BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction 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


    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/06/21)

    NY Is Set To Sue US EPA Over ‘Completion’ of PCB Removal

    5 Ways Equipment Financing is Empowering Small Construction Businesses

    Termination of Construction Contracts

    Professor Stempel's Excpert Testimony for Insurer Excluded

    Hawaii Appellate Court Finds Duty to Defend Group Builders Case

    Customer’s Agreement to Self-Insure and Release for Water Damage Effectively Precludes Liability of Storage Container Company

    Priority of Liability Insurance Coverage and Horizontal and Vertical Exhaustion

    Colorado “occurrence”

    Research Institute: A Shared Information Platform Reduces Construction Costs Considerably

    It Pays to Review the ‘Review the Contract Documents’ Clause Before You Sign the Contract

    Increasing Use of Construction Job Cameras

    Supreme Court of Canada Broadly Interprets Exception to Faulty Workmanship Exclusion

    Thank You Once Again for the Legal Elite Election for 2022

    Be Aware of Two New Statutes that Became Effective May 1, 2021

    Echoes of Shutdown in Delay of Key Building Metric

    A Guide to Evaluating Snow & Ice Cases

    Delaware Court Holds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    2018 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!

    Architects Should Not Make Initial Decisions on Construction Disputes

    Congratulations to Partners Nicole Whyte, Keith Bremer, Peter Brown, Karen Baytosh, and Associate Matthew Cox for Their Inclusion in 2022 Best Lawyers!

    Prompt Payment More Likely on Residential Construction Jobs Than Commercial or Public Jobs

    Houston Office Secures Favorable Verdict in Trespass and Nuisance Case Involving Subcontractor’s Accidental Installation of Storm Sewer Pipe on Plaintiff’s Property

    Register and Watch Partner John Toohey Present on the CLM Webinar Series!

    NYPD Investigating Two White Flags on Brooklyn Bridge

    Appraiser Declarations Inadmissible When Offered to Challenge the Merits of an Appraisal Award

    Why A Jury Found That Contractor 'Retaliated' Against Undocumented Craft Worker

    Contractors with Ties to Trustees Reaped Benefits from LA Community College Modernization Program

    Second Circuit Affirms Win for General Contractor on No Damages for Delay Provision

    RDU Terminal 1: Going Green

    California Pipeline Disaster Brings More Scandal for PG&E

    ASCE Statement On House Passage Of The Precip Act

    Congratulations to Jonathan Kaplan on his Promotion to Partner!

    $24 Million Verdict Against Material Supplier Overturned Where Plaintiff Failed to Prove Supplier’s Negligence or Breach of Contract Caused an SB800 Violation

    Keeping KeyArena's Landmark Lid Overhead at Climate Pledge Arena Redevelopment Is A 22,000-Ton Balancing Act

    Governor Brown Signs Legislation Aimed at Curbing ADA Accessibility Abuses in California

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

    New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Coverage Gap Dispute

    How the Science of Infection Can Make Cities Stronger

    Mediation v. Arbitration, Both Private Dispute Resolution but Very Different Sorts

    You Are on Notice: Failure to Comply With Contractual Notice Provisions Can Be Fatal to Your Claim

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

    Notice of Completion Determines Mechanics Lien Deadline

    Court Addresses When Duty to Defend Ends

    How to Get Your Bedroom Into the Met Museum

    Connecting IoT Data to BIM

    9 Positive Housing Statistics by Builder

    Finalists in San Diego’s Moving Parklet Design Competition Announced

    Loan Snarl Punishes Spain Builder Backed by Soros, Gates

    School Blown Down by Wind Still Set to Open on Schedule
    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

    A Duty to Design and Maintain Reasonably Safe Roadways Extends to All Persons. (WA)

    February 25, 2014 —
    Case: Lowman v. Wilbur, et al., 178 Wn.2d 165, 309 P.3d 3.87 (2013). Issue: If a passenger’s injuries are in fact caused by the placement of a utility pole too close to a roadway, can the injuries be deemed too remote for purposes of legal causation? NO. Facts: Plaintiff was a passenger in a vehicle that lost control and collided with a utility pole that was 4.47 feet from the edge of the roadway. The vehicle’s driver was under the influence of alcohol. Plaintiff sued the driver as well as the utility company and Skagit County for negligence. The trial court granted the utility company and Skagit County’s summary judgment motion, finding that the negligent placement of the utility pole was not a legal cause of plaintiff’s injuries. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether a negligently placed utility pole could be the legal cause of a resulting injury. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Natasha Khachatourians, Scheer & Zehnder LLP
    Ms. Khachatourians may be contacted at natashak@scheerlaw.com

    No Entitlement to Reimbursement of Pre-Tender Fees

    April 28, 2016 —
    The Federal District Court for the District of Hawaii determined that the insured was not entitled to pre-tender defense fees. The Hanover Ins. Co. v. Anova Food, LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38947 (D. Haw. March 24, 2016). Anova sold and marketed fish. It was insured under policies issued by Hanover that covered claims of "personal and advertising injury." A patent infringement and false advertising case was filed against Anova in the District Court for the District of Hawaii.The underlying complaint alleged Anova falsely, misleadingly, and deceptively advertised, promoted, and sold fish. The allegations covered a period of time between 1999 and 2012, a portion of which time Anova was covered by the Hanover policies. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Georgia Supreme Court Rules Construction Defects Can Constitute an Occurrence in CGL Policies

    April 05, 2011 —

    Recently, the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed the decision in American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Company v Hathaway Development Company, Inc. stating that because Whisnant’s faulty workmanship caused damage to the surrounding properties, the construction defects constituted “occurrences” under the Commercial General Liability (CGL) policy. Unlike the South Carolina Supreme court ruling in the case of Crossman Communities v Harleysville Mutual, the Georgia Supreme Court stated that an accident can happen intentionally if the effect is not the intended result.

    Interestingly, the only dissenting judge, J. Melton, disagreed with his colleagues on the basis that “although the term ‘accident’ is not specifically defined in the policy, it is axiomatic that an ‘accident’ cannot result from ‘intentional’ behavior.” It is clear that what constitutes an occurrence in CGL policies is still being hotly debated.

    Read the full story...

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Using the Prevention Doctrine

    April 22, 2019 —
    The following scenario happens regularly in the construction industry. A contractor on a project reaches out to a subcontractor to perform work. Excited about the prospect of performing the work, the subcontractor signs a contract and puts it nose to the grindstone. After dutifully completing the work the subcontractor turns to the contractor and asks to be paid. But, the contractor refuses saying that there is a provision in the subcontract that says the contractor is only obligated to pay the subcontractor if the contractor receives payment from the owner. So the contractor has completed the work, but has no money to show for it. One potential remedy for a subcontractor in this situation is the use of the prevention doctrine. “Under the prevention doctrine, ‘if a promisor prevents or hinders fulfillment of a condition to his performance, the condition may be waived or excused.’” Cox v. SNAP, Inc., 859 F.3d 304, 308 (4th Cir. 2017) (quoting Moore Bros. Co. v. Brown & Root, Inc., 207 F.3d 7171, 725 (4th Cir. 2000)). “Put simply, ‘where a party to a contract is the cause of the failure of the performance of the obligation due him or her, that party cannot in any way take advantage of that failure.’” Haddon Hous Assocs v. United States, 711 F.3d 1330, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (quoting Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 245; Williston, § 39:4). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Erhart, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Mr. Erhart may be contacted at derhart@grsm.com

    Massachusetts Pulls Phased Trigger On Its Statute of Repose

    December 21, 2020 —
    In D’Allesandro v. Lennar Hingham Holdings, LLC, 486 Mass 150, 2020 Mass. LEXIS 721, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts answered a certified question regarding how to apply the Massachusetts statute of repose, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 260, § 2B, in regards to phased construction projects. The court held that, in this context, the completion of each individual “improvement” to its intended use, or the substantial completion of the individual building and the taking of possession for occupancy by the owner or owners, triggers the statute of repose with respect to the common areas and limited common areas of that building. Additionally, the court held that where a particular improvement is integral to, and intended to serve, multiple buildings (or the development as a whole), the statute of repose is triggered when the discrete improvement is substantially complete and open to its intended use. In D’Allesandro, the action arose out of the construction, marketing, sale and management of the Hewitts Landing Condominium (the Condominium) project. Ultimately, 150 units were constructed over 24 phases of construction, enclosed in 28 different buildings. Throughout construction, the project’s architect submitted declarations to the Town of Hingham swearing that the individual units were “substantially complete” and could be occupied for their intended use. The Town of Hingham then issued certificates of occupancy for the unit or building. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kyle Rice, White and Williams
    Mr. Rice may be contacted at ricek@whiteandwilliams.com

    LA Wildfires Push California Insurance Market to Its Limit

    January 14, 2025 —
    If you live in California, you’re always bracing for the Big One. This week it arrived in the form of uncontrollable flames. Liability experts equipped with climate models had been uneasily eyeing such a scenario, realizing in recent years that wildfire now had similar system-crashing potential as a major earthquake to upend lives and destabilize California’s $10 trillion residential property market. A group convened to examine worst-case scenarios determined that three specific areas in the state were particularly vulnerable and capable of causing far-reaching fallout. One was Pacific Palisades, the Los Angeles neighborhood reduced to ashes this week by one of at least five fires burning across the city. Reprinted courtesy of Leslie Kaufman, Bloomberg, Lauren Rosenthal, Bloomberg, Michelle Ma, Bloomberg and Alexandre Rajbhandari, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Famed NYC Bridge’s Armor Is Focus of Suit Against French Company

    January 18, 2021 —
    French construction giant Vinci SA faces allegations it’s partly to blame for the degradation of the armor installed on New York City’s Kosciuszko Bridge to protect against terrorist attacks and accidents. Hardwire LLC, a Baltimore company that bid unsuccessfully on the project, previously sued one of its former executives for allegedly stealing its proprietary technology for bridge armor so he could win the contract. On Tuesday, Hardwire sought permission to add two units of Vinci to the suit, which claims damages of more than $40 million. The armor is “splitting, delaminating, and is in danger of falling off,” causing a “clear and present danger,” according to the proposed revised complaint filed in federal court in Maryland. The separation “leaves significant vulnerabilities for the bridge cable.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joel Rosenblatt, Bloomberg

    Court Grants Partial Summary Judgment on Conversion Claim Against Insurer

    February 01, 2023 —
    Although the court was incredulous that the parties were disputing the possession of a gate opener allegedly damaged in a lightning strike, it granted the insured's motion for partial summary judgment finding the insurer had converted the gate opener. Privratsky v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 196002 (D. Haw. Oct. 27, 2022). (Full disclosure, our office is co-counsel for the insured). Mr. Privratsky alleged his home on Maui was struck by lightning which caused an electrical surge. The home and personal property were damaged. The alleged cost of repair work at one point was as much as $325,000. A claim was submitted under a homeowner's policy issued by Liberty Mutual. Liberty paid for only some of the damage. Privratsky filed suit alleging three causes of action for: (1) declaratory judgment that the losses were covered by the policy issued by Liberty; (2) bad faith; and (3) conversion of personal property, namely, the damaged gate operator. 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