BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction defect 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


    The Pandemic of Litigation Sure to Follow the Coronavirus

    FIFA May Reduce World Cup Stadiums in Russia on Economic Concern

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    Insurers' Motion to Void Coverage for Failure to Attend EUO Denied

    Massive Redesign Turns Newark Airport Terminal Into a Foodie Theme Park

    The Risk of A Fixed Price Contract Is The Market

    Duty to Defend Triggered by Damage to Other Non-Defective Property

    Entire Fairness or Business Judgment? It’s Anyone’s Guess

    Mississippi River Spends 40 Days At Flood Stage, Mayors Push for Infrastructure Funding

    Former Superintendent Sentenced in Rhode Island Tainted Fill Case

    Kahana & Feld P.C. Enhances Client Offerings, Expands Litigation Firm Leadership

    The Risks and Rewards of Sustainable Building Design

    The Miller Act Explained

    Ninth Circuit Reverses Grant of Summary Judgment to Insurer For Fortuitous Loss

    The G2G Year-End Roundup (2022)

    Don MacGregor of Bert L. Howe & Associates Awarded Silver Star Award at WCC Construction Defect Seminar

    Witt Named to 2017 Super Lawyers

    Is the Obsession With Recordable Injury Rates a Deadly Safety Distraction?

    Miami's Condo Craze Burns Out on Strong Dollar

    The “Unavailability Exception” is Unavailable to Policyholders, According to New York Court of Appeals

    New York Revises Retainage Requirements for Private Construction Contracts: Overview of the “5% Retainage Law”

    Required Contract Provisions for Construction Contracts in California

    WSHB Expands to Philadelphia

    Drastic Rebuild Resurrects Graves' Landmark Portland Building

    Claim Preclusion: The Doctrine Everyone Thinks They Know But No One Really Knows What it Means in Practice

    Impasse Over Corruption Charges Costs SNC $3.7 Billion, CEO Says

    Mediation v. Arbitration, Both Private Dispute Resolution but Very Different Sorts

    How Long Does a Civil Lawsuit Take?

    Oregon Condo Owners Make Construction Defect Claim

    Show Me the Money: The Good Faith Dispute Exception to Prompt Payment Penalties

    Meet D1's Neutrals Series: KENNETH FLOREY

    Dealing with Hazardous Substances on the Construction Site

    Insured Versus Insured Clause Does Not Bar Coverage

    Tiny Houses Big With U.S. Owners Seeking Economic Freedom

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: LISA D. LOVE

    Duuers: Better Proposals with Less Work

    Render Unto Caesar: Considerations for Returning Withheld Sums

    Mutual Or Concurrent Delay Caused By Subcontractors

    Being deposed—not just for dictators! Depositions in the construction lawsuit (Law & Order: Hard Hat files Part 5)

    Increases in U.S. Office Rents Led by San Jose and Dallas

    Ex-Ironworkers Local President Sentenced to Prison Term for Extortion

    Beware of Design Pitfalls In Unfamiliar Territory

    No Coverage for Installation of Defective Steel Framing

    No Repeal Process for Rejected Superstorm Sandy Grant Applications

    Contractors: A Lesson on Being Friendly

    Repair of Part May Necessitate Replacement of Whole

    Construction Safety Technologies – Videos

    Client Alert: Catch Me If You Can – Giorgio Is No Gingerbread Man

    Acceptable Worksite: New City of Seattle Specification Provisions Now In Effect

    Alaska Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C-" Grade
    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

    Illinois Law Bars Coverage for Construction Defects in Insured's Work

    September 24, 2014 —
    Applying Illinois law, the Seventh Circuit determined there was no coverage for faulty workmanship causing property damage to the insured's project. Nautilus Ins. Co. v. Board of Directors of Regal Lofts Condominium Ass'n, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 16250 (7th Cir. Aug. 21, 2014). The developer converted a vacant building into a condominium. The construction was completed in 2000. The Condominium Board took control of the condo association on July 27, 2000. As early as May 2000, one homeowner was aware of water damage problems in the building. Other complaints surfaced. An investigation found that the exterior brick masonry walls were not fully waterproofed, which caused leaks. The investigation further showed that deteriorated conditions had likely developed over many years, even prior to the condominium conversion, but the present water penetration was caused by the inadequate restoration of the walls to a water-tight condition. The underlying action was filed against the developer for failure to properly construct the exterior walls. The developer's carrier, Nautilus, denied coverage. In an amended complaint, the Board added a count of negligence. Again, Nautilus denied coverage. The Board's second amended complaint alleged that the developer's negligence had caused damage to personal property within the building, in addition to the interior of the building and the building itself. For the third time, Nautilus denied coverage and filed for declaratory relief. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Equitable Lien Designed to Prevent Unjust Enrichment

    November 09, 2020 —
    There are instances where a party does not have construction lien rights but, nevertheless, feels the need to pursue an equitable lien against the real property. No different than a construction lien, an action to enforce an equitable lien has a one-year limitations period if it arises from the “furnishing of labor, services, or material for the improvement of real property.” Fla. Stat. s. 95.11(5)(b). In other words, an equitable lien–not nearly as powerful as a construction lien because a construction lien is recorded in the official public records whereas an equitable lien is not–is tied to an analogous one-year limitations period for those liening for construction improvements. (Notably, if the equitable lien arises outside of the construction improvement context, the one-year statute of limitations would not apply. See Gabriji, LLC v. Hollywood East, LLC, 45 Fla. L. Weekly D2251a (Fla. 4th DCA 2020) (one-year statute of limitations period does not apply to all equitable liens such as those that do not arise from furnishing labor, services, or material for the improvement of real property)). 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

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

    January 27, 2010 —

    In the recent case of UDC-Universal Development, L.P. v. CH2M Hill, 2010 Cal.App.LEXIS 47 (filed January 15, 2010), the Sixth District Court of Appeal provided a stunning illustration of the far-reaching effects of the California Supreme Court’s holding in Crawford v. Weather Shield Manufacturing Inc. (2008) 44 Cal.4th 541. In Crawford, the Court held the duty to defend under an indemnity agreement arose upon the mere tender of defense of a claim covered by the indemnity.

    In the UDC case, CH2M Hill provided engineering and environmental planning services to developer UDC on a project that ultimately wound up in a construction defect lawsuit by the homeowners association ( HOA ). UDC tendered its defense to CH2M Hill, the tender was rejected, and UDC filed a cross-complaint for negligence, breach of contract and indemnity against CH2M Hill and others. After the HOA’s construction defect claims were settled, UDC proceeded to trial against CH2M Hill. The jury found in favor of CH2M Hill on the claims for negligence and breach of contract. At the request of the parties prior to trial, the trial court ruled on the application of the indemnity agreement in light of Crawford and, in so doing, found that the defense obligation arose upon the tender and that CH2M Hill breached that duty despite the jury finding in favor of CH2M Hill.

    The Court of Appeal affirmed, noting that the defense obligation arose as soon as the defense was tendered and did not depend on the outcome of the litigation, and that the HOA’s general description of the defects along with an allegation that Doe engineers were negligent triggered the duty to defend.

    Although this case did not expand the crushing impact of Crawford’s holding, it is

    Read the full story...

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

    Performing Work with a Suspended CSLB License Costs Big: Subcontractor Faces $18,000,000 Disgorgement

    September 17, 2015 —
    In what could lead to a draconian result, the Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District held that a contractor who performs work without a valid license can be required to disgorge all payments received, even if the contractor perfectly performed its work. The case, Judicial Council of California v. Jacobs Facilities, Inc. (Ct. of Appeal, 1st App. Dis., Div. One, A140890, A141393), involved an $18,000,000 contract between Jacobs Facilities, Inc. (“Jacobs Facilities”) and the Judicial Council of California (“Judicial Council”). In April 2006, Jacobs Facilities, a wholly owned subsidiary of Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. (“Jacobs Engineering”) entered into a three year contract with the Judicial Counsel to maintain 121 courthouses and other judicial branch buildings throughout Southern California (the “Contract”). Jacobs Facilities contracted to provide maintenance and oversight services, while retaining subcontractors to perform the actual maintenance and repair work. In December 2006, as part of a corporate reorganization, Jacobs Engineering started winding up Jacobs Facilities and transferred its employees to Jacobs Engineering and then subsequently to another wholly owned subsidiary called Jacobs Project Management Co. (“Jacobs Management”). The work that was performed by Jacobs Facilities was taken over by Jacobs Management. As part of the windup, Jacobs Facilities’ Contractor’s State License Board license was allowed to lapse and the license expired by operation of law in November 2008. Although Jacobs Management was now performing the work, it was not added as a party to the contract. Although it appears Judicial Council was aware of the corporate changes, it was not until November 2009 that the parties assigned the contract to Jacobs Management. Reprinted courtesy of Steven M. Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and David A. Harris, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com Mr. Harris may be contacted at dharris@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insureds' Experts Insufficient to Survive Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    October 17, 2023 —
    The magistrate recommended that insurer's motion for summary judgment be granted due to the insureds' expert's inability to present genuine issues of material fact. Walker v. Century Sur. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142408 (E.D. Texas July 17, 2023). The insureds' property sustained damage from Hurricane Laura. Colonial Claims inspected the property for Century and reported that a portion of the roof was damaged by the hurricane. Century paid insureds $2,212,34. Van Fisher, an engineer with Envista Forensics, then inspected the interior of the property on Century's behalf. Fisher reported that there was some covered interior damage caused by a leak from a storm-created opening in the roof. However, Fisher further reported that there was other interior damage caused by existing water leaks not attributed to the hurricane and thus not covered by the policy. Century then paid the insureds an additional $485.05 based on Fisher's inspection. 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

    Norristown, PA to Stop Paying Repair Costs for Defect-Ridden Condo

    February 10, 2014 —
    The city of Norristown, Pennsylvania has already paid “$3.4 million for construction repairs and legal expenses” for the 26-unit condominium on 770 Sandy Street, according to The Times Herald. Therefore city officials recently declared that “they will no longer pay the $40,000 annual cost for maintenance, electricity and repairs” for the building. “At some point, the folks that own it have to step up and take responsibility for it,” Norristown Council President William Caldwell told The Times Herald. “No later than February 28, the municipality will cease to provide or pay for maintenance of 770 Sandy Street.” Previously, Norristown had received court orders to repair the building, after numerous construction defects turned up including “missing firestops in numerous walls, missing grout and steel rebar in block-wall, emergency stair towers, faulty electrical wiring and no provision for firestopping in the first-floor garage ceiling.” City officials “were faulted by Montgomery County Common Pleas Court judges for not properly inspecting the construction.” Charles Madracchia, past Customers Bank attorney and current Homeowner attorney, is “continuing active litigation in both federal and state court.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Implementation of CA Building Energy Efficiency Standards Delayed

    February 25, 2014 —
    In his California Construction Law blog, Garret Murai published the recent Industry Bulletin released by the California Contractors State License Board (CSLB) regarding the delayed implementation of the California Building Energy Standards. CSLB has delayed implementation from January 1st, 2014 to July 1, 2014 due to “unanticipated delays in developing complete performance compliance software for 2013 Public Domain Residential and Nonresidential California Building Energy Code Compliance guidelines, necessitating the CEC action to change the effective date of energy related provisions.” The Industry Bulletin summarized changes regarding various codes including 2013 California Energy Code, Part 6; 2013 California Administrative Code, Chapter 10, Part 1; and, 2013 CALGreen, Part 11. According to the bulletin, as reported by the California Construction Law blog, “Contractors are encouraged to contact their local building enforcement agencies for assistance and/or clarification.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    AFL-CIO Joins in $10 Billion Infrastructure Plan

    June 30, 2011 —

    The AFL-CIO has announced plans to generate up to $10 billion in funding for infrastructure development, training construction workers, and making buildings more energy efficient, pledging $20 million to retrofit buildings. Bloomberg News reports that union officials made the announcement in Chicago at the Clinton Global Initiative, releasing a statement from Richard Trumka, president of the union, “we, at the AFL-CIO, believe that together, with our partners in business and government, we can profitably invest significant resources to make America more competitive and energy efficient.” A foot injury prevented Mr. Trumka from attending the event.

    The statement also quoted Mark Ayers, president of the Building and Construction Trades Department of the AFL-CIO, “the time is now to become intensely focused on the creation of jobs.”

    Read the full story…

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