BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration 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


    Look to West Africa for the Future of Green Architecture

    Summary Findings of the Fourth National Climate Assessment

    Construction Defects Are Not An Occurrence Under New York, New Jersey Law

    Medical Center Builder Sues Contracting Agent, Citing Costly Delays

    'Perfect Storm' Caused Fractures at San Francisco Transit Hub

    Contractor Liable for Soils Settlement in Construction Defect Suit

    Partner Lisa M. Rolle and Associate Vito John Marzano Obtain Dismissal of Third-Party Indemnification Claims

    U.K. Construction Resumes Growth Amid Resurgent Housing Activity

    U.S. Steel Invoking Carnegie’s Legacy in Revival Strategy

    2018 Super Bowl US. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis

    Value In Being Deemed “Statutory Employer” Under Workers Compensation Law

    New York Appellate Court Expands Policyholders’ Ability to Plead and Seek Consequential Damages

    Michigan Supreme Court Concludes No Statute of Repose on Breach of Contract

    Motion to Dismiss Insureds' Counterclaim on the Basis of Prior Knowledge Denied

    Acquisition, Development, and Construction Lending Conditions Ease

    Florida High-Rise for Sale, Construction Defects Possibly Included

    Nevada Construction Defect Lawyers Dead in Possible Suicides

    Defining Construction Defects

    Contractor Beware: Design-Build Firms Must Review Washington’s Licensing Requirements

    Obama Asks for $302 Billion to Fix Bridges and Potholes

    New York Appellate Court Affirms 1966 Insurance Policy Continues to Cover WTC Asbestos Claims

    Arizona – New Discovery Rules

    Weed Property Owner Gets Smoked Under Insurance Policy

    Construction Warranties: Have You Seen Me Lately?

    The Moving Finish Line: Statutes of Limitation and Repose Are Not Always What They Seem

    More Clear, But Not Yet Crystal: Virginia Amends its Prompt Payment Law and Legislation Banning “Pay-If-Paid Clauses in Construction Contracts Effective July 1, 2023

    Attorney Writing Series on Misconceptions over Construction Defects

    What Should Be in Every Construction Agreement

    Wall Enclosing Georgia Neighborhood Built for Walking Dead TV Show

    Appraisal Can Go Forward Prior to Resolution of Coverage Dispute

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2022 Illinois Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    Trump Administration Issues Proposed 'Waters of the U.S.' Rule

    California Indemnity and Defense Construction Law Changes for 2013

    Lenders and Post-Foreclosure Purchasers Have Standing to Make Construction Defect Claims for After-Discovered Conditions

    Micropiles for bad soil: a Tarheel victory

    Unpredictable Opinion Regarding Construction Lien (Reinstatement??)

    Property Damage, Occurrences, Delays, Offsets and Fees. California Decision is a Smorgasbord of Construction Insurance Issues

    New York’s Highest Court Gives Insurers “an Incentive to Defend”

    Melissa Pang Elected Vice President of APABA-PA Board of Directors

    Florida Court of Appeals Rejects Insurer’s Attempt to Intervene in Underlying Lawsuit to Submit Special Interrogatories

    Alert: AAA Construction Industry Rules Update

    No Coverage for Construction Defect Claim Only Impacting Insured's Work

    DC Circuit Approves, with Some Misgivings, FERC’s Approval of the Atlantic Sunrise Natural Gas Pipeline Extension

    Construction Law Alert: Unlicensed Contractors On Federal Projects Entitled To Payment Under The Miller Act

    Triable Issue of Fact Exists as to Insurer’s Obligation to Provide Coverage Under Occurrence Policy

    The Preservation Maze

    Reasonable Expectations – Pennsylvania’s Case by Case Approach to the Sutton Rule

    Reinventing the Building Envelope – Interview with Gordon A Geddes

    Mexico’s Construction Industry Posts First Expansion Since 2012

    Idaho Federal Court Rules Against Sacketts After SCOTUS Decided Judicial Review of an EPA Compliance Order was Permissible
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: The Colorado Court of Appeals’ Decision Protecting a Declarant’s Right to Arbitration in Construction Defect Cases

    May 20, 2015 —
    On May 7th, the Colorado Court of Appeals issued its much anticipated ruling in Vallagio at Inverness Residential Condominium Association, Inc. v. Metropolitan Homes, Inc., et al., 2015COA65 (Colo. App. May 7, 2015). By way of background, the Vallagio at Inverness Residential Condominiums were developed by Metro Inverness, LLC, which also served as the declarant for its homeowners association. Metropolitan Homes was Metro Inverness’ manager and the general contractor on the project. Greg Krause and Peter Kudla served as declarant-appointed members of the Association’s board during the period of declarant control. When it set up the Association, Metro Inverness included within the Association’s declaration a mandatory arbitration provision specifically for construction defect claims. This provision stated that it “shall not ever be amended without the written consent of Declarant and without regard to whether Declarant owns any portion of the Real Estate at the time of the amendment.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Eleventh Circuit Set to Hear Challenge to Florida Law Barring Foreign Citizens From Buying Real Property

    April 22, 2024 —
    Fort Lauderdale, Fla. (April 2, 2024) - This month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit will hear a challenge to a recently-enacted Florida law, Senate Bill 264, which restricts foreign ownership or investment in Florida real property from specific countries and imposes a near ban on property purchases by Chinese, Russian and other foreign nationals. On July 1, 2023, Senate Bill 264 [codified under Fla. Stat. Ann. §§ 692.201 to 692.205] took effect. The bill, titled “Interests of Foreign Countries,” prohibits Chinese nationals and nationals from other countries, including Russia, from buying real property unless they are American citizens or permanent residents. Prior to the new law's effective date, on May 22, 2023, four Chinese citizens who hold nonimmigrant visas and reside in Florida, along with a Florida-based real estate firm, sued the state of Florida in federal district court, alleging that the new law is unconstitutional and discriminatory, and that it violates the Fair Housing Act [Shen v. Simpson, Case No. 4:23-cv-208]. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Gnesin, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Gnesin may be contacted at Michael.Gnesin@lewisbrisbois.com

    Quick Note: Third-Party Can Bring Common Law Bad Faith Claim

    July 01, 2019 —
    A third-party claimant may bring a common law bad faith claim against a defendant’s liability insurer. Mccullough v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, 2019 WL 2076192, *2 (S.D.Fla. 2019). “A bad faith claim may be brought by a third party absent an assignment from the [defendant] insured.” Id. This can only be done in the third-party bad faith context with the argument that the insurer’s “bad faith” conduct resulted in a judgment against the defendant-insured in excess of the policy limits. However, in any third-party bad faith claim (and, really, bad faith claim in general), coverage must first be determined under the policy. 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

    Is Your Business Insured for the Coronavirus?

    March 16, 2020 —
    How bad will the pandemic get? How much will it spread in the United States? Will we develop a vaccine in time to do any good? As insurance lawyers, we have no idea. But we can help you figure out whether your business is insured for the coronavirus risks that keep business owners up at night. Risk 1: An outbreak forces my business to close until the outbreak ends. Are my financial business losses covered? Maybe. Many commercial property policies provide “business interruption coverage” which may apply. This coverage typically requires that: (i) Your business is shut down. If your business actually closes for a period of time, you may meet this requirement. However, you wouldn’t meet it if your business slows because half of your staff is home sick. (ii) The shutdown is necessary. “Necessary” means something different than “desirable” or “prudent.” Whether a shutdown is necessary depends on the facts. If it is physically or legally impossible to enter your building, then closure is necessary. But if the government issues a public advisory recommending that businesses close, and you voluntarily comply, that’s a different story. (iii) The shutdown is caused by physical damage to your property. Is a viral outbreak “damage” to your property? There’s not a clear answer. On the one hand, courts have found that hazardous contamination of a building constitutes property damage to the building. For example, asbestos incorporated into a building constitutes property damage to the building under a commercial general liability policy. Environmental contamination can also constitute property damage to the contaminated property. Policyholders whose businesses close during an outbreak will argue that property contaminated by the virus satisfies the “physical damage to property” requirement. On the other hand, insurers may argue that the real cause of the shutdown is not the contaminated building surfaces, but the need for social distancing in a neighborhood with many contagious people. Coverage will depend on the policy language and the details of the shutdown. Reprinted courtesy of J. Kelby Van Patten, Payne & Fears and Jared De Jong, Payne & Fears Mr. Van may be contacted at kvp@paynefears.com Mr. Jong may be contacted at jdj@paynefears.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    October 01, 2014 —
    San Jose, California, and Dallas led the U.S. in office-rent increases in the third quarter as cities benefiting from growth in the technology and energy industries outperformed the gradual national recovery. Rents after any landlord discounts, known as effective rents, climbed 6.7 percent from a year earlier in San Jose, compared with the U.S. average increase of 2.6 percent, property researcher Reis Inc. (REIS) said. Dallas rents rose 5.2 percent, followed by San Francisco’s 5.1 percent gain, Houston’s 4.4 percent increase and New York’s 3.9 percent advance. The national sluggishness in the office market’s growth is being bucked by parts of Northern California and Texas, where large bases of technology or energy workers drive demand for space, Reis said. Throughout the U.S., increases in office occupancies show that the market “is in the midst of a recovery,” according to the New York-based company. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hui-yong Yu, Bloomberg
    Hui-yong Yu may be contacted at hyu@bloomberg.net

    Issues to Watch Out for When Managing Remote Workers

    July 13, 2020 —
    Managing remote workers comes with its share of challenges. The complexities of setting and articulating expectations in a remote work environment – and providing feedback about performance tied to those expectations - adds an additional burden to our already-crowded work lives, particularly for managers who are new to remote supervisory roles. This article highlights some key issues that arise when managing remote workers. Issue 1: Insufficient feedback Annual reviews are not enough. Data clearly reflects that employees who receive regular feedback are happier, and more productive, in their roles. Employees require a “continuous feedback loop” to grow and improve. While many companies started migrating toward continuous feedback before the pandemic, remote work further increases the need for more frequent (formal and informal) check-ins. Organizations must provide management with a toolkit for providing – and receiving – constant feedback, and this toolkit should take into account changes in work styles and modalities of communication when employees are remote. Given the ease with which we can give face-to-face feedback compared to “virtual” feedback, this toolkit becomes even more important when only some employees are remote and others have returned onsite. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa (Powar) Clarke, Payne & Fears
    Ms. Clarke may be contacted at mec@paynefears.com

    Seven Key Issues for Construction Professionals to Consider When Dealing With COVID-19

    April 13, 2020 —
    By now every construction professional has been inundated with articles regarding the impacts of COVID-19 on the construction industry. The sheer volume of information is overwhelming and changes by the hour. This article is intended to summarize key issues affecting construction professionals and serve as a general road map for navigating the crisis. 1. Determine Project Status The first consideration is whether the construction projects at issue are allowed to proceed given “shelter in place” and related orders. Generally speaking, Governor Newsom has deemed construction to be essential and, therefore, exempt from California’s “Safer at Home” order. There is some debate as to whether the governor’s order takes priority over contradictory local (City and County) orders. For example, some Northern California counties and the City of Berkeley have issued orders expressly providing that their local orders legally supersede the State order because the local orders are more restrictive. If a local ordinance, public entity representative, or the project owner orders the project to shut down, the parties will need to make a fact specific determination regarding how to proceed at that time. If the project proceeds, employee safety is paramount. In the City of Los Angeles employers are required to develop a “comprehensive COVID-19 exposure control plan” that includes a laundry list of safety requirements. Regardless of the jurisdiction, the parties must err on the side of caution and comply with social distancing (six feet), refrain from holding meetings, and close the project to the public. Anyone who can work remotely should be encouraged to do so. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Adams, Gibbs Giden
    Mr. Adams may be contacted at jadams@gibbsgiden.com

    Commonwealth Court Strikes Blow to Philly Window and Door Ordinance

    January 05, 2017 —
    On December 22, 2016, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court issued an important opinion that has flown under the radar somewhat. The case Rufo v. Board of Licenses and Inspection Review, invalidates a major portion of Philadelphia’s so called windows and doors ordinance, which requires owners of vacant properties to install glass windows and doors with frames on vacant properties. A copy of the opinion can be found here. (I only learned about the case because of a tweet by a litigator with the pro-freedom group the Institute for Justice.) The Windows and Doors Ordinance The case concerns Section 306.2 of the Property Maintenance Code which requires “the owner of a vacant building that is a blighting influence, as defined in this subcode, [to] secure all spaces designed as windows with windows that have frames and glazing and all entryways with doors.” Property owners found in violation of the ordinance can face stiff fines. Property owners are subject to a daily fine for each door and window in violation of the Ordinance. The fine is $300 per window or door. However, because most vacant properties have multiple windows and doors the fines can add up exponentially. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com