BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating 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


    Few Homes Available to Reno Buyers, Plenty of Commercial Properties

    Builder’s Be Wary of Insurance Policies that Provide No Coverage for Building: Mt. Hawley Ins. Co v. Creek Side at Parker HOA

    How Robotics Can Improve Construction and Demolition Waste Sorting

    Courts Take Another Swipe at the Implied Warranty of the Plans and Specifications

    Failing to Adopt a Comprehensive Cyber Plan Can Lead to Disaster

    Construction Case Alert: Appellate Court Confirms Engineer’s Duty to Defend Developer Arises Upon Tender of Indemnity Claim

    Federal Court Strikes Down 'Persuader' Rule

    Harmon Tower Case Settled Prior to Start of Trial

    Ordinary Use of Term In Insurance Policy Prevailed

    California Court Invokes Equity to Stretch Anti-Subrogation Rule Principles

    Liability Insurer’s Duty To Defend Insured Is Broader Than Its Duty To Indemnify

    Ahlers & Cressman Presents a Brief History of Liens

    Construction Defect Bill a Long Shot in Nevada

    Manhattan’s Property Boom Pushes Landlords to Sell Early

    Failure to Timely File Suit in Federal Court for Flood Loss is Fatal

    Insurance Coverage for COVID-19? Two N.J. Courts Allow Litigation to Proceed

    Addressing the Defective Stucco Crisis

    Handshake Deals Gone Wrong

    2021 Construction Related Bills to Keep an Eye On [UPDATED]

    New Megablimp to Deliver to Remote Alaskan Construction Sites

    Houses Can Still Make Cents: Illinois’ Implied Warranty of Habitability

    Resurgent Housing Seen Cushioning U.S. From World Woes: Economy

    A New AAA Study Confirms that Arbitration is Faster to Resolution Than Court – And the Difference Can be Assessed Monetarily

    Second Circuit Finds Potential Ambiguity in Competing “Anti-Concurrent Cause” Provisions in Hurricane Sandy Property Loss

    Nebraska Court Ruling Backs Latest Keystone XL Pipeline Route

    Unravel the Facts Before Asserting FDUTPA and Tortious Interference Claims

    As California Faces Mandatory Water Use Reductions How Will the Construction Industry be Impacted?

    Jinx: Third Circuit Rules in Favor of Teamsters in Withdrawal Case

    New Strategy for Deterring Intracorporate Litigation?: Delaware Supreme Court Supports Fee-Shifting Bylaws

    Seventh Circuit Remands “Waters of the United States” Case to Corps of Engineers to Determine Whether there is a “Significant Nexus”

    Virtual Jury Trials of Construction Disputes: The Necessary Union of Both Sides of the Brain

    New Jersey Law Firm Sued for Malpractice in Construction Defect Litigation

    The Ups and Downs of Elevator Maintenance Contractor's Policy Limits

    Federal Court Dismisses Coverage Action in Favor of Pending State Proceeding

    Badly Constructed Masonry Walls Not an Occurrence in Arkansas Law

    Recent Federal Court Decision Favors Class Action Defendants

    President Trump’s “Buy American, Hire American” Executive Order and the Construction Industry

    The First UK Hospital Being Built Using AI Technology

    Home Prices Expected to Increase All Over the U.S.

    Echoes of Shutdown in Delay of Key Building Metric

    Experts Weigh In on Bilingual Best Practices for Jobsites

    Fannie Mae Says Millennials Are Finally Leaving Their Parents' Basements

    Full Extent of Damage From Turkey Quakes Takes Shape

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 2: Coverage for Smoke-Related Damages

    A Lawyer's Perspective on Current Issues Dominating the Construction Industry

    New Florida Bill Shortens Time for Construction-Defect Lawsuits

    Supreme Court of New Jersey Reviews Statutes of Limitation and the Discovery Rule in Construction Defect Cases

    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

    How Retro-Commissioning Can Extend the Life of a Building—and the Planet

    Congratulations to BWB&O for Ranking #4 in Orange County Business Journal’s 2023 Book of Lists for Law Firms!
    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

    El Paso Increases Surety Bond Requirement on Contractors

    April 25, 2011 —

    The city of El Paso has recently increased surety bonds required of contractors from $10,000 to $50,000, according to the El Paso Times. Proponents of the increase believe it was necessary to protect homeowners from fly-by-night builders, while opponents argue that the increase will have an adverse effect on an industry in that is already suffering due to the economic slowdown.

    Arguments for and against the increase have been flooding the blogosphere with their views. Christian Dorobantescu on the Small Business Entrepreneur Blog claims that “only about 15% of the city’s 2,500 contractors had been able to secure a higher bond to remain eligible for work after the new requirements were announced.” However, insurance companies have a different take. “From a surety broker standpoint, most contractors will be able qualify for the bond; some will just have to pay higher premium rates to obtain it,” a recent post on the Surety1 blog argues.

    While the increased bond may help homeowners deal with construction defect claims, it is not clear what effect it will have on builders in El Paso.

    Read more from the El Paso Times

    Read more from the Small Business Entrepreneur Blog…

    Read more from the Surety1 Blog…

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

    Sarah P. Long Expands Insurance Coverage Team at Payne & Fears

    March 19, 2024 —
    Sarah P. Long has joined Payne & Fears LLP as a Partner in the firm’s Insurance Coverage and Litigation Group. Sarah has represented clients in all aspects of insurance coverage and litigation and also focus on construction defect claims and litigation. Before joining Payne & Fears, Sarah was a partner at Koeller, Nebeker, Carlson, Haluck, LLP, where she represented many of the nation’s builders in construction defect actions and bad faith insurance coverage disputes for 17 years. Known for her dependability, efficiency, and creative problem-solving, Sarah always strives to secure the best results for her clients in the most efficient manner. “We are excited to welcome Sarah to P&F as we continue to expand and add depth to our Insurance Litigation Group. I have known Sarah in a professional and personal capacity for more than 16 years. She is well respected by clients and peers in the legal profession. She is a bright, efficient, and innovative attorney and a wonderful person,” said Sarah Odia, the group’s co-chair. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Payne & Fears LLP

    Condominium Association Wins $5 Million Judgment against Developer

    July 31, 2013 —
    Belgravia Condominium Association, a group of condo owners in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, have secured a $5.05 million judgment against the contractor who converted their 1902 building into condominiums. The suit alleged that the developers and engineers failed to disclose structural problems to the condominium buyers. One issue at hand was the maintenance of the building’s façade which has historic status. Repairs to the façade alone are expected to require $2 million. Ronald Williams, the lawyer for the association, noted that the iron canopy at the entrance had begun to break away and fall even before the condominium association came into being. The decision isn’t yet final, as the developer has an opportunity to appeal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Inspired by Filipino Design, an Apartment Building Looks Homeward

    May 22, 2023 —
    Austerity and efficiency aren’t the first words that come to mind when you see the angled sawtooth bays of Tahanan Supportive Housing, or catch a glimpse of a rainbow through its lobby. But the dramatic exterior and joyful interior of this San Francisco building are both products of their constraints. When David Baker Architects was approached to design the six-story development, the goal was aggressive: Produce 145 units of permanent supportive housing at under $400,000 a unit, and have the operation up and running in less than three years. The firm accepted the challenge, and by 2022, Tanahan was fully leased to residents, all of whom are San Franciscans who have struggled with chronic homelessness. In a city where affordable units typically cost $600,000 to $700,000 each to construct, keeping in budget and meeting the deadline meant turning to the modular building company Factory OS. It also meant keeping variation at a minimum. The studios are identical, like Lego blocks; instead of being mirrored across a hallway, they’re just rotated 180 degrees. But nothing else about the building feels utilitarian. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sarah Holder, Bloomberg

    Confidence Among U.S. Homebuilders Little Changed in January

    January 28, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- Confidence among U.S. homebuilders hovered in January close to a nine-year high, indicating the residential real estate market is poised to expand this year. While the National Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo builder sentiment gauge fell to 57 this month from 58 in December, readings greater than 50 mean more respondents report good market conditions, according to figures issued from the Washington-based group Tuesday. The median forecast in a Bloomberg survey called for 58. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg News

    Don’t Ignore the Dispute Resolution Provisions in Your Construction Contract

    June 05, 2023 —
    Don’t ignore dispute resolution provisions in a construction contract. Sometimes, you may want to. But dispute resolution provisions should be one of the first provisions you look to when a dispute arises recognizing these provisions will be raised if you fail to comply. Not only will they be raised, but the presumption is they will be enforced. This is the situation that was raised in Seminole County, Florida v. APM Construction Corp., 2023 WL 3555356 (Fla. 5th DCA 2023). Here, a contractor was terminated for cause by Seminole County. The contractor then filed suit against the County. The County moved to dismiss the lawsuit because the contractor failed to comply with contractual presuit administrative procedures in the contract prior to filing a lawsuit. While the trial court denied the County’s motion to dismiss, the appellate court granted the County’s petition for writ of certiorari quashing the trial court’s order denying the motion to dismiss. For purposes of granting the writ of certiorari, the appellate court held irreparable harm existed because “certiorari jurisdiction is properly exercised when a trial court permits a party to litigate when there is a contractual or legal obligation to first administrative proceed.” Seminole County, supra, at *2. 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

    Professional Liability Alert: California Appellate Courts In Conflict Regarding Statute of Limitations for Malicious Prosecution Suits Against Attorneys

    April 28, 2014 —
    In conflict with an earlier decision by a different division within the same District, and with a prior decision of another District which followed the earlier case, Division Three of the Second Appellate District has concluded, contrary to established precedent, that the general two-year limitations period set forth in Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1 (“Section 335.1”) applies to malicious prosecution claims against attorneys, rather than the specific one-year statute of limitations for claims against attorneys codified in Code of Civil Procedure section 340.6 (“Section 340.6”). In Roger Cleveland Golf Co., Inc. v. Krane & Smith, APC (filed April 15, 2014, Case No. B237424, consolidated with Case No. B239375), Roger Cleveland Golf Co., Inc. (“Cleveland Golf”), filed a malicious prosecution action against Krane & Smith (“the Attorneys”), who had unsuccessfully prosecuted the underlying breach of contract matter for their client against Cleveland Golf. In that action, on April 26, 2010, the trial court entered its order granting a motion for nonsuit and dismissing the complaint in favor of Cleveland Golf. On May 24, 2011, or approximately 13 months after the trial court had dismissed the underlying complaint, Cleveland Golf commenced a malicious prosecution action against the Attorneys. In the interim, the Attorneys initiated an appeal of the underlying judgment, which was eventually dismissed approximately seven months later. In response to the complaint, the Attorneys filed a special motion to strike, commonly referred to as an anti-SLAPP motion, which included the argument that the malicious prosecution claim was time-barred under the one-year limitations period of Section 340.6. The trial court granted the Attorneys’ motion based on the statute of limitations (and Cleveland Golf’s failure to demonstrate a probability of success on the merits) and dismissed the case. Cleveland Golf’s appeal followed. Reprinted courtesy of David W. Evans, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Stephen J. Squillario, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Evans may be contacted at devans@hbblaw.com, Mr. Squillario may be contacted at ssquillario@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Overview of New Mexico Construction Law

    June 25, 2019 —
    We’ve seen an uptick in out-of-state companies working on construction projects in New Mexico. The following is an overview of some of the nuances of New Mexico construction law about which companies may want to be aware. Construction Contract Issues Limitation of Liability Clauses are usually Enforceable, but Anti-Indemnity Clauses Are Not New Mexico courts have enforced limitation of liability clauses included in construction contracts. See Fort Knox Self Storage, Inc. v. W. Techs., Inc., 140 N.M. 233, 237 (N.M. Ct. App 2006). New Mexico law recognizes the difference between contracts that insulate a party from any and all liability and those that simply limit liability. Fort Knox Self Storage, Inc., 140 N.M. 233 at 237. An exculpatory clause immunizes a party from liability, whereas a limitation of liability clause merely curtails liability. Id. A limitation of liability clause has been held not to violate New Mexico public policy because the party “still bears substantial responsibility for its actions.” Id.; see also Cowan v. D'Angelico, 2010 WL 11493789, *6 (D. N.M. Apr. 26, 2010). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Walker F. Crowson, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Crowson may be contacted at wcrowson@swlaw.com