BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction 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


    TOP TAKE-AWAY SERIES: The 2023 Fall Meeting in Washington, D.C.

    Contractor Prevails on Summary Judgment To Establish Coverage under Subcontractor's Policy

    The Value of Photographic Evidence in Construction Litigation

    Florida Court Puts the Claim of Landlord’s Insurer In The No-Fly Zone

    Supreme Court Finds Insurance Coverage for Intentional (and Despicable) Act of Contractor’s Employee

    Cincinnati Team Secures Summary Judgment for Paving Company in Trip-and-Fall Case

    What ENR.com Construction News Gained the Most Views

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Indeed, You Just Design ‘Em”

    How Your Disgruntled Client Can Turn Into Your Very Own Car Crash! (and How to Avoid It) (Law Tips)

    Is the Issuance of a City Use Permit Referable? Not When It Is an Administrative Act

    Appellate Court reverses district court’s finding of alter ego in Sedgwick Properties Development Corporation v. Christopher Hinds (2019WL2865935)

    Addenda to Construction Contracts Can Be an Issue

    Workarounds for Workers' Comp Immunity: How to Obtain Additional Insured Coverage when the Named Insured is Immune from Suit

    Circumstances In Which Design Professional Has Construction Lien Rights

    Pile Test Likely for Settling Millennium Tower

    Federal Subcontractor Who Failed to Follow FAR Regulations Finds That “Fair” and “Just” are Not Synonymous

    Coverage Issues: When You Need Your Own Lawyer in a Construction Defect Suit

    Elon Musk's Boring Co. Is Feuding With Texas Over a Driveway

    Gaps in Insurance Created by Complex Risks

    Prospective Additional Insureds May Be Obligated to Arbitrate Coverage Disputes

    Workers at Two NFL Stadiums Test Positive for COVID-19, But Construction Continues

    Super Lawyers Selects Haight’s Melvin Marcia for Its 2023 Northern California Rising Stars List

    Five New Laws to Know Before They Take Effect On Jan. 1, 2022

    "Damage to Your Product" Exclusion Bars Coverage

    2018 Construction Outlook: Mature Expansion, Deceleration in Some Sectors, Continued Growth in Others

    UPDATE: ACS Obtains Additional $13.6 Million for General Contractor Client After $19.2 Million Jury Trial Victory

    Texas Federal District Court Dismisses COVID-19 Claim

    Know and Meet Your Notice Requirements or Lose Your Payment Bond Claims

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    California Construction Bill Dies in Committee

    New EPA Regulation for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments

    The Treasures Inside Notre Dame Cathedral

    Congratulations to our 2019 Southern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars

    Meet Orange County Bar Associations 2024 Leaders

    Florida Lien Law and Substantial Compliance vs. Strict Compliance

    The Activist Group Suing the Suburbs for Bigger Buildings

    Haight Expands California Reach – Opens Office in Sacramento

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Gets Construction Defect Bill to Committee

    A “Supplier to a Supplier” on a California Construction Project Sometimes Does Have a Right to a Mechanics Lien, Stop Payment Notice or Payment Bond Claim

    Production of Pre-Denial Claim File Compelled

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Based Upon Exclusion for Contractual Assumption of Liability

    New Spending Measure Has Big Potential Infrastructure Boost

    2021 California Construction Law Update

    Florida Decides Against Adopting Daubert

    Hundreds of Snakes Discovered in Santa Ana Home

    Flawed Welding Faulted in Mexico City Subway Collapse

    SkenarioLabs Uses AI for Property Benchmarking

    Break out the Neon: ‘80s Era Davis-Bacon “Prevailing Wage” Definition Restored in DOL Final Rule

    Peru’s Former President and His Wife to Stay in Jail After Losing Appeal

    In All Fairness: Illinois Appellate Court Finds That Arbitration Clause in a Residential Construction Contract Was Unconscionable and Unenforceable
    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. Drawing 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

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at Slower Pace in May

    July 30, 2014 —
    Residential real-estate prices rose in the 12 months ended May at the slowest pace in more than a year as a lull in the U.S. housing market limits appreciation. The S&P/Case-Shiller index of property values in 20 cities increased 9.3 percent from May 2013, the smallest year-to-year advance since February 2013, after rising 10.8 percent in the year ended in April, the group said today in New York. The median projection of 30 economists surveyed by Bloomberg called for a 9.9 percent year-over-year advance. Compared with the prior month, prices dropped for the first time in two years. Higher mortgage rates and strict lending requirements are bridling sales, which will probably prompt sellers to lower their expectations of how much they can get for their properties. Continued job growth and greater balance between supply and demand will be needed to bring some potential homebuyers back into the market. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Victoria Stilwell, Bloomberg
    Ms. Stilwell may be contacted at vstilwell1@bloomberg.net

    Insurer Ordered to Participate in Appraisal

    March 27, 2023 —
    The court found that the insured's request for an appraisal was timely and ordered the insurer to participate. Cloisters of Naples, Inc v. Landmark Am. Ins. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6884 (M.D. Flag. Jan. 13, 2023). A hurricane damaged Cloisters, a condominium. Cloisters made a claim under its commercial insurance policy with Landmark. Landmark acknowledged coverage but failed to pay what Cloisters thought was needed. Cloisters sued. The policy had a standard appraisal provision, but another clause had a suit litigation provision requiring a request for appraisal within two years after physical loss to the property. The dispute was whether Florida law, allowing appraisal clauses to be valid for 130 years, or Georgia law, which had no such extension on requesting an appraisal. Landmark contended the contract was formed in Georgia, so its law should apply. Florida followed the lure of lex loci, which provided that the law of the jurisdiction where the contract was executed governed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Meet D1's Neutrals Series: BILL FRANCZEK

    August 14, 2023 —
    Company: Woods Rogers Vandeventer Black PLC Office Location: Norfolk, VA Email: Bill.Franczek@wrvblaw.com Website: https://wrvblaw.com/attorney_/william-e-franczek/ Law School: Syracuse University Law – JD, 1982, Magna Cum Laude, Order of the Coif Types of ADR services offered: Arbitration, Dispute Resolution Boards and Panels, Mediation and Neutral Evaluations Affiliated ADR organizations: American Arbitration Association (AAA); International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR); London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA); International Court of Arbitration (ICC) Geographic area served: Nationwide Q: Describe the path you took to becoming an ADR neutral. A: I have an undergraduate degree in Civil Engineering and a Professional Engineering License in NY and VA. So, when I became a lawyer, I applied for membership in the AAA, and was accepted as a construction neutral in 1987. I now practice construction law and serve as an ADR Neutral in matters across the country and internationally. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jessica Knox, Stinson LLP
    Ms. Knox may be contacted at jessica.knox@stinson.com

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 5: Valuation of Loss, Sublimits, and Amount of Potential Recovery

    July 25, 2022 —
    Insurance policies provide different levels of insurance coverage and even if the amount purchased was adequate at one time, developments over time (e.g., inflation, upgrades, regulatory changes and surge pricing) may leave the policyholder underinsured. In this post in the Blog’s Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, we emphasize the need for policyholders to take a close look at the policy’s terms to select the right type and amount of coverage for a potential loss. Various types of coverage are available and there has been extensive litigation concerning the amount of coverage provided by one policy form or another. For example, the policyholder may have purchased market value coverage (the value of the house at the time of the wildfire), replacement coverage subject to a policy limits cap, guaranteed replacement cost coverage, or some variation on the theme. While the property may be properly valued when the insurance is purchased, it may become undervalued at the time of loss due to factors like inflation or home improvements that were not disclosed to the insurer. And, however generous the limits may be when the policy is procured, as one court discussed, it may be insufficient when “surge pricing” occurs after a wildfire.[1] Reprinted courtesy of Scott P. DeVries, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Yosef Itkin, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. DeVries may be contacted at sdevries@HuntonAK.com Mr. Itkin may be contacted at yitkin@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Colorado Supreme Court affirms Woodbridge II’s “Adverse Use” Distinction

    December 20, 2021 —
    Last year, I posted regarding the Colorado Court of Appeals’ decision in Woodbridge II, which concluded that the “adverse use” element for prescriptive easement claims only requires the claimant to “show a nonpermissive or otherwise unauthorized use of property that interfered with the owner’s property interests.” Viento Blanco, LLC, 2020 COA 34 (Woodbridge II), ¶ 2. Thus, Woodbridge II concluded, the claimants acknowledgement or recognition of an owner’s title alone is insufficient to defeat “adverse use” in the prescriptive easement context. Id. That decision was up for review by the Colorado Supreme Court at the time of my prior post. It has now been affirmed, thereby settling an arguable appellate decision split created by Woodbridge II. See Lo Viento Blanco, LLC v. Woodbridge Condo. Ass’n, Inc., 2021 CO 56 (“Woodbridge”). “Like the division below, and for much the same reasons,” the Colorado Supreme Court affirmed in Woodbridge “that under Colorado law, a claimant’s acknowledgement or recognition of the owner’s title during the claimant’s asserted prescriptive period does not interrupt the prescriptive use or undermine the claimant’s adverse use.” Woodbridge, ¶ 2. Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Gabriel’s opinion agreed with the Court of Appeals’ reasoning “that although Woodbridge recognized that it did not hold title, no evidence indicated that it had acted in subordination to the owner’s title.” Id. ¶ at 13. The Court further agreed with Woodbridge II’srejection of Lo Viento’s “permissive use” argument because “the permission offered … was conditional and Woodbridge never agreed to any of the conditions set forth therein.” Id. On that basis, Woodbridge confirmed that “a claimant seeking to establish a prescriptive easement need not show that it asserted exclusive ownership of the property during the prescriptive period,” but only “that its use was without permission or otherwise unauthorized and that it interfered with the owner’s property interests.” Id. at ¶ 23. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

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

    February 14, 2022 —
    On February 4, 2022, President Biden issued an Executive Order on Use of Project Labor Agreements for Federal Construction Projects (EO), which will require the use of project labor agreements (PLAs) on large-scale federal construction projects with a total estimated cost of $35 million or more unless a senior official within the agency grants an exception. Agencies also may require the use of PLAs on projects that are less than $35 million. While the EO is effective immediately, it will only apply to solicitations issued on or after the effective date of final regulations issued by the FAR Council. The FAR Council has 120 days to propose regulations implementing the EO. Often there is a significant period of time between the publication of proposed regulations, evaluation of public comments, and publication of final regulations. Reprinted courtesy of Lori Ann Lange, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Lauren Rayner Davis, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Ms. Lange may be contacted at llange@pecklaw.com Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com Ms. Davis may be contacted at ldavis@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York Team Secures Appellate Win on Behalf of National Home Improvement Chain

    September 26, 2022 —
    New York, N.Y. (August 12, 2022) - New York Appellate Partner Nicholas P. Hurzeler, with New York Partners John J. Doody and David M. Pollack, obtained a significant appellate victory on behalf of a national home improvement chain when a New York Appellate Division panel for the Second Department reduced a jury verdict by more than half. In this matter, which was covered by Law360, the plaintiff was a customer at one of the chain's stores when he was involved in a confrontation with a man and his wife as they exited the store. The chain's loss prevention official told police that the plaintiff had assaulted the female customer. As a result of the incident, the plaintiff was arrested, spent the night in jail, and was arraigned at the same courthouse where he worked as a staff attorney while wearing only an undershirt and jogging shorts. He also had to disclose his arrest on his judgeship nomination application. The charges against him were ultimately dropped after the chain's loss prevention official told prosecutors that surveillance video showed that the female customer’s assault claims were false. The plaintiff subsequently sued the home improvement chain and its loss prevention official for allegedly causing his false arrest and interfering with his career goal of securing a New York state court judgeship. At the close of the trial in this case, the jury determined that the defendant was liable for battery and false imprisonment, and awarded the plaintiff $1.8 million for pain and suffering. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Airbnb Declares End to Party!

    January 27, 2020 —
    As municipalities around the country evaluate changes to their respective codes in an effort to exert greater control over bad actors in the vacation rental market, Airbnb announced on November 2nd that it is banning party houses. The move comes in response to the shooting deaths of five people at a Halloween party hosted at an Airbnb rental house in Orinda, CA. CEO Brian Chesky announced on Twitter that starting November 2, Airbnb would ban “party houses” and redouble the company’s efforts to “combat unauthorized parties and get rid of abusive host and guest conduct.” twitter.com/bchesky The four-bedroom rental reportedly had been rented on Airbnb by a woman who advised the owner her family members had asthma and needed to escape smoke from a wildfire burning in Sonoma County about 60 miles north of Orinda earlier in the week. Nevertheless, the homeowner was suspicious of a one-night rental on Halloween and reminded the renter that no parties were allowed. Having received complaints from neighbors and witnessing some party activity via his camera doorbell, the homeowner called police who were en route to the home, but arrived after the shooting. The Halloween party apparently was advertised on social media as an “Airbnb Mansion Party,” with an admission fee of $10 per person. Independently owned vacation rentals are currently growing at a faster rate than hotels or motels, and in some instances are owned by out-of-state investors seeking not only a real estate return on investment, but also a return on investment associated with revenue streams generated by “pay to play” parties promoted on social media. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick J. Paul, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Paul may be contacted at ppaul@swlaw.com