BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims 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


    Golf Resorts Offering Yoga, Hovercraft Rides to the Green

    Construction Defect Specialist Joins Kansas City Firm

    Trump Administration Announces New Eviction Moratorium

    What are the Potential Damages when a House is a Lemon?

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/10/23) – Wobbling Real Estate, Booming (and Busting) Construction, and Eye-Watering Insurance Premiums

    No Retrofit without Repurposing in Los Angeles

    Construction Defect Case Not Over, Despite Summary Judgment

    Blackstone Suffers Court Setback in Irish Real Estate Drama

    Congress Relaxes Several PPP Loan Requirements

    A Glimpse Into Post-Judgment Collections and Perhaps the Near Future?

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2022 Top Lawyers!

    How Long does a Florida Condo Association Have to File a Construction Defect Claim?

    Investing in Metaverse Real Estate: Mind the Gap Between Recognized and Realized Potential

    HB 20-1046 - Private Retainage Reform - Postponed Indefinitely

    White and Williams recognized with Multiple Honorees in the Chambers 2023 USA Guide

    Insurer Must Defend Claims of Negligence and Private Nuisance

    Brooklyn’s Industry City to Get $1 Billion Modernization

    Predicting the Future of Texas’s Grid Is a Texas-Sized Challenge

    Construction Spending Drops in March

    Minnesota Supreme Court Dismisses Vikings Stadium Funding Lawsuit

    Construction Is Holding Back the Economy

    Hong Kong Buyers Queue for New Homes After Prices Plunge

    Purely “Compensatory” Debts Owed by Attorneys to Clients (Which Are Not Disciplinary or Punitive Fees Imposed by the State Bar) Are Dischargeable In Bankruptcy

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2023 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    Balestreri Potocki & Holmes Attorneys Named 2020 Super Lawyers and Rising Star

    Sureties do not Issue Bonds Risk-Free to the Bond-Principal

    BWB&O Partners are Recognized as 2022 AV Preeminent Attorneys by Martindale-Hubbell!

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twelve White and Williams Lawyers

    Conditional Judgment On Replacement Costs Awarded

    Jury Convicts Ciminelli, State Official in Bid-Rig Case

    Open & Known Hazards Under the Kinsman Exception to Privette

    Real Property Alert: Recording Notice of Default as Trustee Before Being Formally Made the Trustee Does Not Make Foreclosure Sale Void

    Construction Defects #10 On DBJ’s Top News Stories of 2015

    How Your Disgruntled Client Can Turn Into Your Very Own Car Crash! (and How to Avoid It) (Law Tips)

    Too Late for The Blame Game: Massachusetts Court Holds That the Statute of Repose Barred a Product Manufacturer from Seeking Contribution from a Product Installer

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: The Colorado Court of Appeals’ Decision Protecting a Declarant’s Right to Arbitration in Construction Defect Cases

    What You Need to Know About Enforcement Actions by the Contractors State License Board

    Federal Court Sets High Bar for Pleading Products Liability Cases in New Jersey

    Stay-At-Home Orders and Work Restrictions with 50 State Matrix

    Bremer Whyte Congratulates Nicole Nuzzo on OCBA Professionalism and Ethics Committee Appointment

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Indemnity Coverage For Damage Caused by Named Insured

    Designed to Expose: Beware Lender Certificates

    Preventing Costly Litigation Through Your Construction Contract

    CISA Clarifies – Construction is Part of Critical Infrastructure Activities

    New York Developer’s Alleged Court Judgment Woes

    Proposed Law Protecting Tenants Amended: AB 828 Updated

    Illinois Supreme Court Rules Labor Costs Not Depreciated to Determine Actual Cash Value

    Quick Note: Submitting Civil Remedy Notice

    Engineer at Flint Negligence Trial Details Government Water Errors

    Property Owner Entitled to Rely on Zoning Administrator Advice
    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

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/30/24) – Life Science Construction to Increase, Overall Homeownership Is Majority Female, and Senators Urge Fed Chair to Lower Interest Rates

    February 26, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, hospitality and real estate companies create living options, SEC questions some financial institutions on exposure to risks from CRE, renting shows signs of overtaking buying in the housing market, and more! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Brown and Caldwell Appoints Stigers as Design Chief Engineer

    December 13, 2022 —
    WALNUT CREEK, Calif., Dec. 06, 2022 — Brown and Caldwell today announces Vice President Tracy Stigers has been appointed as design chief engineer in recognition of four decades of exceptional technical leadership and client service. She is the first woman in the firm's 75-year history to hold the esteemed title. Stigers will lead all design from a technical and delivery expertise perspective across all of Brown and Caldwell's design initiatives, implementing innovation, quality control, and project delivery throughout North America and the Pacific. Since joining the leading environmental engineering and construction services firm in 1980, Stigers has progressed from junior engineer to one of its top technical and delivery experts. She has vast experience in the design and construction of large-scale wastewater conveyance, treatment, and reuse facilities, including serving as project manager on the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission's $2.3 billion Biosolids Digester Facilities Project, the largest value design job in Brown and Caldwell's history. Early in her career, Stigers worked alongside and was mentored by company co-founder Dave Caldwell, helping shape its tradition of solving the most challenging water and environmental challenges. Her dedication to upholding Brown and Caldwell's reputation for project excellence and innovation was commended by CEO Rich D'Amato: "Tracy is the epitome of quality, commitment, and technical prowess," he said. "Her leadership, knowledge, and legacy of delivering solutions to clients perfectly embody our heritage and is a shining example for tomorrow's aspiring engineering leaders." Throughout her career, Stigers has held numerous leadership roles at industry organizations, including sitting on the board of trustees for the Water Environment Federation and the California Water Environment Association. She is a current member of the Clarkson University Engineering Advisory Council. About Brown and Caldwell Headquartered in Walnut Creek, California, Brown and Caldwell is a full-service environmental engineering and construction services firm with 52 offices and 1,800 professionals across North America and the Pacific. For 75 years, our creative solutions have helped municipalities, private industry, and government agencies successfully overcome their most challenging water and environmental obstacles. As an employee-owned company, Brown and Caldwell is passionate about exceeding our clients' expectations and making a difference for our employees, our communities, and our environment. For more information, visit www.brownandcaldwell.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Freight Train Carrying Hot Asphalt, Molten Sulfur Plunges Into Yellowstone River as Bridge Fails

    July 10, 2023 —
    Associated Press COLUMBUS, Mont. (AP) — A bridge that crosses the Yellowstone River in Montana collapsed early Saturday, plunging portions of a freight train carrying hazardous materials into the rushing water below. Reprinted courtesy of The Associated Press, Engineering News-Record Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Walks the Line on When the Duty to Preserve Evidence at a Fire Scene Arises

    October 14, 2019 —
    The extent to which a loss scene can be altered before adversaries can legitimately cry spoliation has long been a mysterious battleground in the world of subrogation. In the case of In re Xterra Constr., LLC, No. 10-16-00420-CV, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 3927 (Tex. App. – Waco, May 15, 2019), the Court of Appeals of Texas, Tenth District, addressed the question of when a party has a duty to preserve evidence. The court found that the trial court abused its discretion in imposing sanctions on the defendants for the spoliation of evidence as the evidence at issue was already gone by the time the defendants knew or reasonably should have known there was a substantial chance a claim would be filed against them. In this matter, Xterra Construction, LLC, Venturi Capital, Inc. d/b/a Artisan Cabinets and Keith D. Richbourg (collectively, Xterra) leased a commercial space from building owners Daniel Hull and William H. Beazley, Jr. (collectively, Hull) to be used as a woodworking and cabinet making warehouse. On October 18, 2014, there was a fire at the warehouse. By October 20, 2014, Xterra informed its insurance carrier, Cincinnati Insurances Companies (“Cincinnati”) of the loss and Cincinnati’s adjuster, Leann Williams (Williams), met with Keith D. Richbourg (Richbourg) at the site. Williams also hired expert Jim Reil (Reil) to inspect the fire scene to perform a cause and origin investigation. The next day, Williams informed Hull’s attorney that Reil would inspect the scene on October 23, 2014. Hulls attorney, however, did not send anyone to the scene to participate in the inspection. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lian Skaf, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Skaf may be contacted at skafl@whiteandwilliams.com

    Property Insurance Exclusion for Constant or Repeated Leakage of Water

    March 14, 2018 —
    A property insurance policy, no different than any insurance policy, contains exclusions for events that are NOT covered under the terms of the policy. One such common exclusion in a property insurance policy is an exclusion for damages caused by "constant or repeated seepage or leakage of water…over a period of 14 or more days." The application of this exclusion was discussed in the recent opinion of Hicks v. American Integrity Ins. Co. of Florida, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D446a (Fla. 5th DCA 2018). In this case, while the insured was out of town, the water line to his refrigerator started to leak. When the insured return home over a month later, the supply line was discharging almost a thousand gallons of water per day. The insured submitted a property insurance claim. The property insurer engaged a consultant that opined (likely, correctly) that the water line had been leaking for at least five weeks. Based on the above-mentioned exclusion, i.e., that water had been constantly leaking for over a period of 14 days, the insurer denied coverage. This denial led to the inevitable coverage dispute. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    To Bee or Not to Bee - CA Court Finds Denial of Coverage Based on Exclusion was Premature Where Facts had not been Judicially Determined

    November 28, 2018 —
    While I typically discuss cases concerning pollution, today I will change a few letters around and discuss pollination. The case, Unigard Insurance Co. et al. v. George Perry and Sons Inc. et al., asks whether there is coverage for a lawsuit brought against a commercial farm that is alleged to have killed off bee colonies used for pollination. The farm, owned by George Perry & Sons Inc. (“Perry”), allegedly used a pesticide that killed off the bee colonies that Perry had hired from Gary Mattes (“Mattes”) pursuant to an oral agreement. The bees, operating well outside of their weight class, were hired to pollinate Perry’s crops of watermelons and pumpkins. Interestingly, the bees would be brought to the farm in either large hives or “nukes,” which are smaller versions of hives. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Philip B. Wilusz, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Wilusz may be contacted at pbw@sdvlaw.com

    Attorney Risks Disqualification If After Receiving Presumptively Privileged Communication Fails to Notify Privilege Holder and Uses Document Pending Privilege Determination by Court

    May 03, 2017 —
    In McDermott Will & Emery LLP v. Superior Court (4/18/2017 – No. G053623), the Fourth Appellate District, in a 2-1 decision, considered two distinct issues: 1. Whether the attorney-client privilege for a confidential e-mail communication between a client and his attorney had been waived by the client’s inadvertent disclosure of the communication to a third party; and 2. Whether the opposing counsel’s failure to respect the claimed privilege as to the inadvertently produced document or to follow the rules for handling such documents set forth in State Compensation Ins. Fund v WPS, Inc. (1999) 70 Cal.App.4th 644 (State Fund) supported the trial court’s disqualification of counsel and his law firm. This case arose from an intra-family dispute over the deceased matriarch’s substantial investment holdings, a related probate matter, and two subsequent legal malpractice actions. The opinion sets forth in great detail the facts surrounding the claimed inadvertent disclosure by the client (i.e., the privilege holder) of the subject attorney-client e-mail communication, its subsequent dissemination to, and use by, the client’s family members, the ultimate receipt and review by an opposing family member’s counsel, the efforts by the client’s counsel to assert the privilege and “claw-back” the document, and in the face of this privilege claim, the opposing counsel’s extensive use of the document during discovery, including depositions, in the legal malpractice actions. The opposing counsel, who had received the subject document from his own client, had independently concluded that the clearly privileged document lost its privileged status, believing that the privilege had been waived either because of disclosure to third parties or that his obligation to return inadvertently disclosed documents only applied to those produced in litigation during discovery. As a result, the opposing counsel refused all demands for the return or destruction of the document and insisted upon continuing to use it. This dispute finally came to a head over two years after the client’s disclosure in the context of the client’s motion for a judicial determination that the document was privileged (which the trial court granted) and then a motion to disqualify the opposing counsel (which the trial court also granted); both decisions were eventually reviewed by the appellate court. 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

    California Enacts New Claims Resolution Process for Public Works Projects

    January 19, 2017 —
    If you’re a public entity or contractor involved in public works construction you should be aware of a new law, AB 626, which took effect on the first of this year and establishes a new mandatory claims resolution process for disputes on public works projects. Here’s what you need to know: What is the new law and where is it codified at? AB 626 added new Public Contract Code Section 9204 that according to the bill’s author, Assemblymember David Chiu of San Francisco, establishes “a claim resolution process applicable to any claim by a contractor in connection with a public works project.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com