BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design 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


    Industrialized Construction News 7/2022

    Attorney's Erroneous Conclusion that Limitations Period Had Not Expired Was Not Grounds For Relief Under C.C.P. § 473(b)

    Environmental Roundup – April 2019

    Specific Performance: Equitable Remedy to Enforce Affirmative Obligation

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/17/24) – Housing Inflation to Remain High, Proptech Investment to Fall and Office Vacancy Rates to Reach Peak in 2025

    Sensors for Smarter Construction – Interview with Laura Kassovic of MbientLab

    Ready, Fire, Aim: The Importance of Targeting Your Delay Notices

    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    Homeowner Sues Brick Manufacturer for Spalling Bricks

    “Bee” Careful: Unique Considerations When Negotiating a Bee Storage Lease Agreement

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

    The Association of Southern California Defense Counsel (ASCDC) and the Construction Defect Claims Managers Association (CDMA) Annual Construction Defect Seminar

    Contingent Business Interruption Claim Denied

    No Bond, No Recovery: WA Contractors Must Comply With WA Statutory Requirements Or Risk Being Barred From Recovery If Their Client Refuses To Pay

    Concurrent Causation Doctrine Applies Where Natural and Man-made Perils Combine to Create Loss

    Home Prices Expected to Increase All Over the U.S.

    New York Appellate Court Holds Insurer’s Failure to Defend Does Not Constitute a “Reasonable Excuse” Required to Overturn Judgment

    Modernist Houses Galore! [visual candy for architects]

    California’s Fifth Appellate District Declares the “Right to Repair Act” the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    Jury's Verdict for Loss Caused by Collapse Overturned

    Thieves Stole Backhoe for Use in Bank Heist

    Living With a Millennial. Or Grandma.

    Topic 606: A Retrospective Review of Revenue from Contracts with Customers

    When Brad Pitt Tried to Save the Lower Ninth Ward

    City of Sacramento Approves Kings NBA Financing Plan

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    Changes to Judicial Selection in Mexico Create a New Case for Contractual ADR Provisions

    Death, Taxes and Attorneys’ Fees in Construction Disputes

    Florida Legislative Change Extends Completed Operations Tail for Condominium Projects

    Over 70 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 4th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    Cyber Security Insurance and Design Professionals

    S&P Near $1 Billion Mortgage Ratings Settlement With U.S.

    Thanks to All for the 2024 Super Lawyers Nod!

    Cherokee Nation Wins Summary Judgment in COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim

    Construction Defects and Second Buyers in Pennsylvania

    Western Specialty Contractors Branches in San Francisco and Cleveland Take Home Top Industry Honors

    California Court of Appeal Holds a Tenant Owes No Duty to Protect a Social Guest From a Defective Sidewalk Leading to a Condominium Unit

    Over a Hundred Thousand Superstorm Sandy Cases Re-Opened

    Gloria Gaynor Sues Contractor over Defective Deck Construction

    Code Changes Pave Way for CLT in Tall Buildings and Spark Flammability Debate

    Supply Chain Delay Recommendations

    Pennsylvania Mechanics’ Lien “Waivers” and “Releases”: What’s the Difference?

    Update Regarding New York’s New Registration Requirement for Contractors and Subcontractors Performing Public Works and Covered Private Projects

    10 Safety Tips for General Contractors

    General Contractor Intervening to Compel Arbitration Per the Subcontract

    Wyoming Supreme Court Picks a Side After Reviewing the Sutton Rule

    Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Insurance Bad Faith Trials

    New Research Shows Engineering Firms' Impact on Economy, Continued Optimism on Business Climate

    Suing a Local Government in Land Use Cases – Part 1 – Substantive Due Process

    Critical Materials for the Energy Transition: Of “Rare Earths” and Even Rarer Minerals
    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

    NY Supreme Court Rules City Not Liable for Defective Sidewalk

    February 12, 2014 —
    Eileen N. Fanning sued the city of Watertown, New York after incurring injuries from a fall on a sidewalk on Court Street, according to the Watertown Daily Times. A state Supreme Court judge dismissed the lawsuit. According to Fanning as reported by the Watertown Daily Times, the plaintiff “fell on an uneven section of sidewalk” and “suffered multiple broken bones in her hand, as well as neurological damage to her arm, among other injuries.” She claimed that the damage is permanent. The lawsuit involved Purcell Construction (the landscape pavers), Neighbors of Watertown (a renovation project), and the city of Watertown. The judge ruled that “Neighbors of Watertown was not liable for her injuries because the agency neither owned nor controlled the property where the injuries occurred and therefore ‘did not owe a duty of care’ to users of the walk as it was not responsible for the sidewalk’s maintenance.” The city was not held liable “because it had received no prior written notice about the alleged defective condition of the property.” Furthermore, the judge “agreed with Purcell Construction’s claim that the area claimed to be defective is ‘one little section’ of sidewalk ‘over which the public walked’ for nearly 20 years.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Miller Act: More Complex than You Think

    October 07, 2016 —
    Keith Bremer, senior partner of Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara LLP, has a feature article in the Fall 2016 issue of Construction Claims Magazine, and discusses how the Miller Act has been slowly changing: “This is a complex piece of legislation that is evolving and has been decided differently depending on the federal district a case is heard in,” Bremer wrote. Bremer explained how the courts continue to rule differently in regards to the Miller Act. “Currently it seems jurisdictions are split on the issue of whether or not subcontractors should be allowed to bring both a federal and state cause of action stemming from payment by a Miller Act bond. Therefore, any surety writing these bonds should pay strict attention to how broad or narrow the federal district that would hear the claim has interpreted the scope of a subcontractor’s remedies for Miller Act claims.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Quick Note: Staying, Not Dismissing, Arbitrable Disputes Under Federal Arbitration Act

    July 31, 2024 —
    As you hopefully know from posted articles, arbitration is a creature of contract. Stated differently, there must be a contractual basis to have a dispute resolved through binding arbitration. The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) applies to transactions involving interstate commerce. Oftentimes, lawsuits are filed despite an arbitration provision in a contract because parties can, if they desire, waive their rights to have their dispute resolved through binding arbitration. In what should not be a shocker, the United States Supreme Court in Smith v. Spizzirri, 144 S.Ct. 1173, 1178 (2024), held that when a federal “district court finds that a lawsuit involves an arbitrable dispute, and a party requests a stay pending arbitration, section 3 of the FAA compels the court to stay the proceeding.” Dismissing the lawsuit should not be the option. Staying the lawsuit should. 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

    Construction Defect Leads to Death, Jury Awards $39 Million

    November 27, 2013 —
    A failure in the installation of a 13-ton concrete panel in Milwaukee County lead to the death of a 15-year-old boy in 201; two others were also injured. A lawsuit over this has concluded with the contractor, Advance Cast Stone, found culpable due to their concealing that the panel was not installed as prescribed. The incident happened at a parking garage operated by the county. Advanced Cast Stone made the claim that the method they used to secure the panel had been approved by other in the project. The jury awarded $6.3 million to the estate of Jared Kellner, $1.5 million each to the young man who was injured, Eric Wosniki, and his parents. The county was also awarded $6 million for lost revenue in the parking garage and for repairs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Norfolk Southern Agrees to $310M Settlement With Feds Over 2023 Ohio Derailment

    June 21, 2024 —
    Norfolk Southern Corp. has agreed to pay more than $310 million and implement safety improvements as part of a settlement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Dept. of Justice over the disastrous February 2023 train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, officials and the company announced May 23. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Highway for Olympics Cuts off Village near Sochi, Russia

    February 07, 2014 —
    A new highway costing $635 million was built in Sochi, Russia to support this month’s Winter Olympic Games—but the “shining” highway has cut off residents of the Village of Akhtyr, according to The Spokesman-Review. The online publication reports that while the Olympics will showcase the “luxury malls, sleek stadiums and high-speed train links, thousands of ordinary people in the Sochi area put up with squalor and environmental waste: villagers living next to an illegal dump filled with Olympic construction waste, families whose homes are sinking into the earth, city dwellers suffering chronic power cuts despite promises to improve electricity.” One of the Sochi residents told KPAX News that what was once a “15-minute walk to get the bus to work has become a two-hour, cross-country trek. Military guards block their way to the rickety footbridge they used to use.” Furthermore, KPAX News claimed, “Heavy construction and traffic have chewed up the road through town and turned it into a dust bowl.” Read the full story at The Spokesman-Review... Read the full story at KPAX News... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Structural Health Check-Ups Needed but Are Too Infrequent

    August 16, 2021 —
    Knowing when a building is structurally deteriorating, and actually doing something about it can be very different things, as the collapse in Surfside, Fla., has shown this month. And while onsite visual inspections are still the common kind of structural assessment, other methods can assess the health of a building or piece of infrastructure and determine its soundness (see p. 69). Reprinted courtesy of Jeff Rubenstone, Engineering News-Record Mr. Rubenstone may be contacted at rubenstonej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Counterpoint: Washington Supreme Court to Rule on Resulting Losses in Insurance Disputes

    September 01, 2011 —

    This is the fourth installment of posts on Vision One v. Philadelphia Indemnity, a Washington Supreme Court case touching on Washington construction and insurance law. After Williams v. Athletic Field got so much coverage, I wished that I had provided a forum for argument on Builders Counsel. While we await that opinion from the Supreme Court, I decided to let a few good writers have at Vision One here on the blog.  Last week, attorney Chris Carr weighed in. Today, insurance expert David Thayer returns to give his final impression. David provided an initial peak at the case earlier this year. Thanks to both Chris and David for contributing to the debate.

    In August 2011 the Washington Supreme Court will rule on a pair of joined cases that involve critical insurance coverage issues. The outcome of the ruling will impact a large swath of policyholders in Washington State including builders, developers, and homeowners to name a few.

    The cases are Vision One vs. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance and Sprague vs. Safeco. The Vision one case comes from Division Two of the Appellate Court which overturned a lower court decision in favor the plaintiff, Vision One. Division Two decided that the collapse of a concrete pour during the course of construction did not constitute a resulting loss due to faulty workmanship. They further went on to redefine efficient proximate cause in a way that is harmful to policyholders by broadening rather than narrowing the meaning of exclusionary language in Philadelphia’s Builders Risk Policy.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

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