BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut construction defect 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


    School Blown Down by Wind Still Set to Open on Schedule

    Surveys: Hundreds of Design Professionals See Big COVID-19 Business Impacts

    It’s Not Just the Millennium Tower That’s Sinking in San Francisco

    Lis Pendens – Recordation and Dissolution

    DC Circuit Approves, with Some Misgivings, FERC’s Approval of the Atlantic Sunrise Natural Gas Pipeline Extension

    Insurance Alert: Insurer Delay Extends Time to Repair or Replace Damaged Property

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds Fire Damage Resulted from Single Occurrence

    Legislative Update: Bid Protest Law Changes to Benefit Contractors

    What You Need to Know to Protect the Project Against Defect Claims

    7 Ways Technology is Changing Construction (guest post)

    Homebuilding Still on the Rise

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “This Is Sufficient for Your Purposes …”

    Direct Contractors In California Should Take Steps Now To Reduce Exposure For Unpaid Wages By Subcontractors

    Haight Welcomes Elizabeth Lawley

    North Carolina Appeals Court Threatens Long-Term Express Warranties

    Public-Private Partnerships: When Will Reality Meet the Promise?

    The Most Expensive Apartment Listings in New York That Are Not in Manhattan

    Defense Owed to Insured Subcontractor, but not to Additional Insured

    Fed. Judge Blocks Release of Records on FIU Bridge Collapse, Citing NTSB Investigation

    Carbon Sequestration Can Combat Global Warming, Sometimes in Unexpected Ways

    Court Makes an Unsettling Inference to Find that the Statute of Limitations Bars Claims Arising from a 1997 Northridge Earthquake Settlement

    The Contractor’s Contingency: What Contractors and Construction Managers Need to Know and Be Wary Of

    Are COVID-19 Claims Covered by Builders Risk Insurance Policies?

    Global Emissions From Buildings, Construction Climb to Record Levels

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    Insured's Claim for Water Damage Dismissed with Leave to Amend

    Sometimes, Being too Cute with Pleading Allegations is Unnecessary

    Public Works Bid Protests – Who Is Responsible? Who Is Responsive?

    Do You Have the Receipt? Pennsylvania Court Finds Insufficient Evidence That Defendant Sold the Product

    French Government Fines National Architects' Group $1.6M Over Fee-Fixing

    Hawaii Court of Appeals Finds Insured AOAO Not Liable for Securing Inadequate Insurance

    The Fair Share Act Impacts the Strategic Planning of a Jury Trial

    Las Vegas Team Obtains Complete Dismissal of a Traumatic Brain Injury Claim

    Luxury Homes Push City’s Building Permits Past $7.5 Million

    First Railroad Bridge Between Russia and China Set to Open

    Texas Jury Awards $5.3 Million to Company Defamed by Union: Could it work in Pennsylvania?

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Los Angeles Tier 1 “Best Law Firm” and Tier 2 for Los Angeles and Orange County by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2022

    Florida’s Supreme Court Resolves Conflicting Appellate Court Decisions on Concurrent Causation

    Asbestos Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Michigan Lawmakers Pass $4.7B Infrastructure Spending Bill

    Citigroup Pays Record $697 Million for Hong Kong Office Tower

    Deadline for Hurricane Ian Disaster Recovery Applications Announced

    Baby Boomer Housing Deficit Coming?

    Detroit Craftsmen Sift House Rubble in Quest for Treasured Wood

    It's a Wrap! Enforcing Online Agreements in Light of the CPRA

    Narrow Promissory Estoppel Exception to Create Insurance Coverage

    The National Labor Relations Board Joint Employer Standard is Vacated by the Eastern District of Texas

    New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ Bill

    Windstorm Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    You Need to be a Contractor for Workers’ Compensation Immunity to Apply
    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

    Cyber Thieves Phish Away a $735K Payment to a Minnesota Contractor

    May 06, 2024 —
    The contractor's project manager asked for money due, $735,000 under Payment Application 13, to be sent by the owner electronically. "Hi Rick," the project manager, whose first name is Jalen, wrote in an email dated Aug. 15. "Can we have payments remitted electronically as we currently have numerous uncleared checks on hold?" Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Colorado Supreme Court affirms Woodbridge II’s “Adverse Use” Distinction

    December 20, 2021 —
    Last year, I posted regarding the Colorado Court of Appeals’ decision in Woodbridge II, which concluded that the “adverse use” element for prescriptive easement claims only requires the claimant to “show a nonpermissive or otherwise unauthorized use of property that interfered with the owner’s property interests.” Viento Blanco, LLC, 2020 COA 34 (Woodbridge II), ¶ 2. Thus, Woodbridge II concluded, the claimants acknowledgement or recognition of an owner’s title alone is insufficient to defeat “adverse use” in the prescriptive easement context. Id. That decision was up for review by the Colorado Supreme Court at the time of my prior post. It has now been affirmed, thereby settling an arguable appellate decision split created by Woodbridge II. See Lo Viento Blanco, LLC v. Woodbridge Condo. Ass’n, Inc., 2021 CO 56 (“Woodbridge”). “Like the division below, and for much the same reasons,” the Colorado Supreme Court affirmed in Woodbridge “that under Colorado law, a claimant’s acknowledgement or recognition of the owner’s title during the claimant’s asserted prescriptive period does not interrupt the prescriptive use or undermine the claimant’s adverse use.” Woodbridge, ¶ 2. Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Gabriel’s opinion agreed with the Court of Appeals’ reasoning “that although Woodbridge recognized that it did not hold title, no evidence indicated that it had acted in subordination to the owner’s title.” Id. ¶ at 13. The Court further agreed with Woodbridge II’srejection of Lo Viento’s “permissive use” argument because “the permission offered … was conditional and Woodbridge never agreed to any of the conditions set forth therein.” Id. On that basis, Woodbridge confirmed that “a claimant seeking to establish a prescriptive easement need not show that it asserted exclusive ownership of the property during the prescriptive period,” but only “that its use was without permission or otherwise unauthorized and that it interfered with the owner’s property interests.” Id. at ¶ 23. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    Accident/Occurrence Requirement Does not Preclude Coverage for Vicarious Liability or Negligent Supervision

    June 06, 2018 —
    In Liberty Surplus Ins. Corp. v. Ledesma & Meyer Construction Co., Inc. (No. S236765, filed 6/4/18) (L&M), the California Supreme Court ruled that the liability insurance requirement that injury be caused by an “occurrence,” defined as an “accident,” does not preclude coverage of an employer’s independent tort liability for injury deliberately caused by its employee. In L&M, Liberty insured a construction company that contracted to manage a construction project at a middle school in San Bernardino, California. A 13-year-old student subsequently sued the company in state court, alleging that she had been sexually molested by a company employee, Hecht. Among others, she alleged a cause of action for negligent hiring, retention and supervision of the employee. The construction company tendered to Liberty, which defended the employer under a reservation of rights while seeking declaratory relief in federal court. The district court granted summary judgment for Liberty, ruling that the injury was not caused by an “occurrence.” On appeal, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals certified the question to the California Supreme Court as a matter of state law. 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

    Best Lawyers Honors 43 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Recognizes Three Partners as 'Lawyers of The Year'

    September 14, 2020 —
    Best Lawyers has selected 43 Lewis Brisbois attorneys across 25 offices for inclusion in its list of 2021 Best Lawyers in America. It has also recognized three Lewis Brisbois partners as "Lawyers of the Year": Los Angeles Partner Jon P. Kardassakis (Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions - Defendants); Roanoke Partner Paul C. Kuhnel (Medical Malpractice Law - Defendants); and Northwest Indiana Managing Partner Renee J. Mortimer (Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants). Please join us in congratulating these three partners and the following attorneys on their Best Lawyers recognition. Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Manager Has Defense As Additional Insured

    September 03, 2015 —
    The court found that the construction manager was an additional insured under the contractor's policy. Turner Constr. Co. v. Navigators Ins. Co., 2015 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2704 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. July 23, 2015). The owner hired two contractors, Enclos Corp. and Five Star Electric Corp. In their separate contracts with the owner, each contractor agreed to procure a CGL policy naming the owner and a person identified as the construction manager as additional insureds. Travelers was Enclos's insurer, and Navigators Insurance Company was Five Star's insurer. Turner was hired to "provide pre-construction services and construction management services for the Project." 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

    Surety Bond Now a Valid Performance Guarantee for NC Developers (guest post)

    June 09, 2016 —
    Welcome summer days! Today we have a guest post by Todd Bryant, president and founder of Bryant Surety Bonds. He is a surety bonds expert with years of experience in helping contractors get bonded and start their business. While design professionals generally don’t have to deal with performance bonds directly, they are often at the front lines of advising owners as to various Requests for Proposals submitted by hopeful contractors. In that spirit, be sure to read how the new law changes security requirements. Take it away, Todd! Last year wrapped up with some good news for North Carolina subdivision developers: House Bill 721 confirmed that construction bonds are, in fact, a viable form of performance guarantee. Previous legislation was ambiguous on this point, but the new bill– which took effect last October– sought to clear up the confusion. Although the new rules have been in effect for eight months, there’s been scant coverage of the changes, and what they mean for developers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    Generally, What Constitutes A Trade Secret Is A Question of Fact

    February 01, 2021 —
    In construction, contractors maintain competitiveness by compiling, combining, utilizing, or developing proprietary and unique systems. The systems can be from a cost standpoint (determining general conditions or general requirement costs and percentages including percentages for insurance) or can be with respect to certain construction assembly or delegated design components. Such proprietary and unique systems are trade secrets to the contractors and efforts are taken to identify such information as confidential when proposing on a project. Contractors would not want such systems disclosed to others because it would dilute and impact what they believe is valuable and makes them competitive in the marketplace. Florida’s Uniform Trade Secret Act (“FUTSA”) creates a statutory cause of action for the misappropriation of trade secrets. (FUTSA is set forth in Florida Statute s. 688.001 en seq.) FUTSA displaces or “preempts all claims [such as common law claims] based on misappropriation of trade secrets.” Alphamed Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Arriva Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 391 F.Supp.2d 1148, 1167 (S.D.Fla. 2005). See also Fla. Stat. s. 688.008. Florida Statute s. 688.002 (found here) defines the terms “trade secret” and “misappropriation.” 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

    Discovery Requests in Bad Faith Litigation Considered by Court

    June 10, 2015 —
    The federal district court considered a variety of discovery requests by the insured in a bad faith case against State Farm. Stephens v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 2015 WL 1638516 (M.D. Pa. April 13, 2015). The insured plaintiff was a quadriplegic. His complaint alleged that he notified State Farm, through its agent, that he would have to leave his residence for medical treatment and intended to rent the home while he received care for his disabling condition. The complaint further alleged that the insured was told by State Farm's agent that his insurance would remain unaffected by his departure while he sought medical care. Nevertheless, when the insured reported loss due to vandalism and water damage at his home, State Farm relied upon his departure from the residence to cancel his insurance. In discovery, the insured requested three categories of documents from State Farm. First, he requested State Farm's claims manuals, guidelines and instructions materials relating to insurance claims like those made by this insured. Second, the plaintiff requested performance reviews and performance incentive programs for all of State Farm's employees who played a role in decisions in this case from 2009 to the present. Finally, the plaintiff demanded that State Farm compile information relating to other insurance lawsuits brought against State Farm involving theft, vandalism and water damage claims, as well as all lawsuits or complaints regarding the conduct of this particular claims adjuster. When the materials were not produced, plaintiff filed a motion to compel. 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