BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architect
    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


    How to Make the Construction Dispute Resolution Process More Efficient and Less Expensive

    Construction Mezzanine Financing

    Know your Obligations: Colorado’s Statutory Expansions of the Implied Warranty of Habitability Are Now in Effect

    Appellate Division Confirms Summary Judgment in Favor of Property Owners in Action Alleging Labor Law Violations

    CA Supreme Court Rejects Proposed Exceptions to Interim Adverse Judgment Rule Defense to Malicious Prosecution Action

    Contract Disruptions: Navigating Supply Constraints and Labor Shortages

    Construction of World's Tallest Building to Resume With New $1.9B Contract for Jeddah Tower

    Ways of Evaluating Property Damage Claims in Various Contexts

    #12 CDJ Topic: Am. Home Assur. Co. v. SMG Stone Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75910 (N. D. Cal. June 11, 2015)

    The G2G Mid-Year Roundup (2022)

    Stick to Your Guns on Price and Pricing with Construction Contracts

    Merger to Create Massive Los Angeles Construction Firm

    The Pandemic, Proposed Federal Privacy Regulation and the CCPA

    You Are Not A “Liar” Simply Because You Amend Your Complaint

    SDNY Vacates Arbitration Award for Party-Arbitrator’s Nondisclosures

    CAUTION: Terms of CCP Section 998 Offers to Compromise Must Be Fully Contained in the Offer Itself

    The Texas Supreme Court Limits the Use of the Economic Loss Rule

    Plan Ahead for the Inevitable Murphy’s Law Related Accident

    “Bound by the Bond”

    Subcontractors Found Liable to Reimburse Insurer Defense Costs in Equitable Subrogation Action

    Construction Calamity: Risk Transfer Tips for Contractors After a Catastrophic Loss

    California’s Right To Repair Act Is The Sole Remedy For Damages For Construction Defects In New Residential Construction

    The A, B and C’s of Contracting and Self-Performing Work Under California’s Contractor’s License Law

    Preparing For the Worst with Smart Books & Records

    Cincinnati Team Secures Summary Judgment for Paving Company in Trip-and-Fall Case

    Orange County Team Obtains Unanimous Defense Verdict in Case Involving Failed Real Estate Transaction

    Daily Reports – The Swiss Army Knife of Project Documentation

    Ohio School Board and Contractor Meet to Discuss Alleged Defects

    Corps Spells Out Billions in Infrastructure Act Allocations

    Progress, Property, and Privacy: Discussing Human-Led Infrastructure with Jeff Schumacher

    Wyncrest Commons: Commonly Used Progress Payments in Construction Contracts Do Not Render Them Installment Contracts

    Temporary Obstructions Are a Permanent Problem Under the Americans with Disabilities Act

    Increase in Single-Family New Home Sales Year-Over-Year in January

    Firm Pays $8.4M to Settle Hurricane Restoration Contract Case

    Reporting Requirements for Architects under California Business and Professions Code Section 5588

    The “Up” House is “Up” for Sale

    MapLab: Why More Americans Are Moving Toward Wildfire

    Increasing Use of Construction Job Cameras

    NLRB Broadens the Joint Employer Standard

    How Technology Reduces the Risk of Façade Defects

    California Supreme Court Holds Insured Entitled to Coverage Under CGL Policy for Negligent Hiring

    Champagne Wishes and Caviar Dreams. Unlicensed Contractor Takes the Cake

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute Stage 2- Increase the Heat

    The Shifting Sands of Alternative Dispute Resolution

    Underpowered AC Not a Construction Defect

    North Dakota Supreme Court Clarifies Breadth of Contractual Liability Coverage

    Modular Homes Test Energy Efficiency Standards

    Ambush Elections are Here—Are You Ready?

    Excess-Escape Other Insurance Provision Unenforceable to Avoid Defense Cost Contribution Despite Placement in Policy’s Coverage Grant

    No Jail Time for Disbarred Construction Defect Lawyer
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Trial Victory in San Mateo County!

    February 24, 2020 —
    Wilke Fleury attorneys Adriana Cervantes and Matt Powell recently prevailed at trial in a case involving a real property dispute in San Mateo County. Wilke Fleury represented the owner of an apartment building in an action against an individual who recently acquired the duplex on the adjoining property. As set forth in the pleadings, the Apartment’s owner, tenants, and invitees, used the property in many ways including access, parking, and recreational purposes for over five years, and the new owner had actual notice of that use before the purchase. Nonetheless, the new owner insisted the Apartment had no right to use the property, and filed an action to quiet title. Wilke Fleury filed a cross-complaint on behalf of the Apartment alleging that it had a prescriptive easement over the property. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wilke Fleury

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

    December 11, 2018 —
    The Privette doctrine, named after the court case Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th 689, provides that a higher-tiered party such as an owner or general contractor is not liable for injuries sustained by employees of a lower-tiered party such as a subcontractor on a construction project. There are, however, exceptions to the Privette doctrine. One of these exceptions is known as the “retained control doctrine.” Under the retained control doctrine, a higher-tiered party cannot avoid liability under the Privette doctrine if the higher-tiered party: (1) retains control over the conditions of the work; (2) negligently exercises control over such conditions; and (3) its negligent exercise of control contributes to the injuries sustained by the employee of the lower-tiered party. 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

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (6/4/24) – New CRE Litmus Tests, Tech Integration in Real Estate and a Jump in Investor Home Purchases

    July 02, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, big bank exposure to CRE lending grows, concerns for the construction industry abound, U.S. hotel securitized loans come due, and more! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    When is Forum Selection in a Construction Contract Enforceable?

    September 29, 2021 —
    If there is one mantra that is repeated often here at Construction Law Musings, it is that your construction contract will be strictly construed and Virginia Courts will enforce the provisions as written. This rule includes forum selection clauses. For those that aren’t attorneys, this means that absent a statute to the contrary, the parties can pick the location of any litigation or arbitration by contract. However, the timing of signing that contract makes a difference as a relatively recent Eastern District of Virginia case points out. Marathon Res. Mgmt Grp v. C. Cornell, Inc. examined what happens when work is performed by one party to the contract prior to the execution of the written contract that contains the forum selection provision. In this case, the defendant C. Cornell, Inc. obtained a default judgment in Texas for non-payment by Marathon for painting and cleaning of rooms at Texas A & M University for work invoiced on August 22, 2017, and September 11, 2017. Upon receipt of the garnishment from the Texas Court, Marathon sued C. Cornell in Virginia state court and the defendant removed the case to federal court. Marathon alleged two separate breaches of contract, the first was that C. Cornell violated the forum selection clause of a Master Services Agreement (“MSA”) executed on September 23, 2017. The second was a violation of another clause of the MSA that barred direct communication with any of Marathon’s customers. The second breach was alleged to be by virtue of the garnishment summons to one of Marathon’s customers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    COVID-19 Business Interruption Lawsuits Begin: Iconic Oceana Grill in New Orleans Files Insurance Coverage Lawsuit

    April 20, 2020 —
    On Monday, the iconic New Orleans restaurant, Oceana Grill, filed the first Coronavirus-related business interruption insurance coverage lawsuit in a US jurisdiction. The declaratory judgment action styled Cajun Conti, LLC, et. al. d/b/a Oceana Grill v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London was filed in Louisiana state court for the Parish of Orleans. As a direct result of the government-mandated closures and restrictions on public gatherings implemented by the City of New Orleans and State of Louisiana, Oceana Grill’s petition anticipates a significant loss of business income. Based on allegations in the petition, there are several aspects of Oceana Grill’s policy that make this a good test case for business interruption coverage stemming from the Coronavirus. Although the specific policy language is not quoted in the petition, coverage provisions are categorically identified throughout. As a preliminary matter, the policy at issue appears to be written on an “all risks” basis, meaning the insuring agreement of the policy would likely be triggered generally by all risks of “physical loss or damage” unless specifically excluded. This basis for coverage, which is common in property policies, is advantageous to policyholders, as it limits the insured’s burden of proof to establishing that there was physical loss or damage while leaving the burden of applying any more specific exclusion to the insurance company. Reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey J. Vita, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and William S. Bennett, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Vita may be contacted at jjv@sdvlaw.com Mr. Bennett may be contacted at wsb@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractor Allegedly Stole Construction Materials

    October 16, 2013 —
    A Bronx man has been arrested for the theft of about $5,000 of construction materials and equipment from a New Hyde Park residence. When construction workers informed the homeowner of the missing items, the homeowner contacted Damion Brown, who apparently had previously been doing construction work at the home. Mr. Brown admitted he had taken the items but would not return them to the homeowner. The homeowner contacted police, who took M. Brown into custody. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Building Safety Month Just Around the Corner

    May 07, 2015 —
    For every week in May, the International Code Council (ICC) will spotlight a specific area of building safety. The theme this year is “Resisient Communities Start with Building Codes.” ICC’s first week focus is “Don’t Get Burned – Build to Code,” and the second week the focus changes to “Bounce Back Faster from Disaster – Build to Code.” Next, the ICC will present “Water Safe, Water Smart – Build to Code,” and conclude with “$save Energy – Build to Code.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    What to do about California’s Defect-Ridden Board of Equalization Building

    October 01, 2014 —
    Jerry Brown recently signed into law a bill requiring the state of California “to assess its properties in the Sacramento area and develop long-term plans for renovating, replacing or selling the most troublesome buildings,” according to SF Gate. Some say the Board of Equalization building, which was built for $80 million and then repaired for $60 million has construction defects, is “jeopardizing the health and safety of public employees.” Current problems include “[f]looding, mold, falling windows and free-falling elevators,” reported SF Gate. Furthermore, recently, “three employees filed a $75 million lawsuit against the state, alleging toxic mold in the building is causing extreme fatigue, skin rashes, persistent flu-like symptoms, respiratory illnesses, frequent headaches, memory lapses and fears of cancer.” “This is a disaster,” Assemblyman Roger Dickinson, D-Sacramento, who authored the bill regarding assessing state capitol buildings, told SF Gate. “It endangers the health and safety of employees and the public alike. And it is costing state taxpayers tens of millions of dollars.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of