BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut construction claims 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


    Why Do Construction Companies Fail?

    Revisiting OSHA’s Controlling Employer Policy

    Three White and Williams Lawyers Named Top Lawyers by Delaware Today

    Contractual “Pay if Paid” and “Pay when Paid” Clauses? What is a California Construction Subcontractor to Do?

    Florida Project Could Help Address Runoff, Algae Blooms

    Legislative Changes that Impact Construction 2017

    Construction Defect Not an Occurrence in Ohio

    Construction Defect Coverage Summary 2013: The Business Risks Shift To Insurers

    Absence of Property Damage During Policy Period Equates to No Coverage

    Ohio Court of Appeals Affirms Judgment in Landis v. Fannin Builders

    Action Needed: HB24-1230 Spells Trouble for Colorado Construction Industry and its Insurers

    High Court Could Alter Point-Source Discharge Definition in Taking Clean-Water Case

    SCOTUS, Having Received Views of Solicitor General, Will Decide Whether CWA Regulates Indirect Discharge of Pollutants Into Navigable Water Via Groundwater

    Harmon Tower Construction Defects Update: Who’s To Blame?

    Condo Developers Buy in Washington despite Construction Defect Litigation

    Stuck in Seattle: The Aggravating Adventures of a Gigantic Tunnel Drill

    Subsidence Exclusion Bars Coverage for Damage Caused by Landslide

    Mixed Reality for Construction: Applicability and Reality

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Listed in the Best Lawyers in America© 2017

    Nevada OSHA Provides Additional Requirements for Construction Employers to Address Feasibility of Social Distancing at Construction Sites

    Circuit Court Lacks Appellate Jurisdiction Over Order Compelling Appraisal

    A Lien Might Just Save Your Small Construction Business

    Practical Pointers for Change Orders on Commercial Construction Contracts

    Blackstone to Buy Chicago’s Willis Tower for $1.3 Billion

    Angela Cooner Named "Top Lawyer" by Phoenix Magazine in Inaugural Publication

    Broker's Motion for Summary Judgment on Negligence Claim Denied

    The Most Expensive Travel Construction Flops

    New York Building Boom Spurs Corruption Probe After Death

    Intellectual Property And Employment Law Best Practices: Are You Covering Your Bases In Protecting Construction-Related Trade Secrets?

    Ambiguity Kills in Construction Contracting

    Florida Death Toll Rises by Three, Reaching 27 as Search Resumes

    A Year-End Review of the Environmental Regulatory Landscape

    $5 Million Construction Defect Lawsuit over Oregon Townhomes

    Louisiana Court Holds That Application of Pollution Exclusion Would Lead to Absurd Results

    Golden Gate Bridge's $76 Million Suicide Nets Near Approval

    “I Didn’t Sign That!” – Applicability of Waivers of Subrogation to Non-Signatory Third Parties

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2021 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    Denver Officials Clamor for State Construction Defect Law

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/8/24) – Hotel Labor Disputes, a Congressional Real Estate Caucus and Freddie Mac’s New Policies

    4 Steps to Take When a Worker Is Injured on Your Construction Site

    Homeowners Sued for Failing to Disclose Defects

    Millennium’s Englander Buys $71.3 Million Manhattan Co-Op

    Professional Liability Client Alert: Law Firms Should Consider Hiring Outside Counsel Before Suing Clients For Unpaid Fees

    Insurer Must Pay for Matching Siding of Insured's Buildings

    Oregon Supreme Court Confirms Broad Duty to Defend

    California Supreme Court Raises the Bar on Dangerous Conditions on Public Property Claims

    Insurer Granted Summary Judgment on Faulty Workmanship Claim

    California Judicial Council Votes to Rescind Prohibitions on Eviction and Foreclosure Proceedings

    Historical Long-Tail Claims in California Subject to a Vertical Exhaustion Rule

    AB 1701 – General Contractor Liability for Subcontractors’ Unpaid Wages
    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

    Related’s $1 Billion Los Angeles Project Opens After 15-Year Wait

    August 22, 2022 —
    It’s taken 15 years — longer than the time to finish Manhattan’s Hudson Yards — for Related Cos. to complete the Grand LA, a $1 billion hotel, residential and retail complex designed by star architect Frank Gehry. The Los Angeles hilltop development’s 28-floor Conrad hotel opens July 6, and the first tenants move into a neighboring 45-story apartment tower on July 15. The retail section — a mall-like space between the two towers for restaurants and boutiques — debuts in 2023. Grand LA rises across Grand Avenue from Gehry’s aluminum-clad Walt Disney Concert Hall, home of the Los Angeles Philharmonic. Nearby palaces of culture include the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion, the Ahmanson Theatre, the Broad art museum, Los Angeles Museum of Contemporary Art and the Colburn School, a music and dance academy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Gittelsohn, Bloomberg

    Disputes Will Not Be Subject to Arbitration Provision If There Is No “Significant Relationship”

    November 29, 2021 —
    As you know from prior articles, arbitration is a creature of contract. This means if you want your disputes to be resolved by binding arbitration, as opposed to litigation, you want to make sure there is an arbitration provision in your contract. If there are certain types of disputes you do not want subject to arbitration, you want to specify those types of disputes/claims in your arbitration provision. If you are not sure, make sure to discuss the pros and cons of arbitration with your counsel when drafting and negotiating the contract. However, even with a broad arbitration provision, there are times where a dispute may still fall out of the scope of the arbitration provision, i.e., the dispute is not arbitrable. If this occurs, such dispute will be resolved by litigation. Parties that have buyer’s remove and do not want to arbitrate their dispute may try to make this argument that the dispute is not subject to the scope of the arbitration provision. There are times this argument carries weight because the dispute has no significant relationship to the agreement with the arbitration provision, as shown below. In Deweees v. Johnson, 46 Fla. L. Weekly D2356b (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), a plaintiff purchased a home in a private residential community. The purchase contract with the developer contained a broad arbitration provision that materially provided that, “all post-closing claims, disputes, and controversies…between purchaser and seller will be resolved by binding arbitration except those arising under section G.5 and G.6 above.” Dewees, supra. Sections G.5 and G.6 provided that the purchaser will not interfere in the sales process with other purchasers and will not interfere with workmen during the construction process. There was also a workmanship and structural defect warranty for the dwelling that also contained an arbitration provision. 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

    Fourth Circuit Rejects Application of Wrap-Up Exclusion to Additional Insured

    December 11, 2018 —
    Utilizing an owner-controlled or contractor-controlled insurance program (collectively known as “wrap-ups”) can reduce claims, save costs, and give owners and general contractors comfort in knowing their project is adequately insured. However, problems often arise when a subcontractor doesn’t enroll in the wrap-up and, instead, agrees to provide additional insured coverage to the owner and general contractor on the subcontractor’s own general liability policy. One of those problems is the prevalence of wrap-up exclusions on subcontractors’ general liability policies. If the wrap-up exclusion is too broadly drafted, the exclusion can eliminate coverage for the general contractor and owner even when the subcontractor is not enrolled in the wrap-up. Reprinted courtesy of K. Alexandra Byrd, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Samantha M. Oliveira, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Byrd may be contacted at kab@sdvlaw.com Mr. Oliveira may be contacted at smm@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Property Insurance Exclusion for Constant or Repeated Leakage of Water

    March 14, 2018 —
    A property insurance policy, no different than any insurance policy, contains exclusions for events that are NOT covered under the terms of the policy. One such common exclusion in a property insurance policy is an exclusion for damages caused by "constant or repeated seepage or leakage of water…over a period of 14 or more days." The application of this exclusion was discussed in the recent opinion of Hicks v. American Integrity Ins. Co. of Florida, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D446a (Fla. 5th DCA 2018). In this case, while the insured was out of town, the water line to his refrigerator started to leak. When the insured return home over a month later, the supply line was discharging almost a thousand gallons of water per day. The insured submitted a property insurance claim. The property insurer engaged a consultant that opined (likely, correctly) that the water line had been leaking for at least five weeks. Based on the above-mentioned exclusion, i.e., that water had been constantly leaking for over a period of 14 days, the insurer denied coverage. This denial led to the inevitable coverage dispute. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Is Still in Trouble, Two Major Reviews Say

    November 07, 2022 —
    Two separate assessments of the health of the Chesapeake Bay indicate that most jurisdictions within its watershed are not on track to meet target goals to cut nitrogen and phosphorus discharge levels by 2025. But new plans and programs put in place in 2022 could improve the restoration trajectory, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Reprinted courtesy of Pam McFarland, Engineering News-Record Ms. McFarland may be contacted at mcfarlandp@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    June 30, 2016 —
    We talk a lot about contractors on the California Construction Law Blog. Owners? Not so much. So this one’s for you. Why are Notices of Completion, Cessation and Non-Responsibility Important to Owners? California recognizes three types of statutory notices on construction projects available to owners:
    • Notices of completion;
    • Notices of cessation; and
    • Notices of non-responsibility.
    • Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
      Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

      Court of Appeals Upholds Default Judgment: Serves as Reminder to Respond to Lawsuits in a Timely Manner

      October 02, 2023 —
      In Cyrus Way Partners, LLC. (“Cyrus”) v. Cadman, Inc. (“Cadman”), the primary issue on appeal was whether the trial court erred in denying Cadman’s motion to vacate the default judgment under Civil Rules 55 and 60. A default judgment is a legal ruling that can be entered in favor of the plaintiff when the defendant fails to respond to a lawsuit. If that happens, the court may resolve the lawsuit without hearing from the other side. In Washington, a party typically has 20 days to appear in a suit before being at risk for default judgment. If a default judgment is entered for the plaintiff, the defendant can move to vacate the default judgment, meaning the defendant hopes the court will set aside the default judgment as if it never happened. In this case, Cadman, the defendant, presents several ultimately unsuccessful arguments for why the default judgment in favor of Cyrus, the plaintiff, should be vacated. Cyrus and Orca Beverage Inc. (“Orca”) are under common ownership. In 2018, Cyrus began a project to build a warehouse for Orca, which included the construction of a large concrete slab. Cadman was hired to supply the concrete. Cyrus hired Olympic Concrete Finishing Inc. (“Olympic”) to finish the concrete. On April 1, 2018, Cadman poured the concrete, and Olympic finished the slab. The next day, Cyrus noticed several problems with the slab, which experts hired by both Cyrus and Cadman opined were caused by an abnormally high air content in the concrete. Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC

      Death of Subcontractor’s Unjust Enrichment Claim Against Project Owner

      April 12, 2021 —
      In a previous article, I discussed a subcontractor’s unjust enrichment claim against a project’s owner and the death of this equitable claim if the owner fully paid the general contractor or paid the general contractor for the subcontractor’s work. This can be best summarized from a very short 1995 opinion out of the Fourth District Court of Appeal: “Unjust enrichment is equitable in nature and cannot exist where payment has been made for the benefit conferred. [Owner] paid [General Contractor] the full amount of its contract for the construction project. Accordingly, there can be no unjust enrichment claim to support [Subcontractor’s] claim.” Gene B. Glick Co., Inc. v. Sunshine Ready Concrete Co., Inc., 651 So.2d 90 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A. Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of