BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture 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


    Being the Bearer of Bad News (Sounding the Alarm on Construction Issues Early and Often) (Law Note)

    Uniwest Rides Again (or, Are Architects Subject to Va. Code Section 11-4.1?)

    Court Clarifies Sequence in California’s SB800

    Justice Didn’t Ensure Mortgage Fraud Was Priority, IG Says

    Unions Win Prevailing Wage Challenge Brought By Charter Cities: Next Stop The Supreme Court?

    Contractors: A Lesson on Being Friendly

    Best Lawyers Honors 43 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Recognizes Three Partners as 'Lawyers of The Year'

    Late Filing Contractor Barred from Involving Subcontractors in Construction Defect Claim

    Celebrating Excellence: Lisa Bondy Dunn named by Law Week Colorado as the 2024 Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants

    Contractors Liable For Their Subcontractor’s Failure To Pay Its Employees’ Wages And Benefits

    When is a “Willful” Violation Willful (or Not) Under California’s Contractor Enforcement Statutes?

    BWB&O is Recognized in the 2024 Edition of Best Law Firms®!

    Hydrogen Powers Its Way from Proof of Concept to Reality in Real Estate

    Dispute Over Amount Insured Owes Public Adjuster Resolved

    Mechanic’s Liens- Big Exception

    Still Going, After All This Time: the Sacketts, EPA and the Clean Water Act

    Contractor Liable for Soils Settlement in Construction Defect Suit

    Tenth Circuit Finds Insurer Must Defend Unintentional Faulty Workmanship

    BOOK CLUB SERIES: Everything You Want to Know About Construction Arbitration But Were Afraid to Ask

    San Diego: Compromise Reached in Fee Increases for Affordable Housing

    Contractors Prepare for a Strong 2021 Despite Unpredictability

    Why Being Climate ‘Positive’ Is the Buzzy New Goal of Green Building

    OSHA Launches Program to Combat Trenching Accidents

    COVID-19 Response: Key Legal Considerations for Event Cancellations

    Newmeyer Dillion Named 2020 Best Law Firm in Multiple Practice Areas by U.S. News-Best Lawyers

    When Customers Don’t Pay: What Can a Construction Business Do

    Greg Dillion & Newmeyer Dillion Named 2019 Good Scout Award Recipient

    Federal Court of Appeals Signals an End to Project Labor Agreement Requirements Linked to Development Tax Credits

    Construction Defects Lead to “A Pretty Shocking Sight”

    Question of Parties' Intent Prevents Summary Judgment for Insurer

    Texas School District Accepts Settlement Agreement in Construction Defect Case

    Anatomy of an Indemnity Provision

    California Builders’ Right To Repair Is Alive

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

    Burden Supporting Termination for Default

    Southern California Super Lawyers Recognizes Four Snell & Wilmer Attorneys As Rising Stars

    Utah Supreme Court Allows Citizens to Block Real Estate Development Project by Voter Referendum

    Senior Living Facility Makes Construction Defect Claims

    Supplement to New California Construction Laws for 2019

    The 2021 Top 50 Construction Law Firms™

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Will Not Address Trigger for DEP Environmental Cleanup Action at This Time

    Traub Lieberman Recognized in 2022 U.S. News – Best Lawyers “Best Law Firms”

    Personal Injury Claims – The Basics

    California Federal Court Finds a Breach of Contract Exclusion in a CGL Policy Bars All Coverage for a Construction Defect Action

    The Devil is in the Details: The Texas Construction Trust Fund Pitfalls Residential Remodelers (and General Contractors) Should Avoid

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

    Missouri Protects Subrogation Rights

    What California’s COVID-19 Reopening Means for the Construction Industry

    Coloradoans Deserve More Than Hyperbole and Rhetoric from Plaintiffs’ Attorneys; We Deserve Attainable Housing

    ICE Said to Seek Mortgage Role Through Talks With Data Service
    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

    “Details Matter” is the Foundation in a Texas Construction Defect Suit

    March 01, 2012 —

    The Court of Appeals of Texas has ruled in the case of Barzoukas v. Foundation Design. Mr. Barzoukas contracted with Heights Development to build a house. He subsequently sued Heights Developments and “numerous other defendants who participated in the construction of his house.” Barzoukas eventually settled with all but two defendants, one who went bankrupt and Foundation Design, the defendant in this case. In the earlier phase, Barzoukas made claims of “negligence, negligent misrepresentation, fraud, fraudulent inducement, conspiracy, and exemplary damages in connection with the foundation.”

    Foundation Design had been hired to install 15-foot piers to support the foundation. The engineer of record, Larry Smith, sent a letter to Heights Development noting that they had encountered hard clay stone when drilling. Smith changed the specifications to 12-foot piers. Initially, the City of Houston called a halt to work on the home when an inspector concluded that the piers were too shallow. Heights Development later convinced the city to allow work to continue. Subsequently, experts concluded that the piers were too shallow.

    Foundation Design filed a motion for summary judgment. The trial court granted this, “without specifying the basis for its ruling.” Barzoukas contends the court was in error. Foundation Design contends that “Barzoukas failed to proffer competent evidence establishing that their conduct proximately caused damages.” Further, they did not feel that Smith’s letter gave “rise to viable claims for fraud and fraudulent inducement.”

    One problem the court had was a lack of evidence. The court noted that “the purported subcontract is entirely missing” in the pleadings. The court has no contract between Bazourkas and Heights Development, nor one between Heights Development and either Foundation Design or Smith. The court underscored the importance of this, writing, “details matter.” They found that “the details are largely missing here.” Without the contract, the court found it impossible to determine if “Smith or an entity related to him agreed to indemnify Heights Development for damages arising from Smith’s negligent performance.”

    As the material facts are in dispute, the appeals court found that there were no grounds for a summary judgment in the case. “Pointing to the existence of a contract between Heights Development and Barzoukas, or to the existence of a subcontract, is the beginning of the analysis ? not the end.”

    Foundation Design and Smith also claimed that Barzoukas’s expert did not proffer competent evidence and that the expert’s opinions were conclusory. The trial court did not rule on these claims and the appeals court has rejected them.

    Finally, Barzoukas made a claim that the trial court should not have rejected his argument of fraud and fraudulent inducement. Here, however, the appeals court upheld the decision of the lower court. “Barzoukas did not present evidence supporting an inference that Smith or Foundation Design made a purposeful misrepresentation.

    The court remanded the case to the trial court for reconsideration. One member of the panel, Judge Charles Seymore, upheld the entire decision of the trial court. He dissented with the majority, finding that the economic loss rule foreclosed the claim of negligence.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Duty to Defend Bodily Injury Evolving Over Many Policy Periods Prorated in Louisiana

    November 17, 2016 —
    The Louisiana Supreme Court held that the duty to defend in long latency disease cases should be prorated between the insurer and insured when the policies cover for only a portion of the time in which the exposure occurred. Arceneaux v. Amstar Corp., 2016 La. LEXIS 1675 (La. Sept. 7, 2016). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Colorado Drillers Show Sensitive Side to Woo Fracking Foes

    September 03, 2014 —
    A fight over fracking is looming in Texas. Another stand-off is shaping up in Colorado. Yet drillers’ reactions couldn’t be more different. In Texas, drillers are doing their noisy in-your-face fracking as usual. Meanwhile, on a small farm about an hour from the Colorado Rocky Mountains, the oil industry is giving fracking a makeover, cutting back on rumbling trucks and tamping down on pollution. Oil companies in Colorado are responding to a rising tide of resentment as local communities and environmental activists vie to impose measures to ban fracking or restrict drilling. A series of ballot initiatives and other grass roots opposition around the country is seen as threatening the booming shale industry, even in oil-friendly Texas, where the U.S. energy renaissance began. Reprinted courtesy of Zain Shauk, Bloomberg and Bradley Olson, Bloomberg Mr. Shauk may be contacted at zshauk@bloomberg.net; Mr. Olson may be contacted at bradleyolson@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The G2G Year-End Roundup (2022)

    January 04, 2023 —
    Our year-end roundup highlights the top-read Gravel2Gavel posts from 2022. Our authors addressed the legal implications for a variety of hot topics and market disruptions, providing deep industry insights that spanned Metaverse real estate investments, economic sanctions in Russia, and cybersecurity for smart buildings. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Deferred Maintenance?

    December 17, 2024 —
    A Tennessee-based “outsourced maintenance vendor” to an engine company filed suit in Louisiana state court seeking to recover nearly $150,000 on “open account,” for work previously performed. The engine company removed the case to the Federal District Court in New Orleans and asserted as a defense that the vendor lacked a proper Louisiana construction contractor’s license. The engine company filed a motion for summary judgment based on the defense. Under Louisiana law, a contract between parties is “absolutely null”--considered to have never existed--where one of the parties performed services without a required Louisiana contractor’s license, and the combined work reaches a $50,000 threshold. The engine company asserted that the vendor performed typical construction contractor work, including plywood flooring, applied epoxy to concrete flooring, erected part of a commercial carport, undertook certain heavy demolition, and installed fences, guardrails, and wire racks. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Construction Safety Technologies – Videos

    November 02, 2017 —
    Smart hard hats, drone imaging, indoor positioning, and augmented reality are some of the technologies that can make construction sites safer. Construction remains one of the most dangerous industries. In the USA, one in ten construction workers are injured every year. According to ILO, there are at least 60,000 fatal accidents on construction sites around the world every year, one in every 10 minutes. Investments in safety will certainly pay off. Culture, behavior, and attitudes have a great impact on construction safety. Technology can help, but only if it is used properly and consistently. Here’s a collection of recent videos that explain and demonstrate how digital technology can advance construction safety. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at info@aepartners.fi

    Is it the Dawning of the Age of Strict Products Liability for Contractors in California?

    March 30, 2016 —
    It was the Age of Aquarius. And everything was changing. Politically, socially . . . and legally. Through the 19th Century the doctrine of caveat emptor, literally “let the buyer beware,” was the rule of law. Under the doctrine a buyer was expected to protect him or herself against both obvious and hidden defects in a product. It wasn’t until the late 1800s that U.S. courts began to impose implied warranties – for merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose – to protect consumers. But implied warranties were premised on their being a contract between the manufacturer and the user of a defective product, and by the mid 20th Century it was increasingly uncommon for consumers to purchase products directly from a manufacturer. 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

    Insurance Lawyers Recognized by JD Supra 2020 Readers' Choice Awards

    June 29, 2020 —
    Congratulations to Anthony Miscioscia, partner and Co-Chair of the Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Group, and associate Timothy Carroll who have been recognized as top authors in Insurance in the 2020 JD Supra Readers' Choice Awards. The Readers’ Choice Awards recognize top authors and firms for their thought leadership in key topics read by C-suite executives, in-house counsel, media, and other professionals across the JD Supra platform during 2019. Additionally, JD Supra recognized Subrogation counsel, Gus Sara’s alert "New Hampshire's Statute of Repose for Improvements to Real Property Does Not Apply to Product Manufacturers" as one of the most popular product liability articles in 2019. The Readers’ Choice Awards reflect a deep dive into JD Supra 2019 reader data, in which they studied total visibility and engagement among readers across many industries interested in certain defining topics. Along with a top firm in each category, JD Supra also features additional reader data, including the top five most-read articles, popular related topics, total number of authors, and other category-specific information. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys Timothy Carroll, Anthony Miscioscia and Gus Sara Mr. Carroll may be contacted at carrollt@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Miscioscia may be contacted at misciosciaa@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of