BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineer
    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


    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (9/4/24) – DOJ Sues RealPage, Housing Sales Increase and U.S. Can’t Build Homes Fast Enough

    Disputes Will Not Be Subject to Arbitration Provision If There Is No “Significant Relationship”

    Contractor Sues Yelp Reviewer for Defamation

    The Dog Ate My Exclusion! – Georgia Federal Court: No Reformation to Add Pollution Exclusion

    New Insurance Case: Owners'​ Insurance Barred in Reimbursement Action against Tenant

    West Coast Casualty’s 25th Construction Defect Seminar Has Begun

    Wood Wizardry in Oregon: Innovation Raises the Roof for PDX Terminal

    Climate Change a Factor in 'Unprecedented' South Asia Floods

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (04/26/23) – The Energy Transition and a Bit of Brick-and-Mortar Blues

    Deferred Maintenance?

    Federal District Court Dismisses Property Claim After Insured Allows Loss Location to Be Destroyed Prior to Inspection

    London Office Builders Aren’t Scared of Brexit Anymore

    Slip and Fall Claim from Standing Water in Parking Garage

    When it Comes to Trials, it’s Like a Box of Chocolates. Sometimes You Get the Icky Cream Filled One

    Bert L. Howe & Associates Brings Professional Development Series to Their San Antonio Office

    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    BKV Barnett, LLC v. Electric Drilling Technologies, LLC: Analyzing the Impact of Colorado’s Anti-Indemnification Statute

    Good News on Prices for Some Construction Materials

    Australian Developer Denies Building Problems Due to Construction Defects

    Choice of Laws Test Mandates Application of California’s Continuous and Progressive Trigger of Coverage to Asbestos Claims

    Court of Appeal Holds That Higher-Tiered Party on Construction Project Can be Held Liable for Intentional Interference with Contract

    When OSHA Cites You

    Despite Feds' Raised Bar, 2.8B Massachusetts Offshore Wind Project Presses On

    Gatluak Ramdiet Named to The National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/10/23) – Wobbling Real Estate, Booming (and Busting) Construction, and Eye-Watering Insurance Premiums

    Are We Headed for a Work Shortage?

    Eleventh Circuit Reverses Attorneys’ Fee Award to Performance Bond Sureties in Dispute with Contractor arising from Claim against Subcontractor Performance Bond

    Foundation Differences Across the U.S.

    The Requirement to Post Collateral Under General Agreement of Indemnity Is Real

    UPDATE: Texas Federal Court Permanently Enjoins U.S. Department of Labor “Persuader Rule” Requiring Law Firms and Other Consultants to Disclose Work Performed for Employers on Union Organization Efforts

    Detroit Craftsmen Sift House Rubble in Quest for Treasured Wood

    Workplace Safety–the Unpreventable Employee Misconduct Defense

    Insurers Need only Prove that Other Coverage Exists for Construction Defect Claims

    Kahana Feld LLP Senior Attorney Rachael Marvin and Partner Dominic Donato Obtain Complete Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Labor Law Claims on Summary Judgment

    Ohio Rejects the Majority Trend and Finds No Liability Coverage for a Subcontractor’s Faulty Work

    Fifth Circuit: Primary Insurer Relieved of Duty to Defend Without Release of Liability of Insured

    OSHA/VOSH Roundup

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Highlighted | 2019 Northern California Super Lawyers

    Never, Ever, Ever Assume! (Or, How a Stuck Shoe is Like a Construction Project Assumption)

    Construction Defect Settlement in Seattle

    SEC Proposes Rule Requiring Public Firms to Report Climate Risks

    Cyber Security Insurance and Design Professionals

    Eighth Circuit Affirms Finding of Bad Faith, Award of Costs and Prejudgment Interest

    New York’s Highest Court Gives Insurers “an Incentive to Defend”

    The 2021 Top 50 Construction Law Firms™

    The Activist Group Suing the Suburbs for Bigger Buildings

    An Era of Legends

    Viewpoint: A New Approach to Job Site Safety Reaps Benefits

    It Pays to Review the ‘Review the Contract Documents’ Clause Before You Sign the Contract

    Forecast Sunny for Solar Contractors in California
    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. Leveraging 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

    Manhattan to Get Tall, Skinny Tower

    October 21, 2013 —
    At its narrowest, it’s going to be only sixty feet wide. And that will run 1,350 feet into the air. A new apartment tower is going up in New York, and one of its amenities will be that residents in the top floors will be able to look down on the Empire State Building. “It may be the skinniest building ever,” said Gregg Pasquarelli, the principal of SHoP Architects, the firm that designed the building. He estimates its ratio of height to width as “something like 25-to-1.” For all its height, the building will be divided into about 100 units. As part of the development deal, the tower will incorporate and preserve the landmark Steinway Hall. The chair of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, Robert Tierney, described it as “the best of both worlds of new construction and design and historic preservation.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Jersey Judge Declared Arbitrator had no Duty to Disclose Past Contact with Lawyer

    October 22, 2014 —
    According to the New Jersey Law Journal, in a recent ruling, a federal judge in Newark “ruled that an arbitration award should not be vacated based on the arbitrator’s failure to disclose his professional contacts with defense counsel during his prior career as a federal judge.” The plaintiff had sought to vacate an award “because he failed to disclose interactions he had with Dennis Drasco, the lawyer for the defendant, while serving on the bench. But Brown was not required to disclose his contacts with Drasco because they would not cause a reasonable person to question Brown’s impartiality, U.S. District Judge William Walls ruled Oct. 21,” reported the New Jersey Law Journal. The plaintiff’s assertions “suggest nothing more than that Judge Brown and Mr. Drasco were familiar with one another in their professional capacities,” Walls stated, as quoted by the New Jersey Law Journal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Don’t Do this When it Comes to Construction Liens

    September 07, 2020 —
    When it comes to preparing and recording a construction lien, this case is an example of what NOT TO DO! I mean it — this exemplifies what NOT TO DO! It is also a case study of why a party should always work with counsel in preparing a construction lien so that you can avoid the outcome in this case–your lien being deemed fraudulent. In Witters Contracting Company v. West, 2020 WL 4030845 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020), homeowners hired a contractor to renovate their home under a cost-plus arrangement where the contractor was entitled to a 10% fee on construction costs. The contract also required extra work to be agreed in writing between the owner and contractor. During construction a dispute arose. The contractor texted the owner that it will cancel the permit and record a $100,000 construction lien if the owner did not pay it $30,000. Shortly thereafter, the contractor’s counsel sent the homeowners a demand for $59,706 with back-up documentation. Less than a week later, the contractor recorded a construction lien for $75,000. The owners initiated a lawsuit against the contractor that included a claim for fraudulent lien. The contractor then amended its construction lien for $87,239. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Haight has been named by Best Law Firms® as a Tier 1, 2 and 3 National Firm in Three Practice Areas in 2024

    November 27, 2023 —
    Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP is listed in the Best Law Firms® (2024 Edition) with metro rankings in the following areas: Los Angeles
    • Metropolitan Tier 1
      • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    • Metropolitan Tier 2
      • Insurance Law
    • Metropolitan Tier 3
      • Workers’ Compensation Law – Claimants
    Orange County
    • Metropolitan Tier 1
      • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Massachusetts Pulls Phased Trigger On Its Statute of Repose

    December 21, 2020 —
    In D’Allesandro v. Lennar Hingham Holdings, LLC, 486 Mass 150, 2020 Mass. LEXIS 721, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts answered a certified question regarding how to apply the Massachusetts statute of repose, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 260, § 2B, in regards to phased construction projects. The court held that, in this context, the completion of each individual “improvement” to its intended use, or the substantial completion of the individual building and the taking of possession for occupancy by the owner or owners, triggers the statute of repose with respect to the common areas and limited common areas of that building. Additionally, the court held that where a particular improvement is integral to, and intended to serve, multiple buildings (or the development as a whole), the statute of repose is triggered when the discrete improvement is substantially complete and open to its intended use. In D’Allesandro, the action arose out of the construction, marketing, sale and management of the Hewitts Landing Condominium (the Condominium) project. Ultimately, 150 units were constructed over 24 phases of construction, enclosed in 28 different buildings. Throughout construction, the project’s architect submitted declarations to the Town of Hingham swearing that the individual units were “substantially complete” and could be occupied for their intended use. The Town of Hingham then issued certificates of occupancy for the unit or building. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kyle Rice, White and Williams
    Mr. Rice may be contacted at ricek@whiteandwilliams.com

    Court Makes an Unsettling Inference to Find that the Statute of Limitations Bars Claims Arising from a 1997 Northridge Earthquake Settlement

    April 15, 2015 —
    In Britton v. Girardi (No. B249232 – Filed 4/1/2015), the Second Appellate District upheld the trial court’s dismissal due to the statute of limitations based on an inference it drew from a letter attached to the complaint, while reaffirming its prior application of the limitations period in Probate Code section 16460 for fraud claims in the related case of Prakashpalan v. Engstrom, Lipscomb & Lack (2/27/2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 1105. In Britton, just as in Prakashpalan, the plaintiffs sued the attorneys who had represented them in connection with claims against their insurer arising out of the Northridge earthquake. In 1997, the attorneys had settled that litigation for more than $100 million. The plaintiffs allege that the attorneys breached their fiduciary duty by (1) failing to provide an accounting for the settlement, (2) failing to obtain their informed consent to the settlement, and (3) concealing their misappropriation of the settlement funds. They claim that they did not discover this wrongdoing until nearly fifteen years later, in 2012, when the Prakashpalans contacted them about their settlement. Significantly, the plaintiffs attached as an exhibit to the complaint a page of the November 3, 1997 letter to the Prakashpalans (rather than the plaintiffs), which stated that a retired judge who presided over the settlement had determined the allocations and the attorneys could not distribute the proceeds until the plaintiffs signed the “Master Settlement Agreement” by which the plaintiffs agreed to its terms and to give up all claims against the insurer. Reprinted courtesy of David W. Evans, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Stephen J. Squillario, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Evans may be contacted at devans@hbblaw.com Mr. Squillario may be contacted at ssquillario@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Amendments to California Insurance Code to Require Enhanced Claims Handling Requirements for Claims Arising Out Of Catastrophic Events

    September 04, 2019 —
    Senator Bill Dodd, who represents Napa County and surrounding areas in the California Senate, has recently introduced Senate Bill 240, known colloquially as The Insurance Adjuster Act of 2019. S.B. 240 would amend the California Insurance Code to streamline and organize claim processing, particularly during a state of emergency / catastrophic events. The proposal is in response to a series of devastating wildfires which ravaged the Sonoma County and Napa Valley wine country during the 2017 fire season (Atlas, Tubbs, and Nun fires). Many of Senator Dodd’s constituents reported difficulty in navigating the claim process due to multiple claim professionals handling a single claim, many of whom were outside of California, and many of whose capabilities were challenged. S.B. 240 would direct the Department of Insurance to issue annual notices setting forth legal developments as they relate to property insurance policies, including best practices for evaluating damage caused by an emergency, and requires out-of-state claims professionals to certify, under penalty of perjury, that they have read these notices along with claim adjusting literature also prepared by the Department of Insurance. S.B. 240 would also require insurers to designate a primary point of contact for their customers during a state of emergency until the claim is closed or litigation is initiated. While the proposed legislation would not prohibit multiple claims professionals handling a single claim, it would provide for training standards issued by the Department of Insurance on how best to handle claims in a state of emergency. Further, S.B. 240 would require claims professionals who are not licensed in California (1) to be supervised by a licensed California claims professional, and (2) to read and understand the annual emergency claim adjusting literature issued by the Department of Insurance within 15 calendar days of beginning adjusting of claims in California. The bill passed the Senate by unanimous vote and is pending in the Assembly. The bill is also supported by Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara. Accordingly, the bill is expected to pass the Legislature. Once enacted, S.B. 240 would significantly elevate claim adjusting requirements related to emergencies, such as natural disasters, by placing greater oversight in the Department of Insurance, and greater responsibility on claims professional within and outside of California. How pragmatic these requirements are and what practical impact they will have on the industry are developments which we will follow and provide further commentary as this bill makes its way through the California legislature and into the California Insurance Code. Reprinted courtesy of Jon A.Turigliatto, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger and Ravi R. Mehta, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger Mr. A.Turigliatto may be contacted at jturigliatto@cgdrblaw.com Mr. Mehta may be contacted at rmehta@cgdrblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Four Ways Student Debt Is Wreaking Havoc on Millennials

    December 10, 2015 —
    Navient, the country's largest student debt servicer, put out a report Wednesday that suggests young people are doing just fine with their finances. The study surveyed 3,000 millennials and concluded that they are happily taking out mortgages, starting families, saving money, and managing their budgets. "Young adults are not only financially healthy but also actively focused on saving," the report said. Navient may be overstating things. Here are four reasons you should not be convinced that things are going that well for young people who took out student loans. 1. Student Debt Seems to Dampen Homebuying People who finished college were more likely to have a mortgage than people who got only a high school education, the Navient study showed. Students who took out loans for college and didn't graduate, however, are worse off than those who never went at all. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Natalie Kirtroeff, Bloomberg