BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut structural concrete 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


    Settlement Reached in California Animal Shelter Construction Defect Case

    Don’t Be Lazy with Your Tenders

    Ten Years After Colorado’s Adverse Possession Amendment: a brief look backwards and forwards

    Garlock Five Years Later: Recent Decisions Illustrate Ongoing Obstacles to Asbestos Trust Transparency

    John O’Meara is Selected as America’s Top 100 Civil Defense Litigators

    Build Me A Building As Fast As You Can

    Napa Quake, Flooding Cost $4 Billion in U.S. in August

    Virginia Chinese Drywall “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and number of “occurrences”

    Because I Haven’t Mentioned Mediation Lately. . .

    Contractual Setoff and Application When Performance Bond Buys Out of its Exposure

    In a Win for Design Professionals, California Court of Appeals Holds That Relation-Back Doctrine Does Not Apply to Certificate of Merit Law

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Tightens Requirements for Co-Worker Affidavits in Asbestos Cases

    Florida Death Toll Rises by Three, Reaching 27 as Search Resumes

    Are Millennials Finally Moving Out On Their Own?

    The 411 on the New 415 Location of the Golden State Warriors

    Apartment Construction Increasing in Colorado while Condo Construction Remains Slow

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

    Conditional Judgment On Replacement Costs Awarded

    Commerce City Enacts Reform to Increase For-Sale Multifamily Housing

    Claim Preclusion: The Doctrine Everyone Thinks They Know But No One Really Knows What it Means in Practice

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Motion for Remand

    A Court-Side Seat: Waters, Walls and Pipelines

    Illinois Court Addresses Coverage Owed For Subcontractor’s Defective Work

    Construction Employment Rose in 38 States from 2013 to 2014

    Ambiguous Application Questions Preclude Summary Judgment on Rescission Claim

    Coverage Rejected Under Owned Property and Alienated Property Exclusions

    Construction Laborers Sue Contractors Over Wage Theft

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

    Read the Property Insurance Policy to be Sure You are Complying with Post Loss Obligations

    St. Mary & St. John Coptic Orthodox Church v. SBS Insurance Services, Inc.

    EPA Fines Ivory Homes for Storm Water Pollution

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Clarifies Standard for Imposing Spoliation Sanctions

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: The Duty to Defend

    Motion for Summary Judgment Gets Pooped Upon

    Counter the Rising Number of Occupational Fatalities in Construction

    'Right to Repair' and Fixing Equipment in a Digital Age

    Failure to Meet Code Case Remanded to Lower Court for Attorney Fees

    Arezoo Jamshidi Selected to the 2023 San Diego Super Lawyers List

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: LESLIE KING O'NEAL

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    The ‘Sole Option’ Arbitration Provision in Construction Contracts

    Colorado Court of Appeals Enforces Limitations of Liability In Pre-Homeowner Protection Act Contracts

    Insurer's Daubert Challenge to Insured's Expert Partially Successful

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

    Wave Breaker: How a Living Shoreline Will Protect a Florida Highway and Oyster Bed

    Addressing the Defective Stucco Crisis

    Resolve to Say “No” This Year

    What You Need to Know to Protect the Project Against Defect Claims

    Auditor: Prematurely Awarded Contracts Increased Honolulu Rail Cost by $354M

    Court Narrowly Interprets “Faulty Workmanship” Provision
    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

    Insurer Wrongfully Denies Coverage When Household Member Fails to Submit to EUO

    May 06, 2024 —
    The court determined that coverage for a loss by fire could not be denied when the insured's son failed to appear for a examination under oath (EUO). Adekola v. Allstate Vehicle & Prop. Ins. Co., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27125 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 16, 2024). Plaintiff had a homeowners policy with Allstate. Plaintiff - Michele Adekola - was the named insured under the policy. After the fire, Allstate provided payments for temporary housing. Allstate requested examinations under oath of Plaintiff and her son, Nico. Plaintiff and her son were examined by Zoom. Allstate then sought to examine Plaintiff's other son, Lemmeco, but these efforts were unsuccessful. Allstate then stopped paying for Plaintiff's temporary housing and informed Plaintiff that Lemmeco's failure to participate in an EUO was a material breach of duties under the policy and the breach was prejudicial to Allstate. Allstate further contended that Lemmeco had a duty to submit to an EUO. 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

    Survey Finds Tough Labor Market Top-of-mind for Busy Georgia Contractors

    July 30, 2019 —
    In February 2019, the results of the third Annual Georgia Construction Outlook Survey were released. The survey respondents includes general contractors (44%), specialty contractors (53%) and heavy contractors (3%) with gross revenue size that ranged from in excess of $1 billion to less than $5 million. Three-quarters of respondents reported revenues of less than $25 million. Here’s what they had to say about the state of construction in Georgia. Financial Performance and 2019 Outlook It was no surprise to see the majority of respondents reporting increased revenues and margins in 2018. Average gross margins from all respondents increased to 11.3%, up from 9.33% in the prior year. Overall, 72% of respondents saw their gross margins increase and/or remain the same. The largest decrease in margins was seen in the heavy contractor sector, with 33% of respondents reporting a decrease in margins. When it comes to backlog, Georgia is seeing a record number of months in the pipeline and 57% of respondents reported higher backlogs than in the previous year. The increase in backlog helps explain why 84% of respondents are expecting increase in revenues in 2019 over 2018. Interestingly, of those expecting increase in revenue, 40% are anticipating an increase of more than 10% from the prior year. So, the overall financial health of Georgia contractors looks to remain strong at least through 2019. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Hazy, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Hazy may be contacted at scott.hazy@btcpa.net

    Expert Medical Science Causation Testimony Improperly Excluded under Daubert; ID of Sole Cause of Medical Condition Not Required

    April 15, 2014 —
    On April 4, 2014, in Messick v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's summary judgment in favor of Defendant Pharmaceutical Corporation because the district court improperly excluded expert testimony. The three-judge panel held that the district court erred by excluding causation testimony offered by Plaintiff's expert it found to be irrelevant and unreliable. Plaintiff was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2000. In response to her development of osteoporosis after chemotherapy, Plaintiff treated with the drug Zometa for several months in 2002. Zometa is a bisphosphonate, a class of drug commonly used to treat multiple myeloma. Such drugs are generally used to reduce or eliminate the possibility of skeletal-related degeneration and injuries to which cancer patients are particularly susceptible. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation produces Zometa, which was approved by the FDA in 2001 and 2002. In 2005 after encountering issues with her jaw, it was discovered that Plaintiff had osteonecrosis near three of her teeth. The oral specialists treating Plaintiff did so under the assumption that she was suffering from bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw ("BRONJ"), a condition recognized by the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons ("AAOMS"). Plaintiff's BRONJ healed in 2008 - three years after beginning treatment. Thereafter, Plaintiff brought suit against Novartis for strict products liability, negligent manufacture, negligent failure to warn, breach of express and implied warranty, and loss of consortium. In support of her claims, Plaintiff offered her expert's testimony on ONJ and BRONJ, and on the causal link between plaintiff's bisphosphonate treatment and later development of BRONJ. Novartis filed a Daubert motion to exclude the specific causation testimony of Plaintiff's experts and a motion seeking summary judgment. The district court granted both motions on the basis that Plaintiff's expert testimony was irrelevant and unreliable. Reprinted courtesy of R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Whitney L. Stefko, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com; Ms. Stefko may be contacted at wstefko@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    City of Birmingham Countersues Contractor for Incomplete Work

    March 12, 2014 —
    Back in December of 2013, WVTM News reported that Chris Woods, a contractor, filed a lawsuit against the City of Birmingham, Alabama, demanding $1.5 million for the West Police Precinct and two other projects he had been contracted on. However, “Birmingham claimed Woods was fired for not completing projects on time and other contract breaches.” On March 7th, WVTM News reported that the City of Birmingham has filed a counterclaim against Woods, alleging that he “owes $1.2 million for incomplete work.” The city listed his “inability to meet specific construction deadlines and finish either project on time as factors for his termination.” Woods, however, blamed the city for delays, citing multiple design changes requested by Birmingham. The city’s counterclaim also alleged that “Star Insurance Company, ‘identified major, numerous defects in the work that Woods had performed prior to the termination of the West Precinct Project.’” Read the full story, December 2013 Article... Read the full story, March 2014 Article... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    There’s Still No Amazon for Housing, But Fintech’s Working on It

    February 14, 2022 —
    It’s hard to imagine a better scenario for real estate technology than the one that played out in 2021. Low interest rates and pent-up demand ignited the hottest housing market on record, while the pandemic gave buyers and sellers new reasons to conduct business virtually. And yet the year will be better remembered for the way some of the biggest names in the industry struggled. The highest-profile flop was Zillow Group Inc., the online listings giant that pulled the plug on its nascent instant homebuying operation in the face of mounting losses. Compass Inc., the tech-driven real estate brokerage, saw its shares plummet 50% as part of a broader selloff in property-related technology stocks. Better, an online mortgage company, fired 9% of its staff. The bumpy year underscored a problem that’s been holding back the adoption of technology in real estate for the past two decades. Each sale of a home involves hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars, and no two properties are exactly alike. Silicon Valley-backed companies have gone a long way in making searching for homes and advertising them simpler and faster. But it’s a difficult process to move fully online and involves a lot of people such as agents, appraisers, brokers, and contractors, as well as entrenched interests. For example, Zillow’s house buying business—billed as a way for customers to get out of their homes quickly and speed the moving process—faltered in part because the company couldn’t find enough contractors to fix up those homes to resell them. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Clark, Bloomberg

    Insureds' Summary Judgment Motion on Mold Limitation Denied

    November 10, 2016 —
    The insureds' motion for partial summary judgment on the applicability of the homeowner's mold limitation was denied. R.W.& R. v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 2016 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 131586 (W.D. Wash. Sept. 26, 2016). The policy imposed a $5,000 limit on losses caused by mold. Plaintiffs discovered that their dishwasher was leaking and reported the loss to Liberty. Liberty's contractor concluded that the bottom of the dishwasher had rusted out, causing water to seep into parts of the kitchen and the laundry/utility room below. The contractor used dehumidifiers to extract moisture from the affected areas and removed damaged cabinetry, drywall and tiling. The contractor discovered mold that it believed predated the dishwasher leak. Although the contractor took steps to remove the mold, its dehumidification efforts exacerbated the problem by dispersing mold spores throughout portions of the house. 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

    Pollution Created by Business Does Not Deprive Insured of Coverage

    November 26, 2014 —
    The federal district court determined that coverage was properly denied under the pollution exclusion of the policies. Headwaters Resources, Inc. v. Illinois Union Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20060 (10th Cir. Oct. 20, 2014). Over 400 residents of Chesapeake, Virginia, filed two lawsuits against the insured, Headwaters, alleged property damage and bodily injury due to pollution generated in connection with the development of a golf course. The complaints alleged that between 2002 and 2007, the defendants used 1.5 million tons of toxic fly ash during construction of a golf course. The insured allegedly transported the fly ash to an open pit adjacent to residential neighborhoods. The chemicals from the fly ash leached into the ground water, damaging the private wells. The fly ash pit also released airborne contaminants that produced a strong smell of ammonia. As a result of the alleged contamination, the property values of plaintiffs' homes depreciated and members of the community faced increased risk of serious bodily injuries caused by exposure to the fly ash. 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

    Suppliers of Inherently Dangerous Raw Materials Remain Excluded from the Protections of the Component Parts Doctrine

    December 02, 2015 —
    In Brady v. Calsol, Inc. 2015 No. B262028, the California Court of Appeal, Second District, reversed summary judgment for a raw materials supplier where there was a triable issue of fact as to whether the benzene levels contained in the supplier’s mineral spirits could have caused plaintiffs’ leukemia. Plaintiffs were mechanics Ernest Brady and David Gibbs, who used Safety-Kleen solvent to degrease automotive parts. Brady and Gibbs were diagnosed with leukemia allegedly caused by exposure to Safety-Kleen solvent during the course of their employment. In 2008, Plaintiffs sued Calsol, Inc., a distributor of mineral spirits for the ultimate manufacturer, Safety-Kleen Systems, Inc. Plaintiffs asserted negligence and strict products liability claims. Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that benzene, a carcinogen found in mineral spirits, caused their leukemia. Benzene is only carcinogenic to humans at certain levels. The parties dispute the levels of benzene found in the mineral spirits supplied to Safety-Kleen. Calsol contended the benzene levels were present only in low concentrations. Plaintiffs alleged the benzene levels were capable of causing injury. Reprinted courtesy of Leah B. Mason, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Michael J. Worth, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Mason may be contacted at lmason@hbblaw.com Mr. Worth may be contacted at mworth@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of