BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design 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


    San Francisco Bucks U.S. Trend With Homeownership Gains

    James R. Lynch Appointed to the Washington State Capital Project Review Committee

    One More Thing Moving From California to Texas: Wildfire Risk

    New OSHA Rule Creates Electronic Reporting Requirement

    Superior Court Of Pennsylvania Holds Curb Construction Falls Within The Scope Of CASPA

    Developer Pre-Conditions in CC&Rs Limiting Ability of HOA to Make Construction Defect Claims, Found Unenforceable

    EPA Issues New PFAS Standard, Provides $1B for Testing, Cleanup of 'Forever Chemicals'

    Am I Still Covered Under the Title Insurance Policy?

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules in Builder’s Implied Warranty of Habitability Case

    Construction-Industry Clients Need Well-Reasoned and Clear Policies on Recording Zoom and Teams Meetings

    July 1, 2015 Statutory Changes Affecting Virginia Contractors and Subcontractors

    A Survey of New Texas Environmental and Regulatory Laws Enacted in the 88th Session (Updated)

    The Golden State Commits to Going Green – Why Contractors Will be in High Demand to Build the State’s Infrastructure

    Property Damage to Non-Defective Work Is Covered

    Ireland Said to Plan Home Loans Limits to Prevent Bubble

    No Coverage for Roof Collapse During Hurricane

    Massachusetts Federal Court Holds No Coverage for Mold and Water Damage Claim

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

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

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap – Considerations for Optimizing Dispute Resolution Clauses

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 38 White and Williams Lawyers

    PFAS: From Happy Mistake to Ubiquity to Toxic Liability (But is there coverage?)

    Using Lien and Bond Claims to Secure Project Payments

    Changes To Commercial Item Contracting

    OSHA Reinforces COVID Guidelines for the Workplace

    Coverage Doomed for Failing Obtain Insurer's Consent for Settlement

    Back to Basics: What is a Changes Clause?

    Is Your Construction Business Feeling the Effects of the Final DBA Rule?

    North Miami Beach Rejects as Incomplete 2nd Engineering Inspection Report From Evacuated Condo

    Determining Occurrence for Injury Under Commercial General Liability Policy Without Applying “Trigger Theory”

    The EEOC Targets Construction Industry For Heightened Enforcement

    Insurance Client Alert: Denial of Summary Judgment Does Not Automatically Establish Duty to Defend

    Attempt to Overrule Trial Court's Order to Produce Underwriting Manual Fails

    Challenging Enforceability of Liquidated Damages (In Federal Construction Context)

    OSHA Updates: You May Be Affected

    How BIM Helps Make Buildings Safer

    Hawaii Federal District Court Again Rejects Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    DoD Will Require New Cybersecurity Standards in 2020: Could Other Agencies Be Next?

    No Subrogation, Contribution Rights for Carrier Defending Construction Defect Claim

    HHMR Lawyers Recognized by Best Lawyers

    The Cross-Party Exclusion: The Hazards of Additional Named Insured Provisions

    Know When Your Claim “Accrues” or Risk Losing It

    Federal Interpleader Dealing with Competing Claims over Undisputed Payable to Subcontractor

    Potential Pitfalls Under the Contract Disputes Act for Federal Government Contractors

    Flawed Welding Faulted in Mexico City Subway Collapse

    The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities From Scratch

    Forcible Entry and Detainer Actions: Courts May Not Consider Tenant’s Hardship

    Judge Gives Cintra Bid Protest of $9B Md. P3 Project Award New Life

    University of California Earthquake Report Provides List of Old Concrete Buildings in LA

    BIOHM Seeks to Turn Plastic Waste into Insulation Material with Mushrooms
    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

    Appellate Court Endorses Discretionary Test for Vicarious Disqualification of Law Firms Due To New Attorney’s Conflict

    February 07, 2018 —
    In California Self-Insurer’s Security Fund et al. v. The Superior Court of Orange County (1/26/2018 – No. G054981), the Fourth Appellate District considered whether vicarious disqualification of a law firm is mandatory or discretionary where an attorney with a conflict joins a firm and the firm enacts an ethical screen to prevent transmission of confidential information between the new attorney and the rest of the firm. This case arose from an effort by the California Self-Insurer’s Security Fund (the “Fund”) to be reimbursed for workers’ compensation benefits advanced on behalf of the Healthcare Industry Self-Insurance Program (the “Program”). The Fund hired Nixon Peabody LLP (“Nixon Peabody”) to represent it in connection with this matter. In November 2013, represented by members of Nixon Peabody’s San Francisco office, the Fund filed a lawsuit naming 304 members of the Program as defendants. Approximately 170 defendants have since settled. Two of the non-settling defendants (“Moving Parties”), were represented by Michelman & Robinson, LLP (“M&R”). From approximately 2009 until February 1, 2017, attorney Andrew Selesnick served as Chair of M&R’s Health Care Department at the firm’s Los Angeles office, managing a team of attorneys who represented clients in the healthcare industry. Commencing in 2014, a team of four attorneys at M&R, including Selesnick, represented the Moving Parties and four other defendants, the latter of whom have since settled. Selesnick was actively involved, including participating in a confidential discussion pertaining to Moving Parties’ liability and damages and receiving many e-mails containing communications about the common defense of the remaining 170 defendants. Reprinted courtesy of David W. Evans, Haight Brown Bonesteel and Stephen M. Tye, Haight Brown Bonesteel Mr. Evans may be contacted at devans@hbblaw.com Mr. Tye may be contacted at stye@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Attorneys Get an AI Assist in Document Crunch

    May 20, 2024 —
    Artificial intelligence is often touted as a gamechanger for construction processes, and Document Crunch, a company co-founded by a longtime construction attorney, is already changing up one key area: construction contracts. Reprinted courtesy of Jeff Yoders, Engineering News-Record Mr. Yoders may be contacted at yodersj@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    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

    California Contractors: New CSLB Procedure Requires Non-California Corporations to Associate All Officers with Their Contractor’s License

    April 19, 2021 —
    As of July 1, 2020, “[e]very person who is an officer, member, responsible manager, or director of a corporation or limited liability company seeking licensure under this chapter shall be listed on the application as a member of the personnel of record,” and they must match those officers listed on California Secretary of State’s (SOS) records. (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 7065 (b)(1)). This is a deviation from the Contractors State License Board’s (CSLB) past practice of requiring foreign corporations to associate as personnel of record only their president, in contrast to requiring domestic corporations to associate their president, secretary, and treasurer. Beware that the CSLB may discover that the licensee’s personnel of record are incomplete or incorrect when reviewing a license renewal application, because it will compare the SOS’s records to the license renewal application. A license renewal application requires the licensee to list its qualifier and personnel of record. If the SOS and CSLB records do not match, this could delay approval of the license renewal application until the missing personnel are added and fingerprinted. Reprinted courtesy of Amy Pierce, Lewis Brisbois, Mark Oertel, Lewis Brisbois and John Lubitz, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Pierce may be contacted at Amy.Pierce@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Oertel may be contacted at Mark.Oertel@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Lubitz may be contacted at John.Lubitz@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hudson River PCB Cleanup Lands Back in Court

    September 03, 2019 —
    As it previously had warned, New York state on Aug. 21 filed a federal lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency seeking to reverse its certification that General Electric Co.'s removal of PCBs from the Hudson River was complete, despite the agency’s five-year review finding that the cleanup was not adequate to protect human health and the environment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Battle of Experts Cannot Be Decided on Summary Judgment

    June 13, 2018 —
    When two competing experts disagreed on the cause of the loss, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the insurer. Garcia v. Firs Community Ins. Co., Fla. App. LEXIS 4237 (Fla. Ct. App. March 28, 2018). Garcia, the homeowner, discovered water damage in his home, allegedly due to a roof leak. Garcia notified his insurer, First Community Insurance Company. A forensic engineer, Ivette Acosta, was retained by First Community to inspect the property. After the inspection, coverage was denied. The homeowner's policy covered direct loss to property only if the loss was a physical loss. Loss caused by ""rain snow, sleet, sand or dust to the interior of a building was excluded unless a covered peril first damaged the building causing an opening in a roof or wall and the rain, snow, sleet, sand or dust enters through this opening." Loss caused by wear and tear, marring, or deterioration was also excluded. 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

    How the Parking Garage Conquered the City

    January 09, 2023 —
    Uncertainty overcame owners of several Manhattan parking garages in September. A plan to implement congestion pricing — charging drivers to enter a zone south of 60th Street — could lead to more transit usage by commuters, and thus the closure of some parking garages, The City reported. Parking options have already been on the wane in the largest US city: The NYC Department of Consumer Affairs and Worker Protection counted more than 2,200 licenses for garages and lots in 2015, a number that fell to 1,899 by 2021.  For most urban residents, if not outer-borough drivers, that decline is reason to cheer. The parking garage — a big, concrete-gray box for cars — is a notorious bane of urban vitality. City after city, desperate to lure suburbanites downtown to work or shop, bulldozed prime real estate to build these structures in the postwar era, turning central business districts into vehicle-storage voids that sapped streets of pedestrian energy and hollowed out neighborhoods. Building codes that mandated a certain number of parking spaces have kept new garages coming: In suburbs, exurbs and towns across the US, you will find these facilities, squatting beside shopping centers and stadiums, airports and office parks, planned communities and amusement parks.  Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Andrew Zaleski, Bloomberg

    Ruling Finds Builder and Owners at Fault in Construction Defect Case

    December 30, 2013 —
    A Minnesota home owners association has been found 30liable for some of the damage to their homes in a jury trial. The Interlachen Propertyowners Association made a claim of construction defects against Keupers Architects and Builders who had constructed the 24-unit town home complex. According to the association’s lawyer, the half-log siding was improperly installed, leading to water intrusion and rot. The jury did find for the homeowners on the construction defect claim, but found on a claim of negligent repairs that the association was 30% at fault, due to insufficient maintenance of the building. “We don’t think any amount of maintenance would have saved these buildings,” said Jason Tarasek, the lawyer for the association. The association is likely to appeal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of