BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction 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


    Appellate Team Secures Victory in North Carolina Governmental Immunity Personal Injury Matter

    You Say Tomato, I Say Tomahto. But When it Comes to the CalOSHA Appeals Board, They Can Say it Any Way They Please

    The Credibility of Your Expert (Including Your Delay Expert) Matters in Construction Disputes

    Improvements to Confederate Monuments Lead to Lawsuits

    The DOL Claims Most Independent Contractors Are Employees

    How the Parking Garage Conquered the City

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

    Nevada Lawmakers Had Private Meetings on Construction Defects

    What You Need to Know About the Recently Enacted Infrastructure Bill

    Insurer Could Not Rely on Extrinsic Evidence to Circumvent Its Duty to Defend

    BE PROACTIVE: Steps to Preserve and Enhance Your Insurance Rights In Light of the Recent Natural Disasters

    Suppliers Must Also Heed “Right to Repair” Claims

    Key California Employment Law Cases: October 2018

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (06/29/22)

    Quick Note: Unenforceable Language in Arbitration Provision

    Congress Considers Pandemic Risk Insurance Act to Address COVID-19 Business Interruptions Losses

    The Evolution of Construction Defect Trends at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    New York’s Second Department Holds That Carrier Must Pay Judgment Obtained by Plaintiff as Carrier Did Not Meet Burden to Prove Willful Non-Cooperation

    Builder Exposes 7 Myths regarding Millennials and Housing

    Behavioral Science Meets Construction: Insights from Whistle Rewards

    Defenses Raised Three-Years Too Late Estop Insurer’s Coverage Denial

    Defective Stairways can be considered a Patent Construction Defect in California

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Burks Smith and Katie Keller Win Daubert Motion Excluding Plaintiff’s Expert’s Testimony in the Middle District of Florida

    When is an Indemnification Provision Unenforceable?

    Fourth Circuit Questions EPA 2020 Clean Water Act 401 Certification Rule Tolling Prohibition

    Late Notice Bars Insured's Claim for Loss Caused by Hurricane

    Insureds' Experts Insufficient to Survive Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    Relief Bill's Highway Funds Could Help Construction Projects

    Deleted Emails Cost Company $3M in Sanctions

    Court Finds That Limitation on Conditional Use Permit Results in Covered Property Damage Due to Loss of Use

    Affordable Housing should not be Filled with Defects

    Floors Collapse at Russian University in St. Petersburg

    General Release of Contractor Upheld Despite Knowledge of Construction Defects

    UConn’s Law-School Library Construction Case Settled for Millions

    South Carolina Couple Must Arbitrate Construction Defect Claim

    Proving Contractor Licensure in California. The Tribe Has Spoken

    How Retro-Commissioning Can Extend the Life of a Building—and the Planet

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “That’s Not How I Read It”

    Is the Issuance of a City Use Permit Referable? Not When It Is an Administrative Act

    Managing Narrative, Capturing Context, and Building Together: Talking VR and AEC with David Weir-McCall

    California insured’s duty to cooperate and insurer’s right to select defense counsel

    Manhattan Luxury Condos Sit on Market While Foreign Buyers Wait

    Dust Obscures Eleventh Circuit’s Ruling on “Direct Physical Loss”

    Additional Elements a Plaintiff Must Plead and Prove to Enforce Restrictive Covenant

    How to Protect the High-Tech Home

    Construction Calamity: Risk Transfer Tips for Contractors After a Catastrophic Loss

    Basement Foundation Systems’ Getting an Overhaul

    Rachel Reynolds Selected as Prime Member of ADTA

    California Supreme Court Raises the Bar on Dangerous Conditions on Public Property Claims
    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

    United States Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in EEOC Subpoena Case

    March 29, 2017 —
    On September 29, 2016, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in McLane Co. Inc. v. EEOC, case number 15-1248, a case that asks the Court to resolve a split in the Circuit Courts of Appeals on the proper standard of review applied to a district court decision to quash or enforce a subpoena issued by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). The decision by our highest court on the correct standard of review will have important implications for businesses, because if a litigant is displeased with a lower court's decision, it may get two bites at the apple. Such an outcome will likely encourage more appeals, drawn-out investigations and increase legal fees. On the other hand, if the Supreme Court decides that the Ninth Circuit was wrong and that a deferential standard of review (as opposed to a de nova standard) is appropriate, the losing side in future cases is more likely to accept the decision of the lower district court, knowing its chances of winning on appeal are slim. Reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey M. Daitz, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Rashmee Sinha, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Daitz may be contacted at jdaitz@pecklaw.com Ms. Sinha may be contacted at rsinha@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractor Sues Golden Gate Bridge District Over Suicide Net Project

    December 18, 2022 —
    The project to install a suicide-deterrence net and perform other upgrades on the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco now is expected to complete five years late and cost more than double the original contract price, its contractors say. The joint venture leading the project filed a breach-of-contract complaint against the agency that manages the bridge seeking $195 million in damages, while the agency counters that delays were caused by changes in the contractor’s ownership. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Sewage Treatment Agency Sues Insurer and Contractor after Wall Failure and Sewage Leak

    January 22, 2013 —
    Trial preparations continue over the failure of a wall at a sewage treatment plant and the failure of the insurer to provide coverage. The Binghamton-Johnson City Joint Sewage Treatment Plant sued its insurer, American Alternative Insurance Corp., in March 2012 over insurance coverage. AAIC claimed that the wall failure, which released hundreds of thousands of gallons of sewage, was due to structural defects which preceded the policy. AAIC did pay more than $300,000 for covered losses, although officials claim that coverage should be a further $3.5 million. Additionally, the board is suing the contractor who constructed the wall. Here, the operators of the sewage plant are seeking $20 million. The wall was built as part of a $67 million improvement project between 2004 and 2006. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Federal Court Holds That Other Insurance Analysis Is Unnecessary If Policies Cover Different Risks

    September 28, 2020 —
    In Greater Mutual Insurance Company v. Continental Casualty Company, 2020 WL 5370419 (S.D.N.Y. September 8, 2020), the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York had occasion to consider the “other insurance” provisions of a commercial general liability policy, issued by Greater Mutual Insurance Company (“GNY”), and a directors and officers (“D&O”) policy, issued by Continental, to the same insured. The GNY policy covered, inter alia, property damage caused by an occurrence, as well as “personal advertising injury,” defined to include “[t]he wrongful eviction from, wrongful entry into, or invasion of the right of private occupancy of a room, dwelling or premises that a person occupies, committed by or on behalf of its owner, landlord or lessor.” The Continental D&O policy covered claims for wrongful acts, including “wrongful entry or eviction, or other invasion of the right to private occupancy. . . .” Unlike the GNY policy, however, the Continental policy expressly excluded coverage for damage to tangible property. In the underlying action, the plaintiffs alleged that the insured engaged in construction work to fix a leak from a terrace on the seventeenth floor. In doing so, the insured accessed the plaintiffs’ roof terrace. The plaintiffs alleged that the construction workers installed and stored construction materials on the roof terrace, making the plaintiffs unable to access the terrace. Plaintiffs also alleged that their deck furniture may have suffered damage, and that the workers had a “direct line of sight” into their unit, resulting in the plaintiffs having to leave their unit frequently. Causes of action were for property damage, constructive eviction, partial constructive eviction, and invasion of privacy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com

    Congratulations to Partner Nicole Whyte on Receiving the Marcus M. Kaufman Jurisprudence Award

    September 30, 2024 —
    On Thursday, September 19th, BWB&O Partner Nicole Whyte and her fellow recipients Michael Ermer and Hon. Kirk Nakamura (Ret.) were honored at this year’s Jurisprudence Awards Dinner, a fundraiser benefitting the Anti-Defamation League! Thank you to BWB&O Co-Founder and Nicole’s longtime business partner and friend Keith Bremer for his thoughtful introduction and for presenting her with the award, and to BWB&O’s team who joined the event to support Nicole Whyte. Since 1993, the Anti-Defamation League has presented the Marcus M. Kaufman Jurisprudence Award to attorneys who make exceptional contributions to the legal profession and community. ADL’s mission is to stop defamation and secure justice and fair treatment for all people. To learn more about ADL, please visit adl.org Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Plaintiffs In Construction Defect Cases to Recover For Emotional Damages?

    March 16, 2011 —

    A recent post to the Markusson, Green, Jarvis Blog reports on an important appeals decision which promises to impact construction defect litigation in Colorado.

    The post provides analysis on the recovery of inconvenience damages. The focus of the piece is centered on Hildebrand v. New Vista Homes II, LLC, 08CA2645, 2010 WL 4492356 (Colo. Ct. App. Nov. 10, 2010), wherein it was held that " the plain language of Construction Defect Action Reform Act permits recovery of damages for inconvenience, and that the trial court did not err by allowing inconvenience damages to go to the jury".

    According to the MGJ Blog "The Hildebrand decision is important because it provides Construction Defect Plaintiffs with a foothold for collecting emotional damages. While several questions of law remain as to who or under exactly what circumstances a Plaintiff may recover these types of damages, the Hildebrand case has clearly set forth that emotional damages may be considered as part of actual damages pursuant to CDARA."

    Read Full Story...

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

    2020s Most Read Construction Law Articles

    January 25, 2021 —
    2020 was . . . well . . . well it was memorable. Among many other things, construction was recognized as essential and ConsensusDocs published industry firsts in addressing prefabricated construction and lean for design-build, as well as 8 comprehensively revised performance and payment bonds. We also saw unprecedented readership of our construction law newsletter. As we celebrate the end of 2020 and wish you a happy new year, we continue a new a tradition of recognizing the below most read construction law articles of the year. The ConsensusDocs Team. 5. Level 10 Construction v. Sea World LLC: Can Force Majeure Save Sea World? By: Jamey B. Collidge Associate, Troutman Pepper. 4. The Designer’s Pre-bid Standard Of Care In A Design-Build Project By: Joshua A. Morehouse Associate, Peckar & Abramson P.C. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Building on New Risks: Construction in the Age of Greening

    February 20, 2023 —
    Fire and explosions remain the No. 1 cause of construction and engineering insurance claims, accounting for 27% of the value of insurance claims over the last five years, according to industry claims data analysis conducted by global commercial insurer AGCS. Natural catastrophes, such as hurricanes or floods, account for almost a fifth of claims by value (19%), followed by defective products (10%). Faulty workmanship or maintenance (8%) and machinery breakdown (7%) round out the top five causes of construction and engineering losses, according to the value of claims. The Risks and Benefits of Greening The analysis was conducted on 22,705 insurance claims made worldwide between January 2017 and December 2021. The claims were worth approximately $13.9 billion in value and include the share of other insurers as well as AGCS. But if there is an impression that the risks remain in stasis, that is not the case. Reprinted courtesy of Blanca Berruguete, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of