BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expert
    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


    Alabama Still “An Outlier” on Construction Defects

    Nevada Judge says Class Analysis Not Needed in Construction Defect Case

    EPA Rejects Most of N.Y.’s $511 Million Tappan Zee Loan

    Not So Fast, My Friend: Pacing and Concurrent Delay

    Homeowner's Claim for Collapse Survives Summary Judgment

    Wharf Holdings to Sell Entire Sino-Ocean Stake for $284 Million

    3M PFAS Water Settlement Could Reach $12.5B

    Federal Court Predicts Coverage In Utah for Damage Caused By Faulty Workmanship

    Drafting or Negotiating A Subcontract–Questions To Consider

    Arkansas Federal Court Fans the Product Liability Flames Utilizing the Malfunction Theory

    West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar Returns to Anaheim May 15th & 16th

    Sanctions Issued for Frivolous Hurricane Sandy Complaint Filed Against Insurer

    Could This Gel Help Tame the California Fires?

    Colorado Nearly Triples Damages Caps for Cases Filed in 2025, Allows Siblings to File Wrongful Death Claims

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

    Louisiana Court Holds That Application of Pollution Exclusion Would Lead to Absurd Results

    Rooftop Owners Sue Cubs Consultant for Alleged False Statements

    Where Do We Go From Here?

    In UK, 16th Century Abbey Modernizes Heating System by Going Back to Roman Times

    Nevada Assembly Bill Proposes Changes to Construction Defect Litigation

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Three Attorneys Named Among The Best Lawyers in America 2018

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

    Bad Faith and a Partial Summary Judgment in Seattle Construction Defect Case

    Contractor’s Unwritten Contractual Claim Denied by Sovereign Immunity; Mandamus Does Not Help

    Helsinki is Building a Digital Twin of the City

    Warranty of Workmanship and Habitability Cannot Be Disclaimed or Waived Under Any Circumstance

    Hunton Insurance Group Advises Policyholders on Issues That Arise With Wildfire Claims and Coverage – A Seven-Part Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Obtains Pre-Answer Motion to Dismiss in Favor of Defendant

    Better Building Rules Would Help U.K.'s Flooding Woes, CEP Says

    An Uncharted Frontier: Nevada First State to Prohibit Defense-Within-Limits Provisions

    Who Will Pay for San Francisco's $750 Million Tilting Tower?

    Monitoring Building Moisture with RFID – Interview with Jarmo Tuppurainen

    Update: Lawyers Can Be Bound to Confidentiality Provision in Settlement Agreement

    California Supreme Court Declines to Create Exception to Privette Doctrine for “Known Hazards”

    Missouri Asbestos Litigation Reform: New Bill Seeks to Establish Robust Disclosure Obligations

    Rich NYC Suburbs Fight Housing Plan They Say Will ‘Destroy’ Them

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

    Is Your Business Insured for the Coronavirus?

    Kentucky Supreme Court Creates New “Goldilocks Zone” to Limit Opinions of Biomechanical Experts

    JAMS Announces Updated Construction Rules

    Happy Thanksgiving from CDJ

    Ex-Construction Firm That Bought a $75m Michelangelo to Delist

    The Fair Share Act Impacts the Strategic Planning of a Jury Trial

    Virginia Families Hope to Sue over Chinese Drywall

    Wisconsin High Court Rejects Insurer’s Misuse of “Other Insurance” Provision

    For Smart Home Technology, the Contract Is Key

    Colorado Homebuyers Must be in Privity of Contract with Developer to Assert Breach of Implied Warranty of Suitability

    Alabama Court Determines No Coverage For Insured's Faulty Workmanship

    Force Majeure Under the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic
    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

    Farewell Capsule Tower, Tokyo’s Oddest Building

    April 25, 2022 —
    Anyone who has seen Tokyo's Nakagin Capsule Tower will remember it. Studded with grey cubes, the striking building carries an obvious architectural message: this is a modular habitat. Built half a century ago during Japan’s dizzying ascent as an economic power, the 140-unit complex has been left behind by the times, overshadowed by taller and sleeker skyscrapers that overlook the city of 14 million. Once demolition officially starts April 12, scaffolding will surround the two towers that make up the building. The capsules will then be plucked off one by one, most likely behind protective sheets of plastic because they contain asbestos. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Reed Stevenson, Bloomberg

    Woodbridge II and the Nuanced Meaning of “Adverse Use” in Hostile Property Rights Cases in Colorado

    November 23, 2020 —
    Earlier this year, the Colorado Court of Appeals issued an opinion addressing at length “whether the requirement that the use be ‘adverse’ in the adverse possession context is coextensive with adverse use in the prescriptive easement context.” See Woodbridge Condo. Ass’n, Inc. v. Lo Viento Blanco, LLC, 2020 COA 34 (Woodbridge II), ¶ 2, cert. granted, No. 20SC292, 2020 WL 5405376 (Colo. Sept. 8, 2020). As detailed below, the Woodbridge II court concluded that the meanings of “adverse” in these two contexts are not coextensive—while “hostility” in the adverse possession context requires a claim of exclusive ownership of the property, a party claiming a prescriptive easement is only required to “show a nonpermissive or otherwise unauthorized use of property that interfered with the owner’s property interests.” Thus, the Woodbridge II court reasoned a claimants’ acknowledgement or recognition of an owner’s title alone is insufficient to defeat “adverse use” in the prescriptive easement context. This significant ruling is at odds with a prior division’s broad statement, while considering a prescriptive easement claim, that “[i]n general, when an adverse occupier acknowledges or recognizes the title of the owner during the occupant’s claimed prescriptive period, the occupant interrupts the prescriptive use.” See Trask v. Nozisko, 134 P.3d 544, 553 (Colo. App. 2006). Perhaps for that reason, Woodbridge II is currently pending certiorari review before the Colorado Supreme Court in a case that should provide some much-needed clarity on what constitutes “adverse use” in the context of a prescriptive easement. As we await the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision, I thought it worthwhile to provide a brief analysis of the Woodbridge II court’s deep dive into the nuances of “adverse use” in this field of Colorado law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    Requesting an Allocation Between Covered and Non-Covered Damages? [Do] Think Twice, It’s [Not Always] All Right.

    October 12, 2020 —
    As is often the case in construction defect and other insurance defense litigation, a plaintiff’s claims for relief typically encompass both covered and uncovered damages. Obviously, it is in the insured’s best interests to have as many damages covered by insurance as possible. From the insurer’s perspective and against the backdrop of owing duty of good faith and fair dealing to its insureds, however, it is generally better to have an allocation of covered vs. non-covered damages. This places the insurer, insured, and insurance retained defense counsel in a difficult position. A recent opinion from U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, Rockhill Ins. Co. v. CFI-Global Fisheries Mgmt, Civil Action No. 1:16-CV-02760-RM-MJW, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35209 (D. Colo. Mar. 2, 2020), sheds light on the issue, even though some may feel it only further muddies already murky waters. Rockhill involved review of an arbitration proceeding that property-owner, Heirloom I, LLC (“Heirloom”) filed against CFI-Global Fisheries Management (“CFI”). Rockhill Insurance Company (“Rockhill Insurance”) was asked to defend the arbitration as CFI’s professional and general liability insurer. At issue in the arbitration was Heirloom’s claim that CFI defectively designed and constructed a fisheries enhancement that was destroyed by natural processes four times in three years. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Todd Likman, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. Likman may be contacted at likman@hhmrlaw.com

    TOP TAKE-AWAY SERIES: The 2023 Fall Meeting in Washington, D.C.

    November 13, 2023 —
    Over 500 construction lawyers, experts, and consultants descended on Washington last week for the Forum’s 2023 Fall Meeting. Newly minted Forum Chair John Cook and Program Coordinators Catherine Delorey and Brian Zimmerman put together a stellar program focused on navigating government construction. For this installation of the post-meeting post, I'm teaming up with guest contributor, Jennifer Kanady, to bring you 10 of our top take-aways from this unique program. 10. Contracting with the government is replete with risk that could easily trap the unwary. Nobody likes to be taken advantage of. But hell hath no fury like the U.S. Government scorned. Erin Cannon-Wells and Aaron Silberman, gave a (truly) delightful, Indiana-Jones-inspired presentation on the regulations that can doom the unwitting contractor who is less than perfectly forthright in its dealings. The government has created financial incentives for members of the public to report your company’s violations as part of a qui tam action. When you consider the number of potential whistleblowers in the bidding process and the contracting chain, a qui tam action would seem more likely than not. Add to that the sanctions contractors might face for even innocent errors either by their own companies or their downstream subs, and government contracting begins to sound increasingly like the Temple of Doom. Oh, and in case you were only focused on affirmative claims, beware the “reverse false claim” which is concealing information that would rightfully entitle the government to a credit… Reprinted courtesy of Marissa L. Downs, Laurie & Brennan, LLP and Jennifer M. Kanady, FAC Services, LLC Ms. Downs may be contacted at mdowns@lauriebrennan.com Ms. Kanady may be contacted at JKanady@facfin.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    November 28, 2022 —
    PENNSYLVANIA. — The Pennsylvania Council of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) released the 2022 Report Card for Pennsylvania's Infrastructure today at three congruent news conferences across the state including Harrisburg, Lehigh Valley, and Pittsburgh, with 15 categories of infrastructure receiving an overall grade of a "C-". This is the same grade issued by the council in its 2018 report. A "C-" means Pennsylvania's infrastructure is in mediocre condition and requires attention. Pennsylvania's aviation and rail networks are helping to drive economic growth in the region and an improved roadway network is helping increase efficiency for the regional and national economies, but an aging infrastructure network and struggling water systems threaten the health, safety and welfare of the region. Civil engineers graded aviation (B-), bridges (D+), dams (C), drinking water (D), energy (C), hazardous waste (B-), levees (C), parks (C+), ports (C+), rail (C), roads (C-), solid waste (C+), stormwater (D), transit (D), and wastewater (D-). "Considering Pennsylvania's aging infrastructure and its critical role in our state's economy, policy makers must continue to prioritize dedicated funding to update and improve all infrastructure assets," said Rep. Mike Carroll, D-118. "Failure to do so will seriously harm the quality of life for every citizen." "This report shows that Pennsylvania's infrastructure has seen some noteworthy improvements and that our lawmakers are prioritizing the built environment, but out-of-sight, out-of-mind systems such as water and wastewater pipelines are lacking the necessary attention," said David DiGioia, chair, 2022 Report Card for Pennsylvania's Infrastructure. "With help from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we could improve our communities for generations if we double down on investment and close our funding gaps across all sectors included in this report." The Report Card was created as a public service to citizens and policymakers to inform them of the infrastructure needs in their state. Civil engineers used their expertise and school report card-style letter grades to condense complicated data into an easy-to-understand analysis of Pennsylvania's infrastructure network. ASCE State and Regional Infrastructure Report Cards are modeled after the national Infrastructure Report Card, which gave America's infrastructure an overall grade of 'C-' in 2021. To view the report card and all five categories, visit https://infrastructurereportcard.org/state-item/Pennsylvania/. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 150,000 civil engineers worldwide and is America's oldest national engineering society. ASCE works to raise awareness of the need to maintain and modernize the nation's infrastructure using sustainable and resilient practices, advocates for increasing and optimizing investment in infrastructure, and improve engineering knowledge and competency. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Trump Order Waives Project Environment Rules to Push COVID-19 Recovery

    June 15, 2020 —
    Citing the "national emergency" spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic's economic hit, President Donald Trump has signed an executive order that directs federal agencies to bypass environmental laws to expedite infrastructure projects, including those on federal lands, as a stimulus. Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record attorneys Debra K. Rubin, Mary B. Powers and Jim Parsons Ms. Rubin may be contacted at rubind@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    An Era of Legends

    May 03, 2018 —
    In 2010, West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar added a new award: The Legend of an Era. West Coast Casualty recognizes “those in the construction defect community who inspire, contribute, advocate and influence others for the benefit and betterment of this community, making it a better place.” They define Legend as “One that inspires or achieves legendary fame based upon ones own achievement(s) which promises to be enduring” and Era, as “A fixed point of time from which a series of years is reckoned and an order of things prevail.” This annual award is presented at the West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Contractors: Amended Section 7141.5 Provides Important License Renewal Safety Net

    July 25, 2021 —
    Under California’s Contractors State License Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 7000 et seq., contractors’ licenses expire two years from the last day of the month in which the license was issued or two years from the date on which the renewed license last expired. The Contractors State License Board (CSLB) sends licensees a renewal application 60 to 90 days in advance of the date the license is set to expire. Even with various controls in place, mistakes happen and a renewal application filing deadline can be missed. During the August 5-6, 2019 Executive, Licensing, and Legislative Committee Meetings, the CSLB discussed proposed amendments to Section 7141.5 to reduce both the burden on it to review applications for retroactive renewal of a license that had not been timely submitted and to provide contractors with some relief from the high burden to establish “the failure to renew was due to circumstances beyond the control of the licensee.” Not long after, the CSLB’s Board of Directors gave staff approval to seek an author for the bill and, on September 29, 2020, Governor Newsom signed Senate Bill 1474 into law, which includes the CSLB’s proposed amendments to Section 7141.5, effective January 1, 2021. Reprinted courtesy of Amy L. Pierce, Lewis Brisbois, Mark A. Oertel, Lewis Brisbois, John Lubitz, Lewis Brisbois and Adam B. Wiens, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Pierce may be contacted at Amy.Pierce@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Oertel may be contacted at Mark.Oertel@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Lubitz may be contacted at John.Lubitz@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Wiens may be contacted at Adam.Wiens@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of