BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultant
    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


    Public Law Center Honors Snell & Wilmer Partner Sean M. Sherlock As Volunteers For Justice Attorney Of The Year

    There's No Such Thing as a Free House

    With VA Mechanic’s Liens Sometimes “Substantial Compliance” is Enough (but don’t count on it) [UPDATE]

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (03/08/23) – Updates on U.S. Mortgage Applications, the Inflation Reduction Act, and Multifamily Sector

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Advances to Debris Removal Phase

    Canada Home Resales Post First Fall in Eight Months

    Nevada Assembly Sends Construction Defect Bill to Senate

    New Case Alert: Oregon Supreme Court Prohibits Insurer’s Attempt to Relitigate Insured’s Liability

    New Hampshire Asbestos Abatement Firm Pleads Guilty in Federal Fraud Case

    Late Notice Bars Insured's Claim for Loss Caused by Hurricane

    Jury's Verdict for Loss Caused by Collapse Overturned

    Parties Can Agree to Anything In A Settlement Agreement………Or Can They?

    Texas Supreme Court Holds Anadarko’s $100M Deepwater Horizon Defense Costs Are Not Subject To Joint Venture Liability Limits

    #2 CDJ Topic: Valley Crest Landscape v. Mission Pools

    Wait! Don’t Sign Yet: Reviewing Contract Protections During the COVID Pandemic

    Occurrence-Based Insurance Policies and Claims-Made Insurance Policies – There’s a Crucial Difference

    Haight has been named by Best Law Firms® as a Tier 1, 2 and 3 National Firm in Three Practice Areas in 2024

    Concrete Worker Wins Lawsuit and Settles with Other Defendant

    Life After McMillin: Do Negligence and Strict Liability Causes of Action for Construction Defects Still Exist?

    Is it time for a summer tune-up?

    2024 Update to CEB’s Mechanics Liens Now Available

    Contractor’s Assignment of Construction Contract to Newly Formed Company Before Company Was Licensed, Not Subject to B&P 7031

    World’s Biggest Crane Lifts Huge Steel Ring at U.K. Nuclear Site

    More Thoughts on “Green” (the Practice, not the Color) Building

    Restoring the USS Alabama: Surety Lessons From an 80-Year-Old Battleship

    Recent Bribery and Anti-Corruption Enforcement Trends in Global Construction Industry

    Will Future Megacities Be a Marvel or a Mess? Look at New Delhi

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

    #3 CDJ Topic: Underwriters of Interest Subscribing to Policy No. A15274001 v. ProBuilders Specialty Ins. Co., Case No. D066615

    California Governor Signs SB 496 Amending California’s Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Virtual Mediation – How Do I Make It Work for Me?

    Understand Agreements in Hold Harmless and Indemnity Provisions

    Anatomy of a Data Center

    Unpunished Racist Taunts: A Pennsylvania Harassment Case With No True 'Winner'

    Pennsylvania: When Should Pennsylvania’s New Strict Products Liability Law Apply?

    LA County Begins Arduous Cleanup, Rebuild Effort in Altadena as New Fire Flares

    Can a Non-Signatory Invoke an Arbitration Provision?

    Toronto Contractor Bondfield Wins Court Protection as Project Woes Mount

    Supreme Court of New York Denies Motion in all but One Cause of Action in Kikirov v. 355 Realty Assoc., et al.

    Boston-area Asbestos-Abatement Firms Face Wage and Safety Complaints

    Super Lawyers Recognized Five Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

    Client Alert: Release of Liability Agreement Extinguishes Duty of Ordinary Care

    GA Federal Court Holds That Jury, Not Judge, Generally Must Decide Whether Notice Was Given “As Soon as Practicable” Under First-Party Property Damage Policies

    Updates to the CEQA Guidelines Have Been Finalized

    Michigan Lawmakers Pass $4.7B Infrastructure Spending Bill

    Making the Construction Industry a Safer place for Women

    Zurich American Insurance Company v. Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company

    South Carolina Legislature Redefining Occurrences to Include Construction Defects in CGL Policies

    EO or Uh-Oh: Biden’s Executive Order Requiring Project Labor Agreements on Federal Construction Projects

    Lease-Leaseback Battle Continues as First District Court of Appeals Sides with Contractor and School District
    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

    Falling Crime Rates Make Dangerous Neighborhoods Safe for Bidding Wars

    March 19, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- LaTasha Gunnels was outbid four times before she snagged a home in Anacostia, the southeast Washington, D.C. neighborhood that comes with a discount because of its reputation for drugs and crime. The 35-year-old nurse said the area, in a section of the city across a river from Capitol Hill known for its historically high murder rates, is changing rapidly. Buyers like Gunnels, priced out of costlier spots, helped lift values 21 percent in the Anacostia area in 2014, the biggest surge of any D.C. neighborhood, according to data provider Real Estate Business Intelligence. “I’m not going to sugarcoat it -- crime is still there -- but police officers are on every single corner and nobody has bothered me yet,” Gunnels said. “What I’m paying for my mortgage, people are paying for one-bedroom apartments in other parts of D.C.” Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg reportersHeather Perlberg, Prashant Gopal, and John Gittelsohn Ms. Perlberg may be contacted at hperlberg@bloomberg.net Mr. Gopal may be contacted at pgopal2@bloomberg.net Mr. Gittelsohn may be contacted at johngitt@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Dallas Condo Project to Expand

    November 20, 2013 —
    Cooper & Stebbins has announced that they are building additional units at Southlake Town Square. One set of additions will expand the Garden District Brownstones, which were built in 2006. There will additionally be a five-story building to be called The Residences. Southlake Town Square is a mixed-use development, combining retail and residences. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Seventh Circuit Remands “Waters of the United States” Case to Corps of Engineers to Determine Whether there is a “Significant Nexus”

    July 10, 2018 —
    On June 27, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit decided the case of Orchard Hill Building Co. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Court of Appeals vacated the decision of the District Court granting the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps) motion for summary judgment dismissing the Orchard Hill Building Company’s (Orchard) complaint that the Corps’ jurisdictional determination erroneously found that the waters at issue were “jurisdictional waters” under the Clean Water Act (CWA) subject to the Corps’ jurisdiction. Acknowledging that the Corps and EPA had promulgated a new rule re-defining “waters of the United States” in 2015—which is now being challenged in the courts—the Court of Appeals noted that this case is controlled by the pre-2015 definition of “waters of the United States.” The Court of Appeals remanded the case to the Corps, directing it to determine if there was a significant nexus, as required. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Iconic Seattle Center Arena Roof the Only Piece to Stay in $900-Million Rebuild

    July 09, 2019 —
    The roof covering the under-construction Seattle Center Arena will remain. And it won’t move, even as contractors remake the entire arena beneath it. OVG-Seattle has started the task of remaking the city-owned structure—and the only major arena within a park in North America—into the home for the expansion NHL Seattle franchise and the start of the 2021 NHL season. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tim Newcomb, ENR
    Mr. Newcomb may be contacted at

    Can You Really Be Liable For a Product You Didn’t Make? In New Jersey, the Answer is Yes

    December 14, 2020 —
    New Jersey has recently expanded liability for product distributors and manufacturers to products that the distributor/manufacturer did not make or sell. This alert discusses this new law and steps that distributors and manufacturers may consider to reduce their potential liability. In Whelan v. Armstrong International, Inc., the New Jersey Supreme Court held that distributors and manufacturers can be strictly liable for injuries caused by replacement parts added after the point of sale which had not been manufactured or sold by any of the defendants in the case. In Whelan, the defendants’ products had originally been sold with asbestos-containing parts. Mr. Whelan, the plaintiff, argued that asbestos-containing replacement parts were required to repair and maintain the products. The court found that because the products were designed with asbestos-containing parts, “[d]efendants had a duty to provide warnings given the foreseeability that third parties would be the source of asbestos-containing replacement components.” (Emphasis added). This reasoning, based on “foreseeability,” should give pause to all product distributors and manufacturers—even those who do not make or sell products that contain asbestos. Certainly distributors and manufacturers of products with asbestos-containing parts must take heed that they may now be liable for replacement parts that they neither manufactured nor sold. This alone is a significant holding that expands potential liability. Reprinted courtesy of James Burger, White and Williams LLP and Robert Devine, White and Williams LLP Mr. Burger may be contacted at burgerj@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Devine may be contacted at deviner@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Should I Pull the Pin? Contractor and Subcontractor Termination for Cause

    January 26, 2017 —
    Any owner or general contractor who has a few projects under his or her belt has likely had this thought: “My contractor (or subcontractor) is not performing the way I expected; should I replace him?” The other side of the termination coin is: “This project is not going the way I expected; should I get out?” While there may be an emotional high that immediately comes from terminating a contractor or subcontractor (or leaving a project, in mid-stream), there are many factors to be weighed, before making that decision. Project Delay. Replacing a contractor or subcontractor that has already begun performance always results in delays to the project. Assessing the work in place, interviewing replacement contractors, and negotiating the terms of the new relationship can easily consume weeks, if not months of project time. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick McNamara, Porter Law Group
    Mr. McNamara may be contacted at pmcnamara@porterlaw.com

    Rancosky Adopts Terletsky: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Sets Standard for Statutory Bad Faith Claims

    September 28, 2017 —
    Earlier today, in a case of first impression, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court adopted the Terletsky two-part test for proving a statutory “bad faith” claim under 42 Pa. C.S.A. § 8371, which requires that a plaintiff present “clear and convincing evidence (1) that the insurer did not have a reasonable basis for denying benefits under the policy and (2) that the insurer knew of or recklessly disregarded its lack of a reasonable basis.” Rancosky v. Washington National Insurance Company, No. 28 WAP 2016 (Pa. Sept. 28, 2017). The court further ruled that proof of an insurer’s “subjective motive of self-interest or ill-will,” while potentially probative of the second prong of the test, is not a requirement to prevail under § 8371. Evidence of an insurer’s “knowledge or reckless disregard for its lack of a reasonable basis” for denying a claim alone, according to the court, is sufficient even in cases seeking punitive damages. Reprinted courtesy of John Anooshian, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Sean Mahoney, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Anooshian may be contacted at anooshianj@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Mahoney may be contacted at majoneys@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa Rolle Wins Summary Judgment on Behalf of Contract Utility Company in Personal Injury Action

    April 25, 2023 —
    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa Rolle obtained summary judgment on behalf of a contract utility company (“Utility Company”) in a matter brought before the New York Supreme Court, Queens County. In the complaint, the Plaintiff alleged that she sustained injuries as a result of a trip and fall accident where the Plaintiff’s foot allegedly went into a hole in the grass strip abutting the sidewalk adjacent to a premises located in Queens, NY. The Plaintiff claimed that the defect in the sidewalk was caused by the removal of a utility pole at the curb strip that was not correctly backfilled. The Defendant Utility Company is in the business of inspecting, treating, and repairing utility and telecommunication structures, including wooden utility poles. TLSS was successfully able to establish that, three years prior to the accident, the Utility Company was retained to conduct a visual inspection of the subject pole. However, the Utility Company does not and has not owned, installed, removed or replaced in-service utility poles in New York or at the location of the alleged accident. Further, TLSS established that the Utility Company did not service or remove the subject pole at the accident site or backfill the curb strip. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lisa M. Rolle, Traub Lieberman
    Ms. Rolle may be contacted at lrolle@tlsslaw.com