BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration 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


    Sold Signs Fill Builder Lots as U.S. Confidence Rises: Economy

    The Looming Housing Crisis and Limited Government Relief—An Examination of the CDC Eviction Moratorium Two Months In

    Zinc in London Climbs for Second Day Before U.S. Housing Data

    Denial of Claim for Concealment or Fraud Reversed by Sixth Circuit

    NTSB Pittsburgh Bridge Probe Update Sheds Light on Collapse Sequence

    Jobs Machine in U.S. Created More Than Burger Flippers Last Year

    Notes from the Nordic Smart Building Convention

    Drastic Rebuild Resurrects Graves' Landmark Portland Building

    Winter COVID-19 Relief Bill: Overview of Key Provisions

    Supreme Court Holds That Prevailing Wage Statute is Constitutional

    South Carolina Homeowners May Finally Get Class Action for Stucco Defects

    Insurer Unable to Declare its Coverage Excess In Construction Defect Case

    Around the State

    Insurance Law Alert: Incorporation of Defective Work Does Not Result in Covered Property Damage in California Construction Claims

    Pennsylvania Court Finds that Two Possible Causes Can Prove a Product Malfunction Theory of Liability

    Mississippi Floods Prompt New Look at Controversial Dam Project

    Delaware District Court Finds CGL Insurer Owes Condo Builder a Duty to Defend Faulty Workmanship Claims — Based on the Subcontractor Exception to the Your Work Exclusion

    Times Square Alteration Opened Up a Can of Worms

    Maximizing Contractual Indemnity Rights: Insuring the Indemnitor's Obligation

    Two Lawyers From Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group, Andrea DeField and Latosha Ellis, Selected for American Bar Association’s 2022 “On The Rise” Award

    New WA Law Caps Retainage on Private Projects at 5%

    Florida extends the Distressed Condominium Relief Act

    New Jersey Appellate Decision Reminds Bid Protestors to Take Caution When Determining Where to File an Action

    The Godfather of Solar Predicts Its Future

    Why Ethiopia’s $5 Billion Dam Has Riled Its Neighbors

    U.S. Army Corps Announces Regulatory Program “Modernization” Plan

    How Data Drives the Future of Design

    Housing Starts in U.S. Slumped More Than Forecast in March

    The Requirement to State a “Sum Certain” No Longer a Jurisdictional Bar to Government Contract Claims

    Senator Ray Scott Introduced a Bill to Reduce Colorado’s Statute of Repose for Construction Defect Actions to Four Years

    ASCE Statement on House Failure to Pass the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    Still Going, After All This Time: the Sacketts, EPA and the Clean Water Act

    Do We Need Blockchain in Construction?

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    Will Future Megacities Be a Marvel or a Mess? Look at New Delhi

    Why Clinton and Trump’s Infrastructure Plans Leave Us Wanting More

    Dear Engineer: Has your insurer issued a “Reservation of Rights” letter? (law note)

    Iowa Apartment Complex Owners Awarded Millions for Building Defects

    Atlanta Office Wins Defense Verdict For Property Manager On Claims By Vendor, Cross-Claims By Property Owner

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Who Needs Them”

    Congratulations to our 2019 Southern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Clarifies Standard for Imposing Spoliation Sanctions

    Location, Location, Location—Even in Construction Liens

    Save A Legal Fee? Sometimes You Better Talk With Your Construction Attorney

    Law Firm Settles Two Construction Defect Suits for a Combined $4.7 Million

    California Rejects Judgments By Confession Pursuant to Civil Code Section 1132

    Trump Administration Announces New Eviction Moratorium

    Deck Police - The New Mandate for HOA's Takes Safety to the Next Level

    Miller Act Bond Claims Subject to “Pay If Paid”. . . Sometimes

    Project Labor Agreements Will Now Be Required for Large-Scale Federal Construction Projects
    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

    In a Win for Property Owners California Court Expands and Clarifies Privette Doctrine

    March 28, 2018 —
    We’ve written before about the Privette doctrine, which generally holds that a higher-tiered party is not liable for injuries sustained by employees of a lower-tiered party under the peculiar risk doctrine, here, here, here and here. We’ve also talked about some of the exceptions to the Privette doctrine, including the non-delegable duty doctrine and the negligent exercise of retained control doctrine, which provide that a hirer cannot rely on the Privette doctrine if it owed a non-delegable duty to an employee of an independent contractor or if it retained control over the work of an employee of an independent contractor and negligently exercised that control in a manner that affirmatively contributes to injuries to that employee. In the next case, Delgadillo v. Television Center, Inc., Second District Court of Appeals, Case No. B270985 (February 2, 2018), the Court examined whether a property owner could be held liable under the non-delegable duty doctrine and negligent exercise of retained control doctrine for failing to provide structural anchor bolts on its buildings which led to the death of an employee of window washing company. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel, Rose, Black, & Dean, LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Yellowstone Park Aims for Quick Reopening After Floods

    July 03, 2022 —
    Gardiner, Mont. (AP) -- Most of Yellowstone National Park should reopen within the next two weeks — much faster than originally expected after record floods pounded the region last week and knocked out major roads, federal officials said. Yellowstone Superintendent Cam Sholly said the world-renowned park will be able to accommodate fewer visitors for the time being, and it will take more time to restore road connections with some southern Montana communities. Park officials said Sunday they'll use $50 million in federal highway money to speed up road and bridge repairs. There’s still no timetable for repairs to routes between the park and areas of Montana where the recovery is expected to stretch for months. Yellowstone will partially reopen at 8 a.m. Wednesday, more than a week after more than 10,000 visitors were forced out of the park when the Yellowstone and other rivers went over their banks after being swelled by melting snow and several inches of rainfall. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg

    The Murky Waters Between "Good Faith" and "Bad Faith"

    September 30, 2019 —
    In honor of Shark Week, that annual television-event where we eagerly flip on the Discovery Channel to get our fix of these magnificent (and terrifying!) creatures, I was inspired to write about the “predatory” practices we’ve encountered recently in our construction insurance practice. The more sophisticated the business and risk management department is, the more likely they have a sophisticated insurer writing their coverage. Although peaceful coexistence is possible, that doesn’t mean that insurers won’t use every advantage available to them – compared to even large corporate insureds, insurance companies are the apex predators of the insurance industry. In order to safeguard policyholders’ interests, most states have developed a body of law (some statutory, some based on judicial decisions) requiring insurers to act in good faith when dealing with their insureds. This is typically embodied as a requirement that the insurer act “fairly and reasonably” in processing, investigating, and handling claims. If the insurer does not meet this standard, insureds may be entitled to damages above and beyond that which they could otherwise recover for breach of contract. Proving that an insurer acted in “bad faith,” however, can be like swimming against the riptide. Most states hold that bad faith requires more than just a difference of opinion between insured and insurer over the available coverage – the policyholder must show that the insurer acted “wantonly” or “maliciously,” or, in less stringent jurisdictions, that the insurer was “unreasonable.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Theresa A. Guertin, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Ms. Guertin may be contacted at tag@sdvlaw.com

    Suzanne Pollack Elected to Lawyers Club of San Diego 2021 Board of Directors

    May 03, 2021 —
    San Diego Associate Suzanne Pollack was recently elected to the 2021 Lawyers Club of San Diego Board of Directors for a three-year term that will begin on July 1, 2021. Founded in 1972, the mission of Lawyers Club - San Diego’s largest specialty bar association - is to advance the status of women in the law and society. “I am honored to be joining Lawyers Club’s Board of Directors, particularly after this last year, during which we saw the dramatic impact that the pandemic had upon women in the workforce," said Ms. Pollack. "Promoting equality, diversity, and advocacy has never been more important, and I look forward to working with the Board to further these goals.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Suzanne Pollack, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Pollack may be contacted at Suzanne.Pollack@lewisbrisbois.com

    New Home Permits Surge in Wisconsin

    October 10, 2013 —
    September saw a 42% increase in the number of permits issued to build new homes in the metro areas of Wisconsin. MTD Marketing Services of Wisconsin described it as “another good month as starts continue to increase across the state.” In September 2012, 266 permits were issued, while September 2013 saw that increase to 378. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Cause Still Unclear in March Retaining Wall Collapse on $900M NJ Interchange

    June 07, 2021 —
    A probe continues by construction engineer Hardesty and Hanover LLC into what caused the late March collapse of a retaining wall that is part of one of New Jersey's largest roadbuilding projects—the already late-running effort called Direct Connection, which aims to untangle the convoluted interchange of north-south I-295 and east-west Route 42 in Camden County. Reprinted courtesy of Stephanie Loder, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Supreme Court of Kentucky Holds Plaintiff Can Recover for Stigma Damages in Addition to Repair Costs Resulting From Property Damage

    August 15, 2018 —
    In Muncie v. Wiesemann, 2018 K.Y. LEXIS 257, the Supreme Court of Kentucky considered whether stigma damages[1] in a property casualty case are recoverable in addition to the costs incurred to remediate the actual damage. The court held that stigma damages are recoverable in addition to repair costs, but the total of the stigma damages and repair costs cannot exceed the diminution in the fair market value of the property. The court’s decision establishes that if the repair costs are insufficient to make the plaintiff whole, a recovery for stigma damages up to the amount of the diminution in the market value of the home is appropriate. Appellants Cindy and Jim Muncie incurred significant property damage to their home as a result of an oil leak originating from a neighboring property owned by the Estate of Martha Magel. In 2011, Auto Owners Insurance Company (Auto Owners), the liability carrier for the Estate’s testatrix, Patricia Weisman, filed an impleader complaint in federal court to discharge its obligation to settle the third-party liability claims on behalf of Ms. Weisman. Auto Owners reached a settlement with the Muncies for $60,000 which represented the remediation costs for the actual damage to the property. The settlement release reserved the Muncies’ right to pursue a claim for stigma damages associated with the oil leak. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Duty to Defend Affirmed in Connecticut Construction Defect Case

    August 13, 2014 —
    According to an article by Matthew Vocci of Ober | Kaler in JD Supra, the Supreme Court of Conneticut affirmed in Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Netherlands Ins. “that allegations of years-long, continuing and progressive water intrusion caused by alleged construction defects triggered a duty to defend under CGL coverage language.” Vocci stated that the result demonstrated “the importance of the wording of the allegations relating to construction defects, resulting damage and when the parties were on notice of the issues. For property owners, contractors/builders/developers and their insurers, the allegations in the complaint guide what can be a difficult and contentious determination regarding whether the insured is provided with a defense from its CGL carrier.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of