BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs 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


    Nebraska Court Ruling Backs Latest Keystone XL Pipeline Route

    Pending Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Rise Most in Four Years

    Understanding Entitlement to Delays and Proper Support

    Struggling Astaldi Announces Defaults on Florida Highway Contracts

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/31/24) – International Homebuying Shrinks Commercial Real Estate Focus on Sustainability, and U.S. Banks Boost Provisions for Credit Losses

    An Overview of the New EPA HVAC Refrigerant Regulations and Its Implications for the Construction Industry

    The Pitfalls of Oral Agreements in the Construction Industry

    A New Digital Twin for an Existing Bridge

    Surety's Settlement Without Principal's Consent Is Not Bad Faith

    National Demand Increases for Apartments, Refuting Calls for Construction Defect Immunity in Colorado

    Georgia House Bill Addresses Construction Statute of Repose

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

    California Court Invokes Equity to Stretch Anti-Subrogation Rule Principles

    Condominium Association Responsibility to Resolve Construction Defect Claims

    Here's Proof Homebuilders are Betting on a Pickup in the Housing Market

    Emergency Paid Sick Leave and FMLA Leave Updates in Response to COVID-19

    Liquidated Damages Clause Not Enforced

    Fourth Circuit Clarifies What Qualifies As “Labor” Under The Miller Act

    Rhode Island Closes One Bridge and May Have Burned Others with Ensuing Lawsuit

    The Starter Apartment Is Nearly Extinct in San Francisco and New York

    Sometimes, Being too Cute with Pleading Allegations is Unnecessary

    Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Found In South Dakota

    Baltimore Project Pushes To Meet Federal Deadline

    Subcontractors Essential to Home Building Industry

    Construction Wall Falls, Hurts Three

    Just Because I May Be An “Expert” Does Not Mean I Am Giving Expert Testimony

    Construction Lien Needs to Be Recorded Within 90 Days from Lienor’s Final Furnishing

    Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies the Meaning of "Living in the Same Household" for Purposes of Coverage Under a Homeowners Policy

    Construction-Industry Clients Need Well-Reasoned and Clear Policies on Recording Zoom and Teams Meetings

    Construction Defect Journal Marks First Anniversary

    Don’t Fall in Trap of Buying the Cheapest Insurance Policy as it May be Bad for Your Business Risks and Needs

    Suspend the Work, but Don’t Get Fired

    Appellate Court reverses district court’s finding of alter ego in Sedgwick Properties Development Corporation v. Christopher Hinds (2019WL2865935)

    Product Defect Allegations Trigger Duty To Defend in Pennsylvania

    Federal Contractors – Double Check the Terms of Your Contract Before Performing Ordered Changes

    No Coverage for Alleged Misrepresentation Claim

    Issues to Watch Out for When Managing Remote Workers

    Summary Judgment for Insurer Reversed Based on Expert Opinion

    Late Notice Bars Insured's Claim for Loss Caused by Hurricane

    Modified Plan Unveiled for Chicago's Sixth-Tallest Tower

    Novation Agreements Under Federal Contracts

    Lead Paint: The EPA’s Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule

    South Carolina School District Investigated by IRS and FBI

    Corps Proposes $4.6B Plan to Steel Miami for Storm Surge

    Parties Can Agree to Anything In A Settlement Agreement………Or Can They?

    Decline in Home Construction Brings Down Homebuilder Stocks

    Safety, Compliance and Productivity on the Jobsite

    Anchoring Abuse: Evolution & Eradication

    Death, Taxes and Attorneys’ Fees in Construction Disputes

    Benford’s Law: A Seldom Used Weapon in Forensic Accounting
    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

    Couple Claims Poor Installation of Home Caused Defects

    December 30, 2013 —
    Robert and Tracy Samosky of Spanishburg, West Virginia have filed a lawsuit claiming that the improper delivery of their modular home caused defects and damages, preventing them from actually using their home. The couple purchased a modular home from J&M Quality Construction for a home designed and built by Mod-U-Kraf Homes. They are suing the two firms for $50,000 in damages, reports the West Virginia Record. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Why Construction Law- An Update

    May 07, 2015 —
    Back in 2009, only a year or so after my first post here at Musings, I posted on why I’m in the field of construction law. Well, a lot has happened in the over 5 years since then, not the least of which is my move to solo practice in July of 2010 and the later certification as a mediator. As I sit here, I look back at the passage of time and the events between my last thoughts on this subject and now and wonder if my thoughts have changed? Frankly, not much has changed as far as my attitude toward the practice of construction law. Despite my kids occasionally rolling their eyes when I talk about a case of interest to me and their sometimes moniker for me as a “dirt lawyer,” I continue to find the representation of the construction professionals that I call clients and friends to be fulfilling and worthwhile. Even in the face of criticisms that we lawyers cause more problems that we solve, I firmly believe that I and other good construction lawyers can and do help avoid and anticipate more problems than I cause. As one of the few solo construction attorneys here in the Richmond area, if anything, I am more involved in the construction community. Between my continued and even increased involvement with the AGC of Virginia and my more recent appointment to the board of the Virginia State Bar‘s Construction Law and Public Contracts Section, I have gained even more insight into the workings of the legal and business landscapes of construction. With each new piece of information gained by such involvement, I see another side to the business of construction that I may not have thought of. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Construction Law Musings
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    No Indemnity Coverage Where Insured Suffers No Loss

    November 05, 2014 —
    The insured subcontractor sought coverage under its Builder's Risk policy for loss despite already being paid under contract the amount sought under the policy. MKB Constr. v. Am Zurich Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136096 (W.D. Wash. Sept. 24, 2014). MKB contracted with the Lower Yukon School District (LYSD) to place gravel fill for a new building pad upon which a school building would be placed in Emmonak, Alaska. The project site was built on tundra that melted in the summer, becoming marshy and pocketed by pools of standing water. LYSD provided the bidding contractors with information stating that settlements of 3 to 9 inches could be expected in areas with 30 inches of fill. The contract was awarded to MKB, who subsequently realized it had under bid the amount of gravel fill that would be required. The estimated difference in the amount bid and the amount that would be needed was 6,583 cubic yards. LYSD refused to increase the contract price. 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

    OSHA Set to Tag More Firms as Severe Violators Under New Criteria

    November 01, 2022 —
    In announcing last month broadened criteria for classifying employers as severe safety violators, U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration official Douglas Parker singled out a steel fabricator near El Paso, Texas. The U.S. Labor Dept. assistant secretary for occupational safety and health, he posted a blog stating that OSHA had placed Kyoei Steel Ltd. in its severe violators program, which subjects the firm to numerous re-inspections until it is allowed to exit. Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record and Stephanie Loder, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Immigrants' Legal Status Eyed Over Roles in New York Fake Injury Lawsuits

    January 07, 2025 —
    Edison Fernando Pesantez Ramon says that early on the morning of Sept. 29, 2021, while working on a building renovation project on 96th Street in Manhattan, he tripped and fell badly on a staircase. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, ENR
    Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com

    Insurer Sued for Altering Policies after Claim

    January 13, 2014 —
    A lawsuit alleges that Fidelity National Property & Casualty Insurance Co. retroactively cancelled policies, substituting policies that covered less after claims were made due to damages from Hurricane Sandy. Insurance Journal reports that Dayton Towers Corp., which owns seven high-rises in Queens, New York City, has sued the insurer. According to Dayton, the policies covered the buildings for amounts from $2.5 to $2.7 million. The total coverage for all seven buildings was $18.5 million. Under new policies, the buildings were covered for $250,000 each, for a total of $1,750,000, which is the amount that Fidelity paid Dayton. The lawsuit alleges that the policy does not allow for the terms to be rewritten when claims are pending. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Seattle Condos, Close to Waterfront, Construction Defects Included

    February 11, 2013 —
    There's a cluster of eight condominium projects in Seattle, some within easy walking distance of each other, that are either in construction defect lawsuits, arbitration, or mediation. Jeff Reynolds, contributing a Seattle PI.com reader blog, notes that as Seattle condo projects have neared the end of the four-year warranty period, condo boards are being targeted by attorneys. Reynolds writes that "once [the attorneys] are hired by the associations, they retain specialists that test for any and all construction defects with the building envelope." The problem that Reynolds sees is that that "major lending institutions stay away from condos with lawsuits." And so homeowners dealing with construction defects have apartments they can't sell to anyone who might want to use financing. This tightens Seattle's already limited inventory, leading to both frustrated sellers and frustrated buyers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Pennsylvania Court Finds that Two Possible Causes Can Prove a Product Malfunction Theory of Liability

    September 29, 2021 —
    In Allstate Ins. Co. v. LG Elecs. USA, Inc., No. 19-3529, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127014, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania considered whether plaintiff’s expert engineer’s opinion that there were two possible causes of a fire—both related to alleged product defects within a refrigerator manufactured by the defendant—was sufficient to support the malfunction theory of products liability. The court found that because both potential causes imposed liability on the product manufacturer and the expert ruled out misuse of the product, as well as all external causes of the fire, it was not necessary for the engineer to identify a specific cause under the malfunction theory. The court also found that the expert’s investigation and opinions met the criteria set forth in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) and the Federal Rules of Evidence and, thus, were admissible. LG Electronics arose from a fire at the home of Thomas and Lisa Ellis. The public sector fire investigator identified the area of fire origin as the top of a refrigerator manufactured by LG Electronics USA, Inc. (LG). The Ellises filed a claim with their homeowner’s insurance carrier, Allstate Insurance Company (Insurer). Insurer retained a fire investigator and an electrical engineer to investigate the origin and cause of the fire. The fire investigator agreed with the public sector investigator that the fire originated at the top of the refrigerator. The engineer conducted a forensic inspection of the scene and ruled out all potential external ignition sources. He then examined the internal components of the refrigerator. He found arcing activity on a wire at the front top of the refrigerator. He opined that there were two possible causes of the fire: either the heater circuit insulation failed over time due to mechanical damage, or the heat from the internal light fixture ignited combustible components of the refrigerator. Since the engineer ruled out improper use of the refrigerator, he opined that the damage was caused by a manufacturing defect. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com