BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction 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


    Statutory Time Limits for Construction Defects in Massachusetts

    OSHA/VOSH Roundup

    A Word to the Wise about Construction Defects

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2020

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives First Tier Ranking

    How to Protect the High-Tech Home

    Comparing Contracts: A Review of the AIA 201 and ConsensusDocs - Part II

    The Texas Supreme Court Limits the Use of the Economic Loss Rule

    Handling Insurance Claims in the Wake of the Los Angeles Wildfires

    How Small Mistakes Can Have Serious Consequences Under California's Contractor Licensing Laws.

    Super Lawyers Recognized Five Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

    Lawsuit Gives Teeth to Massachusetts Pay Law

    Protect Your Right To Payment By Following Nedd

    Montana Federal Court Upholds Application of Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause

    Court Throws Wet Blanket On Prime Contractor's Attorneys' Fees Request In Prompt Payment Case

    Nine Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Recognized as Southern California Super Lawyers

    General Liability Alert: ADA Requirements Pertaining to Wall Space Adjacent to Interior Doors Clarified

    Colorado’s Abbreviated Legislative Session Offers Builders a Reprieve

    Courthouse Reporter Series: The Travails of Statutory Construction...Defining “Labor” under the Miller Act

    Construction Mezzanine Financing

    City Sues over Leaking Sewer System

    New York Court Finds No Coverage Owed for Asbestos Losses Because Insured Failed to Prove Material Terms

    What ENR.com Construction News Gained the Most Views

    Certifying Claim Under Contract Disputes Act

    Skanska Found Negligent for Damages From Breakaway Barges

    Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal Secured by Lewis Brisbois in Coverage Dispute Involving San Francisco 49ers’ Levi Stadium

    On the Ten Year Anniversary of the JOBS Act A Look-Back at the Development of Crowdfunding

    Out of Eastern Europe, a Window Into the Post-Pandemic Office

    Developer’s Failure to Plead Amount of Damages in Cross-Complaint Fatal to Direct Action Against Subcontractor’s Insurers Based on Default Judgment

    The Heat Is On

    COVID-19 Response: Environmental Compliance Worries in the Time of Coronavirus

    Insureds' Summary Judgment Motion on Mold Limitation Denied

    Affordable Housing should not be Filled with Defects

    Georgia State and Local Governments Receive Expanded Authority for Conservation Projects

    Insurer’s Discovery Requests Ruled to be Overbroad in Construction Defect Suit

    Microwave Transmission of Space-Based Solar Power: The Focus of New Attention

    Supreme Court Eliminates Judicial 'Chevron' Deference to Federal Agency Statutory Interpretations

    Appeals Court Affirms Carrier’s Duty to Pay Costs Taxed Against Insured in Construction Defect Suit

    Insurer Must Defend Insured Against Construction Defect Claims

    Another Las Vegas Tower at the Center of Construction Defect Claims

    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

    Equities Favor Subrogating Insurer Over Subcontractor That Performed Defective Work

    Georgia Federal Court Says Fact Questions Exist As To Whether Nitrogen Is An “Irritant” or “Contaminant” As Used in Pollution Exclusion

    AIA Releases Decennial 2017 Updates to its Contracts Suites

    Is Construction Heading Off the Fiscal Cliff?

    Green Home Predictions That Are Best Poised to Come True in 2014 and Beyond (guest post)

    Hanover, Germany Apple Store Delayed by Construction Defects

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2022 Top Lawyers!

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

    Third Circuit Affirms Use of Eminent Domain by Natural Gas Pipeline
    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

    Nader Eghtesad v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    September 28, 2020 —
    In Eghtesad v. State Farm Gen. Ins. Co., 51 Cal.App.5th 406 (June 29, 2020), the California Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s entry of judgment in favor of State Farm General Insurance Company (“State Farm”) based on an order sustaining a demurrer without leave to amend regarding a complaint filed by Nader Eghtesad. Mr. Eghtesad, representing himself, filed a form complaint checking a box for breach of contract. The complaint alleged two paragraphs contending that State Farm had acted in bad faith and concealed benefits due under a policy issued to a former tenant who rented space in a building owned by Eghtesad. Eghtesad was an additional insured under the tenant’s policy. In that regard, the building was damaged during the time that the building was rented and Eghtesad tendered a claim under the State Farm policy contending that he was an additional insured pursuant to the terms of the lease with the tenant. According to Eghtesad, State Farm advised him that he could only make a claim for slander against the former tenant and that coverage was not afforded for his property damage claim. After Eghtesad filed his form complaint, State Farm demurred to the complaint and argued that it did not state facts supporting a cause of action for breach of contract. Ultimately, the trial court agreed with State Farm and entered an order sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend, such that a judgment was entered in State Farm’s favor. Due to health reasons, Eghtesad was never able to file an opposition to the demurrer, despite two extensions of time provided by the trial court intended to allow Eghtesad time to retain counsel and to recover from injuries sustained as a result of an automobile accident. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Velladao, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Velladao may be contacted at Michael.Velladao@lewisbrisbois.com

    Deadline Nears for “Green Performance Bond” Implementation

    December 03, 2024 —
    For this weeks Guest Post Friday at Musings, we welcome Surety Bonds.com, a leading online surety provider. SuretyBonds.com specializes in educating current and prospective business owners about local surety requirements. To keep up with surety bond trends, follow and Surety Bonds Insider blog and @suretybond on Twitter. Professionals who work in the construction industry know the laws that regulate the market change constantly. Unfortunately, even government agencies are flawed, which means they sometimes establish nonsensical, arbitrary regulations that leave construction professionals even more confused as to how they’re expected to do their jobs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    DIR Public Works Registration System Down, Public Works Contractors Not to be Penalized

    July 15, 2024 —
    In a bit of a major freak-out this past Friday, June 28, 2024, public works contractors with Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) registrations expiring on June 30, 2024 were unable to renew their public works registrations. Those who had submitted checks were not receiving responses, DIR was not accepting online payments, and there was no telephone number or address to contact the DIR about the issue. This, of course, could have been a big deal since Labor Code section 1725.5 prohibits contractors and subcontractors from bidding on, being listed in a bid, or being awarded a public works contract unless registered with the DIR. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    South Carolina Law Clarifies Statue of Repose

    July 11, 2011 —

    A new law in South Carolina, H 3375, fixes a loophole in that state’s statute of repose. State law puts a cap of eight years on construction defects, but the 2008 law that set that limit had a loophole that would allow for construction defect claims to start thirteen years after construction. The law also provides a cap on punitive damages.

    The measure was backed by the Carolinas Association of General Contractors. Their spokesperson said that the legislation “increases our state’s ability to be economically competitive and helps protect our members from frivolous lawsuits.”

    Read the full story…

    Read South Carolina H 3375…

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

    Montrose Language Interpreted: How Many Policies Are Implicated By A Construction Defect That Later Causes a Flood?

    March 17, 2011 —

    The Court of Appeals of Indiana recently addressed the “Montrose” language added to the CGL ISO form in 2001 in the context of a construction defect claim where a fractured storm drain caused significant flooding a year after the drain was damaged. The insuring agreement requires that “bodily injury” or “property damage” be caused by an “occurrence” and that the “bodily injury” or “property damage” occur during the policy period. The Montrose language adds that the insurance applies only if, prior to the policy period, no insured knew that the “bodily injury” or “property damage” had occurred in whole or in part. Significantly, it also states that any “bodily injury“ or “property damage” which occurs during the policy period and was not, prior to the policy period known to have occurred, includes a continuation, change or resumption of that “bodily injury” or “property damage” after the end of the policy period.

    In Grange Mutual Cas. Co. v. West Bend Mut. Ins. Co., No. 29D04-0706-PL-1112 (Ct. App. IN March 15, 2011), http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/03151109ehf.pdf, Sullivan was the General Contractor for a school construction project. Its subcontractor, McCurdy, installed the storm drain pipes. One of the storm pipes was fractured in 2005 while McCurdy was doing its installation work. More than a year later, the school experienced significant water damage due to flooding. It was later discovered that the flooding was due to the fractured storm drain. Sullivan’s insurer paid $146,403 for the water damage. That insurer brought a subrogation claim against McCurdy and its two insurers: West Bend and Grange. West Bend had issued CGL coverage to McCurdy while the construction was ongoing , including the date in which the storm pipe was fractured. Grange issued CGL coverage to McCurdy at the time of the flooding. Those two carriers jointly settled the subrogation claim and then litigated which insurer actually owed coverage for the loss. Significantly, the loss that was paid included only damages from the flooding, not any damages for the cost of repairing the pipe.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Shaun McParland Baldwin of Tressler LLP. Ms Baldwin can be contacted at sbaldwin@tresslerllp.com

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

    ASCE Statement on House Failure to Pass the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    October 04, 2021 —
    The following is a statement by Tom Smith, Executive Director, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): WASHINGTON, DC. – Today, American families and businesses are paying the price while the House plays politics and fails to pass the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), a historic piece of legislation that would have monumental impacts on the economy, public safety, global competitiveness, and each American's well-being. After decades of kicking the can down the road on meaningful infrastructure legislation, Congress is missing an extraordinary chance to reverse this unsustainable trend with passage of the IIJA, instead choosing to allow critical projects to be delayed. This legislation was passed in a strong vote by the Senate on August 10th, and almost two months later, it sits on the sidelines as the federal program for transit, roads, and bridges expired on September 30th and projects come grinding to a halt. While other countries are making investments in their future, we are letting politics steal this opportunity to move forward. It does not have to be this way. This comprehensive bill would bring relief to communities facing strained power grids, aging bridges, leaking water pipes, and spotty broadband. American families do not want to have to wonder if their power will stay on in the next storm, if the bridge connecting their community will close for emergency repairs, or if a week of virtual school means their child will miss out. We urge the House to pass this bipartisan, commonsense legislation today to create jobs, make goods and services move more quickly and reliably, and make American communities more climate-resilient. Our infrastructure bill has come due, and now is the time to act. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 150,000 civil engineers worldwide and is America's oldest national engineering society. ASCE works to raise awareness of the need to maintain and modernize the nation's infrastructure using sustainable and resilient practices, advocates for increasing and optimizing investment in infrastructure, and improve engineering knowledge and competency. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Preliminary Notices: Common Avoidable But Fatal Mistakes

    August 26, 2019 —
    In the California building and construction industry, service of a “Preliminary Notice” is a prerequisite for Subcontractor and Supplier claims for payment through the Mechanics Lien, Stop Payment Notice and Payment Bond Claim process. Without proper drafting and service of a Preliminary Notice, these extremely valuable claims cannot be protected. Unfortunately, despite the vital importance of the Preliminary Notice, Subcontractors and Suppliers often make common self-defeating mistakes that make their Preliminary Notice efforts completely ineffective, resulting in loss of their claims rights. The purpose of this article is to list some of these common mistakes in the hope that the reader will avoid such mistakes, preserve the integrity of the Preliminary Notice, and protect the claims rights it makes available: Not Sending out the Preliminary Notice Within 20 Days After Supplying Labor or Materials: The protection of a Preliminary Notice begins 20 days before it sent out. This means that if a Subcontractor or Supplier claimant delivered $100,000 in materials on February 1, that same claimant must serve the Preliminary Notice on or before February 21 (the sooner the better), or the claimant will not be able to pursue an enforceable Mechanics Lien, Stop Payment Notice or Payment Bond claim for that $100,000. There are very few exceptions. Best practice: A Subcontractor or Supplier must send out the Preliminary Notice as soon as an agreement to provide work or materials to a California construction project is in place (See California Civil Code 8204). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    N.J. Voters Approve $116 Million in School Construction

    March 19, 2014 —
    New Jersey voters in 11 of 13 school districts with bond referendums this week approved $116.1 million of construction. The largest project, out of a total of $180 million proposed, failed. Voters in the Greater Egg Harbor Regional High School District rejected $37 million in renovations to three schools. The work would have increased property taxes as much as $36 a year, according to the district, which serves four towns at the Jersey Shore. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stacie Sherman, Bloomberg
    Ms. Sherman may be contacted at sbabula@bloomberg.net