BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction 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


    AAA Revises its Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Illinois Town’s Bond Sale Halted Over Fraudulent Hotel Deals

    Finding of No Coverage Overturned Due to Lack of Actual Policy

    Final Thoughts on New Pay If Paid Legislation in VA

    Court Agrees to Stay Coverage Matter While Underlying State Action is Pending

    Estoppel Certificate? Estop and Check Your Lease

    Are Millennials Finally Moving Out On Their Own?

    Rooftop Solar Leases Scaring Buyers When Homeowners Sell

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Climate Change Lawsuit Barred by “Pollution Exclusion”

    ASCE Statement on EPA Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan

    Duty to Defend Triggered by Damage to Other Non-Defective Property

    Midview Board of Education Lawsuit Over Construction Defect Repairs

    California Supreme Court Adopts Vertical Exhaustion for Long-Tail Claims

    How Many Bridges Does the Chesapeake Bay Need?

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

    'There Was No Fighting This Fire,' California Survivor Says

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected for the 2024 Edition of Best Lawyers and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Property Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Superintendent’s On-Site Supervision Compensable as Labor Under Miller Act

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

    Anti-Fracking Win in N.Y. Court May Deal Blow to Industry

    Structural Failure of Precast-Concrete Span Sets Back Sydney Metro Job

    Los Angeles Considering Census of Seismically Unstable Buildings

    New ANSI Requirements for Fireplace Screens

    A Court-Side Seat: Clean Air, Clean Water, Endangered Species and Deliberative Process Privilege

    Implications for Industry as Supreme Court Curbs EPA's Authority

    Preliminary Notices: Common Avoidable But Fatal Mistakes

    Hurdles with Triggering a Subcontractor Performance Bond

    General Contractor Supporting a Subcontractor’s Change Order Only for Owner to Reject the Change

    Concerns Over Unstable Tappan Zee Bridge Push Back Opening of New NY Bridge's Second Span

    Haight’s Kristian Moriarty Selected for Super Lawyers’ 2021 Southern California Rising Stars

    How Helsinki Airport Uses BIM to Create the Best Customer Experience

    Insurer Doomed in Delaware by the Sutton Rule

    GRSM Named Among 2025 “Best Law Firms” by Best Lawyers

    Is a Violation of a COVID-19 Order the Basis For Civil Liability?

    Duty To Defend Construction Defect Case Affirmed, Duty to Indemnify Reversed In Part

    EPA Issues Interpretive Statement on Application of NPDES Permit System to Releases of Pollutants to Groundwater

    Three-Year Delay Not “Prompt Notice,” But Insurer Not “Appreciably Prejudiced” Either, New Jersey Court Holds

    Protecting and Perfecting Your Mechanics Lien when the Property Owner Files Bankruptcy

    140 Days Until The California Consumer Privacy Act Becomes Law - Why Aren't More Businesses Complying?

    Judgment for Insurer Reversed Due to Failure to Establish Depreciation

    General Indemnity Agreement Can Come Back to Bite You

    Research Project Underway to Prepare Water Utilities for Wildfire Events

    Pennsylvania Court Extends Construction Defect Protections to Subsequent Buyers

    Appraisal Goes Forward Even Though Insurer Has Yet to Determine Coverage on Additional Claims

    New Iowa Law Revises Construction Defects Statute of Repose

    Think Twice Before Hedging A Position Or Defense On A Speculative Event Or Occurrence

    These Are the 13 Cities Where Millennials Can't Afford a Home

    Delays in Filing Lead to Dismissal in Moisture Intrusion Lawsuit

    Damron Agreement Questioned in Colorado Casualty Insurance v Safety Control Company, et al.
    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. Drawing 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

    Multifamily Building Pushes New Jersey to Best Year since 2007

    December 04, 2013 —
    One project that might be seen as typical for New Jersey is Fair Lawn Promenade, which is being built at the former site of a Kodak film processing plant. The development will revitalize an existing area, rather than send people further from the cities into the New Jersey countryside. The development is within walking distance of a commuter rail station. This project and ones like it have pushed New Jersey to a 37% increase in residential building over last year. Almost 60% of this year’s residential building in New Jersey has been multifamily. And it’s likely to stay that way for a while, according to Patrick O’Keefe, an economist at CohnReznick. He says that millennials have less of a “commitment to the American dream of homeownership.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    How Tech Is Transforming the Construction Industry in 2019

    July 08, 2019 —
    The immediate applications and benefits of Industrial Internet of Things technologies are obvious in industries like manufacturing and computing, but these digital transformation technologies may not be top of mind for construction managers. It’s time for that mindset to change. Worldwide spending on IIoT is expected to reach nearly $2 trillion in 2022, proving that these technologies hold a significant amount of value to the industries using them. That rings especially true in construction, where IIoT stands to bolster an already significant commitment to safety and communication. Construction managers should keep these technologies firmly on the radar when making investments in 2019. Smart equipment With sensors and radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags, even legacy construction equipment can become part of a construction company’s IIoT fleet. The data collected from these machines provides construction managers with a wealth of knowledge around downtime, safety, labor, efficiency and more. Additionally, the next era of smart construction equipment will feature more autonomous vehicles and automatic equipment shutdown, both of which promote worker safety. Autonomous vehicles, which self-correct based on feedback and environmental factors, also free up human engineers to move from maintenance tasks into more complex roles that leverage the feedback data reported by IIoT machinery. Reprinted courtesy of Ginger Butz, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Ms. Butz may be contacted at info@moreycorp.com

    Homeowner Sues Brick Manufacturer for Spalling Bricks

    October 22, 2013 —
    A Columbia, South Carolina homeowner has sued Kinney Brick Co., alleging that the bricks used in his home were defective and are now crumbling. The lawsuit alleges that the manufacturer and the distributor were both aware that the bricks would retain moisture and crumble. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court: Fair Share Act Does Not Preempt Common Law When Apportioning Liability

    March 09, 2020 —
    On February 19, 2020, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a long awaited opinion in the matter of Roverano v. John Crane, Inc., No. 26 EAP 2018, No. 27 EAP 2018 (Pa. 2020). The Court’s opinion is a must-read for anyone involved in asbestos litigation in Pennsylvania. In Roverano, the Court ruled that Pennsylvania’s Fair Share Act (42 Pa.C.S. § 7102) does not preempt Pennsylvania common law favoring per capita apportionment of liability to strict liability defendants. In addition, the Court ruled that bankruptcy trusts, that are either joined as third-party defendants or that have entered into a release with the plaintiff, may be included on the verdict sheet for purposes of liability. In this case, Mr. Roverano sued 30 defendants in strict liability and Defendant Crane filed a joinder complaint against Johns-Manville Personal Injury Trust. The case proceeded to trial against eight defendants in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County. At trial, some of the defendants filed motions in limine seeking a ruling that the Fair Share Act applied to asbestos cases. The trial court denied the motion, concluding that asbestos exposure cannot be quantified, and held that that it would apportion liability on a per capita basis consistent with the Court’s opinion in Baker v. AC&S, 755 A.2d 664 (Pa. 2000). Reprinted courtesy of Mark T. Caloyer, Lewis Brisbois and Joelle Nelson, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Caloyer may be contacted at Mark.Caloyer@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Nelson may be contacted at Joelle.Nelson@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    COVID-19 Response: California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board Implements Sweeping New Regulations to Prevent COVID-19 in the Workplace

    December 14, 2020 —
    On November 19, 2020, the California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (OSHSB) proposed sweeping and significant new emergency standards to reduce employee exposure to COVID-19. These standards have been accepted by the Office of Administrative Law and are effective as of November 30, 2020. Accordingly, it is critical that employers familiarize themselves with these new requirements and begin to implement these standards as quickly as possible. The standards include COVID-19 prevention in the workplace, multiple COVID-19 infections and outbreaks in the workplace, “major” COVID-19 outbreaks in the workplace, prevention in employer provided housing, and prevention in employer-provided transportation to and from work. They apply to all California employers and places of employment, except places with one employee who does not have contact with others, employees working from home, or employees in specified health care facilities, services or operations when covered by section 5199. COVID-19 Prevention Program Employers are required to establish, implement, and maintain an “effective” written COVID-19 Prevention Program. Under the Program, an employer is responsible for developing a system for communicating about COVID-19, identifying and evaluating COVID-19 hazards, investigating and responding to COVID-19 cases, correcting COVID-19 hazards, providing training and instructions to employees regarding COVID-19, ensuring all employees are physically distanced, providing face coverings, implementing policies regarding personal protective equipment and recordkeeping, ensuring COVID-19 cases are excluded from the workplace, and prohibiting symptomatic employees from returning to work unless certain requirements are met. Reprinted courtesy of Peter Shapiro, Lewis Brisbois, Drake Mirsch, Lewis Brisbois and Jade McKenzie, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Shapiro may be contacted at Peter.Shapiro@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Mirsch may be contacted at Drake.Mirsch@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. McKenzie may be contacted at Jade.Mckenzie@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Philadelphia Voters to Consider Best Value Bid Procurment

    May 10, 2017 —
    My friend and colleague, Chris McCabe, recently published an opinion piece on Philly.com concerning the May 16 ballot question that asks Philadelphia voters to approve a change in the way Philadelphia awards public contracts. Currently, Philadelphia, like all municipalities in Pennsylvania, uses an objective lowest responsible bidder standard in the award of public contracts. Under this approach, public contracts must be awarded to a bidder that responds to all of the criteria of the request for bids and offers the lowest price. Under this traditional approach the award of public contracts is completely transparent. The May 16 ballot initiative seeks to change this. If approved, Philadelphia could award public contracts using a host of subjective factors. What those factors would be are unknown because the policies are not yet written. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    Appraisers’ Failure to Perform Assessment of Property’s Existence or Damage is Reversible Error

    July 30, 2015 —
    In Lee v. California Capital Insurance Co. (No. A136280; filed 6/18/15), a California Court of Appeal held that it was error for an appraisal panel to assign loss values to items simply because they were listed in the insured’s scope of loss, and regardless of whether inspection revealed they were undamaged or never existed. California Capital insured a twelve unit apartment building owned by Ms. Lee in Oakland, California. When a fire damaged one unit, the insurer prepared an estimate of $69,255 and paid an undisputed amount of $46,755, which was the amount of the estimate less depreciation and the deductible. But Ms. Lee claimed that six of the units had been damaged, and she retained a public adjuster who submitted a claim exceeding $800,000. This included cleaning, asbestos abatement, reconstruction of the affected apartments, and loss of rent. She claimed burn damage to one unit and smoke damage requiring complete replacement of all the interior rooms of five apartments, along with removal of a portion of the stucco exterior and iron balcony railings and repainting of the entire building. 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

    Implied Warranty Claims–Not Just a Seller’s Risk: Builders Beware!

    May 10, 2021 —
    One of the thorns in the side of every construction defect defense litigator is the implied warranty claim. The “implied warranty” is a promise that Colorado law is “implied” into every contract for a sale of a new home that the home was built in a workmanlike manner and is suitable for habitation. Defense attorneys dislike the implied warranty claim because it is akin to a strict liability standard. All that is required to provide the claim is that an aspect of construction is found to be defective — i.e., inconsistent with the building code or manufacturer’s installation instructions — regardless of whether the work was performed to the standard of care. The implied warranty claim is therefore easier to prove than a negligence claim, where a claimant must prove that a construction professional’s work fell below a standard of reasonable care. Additionally, it is not a defense to an implied warranty claim that the homeowners or the HOA are, themselves, partially liable for the defects where damage is due in part to insufficient or deferred maintenance, as it is for negligence claims. The only redeeming aspect to the implied warranty claim was that, until recently, it was believed that it could only be asserted by a first purchaser against the seller of an improvement, because the implied warranty arises out of the sale contract. Recently, the Colorado Court of Appeals opinion in Brooktree Village Homeowners Association v. Brooktree Village, LLC, 19CA1635, decided on November 19, 2020, extended the reach of the implied warranty — though just how far remains to be seen. Specifically, a division of the Court of Appeals held that an HOA can assert implied warranty claims on behalf of its members for defects in common areas, even where there is no direct contractual relationship between the parties to base the warranty upon. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Carin Ramirez, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Ramirez may be contacted at ramirez@hhmrlaw.com