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


    Miller Wagers Gundlach’s Bearish Housing Position Loses

    Investigation Continues on Children Drowning at Construction Site

    Landowners Try to Choke Off Casino's Water With 19th-Century Lawsuit

    Changes to Arkansas Construction and Home Repair Laws

    After Breaching its Duty to Defend, Insurer Must Indemnify

    Liebherr Claims Crane Not Cause of Brazil Stadium Construction Accident

    Reasonableness of Liquidated Damages Determined at Time of Contract (or, You Can’t Look Back Again)

    The “Program Accessibility” Exception for Public Entities Under the ADA

    Are Defense Costs In Addition to Policy Limits?

    Claims Against Broker Dismissed

    Ex-Engineered Products Firm Executive Convicted of Bid Rigging

    Replacing Coal Plants with Renewables Is Cheaper 80% of the Time

    Auditor: Prematurely Awarded Contracts Increased Honolulu Rail Cost by $354M

    Super Lawyers Selects Haight Lawyers for Its 2023 California Rising Stars List

    Loaded Boom of Burning Tower Crane Collapses in Manhattan, Injuring Six

    Wisconsin Court of Appeals Re-affirms American Girl To Find Coverage for Damage Caused by Subcontractors

    Mutual Or Concurrent Delay Caused By Subcontractors

    Construction Legislation Likely to Take Effect July 1, 2020

    Asserting Non-Disclosure Claim Involving Residential Real Property and Whether Facts Are “Readily Observable”

    The Overlooked Nevada Rule In an Arena Project Lawsuit

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    New Green Standards; Same Green Warnings for Architects & Engineers (law note)

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

    Force Majeure Under the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic

    LAX Construction Defect Suit May Run into Statute of Limitations

    Wyoming Supreme Court Picks a Side After Reviewing the Sutton Rule

    Tokyo Building Flaws May Open Pandora's Box for Asahi Kasei

    Jobsite Safety Should Be Every Contractors' Priority

    Prejudice to Insurer After Late Notice of Hurricane Damage Raises Issue of Fact

    Insurers Dispute Sharing of Defense in Construction Defect Case

    Rihanna Gained an Edge in Construction Defect Case

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Fires up a Case-By-Case Analysis for Landlord-Tenant, Implied Co-Insured Questions

    Another Smart Home Innovation: Remote HVAC Diagnostics

    Building Amid the COVID Challenge

    Last, but NOT Least: Why You Should Take a Closer Look at Your Next Indemnification Clause

    It Has Started: Supply-Chain, Warehouse and Retail Workers of Essential Businesses Are Filing Suit

    Tom Newmeyer Elected Director At Large to the 2017 Orange County Bar Association Board of Directors

    A Good Examination of Fraud, Contract and Negligence Per Se

    Texas Supreme Court Holds Stipulated Extrinsic Evidence May Be Considered in Determining Duty to Defend

    Ambiguous Application Questions Preclude Summary Judgment on Rescission Claim

    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Manhattan Home Prices Top Pre-Crisis Record on Luxury Deals

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Collapse Coverage Fails

    Stadium Intended for the 2010 World Cup Still Not Ready

    City of Seattle Temporarily Shuts Down Public Works to Enforce Health and Safety Plans

    Court Extends Insurer Rights to Equitable Contribution

    Appraiser Declarations Inadmissible When Offered to Challenge the Merits of an Appraisal Award

    New Jersey Court Adopts Continuous Trigger for Construction Defect Claims

    South Carolina Couple Must Arbitrate Construction Defect Claim

    First Lumber, Now Drywall as Canada-U.S. Trade Tensions Escalate
    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

    Florida Self-Insured Retention Satisfaction and Made Whole Doctrine

    March 11, 2014 —
    Intervest Construction of Jax, Inc. v. General Fidelity Insurance Co., * So.2d * (Fla. 2014), the issue was whether the insured general contractor could satisfy the SIR in its CGL policy with funds it received from the insurer of a subcontractor in settlement of the general contractor’s contractual indemnity claim against that subcontractor. ICI was the general contractor for a residence sold to Ferrin. Several years after completion, Ferrin suffered injuries in a fall while using attic stairs installed by ICI’s subcontractor Custom Cutting. Ferrin sued ICI but not Custom Cutting. ICI was insured by General Fidelity with a $1M SIR. ICI sought contractual indemnity from Custom Cutting. The Ferrin suit was ultimately settled for $1.6M. Custom Cutting’s CGL insurer paid $1M to ICI to resolve ICI’s contractual indemnity claim. Using the $1M paid on behalf of Custom Cutting and $300K of its own funds, ICI paid $1.3M to Ferrin. General Fidelity paid the remaining $300K with an agreement with ICI that each was entitled to seek reimbursement of $300K from the other. ICI filed suit in Florida state court. General Fidelity removed to federal court. The Eleventh Circuit certified the relevant questions to the Supreme Court of Florida. The Florida Supreme Court first held that the General Fidelity SIR allowed ICI to satisfy the SIR through indemnification payments received from a third party. While the SIR provision stated that it must be satisfied by the insured, it did not include any language proscribing the source of the funds used by the insured to satisfy the SIR. The court distinguished other decisions where the SIR endorsement expressly stated that payments by others, including other insurers, could not satisfy the SIR. The court also relied on the fact that ICI “hedged its retained risk” by paying for its entitlement to contractual indemnification from its subcontractor years prior to purchasing the General Fidelity policy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott Patterson, CD Coverage

    New York Appellate Court Holds Insurer’s Failure to Defend Does Not Constitute a “Reasonable Excuse” Required to Overturn Judgment

    January 21, 2019 —
    A recent opinion by the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division (Second Department) highlights the potential risks for an insurer leaving an insured unrepresented while the insurer pursues other parties or insurers who may be primarily responsible for defending the insured. In refusing to overturn a default judgment entered against an insured while its insurer knew that a complaint had been filed but refused to defend, the New York court’s decision raises questions about how claims adjusters are to effectively manage new claims to prevent a default judgment being entered against the insured, while at the same time ensuring that the appropriate party or insurance company handles the insured’s defense. In Kaung Hea Lee v. 354 Management Inc., 2018 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7749 (N.Y. App. Div. Nov. 14, 2018) (354 Management) the underlying plaintiffs obtained a default judgment against the defendant insured due to its failure to answer the plaintiffs’ complaint. The plaintiffs then moved to determine the extent of damages to which they were entitled by virtue of the default judgment. The defendant opposed that motion, relying on an affidavit from a senior liability claims adjuster employed by the defendant’s insurer. “In the affidavit, the claim adjuster stated that she did not assign an attorney to answer the complaint because the codefendant . . . was contractually obligated to defend and indemnify the defendant [insured], and she had been attempting to have either [the codefendant] or its insurer provide an attorney” for the defendant. However, it was determined that the claims adjuster knew about the plaintiffs’ complaint two weeks after the plaintiffs served it on the defendant and months before the plaintiffs moved for default judgment. Despite this knowledge, the defendant’s insurer did not provide a defense or, apparently, obtain an extension of time to respond to the complaint, which led to the default judgment. Reprinted courtesy of Timothy Carroll, White and Williams and Anthony Miscioscia, White and Williams Mr. Carroll may be contacted at carrollt@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Miscioscia may be contacted at misciosciaa@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Cerberus, Blackstone Loosening Credit for U.S. Landlords

    July 09, 2014 —
    U.S. property owners with just one rental house can now get cash from Wall Street to buy more. Cerberus Capital Management LP, which initially targeted landlords with multimillion-dollar loans, is financing low-volume deals for small investors through its FirstKey Lending, with looser terms than government-backed mortgages from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, said Randy Reiff, the business’s chief executive officer. Blackstone Group LP (BX)’s rental lending arm, B2R Finance LP, is making a similar push to mom-and-pop landlords. “Our premise has always been to be able to lend to the middle market and entrepreneurial borrowers in the space, not just the institutional borrowers,” Reiff said. “The biggest guys have always enjoyed access to capital. The largest part of this market is really the entrepreneurial owners.” The companies are competing to lend to owners of the almost 14 million rental houses in the U.S. at a time when many Americans are struggling to get a mortgage and homeownership is declining. Cerberus and Blackstone, along with Colony Capital LLC, also are racing to package debt on homes managed by separate landlords for the first multiborrower bond sale. Ms. Perlberg may be contacted at hperlberg@bloomberg.net; Mr. Gittelsohn may be contacted at johngitt@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Heather Perlberg and John Gittelsohn – Bloomberg

    Woodbridge II and the Nuanced Meaning of “Adverse Use” in Hostile Property Rights Cases in Colorado

    November 23, 2020 —
    Earlier this year, the Colorado Court of Appeals issued an opinion addressing at length “whether the requirement that the use be ‘adverse’ in the adverse possession context is coextensive with adverse use in the prescriptive easement context.” See Woodbridge Condo. Ass’n, Inc. v. Lo Viento Blanco, LLC, 2020 COA 34 (Woodbridge II), ¶ 2, cert. granted, No. 20SC292, 2020 WL 5405376 (Colo. Sept. 8, 2020). As detailed below, the Woodbridge II court concluded that the meanings of “adverse” in these two contexts are not coextensive—while “hostility” in the adverse possession context requires a claim of exclusive ownership of the property, a party claiming a prescriptive easement is only required to “show a nonpermissive or otherwise unauthorized use of property that interfered with the owner’s property interests.” Thus, the Woodbridge II court reasoned a claimants’ acknowledgement or recognition of an owner’s title alone is insufficient to defeat “adverse use” in the prescriptive easement context. This significant ruling is at odds with a prior division’s broad statement, while considering a prescriptive easement claim, that “[i]n general, when an adverse occupier acknowledges or recognizes the title of the owner during the occupant’s claimed prescriptive period, the occupant interrupts the prescriptive use.” See Trask v. Nozisko, 134 P.3d 544, 553 (Colo. App. 2006). Perhaps for that reason, Woodbridge II is currently pending certiorari review before the Colorado Supreme Court in a case that should provide some much-needed clarity on what constitutes “adverse use” in the context of a prescriptive easement. As we await the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision, I thought it worthwhile to provide a brief analysis of the Woodbridge II court’s deep dive into the nuances of “adverse use” in this field of Colorado law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    Michigan Claims Engineers’ Errors Prolonged Corrosion

    June 30, 2016 —
    Only a few months ago, Michigan’s state agencies stood at the center of a circle of blame for the Flint water crisis. A special advisory task force had condemned the state’s use of an emergency manager to make key decisions about the city, including, in 2014, the money-saving switch of the water source from Lake Huron to the Flint River and the state Dept. of Environmental Quality’s slow response to citizen reports of smelly, discolored water. On June 22, Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette started working to expand the circle via a new lawsuit in a Genesee County state court, accusing engineers Veolia N.A. and Houston-based Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam (LAN) and its parent company, Leo A Daly Co., of professional negligence. Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record and Erin Richey, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Harlem Developers Reach Deal with Attorney General

    February 25, 2014 —
    Joseph Scarpinito and Shiraz Sanjana, developers of the Mirada condominium in Harlem, New York can avoid a contempt charge from state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, “if they make the required repairs and obtain a permanent certificate of occupancy at the property,” according to The Real Deal. Scarpinito and Sanjana “agreed to deposit $200,000 into an escrow account and make repairs to stop flooding and other defects at the 161 East 110th Street condo, which are required to obtain a certificate of occupancy from the city Department of Buildings.” Last December, the Attorney General “filed suit against the developers, alleging they submitted false filings to his office in claiming that Scarpinito’s 83-year-old mother was the actual developer of the 68-unit condo.” Furthermore, the condo board lawyers submitted a complaint to Schneiderman “detailing extensive defects in the building, including water leaks entering the building from the roof and façade.” The developers have been ordered “to submit weekly reports to the AG’s office detailing progress on the repairs and obtaining the certificate of occupancy.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is Everybody Single? More Than Half the U.S. Now, Up From 37% in '76

    September 10, 2014 —
    Single Americans make up more than half of the adult population for the first time since the government began compiling such statistics in 1976. Some 124.6 million Americans were single in August, 50.2 percent of those who were 16 years or older, according to data used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in its monthly job-market report. That percentage had been hovering just below 50 percent since about the beginning of 2013 before edging above it in July and August. In 1976, it was 37.4 percent and has been trending upward since. In a report to clients entitled “Selfies,” economist Edward Yardeni flagged the increase in the proportion of singles to more than 50 percent, calling it “remarkable.” The president of Yardeni Research Inc. in New York said the rise has “implications for our economy, society and politics.” Singles, particularly younger ones, are more likely to rent than to own their dwellings. Never-married young singles are less likely to have children and previously married older ones, many of whom have adult children, are unlikely to have young kids, Yardeni wrote. That will influence how much money they spend and what they buy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rich Miller, Bloomberg
    Mr. Miller may be contacted at rmiller28@bloomberg.net

    Lewis Brisbois’ Houston Office Selected as a 2020 Top Workplace by the Houston Chronicle

    December 21, 2020 —
    Lewis Brisbois’ Houston office was recently selected for inclusion in the Houston Chronicle’s 2020 Top Workplaces section. To determine the recipients of this honor, the publication surveyed more than 37,000 Houston-area employees regarding their organization’s leadership, cooperation, communication, work-life balance, pay, and benefits. Based upon the employees’ feedback, the publication selected its Top Workplaces winners and announced them during a virtual awards ceremony in November. Houston Office Administrator Kristi Kraeger expressed excitement concerning this honor, explaining, “In the two years I have been with Lewis Brisbois, we have more than doubled in size. We have created a friendly, professional, team-oriented environment, and we strive to provide growth and opportunity to our employees.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Oubre, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Oubre may be contacted at David.Oubre@lewisbrisbois.com