BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction 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


    Sixth Circuit Holds that Some Official Actions Taken in the “Flint Water Crisis” Could Be Constitutional Due Process Violations

    Another Colorado City Passes Construction Defects Ordinance

    First Lumber, Now Drywall as Canada-U.S. Trade Tensions Escalate

    Colorado Governor Polis’s Executive Order D 2020 101: Keeping Up with Colorado’s Shifting Eviction Landscape during COVID-19

    OSHA Penalties—What Happened with International Nutrition

    Treble Damages Awarded After Insurer Denies Coverage for Collapse

    Quick Note: Aim to Avoid a Stay to your Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    Feds Used Wire to Crack Las Vegas HOA Scam

    Louisiana Politicians Struggle on Construction Bills, Hospital Redevelopment

    The Importance of the Subcontractor Exception to the “Your Work” Exclusion

    Top 10 OSHA Violations For The Construction Industry In 2023

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    A Compilation of Quirky Insurance Claims

    Additional Insured Secures Defense Under Subcontractor's Policy

    “To Indemnify, or Not to Indemnify, that is the Question: California Court of Appeal Addresses Active Negligence in Indemnity Provisions”

    Construction Defect Lawsuits May Follow Hawaii Condo Boom

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment to Reject Collapse Coverage Denied

    Additional Insured Status Survives Summary Judgment Stage

    North Carolina, Tennessee Prepare to Start Repairing Helene-damaged Interstates

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment in Collapse Case Denied

    A Year Later, Homeowners Still Repairing Damage from Sandy

    Department Of Labor Recovers $724K In Back Wages, Damages For 255 Workers After Phoenix Contractor Denied Overtime Pay, Falsified Records

    Vegas Hi-Rise Not Earthquake Safe

    Despite Increased Presence in Construction, Women Lack Size-Appropriate PPE

    No Coverage for Defects in Subcontrator's Own Work

    Determining Duty to Defend in Wisconsin Does Not Include Extrinsic Evidence

    Rebuilding the West: Construction Considerations After the Smoke Clears

    Some Construction Contract Basics- Necessities and Pitfalls

    Connecticut Answers Critical Questions Regarding Scope of Collapse Coverage in Homeowners Policies in Insurers’ Favor

    Road Project to Improve Access to Peru's Machu Picchu Site

    Winners Announced in Seattle’s Office-to-Residential Call for Ideas Contest

    Hospital Inspection to Include Check for Construction Defects

    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    Seattle Developer Defaults on Renovated Office Buildings

    Mich. AG Says Straits of Mackinac Tunnel Deal Unconstitutional

    Town Sues over Defective Work on Sewer Lines

    Coverage Under Builder's Risk Policy Properly Excluded for Damage to Existing Structure Only

    Cogently Written Opinion Finds Coverage for Loss Caused By Defective Concrete

    Proposed Law Protecting Tenants Amended: AB 828 Updated

    Congratulations to San Diego Partner Johnpaul Salem and Senior Associate Scott Hoy for Obtaining a Complete Defense Verdict!

    Federal Court Requires Auto Liability Carrier to Cover Suit Involving Independent Contractor Despite “Employee Exclusion”

    Builders Beware: A New Class Of Defendants In Asbestos Lawsuits

    What Will the 2024 Construction Economy Look Like?

    Modification: Exceptions to Privette Doctrine Do Not Apply Where There is No Evidence a General Contractor Affirmatively Contributed to the Injuries of an Independent Contractor’s Employee

    Congratulations to Haight’s 2021 Super Lawyers San Diego Rising Stars

    Hawaii Appellate Court Finds Duty to Defend Group Builders Case

    “Time Is Money!” In Construction and This Is Why There Is a Liquidated Damages Provision

    Florida Condo Collapse Victims Reach $1 Billion Settlement

    New Jersey Traffic Circle to be Eliminated after 12 Years of Discussion

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC Recognized Among The Top 50 Construction Law FirmsTM of 2023 by Construction Executive
    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

    The Results are in, CEO/Founding Partner Nicole Whyte is Elected to OCBA’s 2024 Board of Directors!

    October 09, 2023 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is excited to share that CEO/Founding Partner Nicole Whyte has been elected to the Orange County Bar Associations (“OCBA”) slate of four open Board of Directors for a three-year term beginning January 2024, alongside Casey Johnson (Aitken Aitken Cohn LLP), William O’Neill (Ross, Wolcott, Teinert & Prout LLP), and Lesley Young (Orange County District Attorney’s Office). “It is one of the greatest honors of my career to have been elected to the OCBA board of directors. Thank you to all those who supported me; I will work tirelessly as your representative to serve our bar and community. I am especially excited to work alongside President Elect Christina Zabat-Fran and the other esteemed members of the board. I look forward to applying my skills and knowledge to serve our legal community as we work to promote excellence, integrity and honor in our profession, and to improve the practice for all.” – Nicole Whyte Nicole is honored to have the opportunity to continue her support with the OC legal community. For over two decades, she has served on various OCBA legal committees and boards. Nicole currently serves on the board of OCBA Master’s Division and is the 2023 Board President of the Public Law Center, the largest pro-bono law firm in Orange County. She is also a current board member of the Sonenshine Pro Bono Committee. Nicole is a founding fellow of the OC Bar Foundation and served as secretary for the Robert Banyard Inn of Court for eight years. Nicole plans to call upon her experience serving on various boards, and her many years of law practice and management experience, to help identify and support the needs of the OCBA and its thriving and diverse OC legal community. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Damages or Injury “Likely to Occur” or “Imminent” May No Longer Trigger Insurance Coverage

    January 05, 2017 —
    Washington Courts allow an insurer to determine its duty to defend an insured against a lawsuit based only on the face of the complaint and the limitations of the insurance policy. This is otherwise known as the “eight corners” rule (four corners of the complaint plus the four corners of the policy). In other words, the insurance company is not permitted to rely on facts extrinsic to the complaint in order to deny its duty to defend an insured. See Truck Ins. Exch. v. VanPort Homes, Inc., 147 Wn.2d 751, 763 (2002). The laws in Washington provide greater protection to the insured over the insurer when it comes to the insurer’s duty to defend. The duty to defend a claim is triggered if a claim could “conceivably” be covered under the policy. See Woo v. Fireman’s Insurance, 161 Wn.2d 43 (2007). If there is any ambiguity in a policy with regard to coverage, the ambiguity is interpreted in favor of the insured. As a result, contractors in Washington regularly tender claims or potential claims to their insurers even when damage has not occurred but will occur in the imminent future. Especially in the context of construction defect cases, a contractor will tender such a claim to its insurer to trigger the broad duty of the insurer to provide a defense. We also regularly recommend this to our contractor clients. For example, if a building owner serves a contractor with a claim that the construction and installation of a window system will imminently cause leaks and corrosion, we would recommend that the contractor tender the claim to its commercial general liability insurer. Washington courts have found a duty to defend when there are allegations in the complaint that covered damages will occur in the imminent future. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Masaki J. Yamada, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Mr. Yamada may be contacted at myamada@ac-lawyers.com

    Revolutionizing Buildings with Hybrid Energy Systems and Demand Response

    January 08, 2024 —
    A recent study conducted by the Finnish Building Services 2030 group explores the potential technologies and business prospects for adaptable energy systems within buildings. Building Services 2030 is a Finnish consortium of Aalto University, Tampere University, and 14 industry partners. The consortium has defined a shared vision for the Finnish building service sector and researches topics that help reach the vision. My company is responsible for the group’s communication, so I eagerly read the research reports as they come out. One of the new reports I found very timely is about the energy flexibility of buildings. The authors are Senior Researcher Juha Jokisalo and Professor Matti Lehtonen from Aalto University. They highlight how the contemporary energy landscape is undergoing a significant transformation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Arctic Fires Are Melting Permafrost That Keeps Carbon Underground

    December 27, 2021 —
    Few things signal something's gone haywire on the planet quite like frozen land on fire. Now scientists have determined that Arctic fires, even milder ones, can reshape a landscape for decades, in ways that may make it even harder to keep global heating from eclipsing international goals. It's mostly rising temperatures that are thawing out frozen Arctic ground but northern blazes — already increasing — are now understood to play a disproportionate role, according to a study published last week in the journal One Earth. Previous research has shown that higher temperatures, drier soil and more lightning storms will lead to more fires. That work, with the new paper, mean that “in the future we might expect to see an outsized influence on thaw from the fires that will likely increase," said Róisín Commane, a Columbia University assistant professor who studies atmospheric composition and wasn’t involved in the new study. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eric Roston, Bloomberg

    Disruption: When Did It Start and Where Will It End?

    June 25, 2019 —
    If change is the only constant—as was famously observed by a Greek philosopher circa 500 B.C.—then why single out some changes as “disruption”? Disruption is about more than just technology; it’s about more, even, than the rapid rollout and development of technology in the past couple of decades. The word disruption refers to processes or products that are fundamentally different from what is currently in use and that render unforeseen, large-scale changes. Early discussions of disruption (the term was coined by Harvard Business School professor Clayton M. Christensen in a 1995 Harvard Business Review article) compared incremental change in existing systems, which are usually supported by established corporations, to innovations that start out as something completely fresh, limited in their appeal and flawed in initial iterations. The construction industry was—and still is—late to adopt most technologies and late in experiencing overall disruption. It also lags behind other industries when it comes to efficiency and productivity. McKinsey reported that construction is one of the “least digitized industries in the world,” despite employing approximately 7% of the world’s working-age population and representing one of the world economy’s largest sectors. Disruption is likely to be fast approaching now, even for the construction industry. But its delay may confer the benefit of allowing construction companies to learn from other industries’ mistakes. Reprinted courtesy of Brian Gallagher, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    State Audit Questions College Construction Spending in LA

    August 17, 2011 —

    A state audit of the Los Angeles Community College District found many problems with their construction spending. Their report, as described in the Los Angeles Times, found construction money spent for other purposes, such as promotional photography and public relation tours, $28.3 million spent on projects that were later cancelled, and oversight committees that provided no oversight.

    Earlier this year, the LA Times ran a series of articles detailing problems with the Los Angles Community College District’s construction program. The LA Times reported that the State Controller’s audit reached many of the same conclusions.

    The Community College District disputed the findings.

    Read the full story…

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

    Colorado Legislature Considering Making it Easier to Prevail on CCPA Claims

    April 03, 2023 —
    House Bill 23-1192 (“HB 23-1192”) is one of the proposed bills making its way through the Colorado legislative session this year. It purports to create additional protections in the Colorado Consumer Protection Act (“CCPA”), but instead threatens to put construction professionals at an increased risk during litigation. Under the scope of the proposed bill, many construction contracts, as drafted, could automatically add up to $250,000 to any claim by lowering the standard for what constitutes an “unfair or deceptive trade practice.” Further, it would remove elements of a CCPA claim currently required by law to prove that an unfair or deceptive trade practice “constitutes a significant impact to the public.” This bill still has a way to go before becoming law, but given its progress thus far, we believe it is highly probable that it will be enacted unless there is substantial pushback. For the reasons discussed below, we urge all construction professionals to take necessary action to obstruct this bill, and particularly Section 1 of the bill, from becoming enacted. The most concerning proposed amendments to the CCPA, through Section 1 of the bill, do the following:
    • Remove the knowingly or recklessly mental state from the general unfair or deceptive trade practice provision concerning an unfair, unconscionable, deceptive, knowingly false, or fraudulent act or practice;
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rachael Bandeira, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Bandeira may be contacted at bandeira@hhmrlaw.com

    TLSS Partner Burks Smith and Associate Katie Keller Win Summary Judgment on Late Reported Water Seepage Case in South Florida

    November 18, 2019 —
    On July 9, 2019, Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP Partner, Burks A. Smith, III and Associate, Kathryn A. Keller, secured Summary Judgment on behalf of a major homeowners’ insurer in a breach of contract action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. See Lehrfield v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company, 2019 WL2994270 (S.D. Fla. 2019). The underlying claim involved a water loss at the Plaintiffs’ residence allegedly resulting in $91,147.32 worth of damage to their home. The claim was reported eight (8) months after the alleged date of loss, and during the inspection, the adjuster observed rot, decay, mold, and warping wood, prompting the carrier to deny the claim based on the Seepage Endorsement. The Plaintiffs filed a breach of contract action alleging that the insurer breached the Policy by denying the claim. Mr. Smith and Ms. Keller argued that Plaintiffs’ Policy with the insurer imposes a duty on the Plaintiffs to comply with the Duties After Loss conditions of the Policy, including the requirement to provide prompt notice of the loss and show the damaged property. As mentioned above, the Plaintiffs provided notice of the claim eight (8) months late, and performed various repairs prior to notifying the insurer of the claim. After the close of discovery, Mr. Smith and Ms. Keller filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on behalf of the insurer based on the late reporting, and further argued that the Plaintiffs had the burden of proving direct physical loss to property within the first 13 days of the loss, given the recent decision of Hicks v. American Integrity Insurance Company of Florida, 241 So.3d 925 (Fla. 3d DCA 1018). In Florida, when an insured fails to comply with their Duties After Loss, a presumption of prejudice to the insurer arises. Bankers Ins. Co. v. Macias, 475 So. 2d 1216, 1218 (Fla. 1985)). In order to recover, the Plaintiffs bear the burden of overcoming the presumption, and must prove that no prejudice existed. Id. Mr. Smith and Ms. Keller’s comprehensive arguments successfully proved to the Court that the Plaintiffs’ failure to timely report the claim prejudiced the insurer by prohibiting the insurer from being able to independently validate the loss, or distinguish between multiple causes of loss. Mr. Smith and Ms. Keller further argued that Plaintiffs did not meet their burden to prove that the insurer was not prejudiced by the Plaintiffs’ failure to comply with the Duties After Loss provision of the Policy. The Motion cited numerous cases and extensive analysis supporting the insurer’s position. Reprinted courtesy of Burks A. Smith, III, Traub Lieberman and Kathryn Keller, Traub Lieberman Mr. Smith, may be contacted at bsmith@tlsslaw.com Ms. Keller may be contacted at kkeller@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of