BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineers
    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


    Major Changes in Commercial Construction Since 2009

    New Megablimp to Deliver to Remote Alaskan Construction Sites

    New York’s Highest Court Reverses Lower Court Ruling That Imposed Erroneous Timeliness Requirement For Disclaimers of Coverage

    U.K. Broadens Crackdown on Archaic Property Leasehold System

    Update Regarding McMillin Albany LLC v. Super Ct.

    Deducting 2018 Real Property Taxes Prepaid in 2017 Comes with Caveats

    DC Circuit Rejects Challenge to EPA’s CERCLA Decision Regarding Hardrock Mining Industry

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Too Soon?”

    Rhode Island Finds Pollution Exclusion Ambiguous, Orders Coverage for Home Heating Oil Leak

    Insurance Client Alert: Mere Mailing of Policy and Renewals Into California is Not Sufficient Basis for Jurisdiction Over Bad Faith Lawsuit

    Renovation Contractors: Be Careful How You Disclose Your Projects

    More Construction Defects for San Francisco’s Eastern Bay Bridge Expansion

    A Loud Boom, But No Serious Injuries in World Trade Center Accident

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “D’Oh!”

    No Coverage for Negligent Misrepresentation without Allegations of “Bodily Injury” or “Property Damage”

    New York’s Highest Court Weighs in on N.Y. Labor Law

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

    Collapse of Improperly Built Deck Not An Occurrence

    Defect Claims Called “Witch Hunt”

    California Court of Appeals Says, “We Like Eich(leay)!”

    Unpunished Racist Taunts: A Pennsylvania Harassment Case With No True 'Winner'

    New York Court Rejects Owner’s Bid for Additional Insured Coverage

    Federal Court Dismisses Coverage Action in Favor of Pending State Proceeding

    Massive Wildfire Near Boulder, Colo., Destroys Nearly 1,000 Homes and Businesses

    The Hidden Price of Outdated Damage Prevention Laws: Part I

    Hawaii Federal Court Grants Insured's Motion for Remand

    Water Intrusion Judged Not Related to Construction

    Home-Rentals Wall Street Made Say Grow or Go: Real Estate

    A Closer Look at an HOA Board Member’s Duty to Homeowners

    In Review: SCOTUS Environmental and Administrative Decisions in the 2020 Term

    Water Seepage, Ensuing Mold Damage Covered by Homeowner's Policy

    Elyria, Ohio, to Invest $250M to Halt Illegal Sewage into Black River

    Aging-in-Place Features Becoming Essential for Many Home Buyers

    AB 685 and COVID-19 Workplace Exposure: New California Notice and Reporting Requirements of COVID Exposure Starting January 1, 2021

    Can I Be Required to Mediate, Arbitrate or Litigate a California Construction Dispute in Some Other State?

    Contractors Prepare for a Strong 2021 Despite Unpredictability

    Association Insurance Company v. Carbondale Glen Lot E-8, LLC: Federal Court Reaffirms That There Is No Duty to Defend or Indemnify A Builder For Defective Construction Work

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    New York Construction Practice Team Obtains Summary Judgment, Dismissal of Labor Law §240(1) Claim Against Municipal Entities

    BWB&O ranks as a 2025 Best Law Firm by Best Lawyers®

    Housing-Related Spending Made Up Significant Portion of GDP in Fourth Quarter 2013

    Builders Seek to Modify Scaffold Law

    Managing Once-in-a-Generation Construction Problems – Part II

    Will the Hidden Cracks in the Bay Bridge Cause Problems During an Earthquake?

    Puerto Rico Grid Restoration Plagued by Historic Problems, New Challenges

    California Supreme Court Protects California Policyholders for Intentional Acts of Employees

    Specific Performance: Equitable Remedy to Enforce Affirmative Obligation

    Thinking About a Daubert Motion to Challenge an Expert Opinion?

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Wins Summary Judgment in Favor of Third-Party Defendant

    DOE Abruptly Cancels $13B Cleanup Award to BWXT-Fluor Team
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Arizona Supreme Court Confirms a Prevailing Homeowner Can Recover Fees on Implied Warranty Claims

    August 30, 2017 —
    On August 9th, in Sirrah Enterprises, L.L.C. v. Wunderlich, the Arizona Supreme Court settled the question about recovery of attorneys’ fees after prevailing on implied warranty claims against a residential contractor. The simple answer is, yes, a homeowner who prevails on the merits can recover the fees they spent to prove that shoddy construction breached the implied warranty of workmanship and habitability. Why? Because, as Justice Timmer articulated, “[t]he implied warranty is a contract term.” Although implied, the warranty is legally part of the written agreement in which “a residential builder warrants that its work is performed in a workmanlike manner and that the structure is habitable.” In other words, a claim based on the implied warranty not only arises out of the contract, the claim is actually based on a contract term. Since, in A.R.S. § 12-341.01, Arizona law provides for prevailing parties to recover their fees on claims “arising out of contract” and because the implied warranty is now viewed by the courts as a contract term, homeowners can recover their fees after successfully proving breach of the implied warranty. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rick Erickson, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr Erickson may be contacted at rerickson@swlaw.com

    White House Plan Would Break Up Corps Civil-Works Functions

    July 18, 2018 —
    As part of a sweeping federal government reorganization proposal, the White House has recommended shifting the Army Corps of Engineers’ civil-works operation to the Dept. of Transportation and the Dept. of the Interior. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, ENR
    Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com

    Colorado Supreme Court to Hear Colorado Pool Systems, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance Company, et al.

    October 10, 2013 —
    The Colorado Pool case has been featured in two past blog entries, including: “An Arapahoe County District Court Refuses to Apply HB 10-1394 Retrospectively,” which discussed the case at the trial court level, and “Colorado Court of Appeals Finds Damages to Non-Defective Property Arising From Defective Construction Covered Under Commercial General Liability Policy,” which discussed the case at the Court of Appeals level. In both instances, the courts held that retroactively applying C.R.S. C.R.S. § 13-20-808 to policies in effect prior to the date of the statute’s enactment would be impermissibly retrospective because it would change the coverage under the policy for which the parties had originally bargained. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain
    David M. McLain can be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    How to Get Your Bedroom Into the Met Museum

    February 23, 2016 —
    A dressing room, i.e., a large closet devoted explicitly to the putting on and taking off of clothing, has just gone on permanent display at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. The room, labeled the Worsham-Rockefeller Dressing Room after its two previous owners, is a dizzying, gilded-age assemblage of competing wallpaper patterns, woodwork, and metal ornament. Still. The Met has one of the largest and most important collections of art in the world: Why did a dressing room end up migrating from a house slated for demolition on West 54th Street to a museum's hallowed halls? And what, for that matter, did every owner of the three-dozen period rooms do to get their homes on display? By narrating the history of the following rooms, three of the Met's curators have helped supply an answer to what it takes to get your bedroom into the Met. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James Tarmy, Bloomberg

    State Supreme Court Cases Highlight Importance of Wording in Earth Movement Exclusions

    June 21, 2017 —
    In Erie Insurance Property and Casualty Company v. Chaber, the West Virginia Supreme Court recently held that an insurance policy’s earth movement exclusion was unambiguous and applied to both manmade and natural earth movement. The Court also found that a narrow “ensuing loss” exception to the exclusion that provided coverage for glass breakage resulting from earth movement could not be extended to cover the entire loss. The Erie Insurance Property and Casualty Company (Erie) insured five commercial buildings owned by Dmitri and Mary Chaber. One of the properties was damaged by a landslide, and the Chabers filed a claim with Erie. Erie asserted that the loss was excluded from coverage because the policy excluded coverage for losses caused by earth movement, which was defined to include earthquakes, landslides, subsidence of manmade mines, and earth sinking (aside from sinkhole collapse), rising or shifting. The exclusion stated that it applied “regardless of whether any of the above . . . is caused by an act of nature or is otherwise caused,” and also contained an anti-concurrent causation clause. However, there was an exception for glass breakage caused by earth movement. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hannah E. Austin, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Austin may be contacted at hea@sdvlaw.com

    Manufacturer of Asbestos-Free Product May Still Be Liable for Asbestos Related Injuries

    July 30, 2015 —
    In Sherman v. Hennessy Industries, Inc. (No. B252566, filed June 18, 2015), the Court of Appeal, Second District, reversed a trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of a manufacturer of a brake grinding machine. The Court cited an exception to the general rule that manufacturers may not be held liable, under a strict products liability theory, where the plaintiff’s injuries arise from other products that are used in conjunction with the defendant’s product. Plaintiff and appellant, Michael Sherman, was an automobile mechanic from 1962 to 1977. Mr. Sherman alleged that during this period he used an arcing machine, which abraded brake linings by means of sand paper moving at high speeds. Sherman alleged the machine released asbestos dust, which he then brought home, exposing his wife Debra Sherman to asbestos. Ms. Sherman developed mesothelioma and passed away from exposure to the asbestos dust carried home by her husband. Reprinted courtesy of Kristian B. Moriarty, R. Bryan Martin and Lee Marshall of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Moriarty may be contacted at kmoriarty@hbblaw.com Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com Mr. Marshall may be contacted at lmarshall@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Commercial Real Estate Brokerages in an Uncertain Russian Market

    March 28, 2022 —
    Several commercial real estate firms have joined the growing list of companies temporarily suspending – or outright terminating – property and facility management operations in Russia amid economic sanctions and mounting international pressure. CBRE is the latest to make such a move, discontinuing its Russian leasing, investment and property management operations and denouncing Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in a statement issued March 7th. Other major players, including Savills, Knight Frank, and Colliers, have already suspended operations in the country, citing similar concern for international sanctions and the humanitarian impact of the invasion. Colliers is going even further to suspend operations in Belarus as well. Recently, global real estate service giant JLL switched course, issuing a formal statement that “with great sadness,” it will begin the process of separating from its domestic operations in Russia, though not commenting on whether the separation will be temporary or permanent. This is a significant change from just earlier this month , where, when asked about pulling operations from the country, JLL stated it would stay abreast of the situation abroad and continue to ensure the safety of its people and clients. Now that CBRE and Dallas-based JLL have joined the list, Houston-based powerhouse Hines appears to be continuing its “wait and see” approach. Hines currently owns Russian assets valued at $2.9 billion, nearly 2 percent of its entire $160 billion asset portfolio, and its property management portfolio manages more than 243 million square feet worldwide. While other firms have temporarily suspended current operations, Hines has gone so far as to say it will avoid servicing any future investments in the country, though it did similarly condemn Russia’s actions. With JLL’s recent decision , if Hines does take a stronger stance, it will likely happen soon. Reprinted courtesy of Cait Horner, Pillsbury and Adam J. Weaver, Pillsbury Ms. Horner may be contacted at cait.horner@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Weaver may be contacted at adam.weaver@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Flexible Seattle Off-Ramp Would Retain Shape in Quake

    November 23, 2016 —
    Moving from the lab to the field, a highway off-ramp bridge under construction in Seattle features memory-retaining metal rods and bendable concrete designed to provide the structure with flexibility sufficient to withstand a major seismic event. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tim Newcomb, Engineering News-Record
    Engineering News-Record may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com