BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural 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


    What if the "Your Work" Exclusion is Inapplicable? ISO Classification and Construction Defect Claims.

    William Doerler Recognized by JD Supra 2022 Readers’ Choice Awards

    Update: Where Did That Punch List Term Come From Anyway?

    Fire Fears After Grenfell Disaster Set Back Wood Building in UK

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Business Interruption, COVID-19 Claims Under Pollution Policy Fails

    The 2021 Top 50 Construction Law Firms™

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increased 4.3% in November

    Allegations That COVID-19 Was Physically Present and Altered Property are Sufficient to Sustain COVID-19 Business Interruption Suit

    They Say Nothing Lasts Forever, but What If Decommissioning Does?

    Safe and Safer

    Apartment Construction Ominously Nears 25-Year High

    Liquidated Damages: A Dangerous Afterthought

    Investigators Explain Focus on Pre-Collapse Cracking in Florida Bridge

    Pulling the Plug

    Homebuilder Predictions for Tallahassee

    Hail Damage Requires Replacement of Even Undamaged Siding

    Rights Afforded to Employees and Employers During Strikes

    Revolutionizing Buildings with Hybrid Energy Systems and Demand Response

    Insurers Can Sue One Another for Defense Costs on Equitable Indemnity and Equitable Contribution Basis

    Revisiting the CMO; Are We Overusing the Mediation Privilege?

    Haight Lawyers Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America© 2019

    Connecticut Federal District Court Again Finds "Collapse" Provisions Ambiguous

    Design-Build Contracting: Is the Shine Off the Apple?

    Don’t Be Lazy with Your Tenders

    The Fourth Circuit Applies a Consequential Damages Exclusionary Clause and the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Claims by a Subrogating Insurer Seeking to Recover Over $19 Million in Damages

    Court Exclaims “Enough!” To Homeowner Who Kept Raising Wrongful Foreclosure Claims

    California Supreme Court to Examine Arbitration Provisions in Several Upcoming Cases

    GRSM Team Wins Summary Judgment in Million-Dollar HOA Dispute

    As Evidence Grows, Regions Prepare for Sea Level Rise

    Jobs Machine in U.S. Created More Than Burger Flippers Last Year

    M&A Representation and Warranty Insurance Considerations in the Wake of the Coronavirus Pandemic

    Court Finds No Coverage for Workplace “Prank” With Nail Gun

    New York Shuts Down Majority of Construction

    Water Bond Would Authorize $7.5 Billion for California Water Supply Infrastructure Projects

    Contractors Struggle with Cash & Difficult Payment Terms, Could Benefit From Legal Advice, According to New Survey

    When Does a Contractor Legally Abandon a Construction Project?

    MetLife Takes Majority Stake in New San Francisco Office Tower

    Read Her Lips: “No New Buildings”

    How Drones are Speeding Up Construction

    The Risk of A Fixed Price Contract Is The Market

    Construction Defect Claims Not Covered

    Thieves Stole Backhoe for Use in Bank Heist

    Apprentices on Public Works Projects: Sometimes it’s Not What You Do But Who You Do the Work For That Counts

    Reminder: Quantum Meruit and Breach of Construction Contract Don’t Mix

    The Role of Code Officials in the Design-Build Process

    How Does Weather Impact a Foundation?

    Insurance Law Alert: California Appeals Court Allows Joinder of Employee Adjuster to Bad Faith Lawsuit Against Homeowners Insurer

    Hirer Liable for Injury to Subcontractor’s Employee Due to Failure to Act, Not Just Affirmative Acts, Holds Court of Appeal

    Bay Area Counties Issue Less Restrictive “Shelter in Place” Orders, Including for Construction

    Brad Pitt’s Foundation Sues New Orleans Architect for Construction Defects
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    The Future of Airport Infrastructure in a Post-Pandemic World

    March 21, 2022 —
    In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, many service industries are reevaluating their physical footprint, and the aviation industry is no exception. Opportunities abound for developers, designers, and contractors to update and expand airport terminals to accommodate traditional needs while also meeting the growing demand for more open space (including larger outdoor areas in terminals and larger cargo facilities to meet the needs of Amazon, FedEx and UPS). The Future of Passenger Terminals In nearly every service industry, safety and hygiene policies are being overhauled, with a specific emphasis on the desire for more space across the board. Even before the pandemic caused a seismic shift in the way individuals interact with each other, airports and airlines had started reducing the number of unnecessary interactions between travelers and employees by introducing self-service check-in kiosks and contactless ordering at restaurants. The automation inside the airport will only continue to advance. Reprinted courtesy of Cait Horner, Pillsbury and Adam J. Weaver, Pillsbury Ms. Horner may be contacted at cait.horner@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Weaver may be contacted at adam.weaver@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Look to West Africa for the Future of Green Architecture

    May 16, 2022 —
    In 2014, a crowd of demonstrators stormed Burkina Faso’s National Assembly building, setting it ablaze and ending the nearly 30-year rule of President Blaise Compaoré. A year later, Burkenabè architect Diébédo Francis Kéré was asked to imagine a new parliamentary building — one that would reflect a more democratic future for the West African nation. Kéré conceived a six-story stepped pyramid that slopes up gently from the ground, inviting citizens to gather, climb and take in views of the capital city, Ouagadougou. The ruins of the former parliament building next door would be transformed into a rainwater-collecting memorial park. The project remains a ways off: Burkina Faso continues to struggle with political unrest, including a coup d’état in January 2022. But Kéré’s fast-growing prominence may improve the odds that his vision will eventually materialize. In March, he became the first African architect to win the Pritzker Architecture Prize, the design field’s top honor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kriston Capps, Bloomberg

    Colorado’s New Construction Defect Law Takes Effect in September: What You Need to Know

    September 07, 2017 —
    Colorado’s new construction defect law officially takes effect this month. Although HB 17-1279 was passed in May, the statutory text provides that it only applies “with respect to events and circumstances occurring on or after September 1, 2017.” With that date now upon us, practitioners should be mindful of the law’s new requirements. The law applies to any lawsuit wherein a homeowner association files a construction defect action on behalf of two or more of its members. “Construction defect action” is defined broadly to include any claims against construction professionals relating to deficiencies in design or construction of real property. Before an association may commence such an action, its board must follow several steps. First, the board must deliver notice of the potential construction defect action to all homeowners and the affected construction professionals at their last known addresses. This requirement does not apply to construction professionals identified after the notice has been mailed, or to construction professionals joined in a previously-approved lawsuit. The notice must include a description of the alleged construction defects with reasonable specificity, the relief sought, a good-faith estimate of the benefits and risks involved, and a list of mandatory disclosures concerning assessments, attorney fees, and the marketability of units affected by construction defects. The notice must also call a meeting of all homeowners. The notice should be sent to the construction professionals at least five days before the homeowners. Reprinted courtesy of Jesse Howard Witt, Acerbic Witt Mr. Witt may be contacted at www.witt.law Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Court of Appeal Adopts Horizontal Exhaustion Rule

    June 28, 2013 —
    In a long running suit regarding thousands of asbestos bodily injury claims brought against Kaiser Cement and Gypsum Corporation, the California appellate court held that the excess carrier's indemnity obligation did not attach until all collectible primary policies were exhausted. Kaiser Cement and Gypsum Corp. v. Ins. Co. of the State of Pennsylvania, 215 Cal. App.4th 210 (Cal. Ct. App. April 8, 2013). Kaiser manufactured a variety of asbestos-containing products from 1944 through the 1970's. Truck Insurance Company provided primary insurance to Kaiser from 1964 to 1983, through four CGL policies covering 19 annual policy periods. The policy in effect from 1974 to 1981 contained a $500,000 "per occurrence" liability limit. Kaiser was insured by three other primary carriers between 1947 and 1987. ICSOP issued a first layer excess policy to Kaiser from 1974 through 1976. Kaiser tendered numerous claims for bodily injury to Truck. By October 2004, Truck's indemnity payments exceeded $50 million and included at least 39 claims that resulted in payments in excess of $500,000. For claims alleging bodily injury in 1974, Kaiser selected Truck's 1974 policy to respond to each of the claims. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    January 29, 2024 —
    Haight attorneys have been selected to the 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers list. Congratulations to:
    • Bruce Cleeland
    • Peter A. Dubrawski
    • Angela S. Haskins
    • Gary L. LaHendro
    • Denis J. Moriarty
    • Jennifer K. Saunders
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

    Business Risk Exclusions Do Not Preclude Coverage

    November 13, 2013 —
    The court rejected the insurer's arguments that the business risk exclusions barred coverage for a contractor. Gen. Cas. Co. of Wisconsin v. Five Star Bldg. Corp., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134122 (D. Mass. Sept. 19, 2013). Five Star was hired by the University of Massachusetts to upgrade the ventilation (HVAC) system on a portion of a building. The large majority of the work involved work in the interior of the building, but a small portion required installation of duct work and supports on top of the roof of the complex. Five Star also penetrated the roof at numerous locations to install supports for duct work and other rooftop structures for the ventilation system. Other subcontractors then secured supports to the concrete roof deck and installed permanent patches where Five Star had penetrated the roofing system. On same days, Five Star could not accomplish the process in a single day after penetrating the roof. It would install temporary patches until the next day. This was the only work on the roof performed by Five Star. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    September 13, 2021 —
    In Gonzalez v. Mathis (Aug. 19, 2021, S247677) __ Cal.5th___, the California Supreme Court reversed an appellate decision holding that a landowner may be liable to an independent contractor, or the contractor’s workers, for injuries resulting from “known hazards,” as running contrary to the Privette doctrine. In Gonzalez, the contractor, who specialized in washing skylights, slipped and fell while accessing the landowner’s particularly hard to reach skylight from a narrow retaining wall that was allegedly covered in loose gravel and slippery. (Slip opn., p. 3.) While the trial court initially granted the landowner summary judgment pursuant to the Privette doctrine, the appellate court reversed and held that the landowner had a responsibility to take reasonable safety precautions where there was a known safety hazard on the landowner’s premises. (Id. at p. 6.) Whether the landowner could have taken various safety precautions also raised disputed issues of material fact precluding summary judgment. (Ibid.) However, the California Supreme Court concluded that no broad, third exception to the Privette doctrine lies; “unless a landowner retains control over any part of the contractor’s work and negligently exercises that retained control in a manner that affirmatively contributes to the injury [citation], it will not be liable to an independent contractor or its workers for an injury resulting from a known hazard on the premises.” (Slip opn., p. 2.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tracy D. Forbath, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Forbath may be contacted at Tracy.Forbath@lewisbrisbois.com

    Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Secures Summary Judgment Win for National Hotel Chain

    August 26, 2019 —
    On June 26, 2019, Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP Partner Bradley T. Guldalian secured summary judgment on behalf of a national hotel chain in a slip and fall accident filed in Osceola County Circuit Court in Kissimmee, Florida. The underlying loss occurred when the Plaintiff slipped and fell in a puddle of water allegedly existing in the hotel’s laundry room and suffered a partial thickness rotator cuff tear involving the distal infraspinatus tendon for which he underwent surgery and incurred over $70,000 in medical bills. The Plaintiff filed a premises liability action against the hotel claiming the hotel had failed to maintain its premises in a reasonably safe condition proximately causing the Plaintiff’s fall and resulting injuries. After discovery closed, Mr. Guldalian filed a motion for summary judgment on behalf of the hotel arguing that to prevail in a negligence claim involving a “transitory foreign substance”, such as water on a floor, an injured party must plead and prove pursuant to Florida Statute 768.0755 that the business establishment had actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition and should have taken action to remedy it prior to the time of the alleged fall. Constructive knowledge may be proven by circumstantial evidence showing that (1) the dangerous condition existed for such a length of time that, in the exercise of ordinary care, the business establishment should have known of the condition or (2) that the condition occurred with such regularity that it was foreseeable that the condition would be present on the day the injury occurred. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bradley T. Guldalian, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Guldalian may be contacted at bguldalian@tlsslaw.com