BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestration
    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


    Before and After the Storm: Know Your Insurance Rights, Coverages and Obligations

    The Colorado Court of Appeals Rules that a Statutory Notice of Claim Triggers an Insurer’s Duty to Defend.

    Supreme Court Overrules Longstanding Decision Supporting Collection of Union Agency Fees

    Savera Sandhu Joins Newmeyer Dillion As Partner

    2018 Spending Plan Boosts Funding for Affordable Housing

    Best Lawyers Honors Hundreds of Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Names Four Partners ‘Lawyers of the Year’

    McDermott International and BP Team Arbitrate $535M LNG Site Dispute

    Possible Real Estate and Use and Occupancy Tax Relief for Philadelphia Commercial and Industrial Property Owners

    Not so Fast – Florida’s Legislature Overrules Gindel’s Pre-Suit Notice/Tolling Decision Related to the Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    The Argument for Solar Power

    Specific Performance of an Option Contract to Purchase Real Property is Barred Absent Agreement on All Material Terms

    CA Supreme Court Permits Insurers to Bring Direct Actions Seeking Reimbursement of Excessive Fees Against Cumis Counsel Under Limited Circumstances

    Connecticut Reverses Course for Construction Managers on School Projects

    Open & Known Hazards Under the Kinsman Exception to Privette

    How Berger’s Peer Review Role Figures In Potential Bridge Collapse Settlement

    NY Court Holds Excess Liability Coverage Could Never be Triggered Where Employers’ Liability Policy Provided Unlimited Insurance Coverage

    Pending Home Sales in U.S. Increase Less Than Forecast

    GRSM Attorneys Selected to 2024 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    Mortgage Bonds Stare Down End of Fed Easing as Gains Persist

    Blockbuster Breakwater: Alternative Construction Method Put to the Test in Tampa Bay

    Economic Damages Cannot be Based On Speculation

    Are Modern Buildings Silently Killing Us?

    Construction Activity on the Upswing

    FAA Seeks Largest Fine Yet on Drones in Near-Miss Crackdown

    Update Regarding McMillin Albany LLC v. Super Ct.

    Safety, Technology Combine to Change the Construction Conversation

    Bridges Need More Attention

    Client Alert: Court Settles Conflict between CCP and Rules of Court Regarding Demurrer Deadline Following Amended Complaint

    Expert Can be Questioned on a Construction Standard, Even if Not Relied Upon

    Rio Olympics Work Was a Mess and Then Something Curious Happened

    ASCE Statement on Devastating Tornado Damages Throughout U.S.

    California Booms With FivePoint New Schools: Real Estate

    Orange County Home Builder Dead at 93

    The Choice Is Yours – Or Is It? Anti-Choice-of-Laws Statutes Applicable to Construction Contracts

    Housing Starts in U.S. Climb to an Almost Eight-Year High

    Real-Estate Pros Fight NYC Tax on Wealthy Absentee Owners

    Showdown Over Landmark Housing Law Looms at U.S. Supreme Court

    NYC Rail Tunnel Cost Jumps and Construction Start Pushed Back

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Highlighted | 2019 Northern California Super Lawyers

    Study Finds Mansion Tax Reduced Sales in New York and New Jersey

    Smart Construction and the Future of the Construction Industry

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Super Lawyers

    Forethought Is Key to Overcoming Construction Calamities

    Tenants Who Negligently Cause Fires in Florida Beware: You May Be Liable to the Landlord’s Insurer

    Medical Center Builder Sues Contracting Agent, Citing Costly Delays

    Cause Still Unclear in March Retaining Wall Collapse on $900M NJ Interchange

    What Does “Mold Resistant” Really Mean?

    UConn’s Law-School Library Construction Case Settled for Millions

    Colorado Nearly Triples Damages Caps for Cases Filed in 2025, Allows Siblings to File Wrongful Death Claims

    Design Professional Liens: A Blueprint
    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

    Difficult Task for Court to Analyze Delay and Disorder on Construction Project

    August 23, 2021 —
    One of my favorites quotes from a case, and I am sure others in the construction industry feel the same way or can relate, is from the District of Columbia Court of Appeals in Blake Construction Co., Inc. v. C.J. Coakley Co., Inc., 431 A.2d 569, 575 (D.C. 1981):
    We note parenthetically and at the outset that, except in the middle of a battlefield, nowhere must men coordinate the movement of other men and all materials in the midst of such chaos and with such limited certainty of present facts and future occurrences as in a huge construction project such as the building of this 100 million dollar hospital. Even the most painstaking planning frequently turns out to be mere conjecture and accommodation to changes must necessarily be of the rough, quick and ad hoc sort, analogous to ever-changing commands on the battlefield. Further, it is a difficult task for a court to be able to examine testimony and evidence in the quiet of a courtroom several years later concerning such confusion and then extract from them a determination of precisely when the disorder and constant readjustment, which is to be expected by any subcontractor on a job site, become so extreme, so debilitating and so unreasonable as to constitute a breach of contract between a contractor and a subcontractor.
    Do you agree with this sentiment? The reality is that retrospectively analyzing delay on a complicated construction project with numerous moving parts on a day-by-day, hour-by-hour, basis is no easy feat. It is not easy for the parties and certainly not easy for courts to unravel. With every party claiming delay based on a retrospective analysis there will be another party with either a different delay analysis or providing credible cross examination as to flaws with the delay analysis. The same bodes true with loss of productivity / inefficiency claims and the particular case-specific facts are important, preferably with evidence such as photos, videos, notifications, daily reports, manpower reports, etc., supporting the facts. But the facts are complicated, and the delay analysis is complicated, and it is a difficult task for a trier of fact to unravel these facts. 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

    PSA: Latest Updates from AGC-VA on COVID Rules (UPDATED)

    June 14, 2021 —
    The recent changes in masking requirements and COVID-related restrictions have prompted questions and concerns throughout the construction industry. We understand your questions and continue to work closely with the Department of Labor and Industry (DOLI) and the Safety and Health Codes Board. Here is what we know at this point:
    • The Governor’s second order terminates the state of public emergency as of May 28, 2021. At that point, the DOLI Safety and Health Codes Board will have 2 weeks to meet and decide whether to rescind, modify, or continue the Final Permanent Standard for Prevention of Covid-19. Companies should continue to follow the standard until further notice.
    • UPDATE: At present, the emergency order does not expire before June 30, unless amended or otherwise changed. Therefore, the two-week period to announce a meeting of the SCHB to review the permanent COVID-19 standard does not begin until July 1, though the meeting can occur after the two-week period. AGCVA has joined other groups in pushing for a meeting as soon as possible.
    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

    Affirmed: Nationwide Acted in Bad Faith by Failing to Settle Within Limits

    July 19, 2017 —
    The Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed that Nationwide acted in bad faith by refusing to settle a claim against its insured for the policy limits, exposing the policyholder to an excess verdict.1 The case arose out of a 2005 automobile accident where Seung Park, who was insured by Nationwide, struck and killed another driver, Stacey Camacho. Shortly after the accident, Ms. Camacho’s estate issued a time-limited demand for the full limits of the policy Nationwide issued to Mr. Park, $100,000, to settle the case. After the deadline to respond to the demand expired, Nationwide rejected the demand and made a counteroffer. A settlement could not be reached and a wrongful death suit was filed against Mr. Park, resulting in a massive jury verdict of $5.83 million. Following the jury verdict, Mr. Park assigned his rights against Nationwide to Ms. Camacho’s estate, which then filed claims for negligence and bad faith failure to settle against Nationwide. The case was tried to a jury, which found in favor of the estate. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bethany Barrese, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Barrese may be contacted at blb@sdvlaw.com

    Crime Policy Insurance Quotes Falsely Represented the Scope of its Coverage

    July 13, 2020 —
    An Indiana businessman found out the hard way how far his insurance company was willing to go to avoid paying a claim after it misrepresented the coverage of a crime policy it sold to him. The quote for the policy indicated that it included coverage for losses resulting from computer hacking. Despite this representation, when the policyholder’s bank accounts were hacked, the insurer denied coverage on the ground that there was no provision for hacking coverage in the policy. Fortunately, the Indiana Court of Appeals recognized the insured’s right to argue before a jury that the insurer’s quotes falsely represented the scope of its coverage. In Metal Pro Roofing, LLC v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., Richard Cornett, principal of Metal Pro Roofing, LLC and Cornett Restoration, LLC (the “LLCs”), purchased a Cincinnati Insurance Company CinciPlus Crime XC+ Policy (the “Policy”). At the time Mr. Cornett purchased this coverage, and during all subsequent renewals, Cincinnati issued insurance quotes that stated:
    Cincinnati can insure your money and securities while at your premises, inside your bank and even off site in the custody of a courier. While you’ve taken precautions to protect your money and securities, you run the risk of loss from employees, robbers, burglars, computer hackers and even physical perils such as fire.
    Give yourself peace of mind with Cincinnati’s crime coverage to insure the money and securities you worked so hard to earn.
    Crime Expanded Coverage (XC®)Plus Endorsement $125.00.
    (Emphasis added.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian J Clifford, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Mr. Clifford may be contacted at bjc@sdvlaw.com

    A New Study on Implementing Digital Visual Management

    July 31, 2024 —
    A new paper, “Implementing Digital Visual Management: A Case Study on Challenges and Barriers,” discusses situational management in complex infrastructure projects. It’s worth reading for anyone interested in improving project management with digital tools. A complex infrastructure project The authors interviewed nine project management professionals who worked for the client on constructing the western part of the Metro in Helsinki and Espoo, Finland. The project lasted eight years and had a budget of 1,200 million euros. The project used a Digital Visual Management (DVM) tool, and the paper discusses the challenges and barriers faced during the tool’s implementation. At the time of the study, the system was used to manage the final documentation and testing status. KPI management The project management team was involved in developing a system for combining collected data into a central dashboard and using it to manage the whole project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Hirer Not Liable Under Privette Doctrine Where Hirer Had Knowledge of Condition, but not that Condition Posed a Concealed Hazard

    December 11, 2023 —
    The Privette doctrine, so-called because of a case of the same name, Privette v. Superior Court, 5 Cal.4th 698 (1993), provides a rebuttable presumption that a hirer is not liable for workplace injuries sustained by employees of hired parties. In other words, if a property owner hires a contractor, and one of the contractor’s employees gets injured while working on the property, there is a rebuttable presumption that the property owner is not liable for the employee’s injuries, the rationale being that because the contractor is required to carry workers’ compensation insurance the contractor is in the better position to absorb losses incurred a workplace injury. There are, however, two widely recognized exceptions to the Privette doctrine. The first, is the Hooker exception, again named after a case of the same name, Hooker v. Department of Transportation, 27 Cal.th 198 (2002), which provides that a hirer is liable for injuries to a hired parties’ employees, if the hirer retained control over the work being performed, negligently exercised that control, and the negative exercise of that control contributed to the employee’s injury. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Repeated Use of Defective Fireplace Triggers Duty to Defend Even if Active Fire Does Not Break Out Until After End of Policy Period

    November 30, 2016 —
    In Tidwell Enterprises v. Financial Pacific Ins. Co. (No. C078665, filed 11/29/16), a California appeals court held that that even though a house fire occurred after the policy period, there was nonetheless a possibility of coverage because the fire might have been the result of ongoing damage to the wood in the chimney chase during the policy period, due to the exposure of that wood to excessive heat from the chimney every time a fire was burned in the fireplace. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insured's Failure to Prove Entire Collapse of Building Leads to Dismissal

    July 19, 2021 —
    The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the insured's claim for damage to her home caused by collapse. Stewart v. Metropolitan Lloyds Ins. Co. of Texas, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 14221 (5th Girl May 13, 2021). One evening, the insured was awakened by a loud bang that shook her house. The next morning, she noticed the damage to her home, cracked sheetrock and sunken floors. She cut a hole through her floor and discovered that a couple of joists below her subfloor had broken and fallen away. The insured filed a claim with Metropolitan. Metropolitan hired an expert who found broken and deteriorated floor joists, deteriorated floor decking, walls not plumb and gaps in the wall-to-ceiling interface. It was determined that the rot in the floor joists and subfloor decking were caused by a combination of termite damage and exposure to moisture over the lifespan of the structure, resulting in the broken floor joists and unlevel floors. The insured's own expert agreed that termite damage and wood rot were the cause of the foundation collapse failure. 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