BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut delay claim 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


    Chambers USA Names Peckar & Abramson to Band 1 Level in Construction Law; 29 P&A Lawyers Recognized as Leading Attorneys; Six Regions and Government Contracts Practice Recognized

    New Jersey Appellate Decision Reminds Bid Protestors to Take Caution When Determining Where to File an Action

    24th Annual West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar A Success

    Court of Appeals Discusses Implied Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Public Works Contracting

    Construction Law Advisory: Mechanical Contractor Scores Victory in Prevailing Wage Dispute

    Augmented and Mixed Reality in Construction

    Suffolk Construction Drywall Suits Involve Claim for $3 Million in Court Costs

    Construction Defects in Roof May Close School

    Incorrect Information Provided on Insurance Application Defeats Claim for Coverage

    Construction Defect Lawsuits May Follow Hawaii Condo Boom

    Video: Contractors’ Update on New Regulations Governing Commercial Use of Drones

    Traub Lieberman Partner Gregory S. Pennington and Associate Emily A. Velcamp Obtain Summary Judgment in Favor of Residential Property Owners

    No Escape: California Court of Appeals Gives a Primary CGL Insurer’s “Other Insurance” Clause Two Thumbs Down

    Embracing Generative Risk Mitigation in Construction

    No Coverage For Construction Defects Under Alabama Law

    Brown Act Modifications in Response to Coronavirus Outbreak

    Court Sharpens The “Sword” And Strengthens The “Shield” Of Contractors’ License Law

    CalOSHA Updates its FAQ on its COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Regulations

    Duty to Defend Triggered by Damage to Other Non-Defective Property

    A New Study: Unexpected Overtime is Predictable and Controllable

    Environmental and Regulatory Law Update: New Federal and State Rulings

    Three's a Trend: Second, Fourth and Ninth Circuits Uphold Broad "Related Claims" Language

    The COVID-19 Impact: Navigating the Legal Landscape’s New Normal

    Contractor Sentenced to Seven Years for Embezzling $3 Million

    Negligent Misrepresentation in Sale of Building Altered without Permits

    Cape Town Seeks World Cup Stadium Construction Collusion Damages

    Blue-Sky Floods Take a Rising Toll for Businesses

    Landmark Towers Association, Inc. v. UMB Bank, N.A. or: One Bad Apple Spoils the Whole Bunch

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

    Hawaii Supreme Court Construes Designated Premises Endorsement In Insured's Favor

    Ohio Court Refuses to Annualize Multi-Year Policies’ Per Occurrence Limits

    CGL Policy May Not Cover Cybersecurity and Data-Related Losses

    My Employees Could Have COVID-19. What Now?

    What ‘The Curse’ Gets Wrong About Passive House Architecture

    Unqualified Threat to Picket a Neutral is Unfair Labor Practice

    Fungi, Wet Rot, Dry Rot and "Virus": One of These Things is Not Like the Other

    Does “Faulty Workmanship” Constitute An Occurrence Under Your CGL Policy?

    Florida Issues Emergency Fraud Prevention Rule to Protect Policyholders in Wake of Catastrophic Storms

    ASCE Statement on Passing of Senator Dianne Feinstein

    No Bad Faith In Filing Interpleader

    Athletic Trainers Help Workers Get Back to the Jobsite and Stay Healthy After Injury

    Haight Welcomes Robert S. Rucci

    Build Back Better Includes Historic Expansion of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program

    Hirer Liable for Injury to Subcontractor’s Employee Due to Failure to Act, Not Just Affirmative Acts, Holds Court of Appeal

    Massachusetts High Court to Decide if Insurers Can Recoup Defense Costs

    WSHB Secures Victory in Construction Defect Case: Contractor Wins Bench Trial

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

    2021 Real Estate Trends: New Year, New Reality—A Day of Reckoning for Borrowers and Tenants

    Termination for Convenience Clauses: Maybe More Than Just Convenience

    Court Upholds Plan to Eliminate Vehicles from Balboa Park Complex
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    The Independent Tort Doctrine (And Its Importance)

    October 24, 2022 —
    A non-construction raises an important legal principle. Here it is because it applies to construction disputes. It actually applies to many business-type disputes. It is based on what is widely referred to as the independent tort doctrine: Florida law does not allow a party damaged by a breach of contract to recover exactly the same contract damages via a tort claim. “It is a fundamental, long-standing common law principle that a plaintiff may not recover in tort for a contract dispute unless the tort is independent of any breach of contract. A plaintiff bringing both a breach of contract and a tort claim must allege, in addition to the breach of contract, “some other conduct amounting to an independent tort.” Bedoyan v. Samra, 47 Fla.L.Weekly D1955a (Fla. 3d 2022) (internal citations omitted). 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

    Connecticut Supreme Court Further Refines Meaning of "Collapse"

    January 13, 2020 —
    Connecticut courts have been inundated with collapse cases the past couple of years due to insureds' living in homes that were constructed with defective concrete manufactured by J.J. Mottes Concrete Company. In a duo of cases, the Connecticut Supreme Court responded to a certified question from the U.S. District Court, holding that collapse required that the building be in imminent danger of falling down. Vera v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 2019 Conn. LEXIS 339 (Conn. Nov. 12, 2019). Plaintiffs had resided in their home since 2009. The home was built in 1993. In August 2015, after learning about the problem of crumbling basement walls affecting homes in their community due to cement manufactured by Mottes, they retained a structural engineer to evaluate their basement walls. The engineer found spider web cracking approximately 1/16 of an inch wide in the basement walls and three small vertical cracks. There were no visible signs of bowing. The engineer did not find that the walls were in imminent danger of falling down, but recommended that the basement walls be replaced. Plaintiffs submitted a claim under their homeowners policy to Liberty Mutual. The claim was denied. The policy did not define collapse, but stated that collapse did not include "settling, cracking, shrinking, bulging or expansion." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Clarifies Pennsylvania’s Strict Liability Standard

    January 14, 2015 —
    In Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., -- A.3d --, 2014 WL 6474923 (Pa. Nov. 19, 2014), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania discussed the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s products liability law and, overturning prior precedent, clarified the law. In particular, the Court, overturned Azzarello v. Black Brothers Company, 480 Pa. 547, 391 A.2d 1020 (1978), clarified the role of the judge and the jury in products liability cases and settled the question of whether Pennsylvania would adopt the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability §§ 1, et. seq. (Third Restatement) as the standard for deciding Pennsylvania products liability cases. The Tincher decision makes clear that Pennsylvania will continue to apply § 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts (Second Restatement) in products liability cases and that jurors, not the court, will decide the question of whether a product is in a defective condition. Plaintiffs may prove that a product is defective using either the consumer expectations test or the risk-utility test. Background The Tincher case arose out a fire that occurred at the home of Terrance and Judith Tincher on June 20, 2007. The Tinchers alleged that the fire started when a lightning strike near their home caused a small puncture in corrugated steel tubing (CSST) carrying natural gas to a fireplace located in their home. The defendant, Omega Flex, Inc. (Omega Flex) manufactured the CSST. Reprinted courtesy of William Doerler, White and Willams LLP and Edward Jaeger, Jr., White and Williams LLP Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com; Mr. Jaeger may be contacted at jaegere@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Mobile Home Owners Not a Class in Drainage Lawsuit

    March 01, 2012 —

    Comparing it to a “complex construction defect action,” the California Court of Appeals for Orange County has rejected the claims of a group of mobile home owners that they should be certified as a class in their lawsuit against Huntington Shorecliffs Mobilehome Park. The Appeals court sustained the judgment of the lower court. The court issued a decision in the case of Criswell v. MMR Family LLC on January 17, 2012.

    The claims made by the group were that the owners and operators of the mobile home park had known of an “on-going and potentially worsening shallow groundwater condition on the property” and had “exacerbated the problem by changing ‘the configuration and drainage related to the hillside that abuts’ the park.” The homeowners claimed that the class should consist of “any past or current homeowner during the same time frame” who had experienced “the accumulation of mold, fungus, and/or other toxins,” “property damage to his/her mobilehome and/or other property resulting from drainage problems, water seepage, water accumulation, moisture build-up, mold, fungus, and/or other toxins,” emotional distress related to drainage problems or mold, and finally health problems “resulting from exposure to drainage problems, water seepage, water accumulation, moisture build-up, mold, fungus, and/or other toxins, in or around one’s home, lot, or common areas of the park.”

    The lower court concluded that while the limits of the class were identifiable, they failed to constitute a class in other ways. First, the people affected were small enough in number that they could be brought together. They “are not so numerous that it would be impracticable to bring them all before the Court.”

    The court noted that while many of the homeowners would have issues in common, they did not find “a well-defined community of interest among the class members.” The Appeals Court wrote that “the individual issues affecting each mobile home and homeowner will predominate over the common issue of the presence of standing or pooling water in and around the park.” The court noted that each home would be affected differently by water and “the ‘accumulation of mold, fungus, and/or other toxins.’”

    While the court conceded that there would be common issues, such as the “defendants’ alleged concealment of excess moisture conditions and their allegedly negligent roadwork and landscaping,” they noted that “these common issues would be swamped by the swarm of individual determinations of property damage, emotional distress, and personal injury.” The Appeals Court cited an earlier case that ruled against certification “if a class action ‘will splinter into individual trials.’” The court affirmed the judgment of the lower court that they could not proceed as a class.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Appeals Court Affirms Carrier’s Duty to Pay Costs Taxed Against Insured in Construction Defect Suit

    November 03, 2016 —
    One of the key reasons for builders to maintain liability insurance is to cover the cost of hiring defense counsel and paying litigation costs in the event of a construction defect lawsuit. If a builder loses a lawsuit, it will typically be responsible for paying the plaintiff’s litigation costs. Today, the Colorado Court of Appeals clarified that the “supplementary payments” section of a standard Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurance policy covers such costs, even if the carrier has reserved the right to dispute whether it has a duty to indemnify the actual damages awarded. This may seem counter-intuitive, insofar as a carrier may owe costs even if it does not cover the underlying loss, but the court’s decision is consistent with the plain language of the CGL form that most carriers use. Reprinted courtesy of Jesse Howard Witt, The Witt Law Firm Mr. Witt may be contacted at his website www.witt.law Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Industry Groups Challenge DOL’s New DBRA Regulations

    December 16, 2023 —
    Less than a month after taking effect, the Department of Labor’s (“DOL”) broad changes to the regulations implementing Davis-Bacon and Related Acts (“DBRA”) are facing legal challenges in two federal courts. These newly-filed lawsuits could change things for those trying to navigate the new regulatory landscape. Contractors on DBRA-covered contracts should keep an eye out for developments. On October 23, 2023, DOL’s final rule updating the regulations implementing DBRA became effective. The first major overhaul of its kind in forty years, the final rule made sweeping changes to the regulations governing payment of prevailing wages on most federally-funded construction contracts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bret Marfut, Seyfarth
    Mr. Marfut may be contacted at bmarfut@seyfarth.com

    CFTC Establishes Climate-Risk Unit, Echoing Other Biden Administration Agency Themes

    April 12, 2021 —
    On March 17, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC or Commission) joined other federal agencies led by Biden Administration appointees in ramping up consideration of climate-related risks in matters under the Commission’s jurisdiction. Stressing the need for a climate-resilient financial system, the CFTC’s new Climate-Risk Unit (CRU) will focus on “the role of derivatives in understanding, pricing, and addressing climate-related risk and transitioning to a low-carbon economy.” Formation of the CRU will accelerate the CFTC’s “engagement in support of industry-led and market-driven processes in the climate – and the larger ESG – space critical to ensuring that new products and markets fairly facilitate hedging, price discovery, market transparency, and capital allocation.” As with similar programs launched by the Securities and Exchange Commission (see our previous alert from March 19), businesses affected by the CFTC’s new initiative should consider active engagement to ensure informed and appropriate approaches are included in any new regulations, policies, or frameworks governing climate-related issues. 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

    Condominium's Agent Owes No Duty to Injured Apartment Owner

    August 28, 2023 —
    The court granted the agent's motion to dismiss claims asserted by a condominium owner's claim for injuries due to a fire in his unit. Great Am. Allliance Ins. Co. v. Village Gardens Homeowners Association, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102900 (C.D. Calif. June 12, 2023). Village Gardens' agent, Roy Palacios Insurance Company, obtained umbrella and excess policies from Great American for apartment buildings located on the property. In obtaining the policies, Village Gardens represented to Great American through Palacios that the property's roof, HVAC, plumbing and electrical systems had been updated. On Febaruary 16, 2019, the apartment in which Vicencio Flores resided caught fire, causing him to suffer severe burns. Flores alleged that the fire was caused by Village Gardens' "improper construction, use of poor construction materials and negligent maintenance of the property." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com