BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation 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


    How Berger’s Peer Review Role Figures In Potential Bridge Collapse Settlement

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/17/23) – A Flop in Flipping, Plastic Microbes and Psychological Hard Hats

    Builders Can’t Rely on SB800

    Insurance for Defective Construction Now in Third Edition

    Fifth Circuit Decision on Number of Occurrences Underscores Need to Carefully Tailor Your Insurance Program

    Indicted Union Representatives Try Again to Revive Enmons

    PSA: New COVID Vaccine ETS Issued by OSHA

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

    EEOC Issues Anti-Harassment Guidance To Construction-Industry Employers

    Insurer’s Optional Appeals Process Does Not Toll Statute of Limitations Following Unequivocal Written Denial

    SB800 CONFIRMED AS EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR CONSTRUCTION DEFECT CLAIMS

    Six Inducted into California Homebuilding Hall of Fame

    Rooftop Owners Sue Cubs Consultant for Alleged False Statements

    Zero-Energy Commercial Buildings Increase as Contractors Focus on Sustainability

    No Coverage for Home Damaged by Falling Boulders

    Modern Tools Are Key to Future-Proofing the Construction Industry

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Failure to Cover Collapse Fails

    Will Claims By Contractors on Big Design-Build Projects Ever End?

    Did the Court of Appeals Just Raise the Bar for California Contractors to Self-Report Construction-Related Judgments?

    Approaches to Managing Job Site Inventory

    Consumer Prices Rising as U.S. Housing Stabilizes: Economy

    Wilke Fleury Secures Bid Protest Denial

    Unpaid Hurricane Maria Insurance Claims, New Laws in Puerto Rico, and the Lesson for all Policyholders

    If I Released My California Mechanics Lien, Can I File a New Mechanics Lien on the Same Project? Will the New Mechanics Lien be Enforceable?

    Puerto Rico Grid Restoration Plagued by Historic Problems, New Challenges

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

    Trump Soho May Abandon Condos to Operate Mainly as Hotel

    U.S. Building Permits Soared to Their Highest Level in Nearly Eight Years

    Potential Extension of the Statutes of Limitation and Repose for Colorado Construction Defect Claims

    Emergency Paid Sick Leave and FMLA Leave Updates in Response to COVID-19

    Construction Reaches Half-Way Point on San Diego's $2.1 Billion Mid-Coast Trolley

    Hunton Insurance Partner Among Top 250 Women in Litigation

    More Business Value from Drones with Propeller and Trimble – Interview with Rory San Miguel

    Phoenix Flood Victims Can’t Catch a Break as Storm Nears

    Canada Cooler Housing Market Boosts Poloz’s Soft Landing

    Homebuyers Aren't Sweating the Fed

    Illinois Appellate Court Address the Scope of the Term “Resident” in Homeowners Policy

    Ninth Circuit Holds that 1993 Budget Appropriations Language Does Not Compel the Corps of Engineers to use 1987 Wetlands Guidance Indefinitely

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Kept Climbing in January

    Flushing Away Liability: What the Aqua Engineering Case Means for Contractors and Subcontractors

    Maybe Supervising Qualifies as Labor After All

    Allegations Versus “True Facts”: Which Govern the Duty to Defend? Bonus! A Georgia Court Clears Up What the Meaning of “Is” Is

    A Court-Side Seat: Coal-Fired Limitations, the Search for a Venue Climate Change and New Agency Rules that May or May Not Stick Around

    Impaired Property Exclusion Bars Coverage When Loose Bolt Interferes with MRI Unit Operation

    The Prompt Payment Act Obligation is Not Triggered When the Owner Holds Less Retention from the General Contractor

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

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

    Haight’s Sacramento Office Has Moved

    Contractors Must Register with the L&I Prior to Offering or Performing Work, or Risk Having their Breach of Contract Case Dismissed

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

    More thoughts on Virginia Mechanic’s Liens

    January 28, 2019 —
    As we settled yet another construction case on the courthouse steps today, I began to think about what I should post to begin 2009. Of course, given the construction industry slowdown that is predicted, and the trend at construction projects around the Commonwealth of Virginia that looks to me as if payments will be harder to come by from Owners less willing, for financial reasons, to work with contractors, mechanic’s liens will be more useful, and necessary, now than ever. Virginia mechanic’s liens are unusually strong because your memorandum of lien takes priority over all prior liens on the property that you have improved (including from the bank that is financing the project) except in very limited circumstances. What this means is that, should you properly file and sue to enforce your lien, you get to foreclose and have first crack at any money. By contrast, a judgment lien takes priority only over liens filed after the lien is recorded. 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

    Couple Sues for Construction Defects in Manufactured Home

    July 31, 2013 —
    A West Virginia couple has sued the manufacturer of their home for construction defects and damage. Darrell and Teri Pearson claim that the home they purchased from Giles Industries was defective. They further claim that Kitchen’s Construction failed to set the home up properly and that the firm did not repair damaged sections of home. The suit also names the firm that sold the home and others. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    First Look at Long List of AEC Firms Receiving PPP Loans

    July 20, 2020 —
    Thousands of construction and design firm from all parts of the U.S. appear on lists of companies that have received federal Paycheck Protection Program forgivable loans, according to federal documents just made public. Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record and Scott Blair, Engineering News-Record Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com Mr. Blair may be contacted at blairs@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Sometimes It’s Okay to Destroy Evidence

    August 17, 2011 —

    The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled in the case of Miller v. Lankow that Mr. Miller was within his rights to remediate his home, even though doing so destroyed the evidence of water intrusion.

    Linda Lankow built a home in 1992. In 2001 or 2002, Lankow discovered a stucco problem at the garage which she attributed to moisture intrusion. She asked the original contractor to fix the wall. In 2003, Lankow attempted to sell her home, but the home inspection revealed fungal growth in the basement. Lankow made further repairs, including alterations to the landscaping.

    In 2004, Lankow put her house on the market once again and entered into an agreement with David Miller. Miller declined to have an independent inspection, as the home had been repaired by professional contractors.

    In 2005, Miller put the house on the market. A prospective buyer requested a moisture inspection. The inspection firm, Private Eye, Inc. found “significant moisture intrusion problems.”

    Miller hired an attorney who sent letters to the contractors and to Lankow and her husband. Lankow’s husband, Jim Betz, an attorney, represented his wife and sent a letter to Miller’s attorney that Miller had declined an opportunity to inspect the home.

    In 2007, Miller’s new attorney sent letters to all parties that Miller had decided to begin remediation work on the house. All stucco was removed. Miller then filed a lawsuit against the prior owners, the builders, and the realtors.

    Two of the contractors and the prior owners moved for summary judgment on the grounds that Miller had spoliated evidence by removing the stucco. They requested that Miller’s expert reports be excluded. The district court found for the defendants and imposed sanctions on Miller.

    The Minnesota Supreme court found that “a custodial party’s duty to preserve evidence is not boundless,” stating that “it may be particularly import to allow remediation in cases such as the one before us.” Their reasoning was that “remediation of the moisture intrusion problem in the home may be necessary, even essential, to address immediate health concerns.”

    Given that Miller needed to remediate the problem in order to continue living there, and that he had given the other parties a “full and fair opportunity to inspect,” the court found that he was within his rights. The court reversed the judgment of the lower court and remanded it to them for review.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Court Says No to Additional Lawyer in Las Vegas Fraud Case

    October 14, 2013 —
    Leon Benzer, who has been accused of being one of the masterminds of the Las Vegas HOA scam, has been denied in his bid to add an additional attorney to his publicly-funded defense. Daniel Albregts, Benzer’s court-appointed attorney, made the request due to the large amount of evidence in the case. Federal prosecutors have provided the defense with more than 3.4 million pages of documents. According to U. S. Magistrate Judge George Foley Jr., “defendant’s counsel should be able to prepare and provide an adequate defense with the assistance of appropriate paralegal and other support services.” Mr. Albregts is currently assisted by Russell Aoki, whose role is that of technical consultant on matters regarding electronic distribution. Federal prosecutors opposed Mr. Albregts hiring Franny Forsman, a former federal public defender. Had Ms. Forsman been hired, the government would have paid $110 per hour for her services. The government is seeking $25 million in restitution from Mr. Benzer. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The California Privacy Rights Act Passed – Now What?

    November 09, 2020 —
    The ballot initiative, Proposition 24, has been passed by voters in yesterday’s election. What does this proposition entail and how does it impact the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)? What’s Covered in Proposition 24 - The California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) The CPRA, among other things, does the following:
    • Revises the existing CCPA to expand consumer rights with respect to personal information and sensitive personal information;
    • Creates a new agency responsible for enforcing the CPRA; and
    • Increases penalties for violations related to the personal information of children under the age of 16.
    As for additional consumer rights, the CPRA offers consumers the opportunity to request a correction of inaccurate personal information. In addition, a consumer may direct a company to “limit its use of the consumer's sensitive personal information” to a use that an average customer would expect. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Heather Whitehead, Newmeyer Dillion
    Ms. Whitehead may be contacted at heather.whitehead@ndlf.com

    Contractor Sues Yelp Reviewer for Defamation

    February 05, 2014 —
    Contractor Christopher Dietz sued Jane Perez, a Virginia homeowner who “wrote a pair of scathing reviews of his services” on Yelp, according to Yahoo Finance. Dietz sued for “defamation and” sought “$750,000 in damages.” The Fairfax, Virginia jury did find the reviews to be defamatory, but they also “found that Dietz had defamed her as well when he responded to her negative reviews with accusations of his own.” The jury decided that “neither deserved to recoup damages.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Professional Services Exclusion Bars Coverage Where Ordinary Negligence is Inseparably Intertwined With Professional Service

    August 17, 2017 —
    In Energy Ins. Mutual Ltd. v. Ace American Ins. Co. (No. A140656, filed 7/11/17, ord. Pub. 8/10/17), a California appeals court found that a professional services exclusion barred coverage for wrongful death and other claims blamed on pipeline inspectors’ failure to identify and properly mark a gas pipeline that was ruptured during construction of another pipeline, resulting in an explosion and fire. In Energy Ins. Mutual, a pipeline owner hired two temporary construction inspectors through a staffing company. The inspectors had to ensure compliance with engineering and safety standards, practices and procedures for pipeline construction, and understand construction drawings and blueprints. They worked together with one of the owner’s employees to perform daily surveillance to ensure the integrity of the pipeline and avoid third party damage. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of