BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing 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


    Nine Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Deadly Fire in Older Hawaii High-Rise Causes Sprinkler Law Discussion

    Congratulations to Partners Nicole Whyte, Keith Bremer, Peter Brown, Karen Baytosh, and Associate Matthew Cox for Their Inclusion in 2022 Best Lawyers!

    The EEOC Is Actively Targeting the Construction Industry

    Pre-Judgment Interest Not Awarded Under Flood Policy

    Henderson Engineers Tests AI for Building Systems Design with Torch.AI

    Haight Brown & Bonesteel Ranked on the 2017 "Best Law Firms" List by U.S. News - Best Lawyers

    Replacement of Gym Floor Due to Sloppy Paint Job is Not Resulting Loss

    Delay Leads to Problems with Construction Defects

    Get Your Contracts Lean- Its Better than Dieting

    California Court of Appeal Clarifies Intent of Faulty Workmanship Exclusions

    Developer’s Fraudulent Statements Are His Responsibility Alone in Construction Defect Case

    Ohio Court Refuses to Annualize Multi-Year Policies’ Per Occurrence Limits

    New Home Construction Booming in Texas

    Washington High Court Holds Insurers Bound by Representations in Agent’s Certificates of Insurance

    Update Relating to SB891 and Bond Claim Waivers

    Vacation during a Project? Time for your Construction Documents to Shine!

    Home insurance perks for green-friendly design (guest post)

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

    Thank You for 14 Consecutive Years of Legal Elite Elections

    43% of U.S. Homes in High Natural Disaster Risk Areas

    Contractor Entitled to Defense for Alleged Faulty Workmanship of Subcontractor

    COVID-19 Response: Recent Executive Orders Present Opportunities for Businesses Seeking Regulatory and Enforcement Relief and Expedited Project Development

    Illinois Supreme Court Finds Construction Defect Claim Triggers Initial Grant of Coverage

    New Strategy for Deterring Intracorporate Litigation?: Delaware Supreme Court Supports Fee-Shifting Bylaws

    Resulting Loss From Faulty Workmanship Covered

    When Do You Call Your Lawyer?

    Construction Demand Unsteady, Gains in Some Regions

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    Preliminary Notice Is More Important Than Ever During COVID-19

    Recent Federal Court Decision Favors Class Action Defendants

    “To Indemnify, or Not to Indemnify, that is the Question: California Court of Appeal Addresses Active Negligence in Indemnity Provisions”

    Coffee Beans, Mars and the 50 States: Civil Code 1542 Waivers and Latent Defects

    Predicting the Future of Texas’s Grid Is a Texas-Sized Challenge

    Study Finds Construction Cranes Vulnerable to Hacking

    The New Industrial Revolution: Rebuilding America and the World

    Partners Jeremy S. Macklin and Mark F. Wolfe Secure Seventh Circuit Win for Insurer Client in Late Notice Dispute

    Navigating the New Landscape: How AB 12 and SB 567 Impact Landlords and Tenants in California

    Does Arbitration Apply to Contemporaneously Executed Contracts (When One of the Contracts Does Not Have an Arbitration Provision)?

    Structural Defects in Thousands of Bridges in America

    Wes Payne Receives Defense Attorney of the Year Award

    Milwaukee's 25-Story Ascent Stacks Up as Tall Timber Role Model

    Feds Outline Workforce Rules for $39B in Chip Plant Funding

    London Shard Developer Wins Approval for Tower Nearby

    How to Protect a Construction-Related Invention

    Navigating Construction Contracts in the Energy Sector – Insights from Sheppard Mullin’s Webinar Series

    Construction Defect Claim Must Be Defended Under Florida Law

    Liability Coverage for Claims of Publishing Secret Data Does Not Require Access by Others

    Will Future Megacities Be a Marvel or a Mess? Look at New Delhi

    Is Privity of Contract with the Owner a Requirement of a Valid Mechanic’s Lien? Not for GC’s
    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

    Trial Court’s Grant of Summary Judgment On Ground Not Asserted By Moving Party Upheld

    December 17, 2015 —
    In Marlton Recovery Partners, LLC v. County of Los Angeles, et al. (filed 11/20/15), the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, affirmed summary judgment in favor of the defendants County of Los Angeles, the County Treasurer-Tax Collector and Board of Supervisors (collectively the “County”) despite the fact summary judgment was granted on grounds not raised by the County. The Court of Appeal determined that because the plaintiff could not have shown a triable issue of material fact on the ground of law relied upon by the trial court, summary judgment was proper. In the underlying case, plaintiff sought cancellation of penalties on delinquent property taxes for 26 parcels under Revenue and Taxation Code §4985.2, which allows the tax collector to cancel such penalties under certain circumstances. The County denied the request prompting plaintiff to challenge the denial on a petition for peremptory writ of mandate to the trial court. Reprinted courtesy of Laura C. Williams, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Williams may be contacted at lwilliams@hbblaw.com Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Franchisors Should Consider Signing a Conditional Lease Assignment Rather Than a Franchisee’s Lease

    November 17, 2016 —
    In Franchise & High Properties, LLC v. Happy’s Franchise, LLC, a 2015 decision issued by the Court of Appeals in Michigan, the franchisor, Happy’s Pizza Franchise, LLC, signed a five-year lease for the commercial space to be occupied by its franchisee, Happy’s Pizza #19, Inc. The franchisor did so to secure a right of first refusal to purchase the property and to enforce the franchise agreement to have the lease assigned to the franchisor if the franchisee defaulted. The issue in the case was whether the term “tenant” referred solely to Happy’s Pizza #19 or whether it also included Happy’s Franchise as a co-tenant. “Tenant” was defined as follows: “Happy’s Pizza #19, Inc., 29102 Telegraph Road, Suite 607, Southfield, MI 48034, the lessee, and Happy’s Pizza Franchise, LLC, a Michigan limited liability company (hereinafter referred to as `Franchisor’), hereinafter designated as the Tenant.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard H. Herold, Real Estate Litigation Blog
    Mr. Herold may be contacted at rherold@swlaw.com

    Stadium Intended for the 2010 World Cup Still Not Ready

    June 18, 2014 —
    Four years after the HM Pitje Stadium in Pretoria, South Africa was expected to open, the stadium, which was meant to be used during the 2010 World Cup, remains closed. IOL News reported that upgrades began in 2006, “[b]ut since then there have been delays and problems with construction which may see the stands having to be rebuilt.” One of the defects that prevented the stadium from being used for the World Cup was that the slope of the main pavilion was too steep. City of Tshwane spokesman Selby Bokaba told IOL News: “Upgrading of the stadium will take approximately two calendar years, with the completion date reliant on the approval and budget availability.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- An Alternative

    February 05, 2015 —
    Over the past three weeks, I’ve discussed three “stages” of a construction dispute from the claim, to how to increase the pressure for payment, to the litigation. While these three steps are all too often necessary tools in your construction collection arsenal, they are expensive and time consuming. No well run construction business can or should budget for litigation. The better practice would be to engage a construction attorney early in the process and avoid the dispute altogether if possible. Unfortunately, even the best of planning can lead to the need to hire a construction lawyer for the less pleasant task of assisting you in getting paid. This post is about an alternative to the scorched earth of stage 3 of the process that can and should be at least considered either before or after the complaint or demand for arbitration has been filed. I am of course speaking about voluntary mediation. Why did I emphasize “voluntary?” Because to me mandatory mediation (as required in many construction contracts) is a bit like forced volunteerism, it is something that the parties will go through to “check a box” but will not have their hearts in it. Remember, by the time the mandatory mediation clause kicks in, the parties are likely at an impasse in their construction dispute and are ready to fight. Being forced to mediate, especially from the party seeking payment, can (and in my experience often does) make the parties just go through the motions at best and be hostile to the process at worst. Neither of these attitudes are conducive to resolving a dispute. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    WSHB Ranked 4th Most Diverse Law Firm in U.S.

    July 14, 2016 —
    American Lawyer, in its annual Diversity Scoreboard Survey, ranked Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP (WSHB) one of the four top law firms in the nation. Scores are based upon the firms’ combined percentage of minority lawyers as well as minority partners in U.S. offices. “Historically, law has not been among the most diverse of professions,” Partner Domingo Tan, Chair of WSHB’s Recruiting Committee, stated according to the firm’s media release. “This trend has recently begun to change and I am proud that our firm is one of the national leaders in recognizing and celebrating diversity as a core value.” WSHB Partner Jade Tran explained how the firm’s diversity benefits its clients: “At WSHB, we are a litigation powerhouse built upon the experiences drawn from our diverse attorney backgrounds. It’s this diversity that also makes our attorneys relatable to our clients who themselves stem from diverse backgrounds.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Berlin Lawmakers Get a New Green Workspace

    June 21, 2021 —
    On a site steeped in history a few hundred meters from the Reichstag in central Berlin, an office building is rapidly taking shape that handily symbolizes how climate protection has come to dominate the political narrative ahead of September’s election. The modular Luisenblock West, which will provide working space for Germany’s Bundestag, or lower house of parliament, is mostly wooden beyond a reinforced concrete core. The individual units that make up the bulk of the building are assembled at a site in the east of the city and designed to reduce carbon footprint by capturing thousands of tons of carbon dioxide. With just four months until the national vote that will mark the end of Angela Merkel’s 16-year reign, the Greens are leading the chancellor’s conservative bloc in some opinion polls and climate protection is high on the list of priorities for many voters. The former fringe party has a real chance of leading a German government for the first time, while traditional parties scramble to affirm their environmental credentials. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Iain Rogers, Bloomberg

    Ohio Court Refuses to Annualize Multi-Year Policies’ Per Occurrence Limits

    June 19, 2023 —
    White and Williams recently obtained summary judgment against an insured on behalf of an insurer and a guarantor, establishing that two multi-year insurance policies provide per occurrence limits on a per policy rather than a per year basis, which shielded potential exposure by over $100 million. The insured had previously sought and obtained coverage under two policies in connection with a single occurrence arising out of massive environmental contamination claims involving a large industrial site. The issue of whether the policies provide per occurrence limits on a policy term or annual basis was not resolved in this earlier litigation. The first policy was effective for three years and provides per occurrence limits of $40 million. The second policy was effective for up to three years and provides per occurrence limits of $15 million. Reprinted courtesy of Patricia Santelle, White and Williams LLP, Adam Berardi, White and Williams LLP and Lynndon Groff, White and Williams LLP Ms. Santelle may be contacted at santellep@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Berardi may be contacted at berardia@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Groff may be contacted at groffl@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Caltrans Hiring of Inexperienced Chinese Builder for Bay Bridge Expansion Questioned

    July 16, 2014 —
    The construction of the new eastern span of San Francisco’s bay bridge has been criticized for the $6.5 billion cost, welding crack violations, and alleged cover ups by Caltrans. The Sacramento Bee reported that the company Shanghai Zhenhua Port Machinery Co. Ltd. (ZPMC) “had never built a bridge.” In fact, ZPMC “was a manufacturer of giant cranes for container ports.” How then did ZPMC manage to obtain the contract? The Sacramento Bee stated that the company “had established a reputation as fast and cost-effective, offering savings of about $250 million compared to the competing bidder.” The project was already “years behind schedule and billions of dollars over budget by political squabbles and construction delays” and there were some fears that the “old bridge might not survive a major quake.” Caltrans was told by an outside expert that ZPMC was a “high risk,” however, the company received a “contingent pass.” Sacramento Bee reported that an audit showed “ZPMC didn’t have enough qualified welders or inspectors…and routinely welded in the rain, a basic error that often causes defects.” Regardless, Caltrans signed off on the project. “In August 2007, Caltrans auditors approved ZPMC outright, although the firm still lacked adequate quality control, even for ‘fracture critical’ materials,” the Sacramento Bee reported. During the California Senate committee hearing in January, Doug Coe, a senior Caltrans engineer, said “’The race for time’ created overwhelming pressure to keep moving as planned….But there’s no excuse for building something defective like that because we are in a race for time.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of