BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing 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


    Incorrect Information Provided on Insurance Application Defeats Claim for Coverage

    House Passes $25B Water Resources Development Bill

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act May be Extended to 2016

    Flying Solo: How it Helps My Construction Clients

    Housing Advocacy Group Moved to Dissolve New Jersey's Council on Affordable Housing

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    Traub Lieberman Partner Greg Pennington Wins Summary Judgment in Favor of Property Owner

    Understanding Entitlement to Delays and Proper Support

    The Texas Storm – Guidance for Contractors

    How Fort Lauderdale Recovered a Phished $1.2M Police HQ Project Payment

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Tear Down This Wall!”

    Scarce Cemetery Space Creates Prices to Die For: Cities

    General Contractor’s Excess Insurer Denied Equitable Contribution From Subcontractor’s Excess Insurer

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

    Poor Pleading Leads to Loss of Claim for Trespass Due to Relation-Back Doctrine, Statute of Limitations

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/16/24) – Chevron Ruling’s Impact on Construction Industry, New Kind of Public Housing and Policy Recommendations from Sustainable Building Groups

    Brazil Congress Chiefs Deny Wrongdoing in Petrobras Scandal

    Project Labor Agreements Will Now Be Required for Large-Scale Federal Construction Projects

    Flooded Courtroom May be Due to Construction Defect

    Where-Forum Art Thou? Is the Chosen Forum Akin to No Forum at All?

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    Safeguarding the U.S. Construction Industry from Unfair Competition Abroad

    Wells Fargo Shuns Peers’ Settlement in U.S in Mortgage

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules in Builder’s Implied Warranty of Habitability Case

    Be Mindful Accepting Payment When Amounts Owed Are In Dispute

    Illinois Appellate Court Finds That Damages in Excess of Policy Limits Do Not Trigger Right to Independent Counsel

    Best Practices: Commercial Lockouts in Arizona

    New York Appeals Court Rekindles the Spark

    Renovate or Demolish Milwaukee’s Historic City Hall?

    'Regluing' Oregon State's Showcase for Mass Timber

    The ALI Restatement – What Lies Ahead?

    Illinois Federal Court Applies Insurer-Friendly “Mutual Exclusive Theories” Test To Independent Counsel Analysis

    Home Building Up in Kansas City

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

    When is a “Notice of Completion” on a California Private Works Construction Project Valid? Why Does It Matter for My Collection Rights?

    Burden of Proof Under All-Risk Property Insurance Policy

    Mitsui Fudosan Said to Consider Rebuilding Tilted Apartments

    Home Repair Firms Sued for Fraud

    Montrose Language Interpreted: How Many Policies Are Implicated By A Construction Defect That Later Causes a Flood?

    The American Rescue Plan Act: What Restaurants Need to Act on NOW

    Executive Insights 2024: Leaders in Construction Law

    "Ordinance or Law" Provision Mandates Coverage for Roof Repair

    The G2G Year in Review: 2020

    Buy a House or Pay Off College? $1.2 Trillion Student Debt Heats Up in Capital

    Overview of New Mexico Construction Law

    Illinois Favors Finding Construction Defects as an Occurrence

    Texas Supreme Court Authorizes Exception to the "Eight-Corners" Rule

    July 1, 2015 Statutory Changes Affecting Virginia Contractors and Subcontractors

    “Source of Duty,” Tort, and Contract, Oh My!

    Party Cannot Skirt Out of the Very Fraud It Perpetrates
    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

    A New Digital Twin for an Existing Bridge

    May 01, 2023 —
    The smartBRIDGE Hamburg project devised a digital twin of a 1970s bridge using open BIM technologies. Allplan and Solibri were instrumental in developing the twin that enables the Hamburg Port Authority, HPA, to maintain the critical infrastructure asset predictively. Built in 1974, the Köhlbrand Bridge is Germany’s second-longest road bridge and one of its busiest. The cable-stayed bridge serves around 36,000 vehicles daily, thus being crucial to the local economy. The age of the bridge and the amount of daily traffic it supported meant that continuous real-time monitoring was the best way to identify repairs and minimize disruption to traffic. 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

    Title II under ADA Applicable to Public Rights-of-Way, Parks and Other Recreation Areas

    June 29, 2017 —
    Plaintiff Ivana Kirola, who suffers from cerebral palsy, sued the City and County of San Francisco, in a class action contending certain public areas, including rights-of-way, pools, parks and other recreation areas, did not meet the mandate of Title II of the American With Disabilities Act (Kirola v. City and County of San Francisco, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 14-17521, 2017 DJDAR 5982). Title II provides that no qualified individual with a disability “shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” Title II’s implementing regulations mandate that each facility constructed after January 26, 1992 be “readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.” And, for each facility “altered after January 26, 1992,” the altered portion must, “to the maximum extent feasible,” be likewise accessible. The Federal Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board creates nonbinding Americans With Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) to ensure compliance with Title II, and that the Department of Justice (DOJ) adopt its own binding regulations, consistent with the ADAAG standards. Here, the District Court interpreted ADAAG standards as not applying to public rights-of-way, parks, and playground facilities. The District Court concluded that none of Kirola’s experts were reliable in their interpretation of the standards and how the standards applied to the public rights-of-way, etc. Conversely, the District Court concluded that all of the city’s experts were reliable. It thus disregarded and discarded every ADAAG violation identified by Kirola’s experts, accepting only the small number of violations identified by the city’s experts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard E. Morton, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
    Mr. Morton may be contacted at rmorton@hbblaw.com

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Two Recent Cases Address Copyright Protection for Architectural Works

    January 16, 2024 —
    Recent decisions by the Seventh Circuit and the Eight Circuit have addressed the scope of protection afforded to architectural works under copyright law. The Seventh Circuit case of Design Basics, LLC v. Signature Constr., Inc., 994 F.3d 879 (7th Cir. 2021), took a somewhat narrow view of the copyright protection afforded to the design of an “affordable, multipurpose, suburban, single-family home.” In Designworks Homes, Inc. v. Columbia House of Brokers Realty, Inc., 9 F.4th 803 (8th Cir. 2021), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 2888, 213 L. Ed. 2d 1103 (2022) the Eight Circuit held that the publication of floor plans of a house in a real estate listing was not protected from claims of copyright infringement. Design Basics, LLC v. Signature Constr., Inc., involved a plaintiff that the court described as holding registered copyrights in thousands of floor plans for suburban, single-family homes that are basic schematic designs, largely conceptual in nature, and depict layouts for one- and two-story single-family homes that include the typical rooms: a kitchen, a dining area, a great room, a few bedrooms, bathrooms, a laundry area, a garage, stairs, assorted closets, etc. The court described the plaintiff as a “copyright troll” and noted that litigation proceeds had become the principal revenue stream for the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued a contractor and related businesses contending hat the defendants had infringed plaintiff’s copyrighted floor plans. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stu Richeson, Phelps
    Mr. Richeson may be contacted at stuart.richeson@phelps.com

    Broker's Motion for Summary Judgment on Negligence Claim Denied

    July 30, 2018 —
    After being sued for negligence for failing to secure proper coverage, the broker was unsuccessful in seeking dismissal by way of summary judgment. Liverman Metal Recycling, Inc. v. Arthur J. Gallagher & Co., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87957 (E.D. N.C. May 25, 2018). Plaintiffs were two companies, Empire and Liverman, that processed scrap metal. They were in the process of merging under a management plan by which Empire would acquire Liverman. As part of the plan, Empire's employees were moved on to Liverman's payroll processing system. Concurrently, Liverman renewed its workmen's compensation policy. Defendant Arthur J. Gallagher & Company, an insurance broker, handled the renewal with the insurer, Bridgefield Insurance Company. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Construction Defects Checklist

    July 18, 2018 —
    Construction defects have existed since humans first began building structures, and will continue to be an occurrence into the future. For builder developers, contractors, and subcontractors, the specter of construction defects is a constant worry. Construction defect litigation is commonplace and can occur years after the construction project has been completed. This opens up an ongoing channel of risk and liability for construction contractors and project managers that are at risk of litigation far after they have completed a project. In this article, we’ll provide a helpful construction defects checklist that outlines the key avenues of risk and areas where construction defects litigation is most often focused. This checklist can help project managers, contractors, and subcontractors anticipate areas of their projects that may need extra attention or focus in order to ensure that they adhere to relevant local and state construction ordinances. Gaining a greater understanding of what construction defects are can provide insight into how construction litigation can prove beneficial for structure owners or contractors who received substandard work. Many clients may not understand that they have an avenue to seek redress in cases where faulty workmanship may have resulted in economic damages or safety concerns in their home, building, or another construction project. Understanding the scope of what a construction defect is, and the areas that are most commonly litigated is helpful to understand when construction defect litigation is a viable option to pursue redress. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara

    Used French Fry Oil Fuels London Offices as Buildings Go Green

    December 10, 2015 —
    PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP’s office above Charing Cross railway station in London is cooled, heated and fueled by an unlikely source: used cooking oil. The system, which helped the property become the greenest building in the U.K. capital, uses oil refined less than two miles away at London Bridge. It also helps prevent an invisible problem: “fatbergs” formed when oils dumped in drains and pipes congeal with baby wipes and diapers and block the city’s sewers. “We’re using London’s waste to fuel a London office building,” said Jon Barnes, head of building at PwC. The system contributed toward a one-third reduction in electricity costs after a two-year refurbishment of the One Embankment Place office building that finished last year. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Siobhan Wagner, Bloomberg

    Hail Damage Requires Replacement of Even Undamaged Siding

    February 05, 2015 —
    In a dispute over the property policy's requirement that lost or damaged property be repaired or replaced, the Minnesota Supreme Court held that the policy language called for replacement of undamaged siding panels to obtain a color match. Cedar Bluff Townhome Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co., 2014 Minn. LEXIS 661 (Minn. Dec. 17, 2014). During a hail storm, all 20 of Cedar Bluff's buildings sustained some damage. The roofs on all of the buildings needed to be replaced, and at least one siding panel on each building sustained damage. Eleven of the 20 buildings had three or fewer damaged panels. At the time of the hail storm, the siding was approximately 11 years old, and the color of the panels had faded. Replacement panels were available, but not in the same color. Cedar Bluff submitted a claim under its business owners' policy to American Family. The policy obligated the insurer to pay for "direct physical loss of or damage to Covered Property at the premises . . . caused by or resulting from any Covered Cause of Loss." "Covered Property" was broadly defined in the policy to include buildings at the premises. 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

    Wisconsin Court Applies the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Negligence Claims for Purely Economic Losses

    August 17, 2020 —
    In Mech. Inc. v. Venture Elec. Contrs., Inc., No. 2018AP2380, 2020 Wisc. App. LEXIS 170, the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, District Two, considered whether a party may bring a negligence claim for purely economic damages. In upholding the lower court, the appellate court found that a party is barred by the Economic Loss Doctrine from bringing a negligence claim for purely economic damages. Both parties involved in this action were subcontractors on a building project at the Great Lakes Research Facility for the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. As a result of Venture Electrical Contractors, Inc. (Venture) not paying for requested work, Mechanical, Inc. (Mechanical) sued Venture for $11,961.31. Venture, in turn, countersued in negligence for $1.1 million for costs incurred due to delays and untimely performance. Mechanical sought dismissal of the negligence claim based upon the Economic Loss Doctrine. Finding that the Economic Loss Doctrine applies to purely economic losses, the trial court dismissed Venture’s negligence claim. Venture appealed to the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rahul Gogineni, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Gogineni may be contacted at goginenir@whiteandwilliams.com