BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope 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


    North Dakota Supreme Court Clarifies Breadth of Contractual Liability Coverage

    Development in CBF Green Building Case in Maryland

    There's No Place Like Home

    Colorado Supreme Court Rules that Developers Retain Perpetual Control over Construction Defect Covenants

    Housing Inventory Might be Distorted by Pocket Listings

    U.S. Codes for Deck Attachment

    Connecticut Federal District Court Again Finds "Collapse" Provisions Ambiguous

    Maryland Finally set to Diagnose an Allocation Method for Progressive Injuries

    Boston’s Tunnel Project Plagued by Water

    Nuclear Fusion Pushes to Reach Commercial Power Plant Stage

    Full Extent of Damage From Turkey Quakes Takes Shape

    Hunton Insurance Practice, Partners Recognized by The Legal 500

    Luxury Homes Push City’s Building Permits Past $7.5 Million

    Signed, Sealed and (Almost) Delivered: EU Council Authorizes Signing of U.S. – EU Bilateral Insurance Agreement

    Duuers: Better Proposals with Less Work

    Commencing of the Statute of Repose for Construction Defects

    What is the Implied Warranty of Habitability?

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Stuck on You”

    Construction Jobs Keep Rising, with April Gain of 33,000

    U.S. Home Prices Climbed 0.1% in July as Gains Slowed

    Avoiding Disaster Due to Improper Licensing

    Leaky Wells Spur Call for Stricter Rules on Gas Drilling

    The One New Year’s Resolution You’ll Want to Keep if You’re Involved in Public Works Projects

    Landlord Duties of Repair and Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment

    SB800 Not the Only Remedy for Construction Defects

    Appeals Court Finds Manuscript Additional Insured Endorsements Ambiguous Regarding Completed Operations Coverage for Additional Insured

    With No Evidence of COVID-19 Being Present, DC Trial Court Finds No Claim for Business Interruption

    Mid-Session Overview of Colorado’s 2017 Construction Defect Legislation

    Preparing For the Worst with Smart Books & Records

    Texas Federal District Court Dismisses COVID-19 Claim

    Repair of Fractured Girders Complete at Shuttered Salesforce Transit Center

    Watchdog Opens Cartel Probe Into Eight British Homebuilders

    Economy in U.S. Picked Up on Consumer Spending, Construction

    Reminder: Just Being Incorporated Isn’t Enough

    Thank You for 14 Consecutive Years of Legal Elite Elections

    Bailout for an Improperly Drafted Indemnification Provision

    Embattled SNC-Lavalin Files Ethics Appeal, Realigns Structure

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    City Drops Impact Fees to Encourage Commercial Development

    Drafting a Contractual Arbitration Provision

    Liability Policy’s Arbitration Endorsement Applies to Third Party Beneficiaries, Including Additional Insureds

    Five Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers in America© 2021

    Trial Court’s Grant of Summary Judgment On Ground Not Asserted By Moving Party Upheld

    Washington’s Court of Appeals Protects Contracting Parties’ Rights to Define the Terms of their Indemnity Agreements

    Court Reminds Insurer that the Mere Possibility Of Coverage at the Time of Tender Triggers a Duty to Defend in a Defect Action

    What’s in a Name? Trademarks and Construction

    HOA Group Speaking Out Against Draft of Colorado’s Construction Defects Bill

    Renovation Makes Old Arena Feel Brand New

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces New Partner Bahaar Cadambi

    Peru’s Former President and His Wife to Stay in Jail After Losing Appeal
    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

    Nevada Assembly Passes Construction Defect Bill

    October 30, 2013 —
    The Nevada Speaker says that AB401 gives contractors what they want, but a contractors’ group has asked a Senate committee to kill the bill. Supporters of AB 401 say that it clarifies what qualifies as a construction defect and shortens the statute of limitations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hirer Not Liable Under Privette Doctrine Where Hirer Had Knowledge of Condition, but not that Condition Posed a Concealed Hazard

    December 11, 2023 —
    The Privette doctrine, so-called because of a case of the same name, Privette v. Superior Court, 5 Cal.4th 698 (1993), provides a rebuttable presumption that a hirer is not liable for workplace injuries sustained by employees of hired parties. In other words, if a property owner hires a contractor, and one of the contractor’s employees gets injured while working on the property, there is a rebuttable presumption that the property owner is not liable for the employee’s injuries, the rationale being that because the contractor is required to carry workers’ compensation insurance the contractor is in the better position to absorb losses incurred a workplace injury. There are, however, two widely recognized exceptions to the Privette doctrine. The first, is the Hooker exception, again named after a case of the same name, Hooker v. Department of Transportation, 27 Cal.th 198 (2002), which provides that a hirer is liable for injuries to a hired parties’ employees, if the hirer retained control over the work being performed, negligently exercised that control, and the negative exercise of that control contributed to the employee’s injury. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Appellate Court Endorses Discretionary Test for Vicarious Disqualification of Law Firms Due To New Attorney’s Conflict

    February 07, 2018 —
    In California Self-Insurer’s Security Fund et al. v. The Superior Court of Orange County (1/26/2018 – No. G054981), the Fourth Appellate District considered whether vicarious disqualification of a law firm is mandatory or discretionary where an attorney with a conflict joins a firm and the firm enacts an ethical screen to prevent transmission of confidential information between the new attorney and the rest of the firm. This case arose from an effort by the California Self-Insurer’s Security Fund (the “Fund”) to be reimbursed for workers’ compensation benefits advanced on behalf of the Healthcare Industry Self-Insurance Program (the “Program”). The Fund hired Nixon Peabody LLP (“Nixon Peabody”) to represent it in connection with this matter. In November 2013, represented by members of Nixon Peabody’s San Francisco office, the Fund filed a lawsuit naming 304 members of the Program as defendants. Approximately 170 defendants have since settled. Two of the non-settling defendants (“Moving Parties”), were represented by Michelman & Robinson, LLP (“M&R”). From approximately 2009 until February 1, 2017, attorney Andrew Selesnick served as Chair of M&R’s Health Care Department at the firm’s Los Angeles office, managing a team of attorneys who represented clients in the healthcare industry. Commencing in 2014, a team of four attorneys at M&R, including Selesnick, represented the Moving Parties and four other defendants, the latter of whom have since settled. Selesnick was actively involved, including participating in a confidential discussion pertaining to Moving Parties’ liability and damages and receiving many e-mails containing communications about the common defense of the remaining 170 defendants. Reprinted courtesy of David W. Evans, Haight Brown Bonesteel and Stephen M. Tye, Haight Brown Bonesteel Mr. Evans may be contacted at devans@hbblaw.com Mr. Tye may be contacted at stye@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Bay Area Firm Offers Construction Consulting to Remodels

    October 02, 2013 —
    Homeowners sometimes aren’t too clear on questions of “building codes, permit process or where to find the right materials,” according to Benoni Mocanu, the owner of MB Development. He’s ready to step in an help by offering construction consulting to homeowners doing their own remodeling projects. In addition to providing the advice to help them through their projects, they’re ready to step in if a homeowner finds that they can’t finish the project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nevada Supreme Court Reverses Decision against Grader in Drainage Case

    June 30, 2011 —

    The Nevada Supreme Court has issued an opinion in the case of Rayburn Lawn & Landscape Designers v. Plaster Development Corporation, reversing the decision of the lower court and remanding the case for a new trial.

    The case originated in a construction defect suit in which Plaster Development Corporation was sued by homeowners. Plaster filed a third-party complaint against its subcontractor, Reyburn. The testimony of Reyburn’s owner was considered to be admission of liability and so the court limited the scope of Reyburn’s closing argument and did not allow the jury to determine the extent of Reyburn’s liability. Reyburn appealed.

    Plaster, in their case, cited California’s Crawford v. Weather Sheild MFG, Inc. The court held the application of these standards, but noted that the “an indemnitor’s duty to defend an indemnitee is limited to those claims directly attributed to the indemnitor’s scope of work and does not include defending against claims arising from the negligence of other subcontractors and the indemnittee’s own negligence.”

    On the matter of law against Reyburn, the court concluded, “Given the conflicting evidence at trial as to whether Reyburn’s work was implicated in the defective retaining walls and sidewalls, and viewing the evidence and inferences in Reyburn’s favor, we conclude that a reasonable jury could have granted relief in favor of Reyburn.” The Nevada Supreme Court conduced that the district court should not have granted Plaster’s motion for judgement.

    Further, the Nevada Supreme Court found that the district court should have apportioned the fees and costs to those claims directly attributed to Reyburn’s scope of work, “if any,” and should not have assigned all attorney costs and court fees to Reyburn.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    State Farm to Build Multi-Use Complex in Dallas Area

    December 30, 2013 —
    State Farm in Insurance is building a new office complex which will have space for thousands of State Farm employees in the Dallas area, according to The Dallas Morning News. That’s not all the $1.5 billion development, CityLine, will include. The first phase of the complex will include three office towers, a shopping center, a hotel, and apartments. Opening is expected in early 2015. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Architects and Engineers Added to Harmon Towers Lawsuit

    February 12, 2013 —
    Since the beginning of the Harmon Towers construction defect lawsuit, it has been CityCenter making claims against Perini, the property owner against the builder. CityCenter now has a new legal team, and with it apparently a new strategy. The Las Vegas Review Journal reports that papers were filed in court on February 8, adding the architect and the engineer as defendants in the case. According to the filings, the engineering firm Halcrow Yolles should have noticed during inspections that parts of the building’s steel skeleton were improperly installed and should have been repaired. Instead these structures were encased in concrete. CityCenter also contends that there were deficiencies in Halcrow’s blueprints. AAI Architects has been named because its contract made it responsible for Halcrow’s work. Perini has contended that some problems at the building were due to bad plans and therefore not their responsibility. They have claimed that they can fix the building for $20 million, of which $4 million would be due to their actions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Chinese Demand Rush for Australia Homes to Stay, Ausin Says

    August 06, 2014 —
    Ausin Group (Finance) Pty, which offers property and mortgage broking in Australia to Chinese buyers, expects to sell two-thirds more homes and to double the amount of loans it arranges as demand from the mainland surges. The company forecasts A$1.5 billion ($1.4 billion) in sales of new residential properties in the year ending June 30, compared with A$900 million over the previous 12 months, Sydney-based Managing Director Joseph Zaja said in an interview yesterday. The value of mortgages the closely held company arranges through Australian banks is expected to climb to A$500 million in the 2015 calendar year, he said. Ausin is benefiting from surging demand from China, where the housing market is faltering. Chinese purchasers overtook Americans to become the biggest buyers of real estate in Australia in the 12 months through June 2013, plowing A$5.9 billion into commercial and residential property, a 42 percent increase from the previous 12 months. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nichola Saminather, Bloomberg
    Ms. Saminather may be contacted at nsaminather1@bloomberg.net