BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut window 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


    For Smart Home Technology, the Contract Is Key

    First-Time Homebuyers Make Biggest Share of Deals in 17 Years

    Seattle Council May Take a New Look at Micro-Housing

    Insurer’s Duty to Defend: When is it Triggered? When is it Not?

    Certified Question Asks Washington Supreme Court Whether Insurer is Bound by Contradictory Certificate of Insurance

    Governor Ducey Vetoes Water and Development Bills

    Do We Need Blockchain in Construction?

    Does Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code Impact Your Construction Project?

    AB5 Construction Exemption – A Checklist to Avoid Application of AB5’s Three-Part Test

    North Carolina Court Rules In Favor Of All Sums

    Competition to Design Washington D.C.’s 11th Street Bridge Park

    Duty to Defend Affirmed in Connecticut Construction Defect Case

    ICE Said to Seek Mortgage Role Through Talks With Data Service

    No Coverage for Building's First Collapse, But Disputed Facts on Second Collapse

    How to Build a Coronavirus Hospital in Ten Days

    Three Steps to a Safer Jobsite

    Acord Certificates of Liability Insurance: What They Don’t Tell You Can Hurt You

    The Economic Loss Rule: From Where Does the Duty Arise?

    Default, Fraud, and VCPA (Oh My!)

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Two Recent Cases Address Copyright Protection for Architectural Works

    An Architect Uses AI to Explore Surreal Black Worlds

    Waiving The Right to Arbitrate Under Federal Law

    Biden Unveils $2.3 Trillion American Jobs Plan

    Texas covered versus uncovered allocation and “legally obligated to pay.”

    Creating a Custom Home Feature in the Great Outdoors

    Appraisers May Determine Causation

    Construction Contract Terms Matter. Be Careful When You Draft Them.

    Third Circuit Court of Appeals Concludes “Soup to Nuts” Policy Does Not Include Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    Hold on Just One Second: Texas Clarifies Starting Point for Negligence Statute of Limitations

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

    Engineer at Flint Negligence Trial Details Government Water Errors

    NIBS Consultative Council Issues Moving Forward Report on Healthy Buildings

    Ninth Circuit Issues Pro-Contractor Licensing Ruling

    Legislatures Shouldn’t Try to Do the Courts’ Job

    Goldman Veteran Said to Buy Mortgages After Big Short

    2021 Real Estate Trends: New Year, New Reality—A Day of Reckoning for Borrowers and Tenants

    Georgia Super Lawyers Recognized Two Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

    Worker’s Compensation Exclusivity Rule Gets “Trumped” by Indemnity Provision

    Ex-Construction Firm That Bought a $75m Michelangelo to Delist

    Traub Lieberman Partner Gregory S. Pennington and Associate Emily A. Velcamp Obtain Summary Judgment in Favor of Residential Property Owners

    Mixed Reality for Construction: Applicability and Reality

    Happenings in and around the 2015 West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Construction Law Client Alert: Hirer Beware - When Exercising Control Over a Job Site’s Safety Conditions, You May be Held Directly Liable for an Independent Contractor’s Injury

    Court Says No to Additional Lawyer in Las Vegas Fraud Case

    Court Reminds Insurer that the Mere Possibility Of Coverage at the Time of Tender Triggers a Duty to Defend in a Defect Action

    Liquidating Agreements—Bridging the Privity Gap for Subcontractors

    What You Need to Know About Notices of Completion, Cessation and Non-Responsibility

    Climate Change a Factor in 'Unprecedented' South Asia Floods

    Top 10 Lessons Learned from a Construction Attorney

    Eighth Circuit Rejects Retroactive Application of Construction Defect Legislation
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    The Jersey Shore gets Beach Prisms Designed to Reduce Erosion

    January 22, 2014 —
    Thirty-five beach prisms manufactured by Smith-Midland Corporation have been installed along the Jersey shore in Ocean Gate, New Jersey. According to the Wall Street Journal, “The prisms protect homes, prevent erosion, and reduce impacts from natural disasters like Hurricane Sandy.” They “are made with a built-in parabolic curve that scatters waves away as spray instead of allowing them to crash up onto the vulnerable shoreline.” Ocean Gate’s Mayor Paul J. Kennedy stated, "We've been losing beach year after year with the Nor'easters we get. So we came up with an idea that hopefully will work,” The Wall Street Journal reported. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Subcontractors Found Liable to Reimburse Insurer Defense Costs in Equitable Subrogation Action

    August 03, 2020 —
    In Pulte Home Corp. v. CBR Electric, Inc. (No. E068353, filed 6/10/20), a California appeals court reversed the denial of an equitable subrogation claim for reimbursement of defense costs from contractually obligated subcontractors to a defending insurer, finding that all of the elements for equitable subrogation were met, and the equities tipped in favor of the insurer. After defending the general contractor, Pulte, in two construction defect actions as an additional insured on a subcontractor’s policy, St. Paul sought reimbursement of defense costs solely on an equitable subrogation theory against six subcontractors that had worked on the underlying construction projects, and whose subcontracts required them to defend Pulte in suits related to their work. After a bench trial, the trial court denied St. Paul’s claim, concluding that St. Paul had not demonstrated that it was fair to shift all of the defense costs to the subcontractors because their failure to defend Pulte had not caused the homeowners to bring the construction defect actions. The appeals court reversed, holding that the trial court misconstrued the law governing equitable subrogation. Because the relevant facts were not in dispute, the appeals court reviewed the case de novo and found that the trial court committed error in its denial of reimbursement for the defense fees. The appeals court found two errors: First, the trial court incorrectly concluded that equitable subrogation requires shifting of the entire loss. Second, the trial court applied a faulty causation analysis – that because the non-defending subcontractors had not caused the homeowners to sue Pulte, thereby necessitating a defense, St. Paul could not meet the elements of equitable subrogation. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    SCOTUS Opens Up Federal Courts to Land Owners

    July 15, 2019 —
    For nearly 36 years, the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U.S. 172, 105 S.Ct. 3108, 87 L.Ed.2d 126 (1985) severely frustrated, if not all but foreclosed, a property owner’s right to bring a claim in federal court based on a regulatory taking. Under the Fifth Amendment, a property owner whose land has been “taken” by the government is entitled to just compensation. There are two types of takings direct or “inverse” or regulatory takings. A direct taking is where the government declares that it needs your land for public use and offers to pay you compensation. You might disagree with the amount offered – and that often is the case. But, a mechanism exists whereby a neutral third party – a condemnation board – will arrive at the compensation that is owed. On the other hand, an inverse condemnation or regulatory taking occurs when the government takes some action that restricts the use of the land in such a way as to severely impact it beneficial economic use. For example, if you own a strip of commercial property and intend to develop it and then the municipality comes along and suddenly changes the zoning classification of the parcel such that you can no longer develop it in a beneficial way, then you might have a regulatory takings case. Under the Court’s Williamson County decision, property owners falling within the later category were required to exhaust state remedies before proceeding to federal court under a claim that their Fifth Amendment rights were violated. The problem with this is that, as the Supreme Court explained, it creates a Catch-22. If property owners exhaust their state remedies and the state remedies result in an unfavorable outcome, the federal court is powerless to overturn that decision under the doctrines of res judicata and the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution. Well, yesterday, the Court overturned Williamson County, in Knick v. Township of Scott, 588 U.S. _____ (2019). There the Court held unequivocally a “property owner has suffered a violation of his Fifth Amendment rights when the government takes his property without just compensation, and therefore may bring his claim in federal court under Section 1983 at that time.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    Electrical Subcontractor Sues over Termination

    November 13, 2013 —
    Millennium Plus, Inc. has sued the contractor for the Efrain A. Duran Water Treatment Plant Facility and Rio Grande City for failing to pay money due to them and terminating the contract. According to the lawsuit, Millennium is claiming that they are owed $161,781 for their work on the water treatment facility. According to the city, the project’s contractor was “very unsatisfied with Millennium’s work.” Although the city disclaims any involvement, Millennium claims it was a “joint enterprise.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Issues of Fact Prevent Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion in Collapse Case

    January 17, 2022 —
    The insurer's effort to dismiss the insured's collapse case by motion for summary judgment failed. Bitters v. Nationwide Gen. Ins. Co., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 228523 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 30, 2021). The insured alleged that there was a "sudden and accidental direct physical loss" to his home caused by collapse due to hidden insect damage to the foundation. The insured came home to find the floor of a bedroom dropped down to the cement slab below. He filed a claim with Nationwide, but coverage was denied. Suit was filed and Nationwide moved for summary judgment. The policy provided coverage for a sudden and accidental collapse caused by hidden insect damage. A building or part of a building was not considered in the state of collapse if it was standing, even if it was in danger of falling low or caving in. 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

    Aging-in-Place Features Becoming Essential for Many Home Buyers

    March 12, 2014 —
    With the rising number of Americans over the age of sixty-five, there is an “upswing” in demand of “aging-in-place home features,” according to Big Builder. Big Builder also noted seven accessible features that homebuyers identified when surveyed by The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB). A couple of the features listed were “doorways at least three feet wide” and “non-slip floors.” The survey results were reported in What Home Buyers Really Want, released in May 2013 by the NAHB. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Home Building Mergers and Acquisitions 2014 Predictions

    March 19, 2014 —
    John McManus, writing for Big Builder, discusses the various predictions for mergers and acquisitions in the home building field for 2014. While predictions vary between individuals, it seems to hover between 15 and 30. McManus lists several home building seller motivations, such as a “[n]eed for cash infusion to buy and develop new lot pipeline” and “[s]uccession planning.” Finally, McManus points out that not every merger and acquisition discussion will lead to a deal: “We've recently seen a combination or three flounder on the issue of price. This occurs partly as the home builder buyer community becomes more discriminating as to what truly fits their program, and partly as smaller builders attain options as regional and national lenders awaken and look to reenter project financing in a bigger way.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Transplants Send Nashville Home Market Upwards

    October 10, 2013 —
    Home sales and prices are up in Nashville, Tennessee, but it isn’t the locals who are responsible. “People are moving from Florida, California, Texas, Arizona. People come from New York and New Jersey and can’t believe the home values and low taxes,” said Margaret Dixon, a Tennessee realtor. And they’re moving to areas that the locals haven’t embraced. They “don’t have imaginary boundaries in their heads.” As a result, home sales are up 22% in the third quarter with a 9% rise in prices, as compared to the same quarter last year in Davidson County, where Nashville is located. In adjacent Williamson County, sales were up even more, with a 31% increase in volume and a 12% increase in price. Smyrna, home of Nissan’s LEAF electric car, saw a 25.5% increase in sales volume. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of