BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut forensic architect
    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


    Condominium Construction Defect Resolution in the District of Columbia

    Surfside Condo Collapse Investigators Have Nearly Finished Technical Work

    Sweat the Small Stuff – Don’t Overlook These Three (3) Clauses When Negotiating Your Construction Contract

    Client Alert: Expert Testimony in Indemnity Action Not Limited to Opinions Presented in Underlying Matter

    It’s Not Just the Millennium Tower That’s Sinking in San Francisco

    Construction of New U.S. Homes Declines on Plunge in South

    Housing Inflation Begins to Rise

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Bond Principal Necessary on a Mechanic’s Lien Claim

    Taking the Stairs to Human Wellness and Greener Buildings

    Billion-Dollar Power Lines Finally Inching Ahead to Help US Grids

    Claims for Breach of Express Indemnity Clauses Subject to 10-Year Statute of Limitations

    Loss Ensuing from Faulty Workmanship Covered

    A Survey of Trends and Perspectives in Construction Defect Decisions

    "My Bad, I Thought It Was in Good Faith" is Not Good Enough - Contractor Ordered to Pay Prompt Payment Penalties

    Washington Supreme Court Expands Contractor Notice Obligations

    Home Prices Beat Estimates With 0.8% Gain in November

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at Slower Pace in May

    Musk Says ‘Chicago Express’ Tunnel Project Could Start Work in Months

    Stucco Contractor Trying to Limit Communication in Construction Defect Case

    Kahana Feld Welcomes Six Attorneys to the Firm in Q4 of 2023

    Partners Jeremy S. Macklin and Mark F. Wolfe Secure Seventh Circuit Win for Insurer Client in Late Notice Dispute

    A UK Bridge That Is a Lesson on How to Build Infrastructure

    Congratulations to Nicholas Rodriguez on His Promotion to Partner

    Wage Theft Investigations and Citations in the Construction Industry

    Use of Dispute Review Boards in the Construction Process

    U.S. Judge Says Wal-Mart Must Face Mexican-Bribe Claims

    Alaska Supreme Court Dismisses Claims of Uncooperative Pro Se Litigant in Defect Case

    A General Contractor’s Guide to Additional Insured Coverage

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Obtains Summary Judgment in Favor of Defendant

    Pandemic Magnifies Financial Risk in Construction: What Executives Can Do to Speed up Customer Payments

    Massachusetts Federal Court Rejects Adria Towers, Finds Construction Defects Not an “Occurrence”

    Environmental Roundup – April 2019

    Christopher Leise Recognized by US News – Best Lawyers 2022 "Lawyer of the Year"

    Amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 – Expert Testimony

    Court Says No to Additional Lawyer in Las Vegas Fraud Case

    Third Circuit Holds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Despite Insured’s Expectations

    Construction Robots 2023

    Fraud and Construction Contracts- Like Oil and Water?

    Congratulations to Partner Nicole Whyte on Receiving the Marcus M. Kaufman Jurisprudence Award

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

    Rio Olympic Infrastructure Costs of $2.3 Billion Are Set to Rise

    Not so Fast! How Does Revoking Acceleration of a Note Impact the Statute of Limitations?

    A Word to the Wise about Construction Defects

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

    Know your Obligations: Colorado’s Statutory Expansions of the Implied Warranty of Habitability Are Now in Effect

    1 De Haro: A Case Study on Successful Cross-Laminated Timber Design and Construction in San Francisco

    Melissa Dewey Brumback Invited Into Claims & Litigation Management Alliance Membership

    New York Court Rejects Owner’s Bid for Additional Insured Coverage

    Developer Africa Israel Wins a Round in New York Condominium Battle
    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. Drawing 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

    Counsel Investigating Coverage Can be Sued for Invasion of Privacy

    January 28, 2019 —
    In Strawn v. Morris, Polich & Purdy (No. A150562, filed 1/4/19), a California appeals court held that policyholders could state a claim for invasion of privacy against an insurer’s coverage counsel and law firm, where the counsel had disseminated inadvertently produced tax returns to forensic accountants while evaluating coverage. In Strawn, a couple’s home was destroyed by fire and the husband was prosecuted for arson, but the criminal case was dropped. Notwithstanding, their insurance claim was denied on the ground that the husband intentionally set the fire and fraudulently concealed his actions. In addition to the insurance company, the insureds also named the carrier’s coverage counsel and his firm in the ensuing bad faith lawsuit, alleging causes of action for elder financial abuse and invasion of privacy. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Plehat Brings Natural Environments into Design Tools

    May 01, 2019 —
    Natural elements are an essential part of the built environment. However, BIM tools offer almost no support to landscape architecture. Plehat is introducing a new solution that helps architects and decision-makers to understand the dynamics of nature and make smart design choices. Plehat used photogrammetric 3D models of Uunisaari islands, to the south of Helsinki. The experimenters modeled the buildings and the plants on the island and used game engine software to create a virtual reality (VR) experience. They called the app the “Landscape Time Machine”. The technology solution they developed paved the way for new software that the company will launch later this year. In 2018, Plehat, a landscape design startup, received funding from the Finnish national KIRA-digi digitalization project to carry out a test. The experimentation demonstrated how seasonal changes and weather conditions affect plants, and how the environment can be visualized and analyzed virtually. 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

    California Condo Architects Not Liable for Construction Defects?

    May 13, 2014 —
    Law360 reported that attorneys for the architects of a San Francisco, California condominium complex told the California Supreme Court that the designers “can’t be held liable for construction defects that caused units to overheat” and urged “the panel to reverse a lower court's ruling that the architects owed a duty of care to the condos’ buyers.” The California appeals court ruling was based on California’s Right to Repair Act, however, “that law doesn’t apply to condo conversions.” The architects argued that since Beacon was “designed and originally rolled out as rental apartments before the units were sold as condos” the Right to Repair Act doesn’t apply. However, Beacon Residential Community Association’s attorney Robert Riggs of Katzoff & Riggs “argued that the architects had a ‘cradle to grave’ involvement in the development of the Beacon.” Riggs stated, “They designed a very large building with essentially no ventilation system, along with windows that don't open.” According to Law360, “[t]he justices took the arguments under submission and did not indicate which way they would rule.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Shifting the Risk of Delay by Having Float Go Your Way

    July 05, 2021 —
    Critical path delay plays a central role in allocating responsibility for project delay. The interrelated concept of concurrency is also frequently determinative of entitlement on a range of claims including by owners for liquidated damages and by contractors for delay damages. What constitutes critical/concurrent delay, however, is hotly debated by scheduling experts. The lack of real consensus regarding how critical/concurrent delay should be determined and analyzed has created significant uncertainty in scheduling disputes. Indeed, courts have adopted differing and at times conflicting theories of concurrency that can produce divergent outcomes for the parties. In an effort to reduce uncertainty, stakeholders have increasingly adopted specialized contractual provisions and scheduling techniques which have significant implications for the evaluation of the companion concepts of criticality and concurrency. One such mechanism is float sequestration. Regardless of whether float sequestration is ultimately in the construction industry’s broader interest, stakeholders must be able to recognize its use and appreciate the implications for delay disputes on their projects. Simply defined, float is the number of days an activity can be delayed before affecting the project’s critical path (i.e., the longest chain of activities which determines the project’s minimal duration). Typically, only delays affecting the critical path can produce concurrent delay. Consequently, the concept of float is integral to understanding and resolving issues of both criticality and concurrency. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher J. Brasco, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald, LLP and Matthew D. Baker, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald, LLP Mr. Brasco may be contacted at cbrasco@watttieder.com Mr. Baker may be contacted at mbaker@watttieder.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Privilege Is All Mine: California Appellate Court Finds Law Firm Holds Attorney Work Product Privilege Applicable to Documents Created by Formerly Employed Attorney

    June 29, 2017 —
    In Tucker Ellis LLP v. Superior Court (A148956 – Filed 6/21/2017), the First Appellate District held that (1) the holder of the attorney work product privilege is the employer law firm rather than the former employee attorney who created the privileged documents while a firm employee, and (2) as a result, the firm did not owe a duty to obtain the former attorney’s permission before disclosing the subject documents to third parties. In Tucker Ellis LLP, the attorney, while still employed by Tucker Ellis, exchanged a series of e-mails with a consultant retained by the firm to assist in asbestos litigation for a client. The firm also entered into an agreement with the consultant to summarize scientific studies on the causes of mesothelioma in a published review article. After the attorney departed the firm, Tucker Ellis was served with a subpoena in connection with a matter pending in Kentucky for the production of communications with the consultant regarding the article. In response, Tucker Ellis, in relevant part, produced the work product e-mails authored by the former attorney. The e-mails eventually ended up on the Internet and reached over 50 asbestos plaintiffs’ attorneys, resulting in the attorney’s termination from his new firm. After Tucker Ellis ignored the attorney’s “claw-back” letter, he filed suit against the firm for negligence, among other causes of action. The trial court granted the former attorney’s motion for summary adjudication on the issue of duty, reasoning that the firm owed the attorney a legal duty to prevent the disclosure of the work product. Tucker Ellis filed a petition for a writ of mandate with the Court of Appeal challenging the trial court’s decision on the duty issue. 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

    Draft Federal Legislation Reinforces Advice to Promptly Notify Insurers of COVID-19 Losses

    April 20, 2020 —
    Insurers across the country are nearly universally denying claims for business interruption stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic. Those denials have in turn been met with swift litigation and potential legislative action. The first business interruption coverage lawsuit related to COVID-19 was filed in New Orleans on March 16. There are now no less than 13 such cases nationwide and many more are likely to follow. Further, legislatures in at least seven states are considering legislation that would, to varying degrees, mandate business interruption coverage for COVID-19 losses, notwithstanding any seemingly contrary policy provisions. From the early stages of the pandemic, we have consistently advised our clients to promptly notify their insurers of all COVID-19 related losses, even where coverage appeared uncertain. The deluge of coverage litigation and contemplated legislation could drastically alter how insurers handle COVID-19 claims. But policyholders who have failed to satisfy policy notice requirements could miss out on the benefits of those changes. Therefore, policyholders would be ill-advised to sit on the sidelines and wait it out. Now, draft Federal legislation appears to add further impetus to instructions to “tender early.” The contemplated “Pandemic Risk Insurance Act of 2020” would reportedly devote billions of dollars of federal funds through a Department of Treasury administered reinsurance program designed to offset losses sustained by insurers who actually pay business interruption losses. The legislation is still taking shape but would reportedly create “a Federal program that provides for a transparent system of shared public and private compensation for business interruption losses resulting from a pandemic or outbreak of communicable disease.” President Trump is also reportedly pressuring insurers to provide business interruption coverage. The massive influx of federal funds and pressure from the White House could encourage insurers to reconsider denials of COVID-19 business interruption claims. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James Hultz, Newmeyer Dillion
    Mr. Hultz may be contacted at james.hultz@ndlf.com

    Defective Panels Threatening Profit at China Solar Farms: Energy

    January 21, 2015 —
    Flaws found in some Chinese solar panels can drastically eat into their efficiency, reducing how much power the panels will produce as the country races to meet aggressive goals to hold the line on fossil fuel emissions. The defects, found in products set to be used only in China, are in a coating that suppresses reflections on glass, allowing the panels to capture more light. About 23 percent of samples taken from dozens of Chinese companies failed to meet requirements, according to regulators in China. For samples from Jiangsu, the eastern province where much of the glass is made, the rate was as high as 40 percent. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg News

    Settlement Reached in Bridge Failure Lawsuit

    December 11, 2013 —
    Officials claimed the failure of a bridge in Afton Township, Illinois was because trucks owned by Welded Construction used the bridge despite exceeding the bridge’s weight limit of 36.5 tons. The firm argued that they should be responsible for the depreciated cost of the bridge, not its replacement cost. Welded Construction had been using the bridge to get to the site of an oil pipeline construction project for Enbridge Energy. Replacement of the bridge was initially estimated at $933,000, but that was in advance of any design work. Enbridge Energy settled the case at $900,000, which should cover most or all of the cost of repair or replacement. Some federal funds may also be available for repairing or constructing a new bridge. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of