability Claims for Design Builders

    February 21, 2022 —
    Nearly half of America’s construction projects are now design-build in a continuing shift. As a result, contractors are taking on more professional liability (“PL”) risk than ever before, and the risk management landscape is changing. There are unique challenges to managing PL risks and claims. Specifically, PL coverage requires proactive claim management and project coordination. As a result, design-build projects should involve significant collaboration amongst all of the parties involved in the project. Claims Made Coverage Considerations PL policies typically provide three types of coverage:
    1. Professional Liability covers defense and indemnity against claims arising out of acts or omissions of the insured in rendering a defined set of professional services –including construction management, project management, and design work in the design build context.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eric M. Clarkson, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Clarkson may be contacted at EClarkson@sdvlaw.com