BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineers
    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


    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    North Carolina Learns More Lessons From Latest Storm

    Happy New Year from CDJ

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 45 White and Williams Lawyers

    Corps of Engineers to Prepare EIS for Permit to Construct Power Lines Over Historic James River

    Fifth Circuit Certifies Questions to Texas Supreme Court on Concurrent Causation Doctrine

    Why Biden’s Infrastructure Plan Is a Green Jobs Plan

    Alarm Cries Wolf in California Case Involving Privette Doctrine

    First Suit to Enforce Business-Interruption Coverage Filed

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

    General Liability Alert: A Mixed Cause of Action with Protected and Non-Protected Activity Not Subject to Anti-SLAPP Motion

    Measures Landlords and Property Managers Can Take in Response to a Reported COVID-19 Infection

    Foundation Differences Across the U.S.

    Calling Hurricanes a Category 6 Risks Creating Deadly Confusion

    CC&Rs Not the Place for Arbitration Agreement, Court Rules

    Where There's Smoke...California's New Emergency Wildfire Smoke Protection Regulation And What Employers Are Required To Do

    The Most Expensive Apartment Listings in New York That Are Not in Manhattan

    New Executive Orders Expedite the Need for Contractors to Go Green

    Construction Cybercrime Is On the Rise

    When Is an Arbitration Clause Unconscionable? Not Often

    The Investors Profiting Off Water Scarcity

    Insurer's Denial of Coverage to Additional Insured Constitutes Bad Faith

    A Court-Side Seat: May Brings Federal Appellate Courts Rulings and Executive Orders

    Forget the Apple Watch. Apple’s Next Biggest Thing Isn’t for Sale

    California Ballot Initiative Seeks to Repeal Infrastructure Funding Bill

    Manhattan Bargain: Condos for Less Than $3 Million

    Shoring of Problem Girders at Salesforce Transit Center Taking Longer than Expected

    Colorado Supreme Court Decision Could Tarnish Appraisal Process for Policyholders

    CDC Issues Moratorium on Residential Evictions Through 2020

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds that Subrogation Waiver Does Not Violate Statute Prohibiting Limitation on Tort Liability in Construction Contracts

    A Retrospective As-Built Schedule Analysis Can Be Used to Support Delay

    Stadium Intended for the 2010 World Cup Still Not Ready

    The Godfather of Solar Predicts Its Future

    Ninth Circuit Holds Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Applies Beyond All-Risk Policies

    Executive Insights 2024: Leaders in Construction Law

    Florida Supreme Court Decision Limits Special Damages Presented to Juries

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/06/21)

    Insurer Entitled to Reimbursement of Defense Costs Under Unjust Enrichment Theory

    Fire Consultants Cannot Base Opinions on Speculation

    Hydrogen—A Key Element in the EU’s Green Planning

    Does a Landlord’s Violation of the Arizona Residential Landlord-Tenant Act Constitute Negligence Per Se?

    Apartments pushed up US homebuilding in September

    How to Prevent Forest Fires by Building Cities With More Wood

    Eliminating Waste in Construction – An Interview with Turner Burton

    Policy Sublimit Does Not Apply to Business Interruption Loss

    Two Injured in Walkway Collapse of Detroit Apartment Complex

    SFAA Commends U.S. Senate for Historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill

    South Carolina Legislature Defines "Occurrence" To Include Property Damage Arising From Faulty Workmanship

    Being deposed—not just for dictators! Depositions in the construction lawsuit (Law & Order: Hard Hat files Part 5)

    Colorado Supreme Court Grants the Petition for Writ of Certiorari in Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Fort Lauderdale Partner Secures Defense Verdict for Engineering Firm in High-Stakes Negligence Case

    June 10, 2024 —
    Fort Lauderdale, Fla. (June 3, 2024) - Fort Lauderdale Managing Partner Cheryl Wilke recently secured a defense verdict for civil engineering firm Gulfstream Design Group and its owner, Matthew Lahti, in a high-stakes professional negligence case in which the plaintiff sought more than $20 million. The verdict by a six-person jury in St. Augustine followed a nine-day trial. The case involved a 100-acre tract of land in St. Johns County, Florida, owned by the plaintiff, Cynthia Taylor. The land was zoned for rural farming, and she wished to sell the property for development. She entered into a contract with Southeast Georgia Acquisitions (“SGA”) to sell the property with the goal of creating a 200-home subdivision. SGA hired Doug Burnett as land use counsel and our client, Gulfstream Design Group, as the civil engineer to design the project. In St. Johns County, only a property owner can submit a Planned Unit Development Plan (“PUD”) for the purpose of rezoning. In this case, Burnett and Gulfstream created text and a proposed map for the PUD and submitted it for approval. The PUD was approved first at the staff level, then by planning and zoning and then by the County Commission. All the services were provided prior to closing with PUD approval, a condition of sale. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Cogently Written Opinion Finds Coverage for Loss Caused By Defective Concrete

    November 07, 2012 —
    If ever in need of a concise, well-reasoned opinion on “occurrence,” “property damage” and applicability of the business risk exclusions, turn to Pamperin Rentals II, LLC v. R.G. Hendricks & Sons Construction, Inc., 2012 Wis Ct. App. LEXIS 698 (Wis. Ct. App. Sept. 5, 2012). A contractor was hired to install concrete during construction of seven gas stations. Red-D-Mix provided the concrete. The contractor and Red-D-Mix were eventually sued by the gas stations, based upon allegations that the concrete was defectively manufactured and installed. The gas stations alleged that Red-D-Mix supplied concrete that was defective and resulted in damages, including the need to repair nearby asphalt. Red-D-Mix tendered to its insurers, who denied coverage. Suit was filed and the insurers moved for summary judgment. The trial court determined there were no allegations of either “property damage” or an “occurrence.” Therefore, there was no duty to defend or indemnify Red-D-Mix. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii.
    Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Public Law Center Honors Snell & Wilmer Partner Sean M. Sherlock As Volunteers For Justice Attorney Of The Year

    June 10, 2019 —
    Snell & Wilmer is pleased to announce the Public Law Center (PLC) has named Orange County partner Sean M. Sherlock as the 2019 Volunteers for Justice Attorney of the Year. Sherlock donates his time and knowledge to his community through his pro bono work with PLC. From 2015 to earlier this year he headed a team of attorneys who represented an elderly PLC client in danger of losing her mobile home. The client is the primary caregiver for her disabled grandson who survives solely on a fixed income of disability and Social Security, causing her to fall behind on her space rent for her mobile home. In addition to pro bono work, Sherlock is an avid community volunteer, spending his time supporting organizations that have included Big Brothers/Big Sisters, Orange County Coastkeeper, AYSO and the Boy Scouts of America. “One of the most rewarding aspects of being an attorney is being able to obtain justice for the vulnerable and defenseless in our society who would otherwise be unable to navigate our legal system,” said Sherlock. “My relationship with the PLC has given me many opportunities to do some very gratifying work, and it is a real pleasure working with and learning from the excellent staff attorneys at PLC.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sean M. Sherlock, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Sherlock may be contacted at ssherlock@swlaw.com

    Court of Appeal: Privette Doctrine Does Not Apply to Landlord-Tenant Relationships

    March 20, 2023 —
    We’ve talked a fair bit about the Privette doctrine which provides for a rebuttable presumption that a hirer is not liable for workplace injuries sustained by employees of hired parties. We’ve also talked about its two exceptions: (1) The Hooker exception which provides for liability if the hirer retained control over the work being performed, negligently exercised that control, and its negligent exercise of that control contributed to an employee’s injury; and (2) the Kinsman exception which provides for liability if the hirer knew or should have known of a concealed hazard, that the hired party did not know of and could not have reasonably discovered, and the hirer failed to warn the hired party of the hazard. The Privette doctrine is not the end all be all of landowner liability, however, as discussed in Ramirez v. PK 1 Plaza 580 SC LP, 85 Cal.App.5th 252 (2022). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    SEC Climate Change Disclosure Letter Foreshadows Anticipated Regulatory Changes

    November 08, 2021 —
    Washington, D.C. (October 13, 2021) - In late September 2021, the Division of Corporation Finance of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a Sample Letter providing guidance to companies on how their climate disclosures will be analyzed for compliance with material risk reporting obligations. The Sample Letter precedes the SEC’s issuance of mandatory climate-related disclosure rules anticipated by year-end and signals a greater focus on specific information used to support securities filings, a development that businesses should take seriously. The Sample Letter builds on climate change guidance the SEC issued in 2010 and identifies nine categories of disclosures the SEC suggests may be material risks that must be disclosed. These include:
    • Consistency between a company’s corporate social responsibility report and its SEC filings;
    • Risks associated with climate-related legislation, regulation, or policy, and resulting compliance costs;
    • Litigation risks related to climate change; and
    • Risks linked to an array of operational and market factors, including capital expenditures, continuity of business operations, supply chain stability, changing demand, reputation, availability of credit and insurance, and other climate-change related potential impacts on the financial condition of the company.
    Reprinted courtesy of Karen C. Bennett, Lewis Brisbois and Jane C. Luxton, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Bennett may be contacted at Karen.Bennett@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Luxton may be contacted at Jane.Luxton@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    BP Is Not an Additional Insured Under Transocean's Policy

    April 01, 2015 —
    Responding to a certified question from the Fifth Circuit, the Texas Supreme Court determined that BP was not an additional insured under Transocean's liability policy and had no coverage under the policy for the deaths caused by the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon. In re Horizon, 2015 Tex. LEXIS 141 (Tex. Feb. 13, 2015). We have previously posted on this case in the federal courts here and here. Transocean owned the Deepwater Horizon, a mobile offshore drilling unit operating in the Gulf of Mexico pursuant to a contract with BP. After an explosion in April 2010, the rig caught fire, killing eleven crew members. Both Transocean and BP sought coverage under Transocean's primary and excess policies. Although they did not dispute that BP was an additional insured, Transocean and its insurers argued that BP was not entitled to coverage for pollution-related liabilities arising from subsurface oil releases in connection with the Deepwater Horizon accident. 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

    Construction Needs Collaborative Planning

    January 20, 2020 —
    What makes construction different from manufacturing is its dynamic nature. Unlike a systemized production plant, a construction site is a mesh of interconnected processes that are far from optimized. The traditional top-down planning practice does not solve problems on the construction site, as recent research reveals. Making planning collaborative is a necessary step in making construction less wasteful. Everybody in the industry has felt frustration with inefficiencies in construction, but seeing the data is still disconcerting. I’ve had the pleasure of attending several workshops organized by the Finnish Aalto University’s research teams. These eye-opening events both revealed how much waste we have in construction today and suggested solutions to this problem. Four Aalto University graduate students shared insights from their research at a workshop of the Waste Workgroup of the Building 2030 consortium. They focused on projects where takt production, a lean construction method, had been used. Takt production breaks the work down into equally timed work batches and typically shortens project lead time considerably—up to 50%. However, even these well-planned projects included waste and unnecessary movement, as the researchers found out. 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

    Homeowner Loses Suit against Architect and Contractor of Resold Home

    June 14, 2011 —

    The California Court of Appeals in the case of Kizor v. Architects ruled that Mr. Kizor could not make construction defect claims against the architect and contractor of his home, as the defects had caused significant damage to the former owners, and it was they, not Kizor, who could have asserted those claims.

    The background of the case was that John and Miranda Redig hired BRU Architects to design a home. During construction in 2000, they wrote to the roofing supplier complaining about leaks. The leaks were caulked, but the roof continued leaking during rains. The Redigs sold their house to Kizor in 2002, with an addendum to the sale contract protecting themselves from liability for further problems with the roof. “Seller has no responsibility for the condition of the roof and stucco and buyer absolves seller of any liability in connection therewith.”

    In 2006, Kizor sued the architects, contractor, and subcontractor. The defendants moved for summary judgment which was granted. Kizor appealed, and in this current court case, appeal was denied.

    Read the court’s decision

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