BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering 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


    Untangling Unique Legal Issues in Modern Modular Construction

    2015-2016 California Labor & Employment Laws Affecting Construction Industry

    Record Keeping—the Devil’s in the Details

    Building Group Has Successful 2012, Looks to 2013

    Skanska Found Negligent for Damages From Breakaway Barges

    Brookfield Wins Disputed Bid to Manage Manhattan Marina

    Don MacGregor of Bert L. Howe & Associates Awarded Silver Star Award at WCC Construction Defect Seminar

    Potential Coverage Issues Implicated by the Champlain Towers Collapse

    “But I didn’t know what I was signing….”

    NY Pay-to-Play Charges Dropped Against LPCiminelli Executive As Another Pleads Guilty

    eRent: Construction Efficiency Using Principles of the Sharing Economy

    Construction Defect Leads to Death of Worker

    Is the Event You Are Claiming as Unforeseeable Delay Really Unforeseeable?

    Changes in the Law on Lien Waivers

    Don’t Do this When it Comes to Construction Liens

    The Vallagio HOA Appeals the Decision from the Colorado Court of Appeals

    Engineering Report Finds More Investigation Needed of Balconies at New Jersey Condo

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Hold the Pickles, Hold the Lettuce?”

    The “Right to Repair” Construction Defects in the Rocky Mountain and Plains Region

    Social Engineering Scams Are On the Rise – Do I Have Insurance Coverage for That?

    Insured's Failure to Prove Entire Collapse of Building Leads to Dismissal

    Do Not Forfeit Coverage Under Your Property Insurance Policy

    Colorado’s Abbreviated Legislative Session Offers Builders a Reprieve

    Brief Discussion of Enforceability of Anti-Indemnity Statutes in California

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

    Rancosky Adopts Terletsky: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Sets Standard for Statutory Bad Faith Claims

    Bid Protests: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (Redeux)

    NLRB Finalizes Rule for Construction Industry Unions to Obtain Majority Support Representational Status

    Time To “Construct” New Social Media Policies

    Arbitrator May Use Own Discretion in Consolidating Construction Defect Cases

    Building Permits Hit Five-Year High

    Colorado Court of Appeals’ Ruling Highlights Dangers of Excessive Public Works Claims

    Power & Energy - Emerging Insurance Coverage Cases of Interest

    Construction Contractors Must Understand Retainage In 2021

    Spearin Doctrine 100 Years Old and Still Thriving in the Design-Build Delivery World

    How to Build a Water-Smart City

    BofA Said to Near Mortgage Deal for Up to $17 Billion

    Recording a Lis Pendens Is Crucial

    Sold Signs Fill Builder Lots as U.S. Confidence Rises: Economy

    What to Do Before OSHA Comes Knocking

    Factories Boost U.S. Output as Builders Gain Confidence: Economy

    Flood-Threat Assessment Finds Danger Goes Far Beyond U.S. Homes

    24/7 Wall Street Reported on Eight Housing Markets at All-Time Highs

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

    How Will Today’s Pandemic Impact Tomorrow’s Construction Contracts?

    Construction in Indian Country – What You Need To Know About Sovereign Immunity

    Update – Property Owner’s Defense Goes up in Smoke in Careless Smoking Case

    White and Williams Defeats Policyholder’s Attempt to Invalidate Asbestos Exclusions

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Tightens Requirements for Co-Worker Affidavits in Asbestos Cases

    Measure of Damages for a Chattel Including Loss of Use
    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. Drawing 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

    Remodel Leads to Construction Defect Lawsuit

    October 16, 2013 —
    The Sacramento, California law firm Anderson Shoech has announced that it will be filing a construction defect lawsuit concerning a single-family home in Sonora, California. The remodel is alleged to have lead to roof leaks and mold growth. Anderson Schoech will have the home inspected by a general contractor who will be retained as an expert witness. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Fence Attached to Building Covered Under Dwelling Provisions

    March 01, 2017 —
    The Texas Supreme Court determined that a damaged fence attached to the insureds' dwelling was covered under the dwelling provisions, not the "other structure" portion of the policy. Nassar v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 2017 Tex. LEXIS 113 (Tex. Jan. 27 ,2017). The insureds' owned six acres of property. Hurricane Ike caused significant damage to the property on September 13, 2008. The insureds submitted a claim to Liberty Mutual under their homeowners' policy. Liberty Mutual paid several claims, but disputes arose over the value of various items of damaged property, including the fencing on the property. The insured's fencing spanned over 4,000 linear feet, including a white picket fence at the northeast corner of the dwelling, an ornamental iron fence in front of the dwelling, numerous cross fences, garden fences, and a larger, perimeter fence. 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

    Harlem Developers Reach Deal with Attorney General

    February 25, 2014 —
    Joseph Scarpinito and Shiraz Sanjana, developers of the Mirada condominium in Harlem, New York can avoid a contempt charge from state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, “if they make the required repairs and obtain a permanent certificate of occupancy at the property,” according to The Real Deal. Scarpinito and Sanjana “agreed to deposit $200,000 into an escrow account and make repairs to stop flooding and other defects at the 161 East 110th Street condo, which are required to obtain a certificate of occupancy from the city Department of Buildings.” Last December, the Attorney General “filed suit against the developers, alleging they submitted false filings to his office in claiming that Scarpinito’s 83-year-old mother was the actual developer of the 68-unit condo.” Furthermore, the condo board lawyers submitted a complaint to Schneiderman “detailing extensive defects in the building, including water leaks entering the building from the roof and façade.” The developers have been ordered “to submit weekly reports to the AG’s office detailing progress on the repairs and obtaining the certificate of occupancy.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Supreme Court Declines Request to Expand Exceptions to Privette Doctrine for Known Hazards

    January 17, 2022 —
    First things first. Happy New Year! Hope you had a good one. To start things off in the new year we’ve got an employment-related case for you – Gonzalez v. Mathis, 12 Cal.5th 29 (2021) – a California Supreme Court case involving the Privette Doctrine. For those not familiar with the Privette Doctrine, the Privette Doctrine is named after the case Privette v. Superior Court, 5 Cal.4th 689 (1993), which held that project owners and higher-tiered contractors are not liable for workplace injuries sustained by employees of lower-tiered contractors. Since then, courts have carved out a few exceptions to the Privette Doctrine including the “retained control exception” (also known as the Hooker exception – that’s the name of the case not the occupation of the injured worker) whereby a “hirer,” that is, the higher-tiered party who hired the lower-tiered party whose employee is injured, can be held liable if the hirer: (1) retains control over any part of the lower-tiered party’s work; and (2) negligently exercises that control in a manner that affirmatively contributes to the worker’s injury. Another exception is the “concealed hazard exception” (also known as the Kinsman exception) whereby a hirer can be held liable if: (1) the hirer knew, or should have known, of a concealed hazard on the property that the lower-tiered contractor did not know of and could not have reasonably discovered; and (2) the hirer railed to warn the lower-tiered contractor of that hazard. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Evaluating Construction Trends From 2023 and Forecasting For 2024

    February 12, 2024 —
    As we begin 2024, it is informative to evaluate what transpired in 2023 in the construction industry, and especially the use of construction technology. 2023 ushered in a variety of newly implemented construction technologies including 3D printed entire houses, improved wearables that detect all aspects of the construction worker from location to temperature to heart rate, increased use of modular construction for entire apartments, hotels, and condominium projects, and eco-friendly and conservation minded technologies to minimize carbon footprint, water preservation and sustainable construction methods, to name a few. 2023 also identified some significant issues in the construction industry. First and foremost, the labor shortages and hiring of skilled and qualified workers continued to be an issue resulting in increased delays, construction accidents, and project mismanagement. The skyrocketing interest rates, decline in commercial/office projects, supply chain issues, material price fluctuation and increase changes in scope of projects all negatively impacted the construction industry in 2023. There is also the demand for renewable and infrastructure projects put strain on construction resources as the projects became “mega” with larger and more complex construction leading to multi-party, high dollar, and more complex claims. Finally, there is a growing trend of construction claims and litigation being financed by third party litigation funding sources for personal/bodily injury claims and construction defect claims. Reprinted courtesy of Jason Feld, Kahana Feld and Dominic Donato, Kahana Feld Mr. Feld may be contacted at jfeld@kahanafeld.com Mr. Donato may be contacted at ddonato@kahanafeld.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Partner Jason Taylor and Senior Associate Danielle Kegley Successful in Appeal of Summary Disposition on Priority of Coverage Dispute in the Michigan Court of Appeals

    December 11, 2023 —
    In this appeal brought before the Michigan Court of Appeals, the appellate court ruled in favor of Traub Lieberman’s insurance carrier client (the “Carrier” or “Client”), affirming an award of summary disposition in favor of the Carrier in a coverage lawsuit. The coverage lawsuit involved a priority dispute between the Carrier and another insurer over which company’s policy had responsibility to cover the defense of their mutual insured, a heating and cooling contractor (the “Insured”) in an underlying lawsuit alleging carbon monoxide poisoning. The Carrier issued a contractor’s pollution liability policy and the other insurer issued a commercial general liability policy to the Insurer. Both the Carrier and the other insurer filed cross-motions for summary disposition in the trial court on the priority of coverage issue. The trial court granted the Client’s motion, holding that the CGL carrier was the primary insurer based on the language in the policies’ “other insurance” clauses. The trial court rejected the CGL carrier’s argument to apply the “total policy insuring intent” or “closest to the risk” tests—tests which Michigan courts have not adopted. Specifically, the court rejected the CGL carrier’s argument that the Client’s contractor’s pollution liability policy was more specifically tailored to the loss in the underlying lawsuit. The trial court also rejected CGL carrier’s alternative argument that the “other insurance” clauses in the policies were irreconcilable, requiring a pro rata allocation based on the respective limits of the policies. Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman and Danielle K. Kegley, Traub Lieberman Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com Ms. Kegley may be contacted at dkegley@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Toll Brothers Shows how the Affluent Buyer is Driving Up Prices

    July 09, 2014 —
    John McManus of Big Builder explained how prices per square foot are rising due to an increase in more affluent buyers: “Discretionary buyers—ones with access to cash treasure troves, robust and growing stock portfolios, sovereign wealth in search of anti-inflationary investment, and, for good measure, throw in a smattering of seven-figure income households flush with this year’s bonus payouts—are who, unit by unit, have electrified the housing market’s recovery on the heels of institutional bulk buyers of 2012 and early 2013.” Toll Brothers, according to McManus, “was, is, and will be the organization most committed to home buying’s discretionary buyer.” “Thanks to the demand for luxury, and for three- and four-bedroom places, we’re seeing pricing-per-square-foot get better and better the greater number of square feet we offer,” David Von Spreckelsen, Toll Brothers City Living division president, told Big Builder. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    COVID-19 Response: Recent Executive Orders Present Opportunities for Businesses Seeking Regulatory and Enforcement Relief and Expedited Project Development

    June 15, 2020 —
    Washington, D.C. (June 8, 2020) - Two recent Executive Orders (EO) aimed at promoting economic recovery from the COVID-19 crisis offer regulatory and enforcement relief and encourage agencies to expedite infrastructure project approvals. The May 19, 2020 EO 13924, “Regulatory Relief to Support Economic Recovery,” directs agencies to determine whether previous regulatory reforms would promote economic recovery if made permanent and encourages compliance assistance through exercising enforcement discretion, including declining enforcement. And the June 4, 2020 EO 13927, “Accelerating the Nation’s Economic Recovery from the COVID-19 Emergency by Expediting Infrastructure Investments and Other Activities,” aims to speed up the permitting process for infrastructure projects to strengthen the national economy. As businesses look to move forward and recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, they should closely review these EOs for opportunities to take advantage of streamlined treatment and faster project approvals. EO 13294 supplements the Administration’s efforts to address the economic crisis brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic by encouraging federal agencies to rescind, modify, waive, or provide exemptions from federal regulations that may inhibit economic recovery and to provide guidance to businesses, particularly small businesses, on what is required of them under federal law for reopening. Specifically, the EO directs agency heads to identify regulatory standards that may inhibit economic recovery and consider rescinding or waiving those regulations, exempting regulated entities from compliance, exercising enforcement discretion, or extending regulatory compliance and enforcement deadlines. It also allows for compliance assistance through accelerated regulatory procedures to receive a pre-enforcement ruling and directs agencies to assess previous regulatory reforms to determine whether making them permanent would promote economic recovery. Since taking office, the Trump Administration has made regulatory reform a cornerstone of its agenda. This Executive Order is a continuation of the aggressive steps taken by the Administration to reduce the regulatory burden faced by American businesses that many argue increases operating costs, inhibits job creation, and stifles economic growth. Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois attorneys Karen C. Bennett, Jane C. Luxton and Amanda L. Tharpe Ms. Bennett may be contacted at Karen.Bennett@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Luxton may be contacted at Jane.Luxton@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Tharpe may be contacted at Amanda.Tharpe@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of