BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness construction
    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


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

    Stormy Seas Ahead: 5th Circuit to Review Whether Maritime Law Applies to Offshore Service Contract

    No Coverage for Additional Insured for Construction Defect Claim

    Julie Firestone & Francois Ecclesiaste Recognized as 2023 MSBA North Star Lawyers

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Louisiana Supreme Court Holds Architect Has No Duty to Safeguard Third Parties Against Injury, Regardless of Knowledge of Dangerous Conditions on the Project

    Japan Quake Triggers Landslides, Knocks Power Plant Offline

    How Drones are Speeding Up Construction

    Chicago’s Bungalows Are Where the City Comes Together

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

    California Plant Would Convert Wood Waste Into Hydrogen Fuel

    Insurer Motion to Intervene in Underlying Case Denied

    Manhattan Bargain: Condos for Less Than $3 Million

    Acquisition, Development, and Construction Lending Conditions Ease

    Texas School System Goes to Court over Construction Defect

    AMLO Hits Back at Vulcan, Threatens to Use Environmental Decree

    Defining Construction Defects

    Illinois Appellate Court Affirms Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case

    Owner Bankruptcy: What’s a Contractor to Do?

    Gatluak Ramdiet Named to The National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List

    Agree First or it May Cost You Later

    Blockbuster Breakwater: Alternative Construction Method Put to the Test in Tampa Bay

    BHA has a Nice Swing: Firm Supports CDCCF Charity at 2014 WCC Seminar

    Contractors and Force Majeure: Contractual Protection from Hurricanes and Severe Weather

    Global Emissions From Buildings, Construction Climb to Record Levels

    New Notary Language For Mechanics Lien Releases and Stop Payment Notice Releases

    Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Damage Caused by Tar Escaping From Roof

    Home Sales Topping $100 Million Smash U.S. Price Records

    “Incidental” Versus “Direct” Third Party Beneficiaries Under Insurance Policies in Which a Party is Not an Additional Insured

    Federal Court Opinion Has Huge Impact on the Construction Industry

    Timely and Properly Assert Affirmative Defenses and Understand Statutory Conditions Precedent

    Collapse of Improperly Built Deck Not An Occurrence

    Newark Trial Team Secures Affirmance of ‘No Cause’ Verdict for Nationwide Housing Manager & Developer

    Construction Defect Lawsuit Came too Late in Minnesota

    California Booms With FivePoint New Schools: Real Estate

    A Good Examination of Fraud, Contract and Negligence Per Se

    The Value of Photographic Evidence in Construction Litigation

    Transplants Send Nashville Home Market Upwards

    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

    OSHA Extends Temporary Fall Protection Rules

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

    Insurer Must Defend Where Possible Continuing Property Damage Occurred

    Tech to Help Contractors Avoid Litigation

    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment in Pinellas County Circuit Court

    California Court of Appeal Adopts Horizontal Exhaustion Rule

    Another Reminder that Contracts are Powerful in Virginia

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

    Florida’s Supreme Court Resolves Conflicting Appellate Court Decisions on Concurrent Causation

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Abandons "Integrated Systems Analysis" for Determining Property Damage

    Downtown Sacramento Building Riddled with Defects

    Henkels & McCoy Pays $1M in Federal Overtime-Pay Case
    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

    U.S. Stocks Fall as Small Shares Tumble Amid Home Sales

    September 24, 2014 —
    U.S. stocks fell, led by a plunge among small companies, as sales of existing homes unexpectedly dropped and China’s finance minister damped stimulus hopes. The Russell 2000 Index of small-cap stocks sank 1.6 percent, the most since July. Yahoo! Inc. (YHOO) dropped 2.3 percent to lead the Dow Jones Internet Composite Index to a one-month low. Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. slid 2.1 percent after surging in its trading debut Sept. 19. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index dropped 0.7 percent to 1,997.37 at 11:24 a.m. in New York, after closing at a record Sept. 18. The benchmark gauge hasn’t had a four-day slide this year and hasn’t fallen 10 percent in three years. The Dow Jones Industrial Average slid 58.40 points, or 0.3 percent, to 17,221.34. Mr. Ciolli may be contacted at jciolli@bloomberg.net; Ms. Bost may be contacted at cbost2@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joseph Ciolli and Callie Bost, Bloomberg

    Construction Defect Claim Did Not Harm Homeowner, Court Rules

    September 30, 2011 —

    The Minnesota Court of Appeals has ruled in Creswell v. Estate of Howe, a case in which a woman bought a home and then sued the seller’s estate, both sets of real estate agents, and the homeowner’s association over construction defects. A district court ruled against her, granting summary judgment to the other parties.

    After buying a townhome “as is,” Catherine Creswell claims to have shared a thought with her agent that the homeowners association was, in the words of her agent, “trying to hide something.” Later, Creswell found that a few days before her closing, the board had discussed problems with “roofs, siding and soundproofing of the townhomes.” The court noted that “it was clear from the documents that appellant [Creswell] received that the association had known about various construction defects for many years, some of which affected [her] unit.”

    Creswell initially sued the estate, the man who negotiated the sale for his mother’s estate, the real estate companies and the agents involved, the homeowners association, and four board members. Later she sued for punitive damages, dropped a claim for interference with contractual relations, and dismissed her claims against the individual board members. The court dismissed all of Creswell’s claims awarding costs to those she sued.

    The appeals court has affirmed the decision of lower court, noting that Creswell “did not provide us with any argument why the district court erred in dismissing her unjust-enrichment, breach of contract, or rescission claims against the various respondents.” Nor did she provide evidence to support her claims of “breach of duty, fraud, and violation of consumer protection statutes.”

    The court noted that Creswell could not sue the homeowners association over the construction defects because she “failed to prove that she was damaged by the association’s nondisclosure.” The court noted that “there are no damages in this case,” as Creswell “was never assessed for any repairs, she had not paid anything out-of-pocket for repairs, and she has presented no evidence that the value of her individual unit has declined because of the alleged undisclosed construction defects.”

    The court granted the other parties motion to dismiss and denied Creswell’s motion to supplement the record. Costs were awarded to the respondents.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    It’s Getting Harder and Harder to be a Concrete Supplier in California

    December 04, 2018 —
    In 2015, the California state legislature passed AB 219, which amended the state’s prevailing wage law to add Labor Code section 1720.9, which requires the payment of prevailing wages to “ready-mixed concrete” drivers on state and local public works projects. Ready-mixed concrete suppliers filed suit in Allied Concrete and Supply Co. v. Baker (September 20, 2018) U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, challenging the law on the ground that, because AB 219 singled out ready-mixed concrete drivers but not other drivers of materials on state and local public works projects, the law violated the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. 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

    Decades of WCC Seminar at the Disneyland Resort

    May 03, 2018 —
    One of the many perks of attending the West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar each year is its location at the Disneyland Hotel. What better excuse to take an afternoon or day or two to visit the happiest place on Earth? Prior to 2001, attendees only had the Disneyland Park to explore. But the beginning of 2001 brought the addition of the California Adventure Theme Park and Downtown Disney. Now when you want a break you can take a stroll through Downtown Disney and shop, eat, or watch some street performers. While California Adventure still has plenty for children to do, it also caters to the twenty-one-and-over-but-still-child-at heart with wine tasting and craft beers available at the park. Disneyland remains a fixture for nostalgia with the Sleeping Beauty Castle, but has updated itself with its addition of Star Wars and Marvel attractions. West Coast Casualty has special Disneyland ticket rates for attendees. Please see their invitation for more details. If you’re interested in one of Disneyland Resort’s sit-down restaurants, a reservation is highly desirable. You may make your reservation online or call Disney Dining at (714) 781-DINE. Staying at the Disneyland Resort? Disney provides their hotel guests with preferred access reservations (call Disney Dining for more information). If you’re looking for a fine dining experience, you’ll enjoy Carthay Circle Restaurant at California Adventure, Catal Restaurant at Downtown Disney, Napa Rose at the Grand Californian Hotel, or Steakhouse 55 at the Disneyland Hotel. If you’re a sports fan, check out ESPN Zone in Downtown Disney. For a one-of-a-kind Disney experience, have lunch or dinner at the Blue Bayou at Disneyland, where the dining room is located within the Pirates of the Caribbean ride. You may also want to check Disneyland Resort’s Entertainment schedule. For a live musical show (included in the cost of admission to California Adventure Park), check out Frozen – Live at the Hyperion. For an illuminating experience, you’ll want to stay for the Paint the Night Parade at the California Adventure Park, which features one million brilliant lights and many of your favorite Disney characters. If you’re a Pixar lover, you won’t want to miss Disneyland Park’s Together Forever – A Pixar Nighttime Spectacular. It’s a fireworks display like only Disney can create, including dazzling projections, pyrotechnics and music from the movies. If you wish to skip the crowds and just relax, then the Madara Spa at Disney’s Grand Californian Hotel may be your choice. The Madara Spa theme is “the mystery of the East meeting the science of the West with boundaries ceasing to exist.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    June 01, 2020 —
    Having an end date for risk is important to construction professionals who need to know when they can close their books and destroy files relating to old projects. While professionals typically look to the statute of limitations and repose, these deadlines can sometimes be harder to determine than one might think. State Laws Prohibiting Alteration of Statutes of Limitation Many contractors seek to control the extent of their risk by negotiating the length of their liability period. In some instances, contractors may seek to shorten the statute of limitations to protect against stale claims. While in other instances, owners periodically negotiate for longer periods to ensure that they will not be time barred from pursuing valid claims. While the majority of states enforce such contractual provision, a number of states hold such clauses unenforceable. In these instances, the state’s original statute of limitations will apply regardless of what the contract says. Reprinted courtesy of Kenneth E. Rubinstein & Nathan Fennessy, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Rubenstein may be contacted at krubinstein@preti.com Mr. Fennessy may be contacted at nfennessy@Preti.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Coverage for Building's First Collapse, But Disputed Facts on Second Collapse

    January 10, 2018 —

    While building's first collapse was not covered, there were disputed facts regarding the second collapse, leading to a reversal of the order granting summary judgment to the insurer on both collapses. Intergroup Int'l Ltd. v. Cincinnati Ins. Cos, 2017 Ohio app. LEXIS 5099 (Ohio Ct. App. Nov. 22, 2017). Intergroup bought a building after it was inspected. While leaks on the roof were repaired and a roof truss that was sagging was replaced, the inspector found the roof to be in good shape.

    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


    Construction Litigation Roundup: “I Never Had a Chance”

    May 29, 2023 —
    “I never had a chance.” Such was the plea of a general contractor to a Maryland federal court after having been terminated for failure to perform. “The Agreement provides no express right to cure,” found the court, weighing in on the contractor’s wrongful termination claim. Indeed, the contract was also very clear on termination, allowing for termination for cause on numerous bases, including a common catchall: if the contractor “persistently fails to perform the provisions of this Agreement.” In advance of the actual date of termination, the owner wrote to the contractor, in accordance with the contract: “Notice is also given that seven days from the date of this correspondence, [owner] will exercise its [termination] rights under Section 13.2.2.2 of the Contract." The communication from the owner contained no discussion of allowing the contractor an opportunity to cure its alleged default. 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

    New York Court Holds Insurer Can Rely on Exclusions After Incorrectly Denying Defense

    March 26, 2014 —
    Reversing its prior decision, the New York Court of Appeals held that the insurer could raise policy exclusions regarding its duty to indemnify after it incorrectly denied its duty to defend. K2 Invest. Group, LLC v. Am. Guar. & Liab. Co., 2014 N.Y. LEXIS 201 (N.Y. Ct. App. Feb. 18, 2014). The insured was sued for legal malpractice. His insurer, American Guarantee, refused to defend and a default judgment was entered. The insured assigned his rights against American Guarantee to the plaintiffs. When the underlying plaintiffs sued, American Guarantee said coverage was barred by two exclusions. In a previous decision, K2 Inv. Group, LLC v. Am Guar. & Liab. Ins. Co., 21 NY 3d 284, the court held that American Guarantee's breach of its duty to defend prevented it from relying on policy exclusions. This, however, contradicted another case issued by the court, Servidone Const. Corp. v. Security Ins. Co. of Hartford, 64 N.Y 2d 419 (1985). 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