BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield 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


    Gilroy Homeowners Sue over Leaky Homes

    Haight’s John Arbucci and Kristian Moriarty Selected for Super Lawyers’ 2020 Southern California Rising Stars

    United States Supreme Court Limits Class Arbitration

    Michigan Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C-" Grade, Improving from "D+" Grade in 2018

    Do Engineers Owe a Duty to Third Parties?

    Excess Carrier's Declaratory Judgment Action Stayed While Underlying Case Still Pending

    Waiver Of Arbitration by Not Submitting Claim to Initial Decision Maker…Really!

    California’s Wildfire Dilemma: Put Houses or Forests First?

    LA Wildfires Push California Insurance Market to Its Limit

    Massive Fire Destroys Building, Firefighters Rescue Construction Worker

    Insurance Policies and Indemnity Provisions Are Not the Same

    Texas Couple Claim Many Construction Defects in Home

    Hunton’s Alice Weeks Selected to the Miami Dade Bar’s Circle of Excellence for Insurance Litigation

    Nondelegable Duty of Care Owed to Third Persons

    Busting Major Alternative-Lending Myths

    Why Metro Atlanta Is the Poster Child for the US Housing Crisis

    Federal Lawsuit Accuses MOX Contractors of Fraud

    Professional Services Exclusion in CGL Policies

    Nevada’s Changing Liability Insurance Landscape—State Insurance Regulator Issues Emergency Regulation and Guidance Addressing Controversial “Defense-Within-Limits” Legislation

    Supreme Court of Oregon Affirms Decision in Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, et al.

    Construction Contract Terms Matter. Be Careful When You Draft Them.

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules in Builder’s Implied Warranty of Habitability Case

    Meet Orange County Bar Associations 2024 Leaders

    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    Will Superusers Future-Proof the AEC Industry?

    Timely Legal Trends and Developments for Construction

    Investigation Continues on Children Drowning at Construction Site

    eRent: Construction Efficiency Using Principles of the Sharing Economy

    Home Buyers will Pay More for Solar

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 49 White and Williams Attorneys

    Denial of Motion to Dissolve Lis Pendens Does Not Automatically Create Basis for Certiorari Relief

    Construction Termination Issues Part 4: What to Do When They Want to Fire You, the Architect or Engineer

    Rattlesnake Bite Triggers Potential Liability for Walmart

    Illinois Supreme Court Limits Reach of Implied Warranty Claims Against Contractors

    NAHB Examines Single-Family Detached Concentration Statistics

    Have the Feds Taken Over Arbitration?

    Taylor Morrison Home Corp’ New San Jose Development

    Federal Interpleader Dealing with Competing Claims over Undisputed Payable to Subcontractor

    Eleventh Circuit Affirms Jury Verdict on Covered Property Loss

    Manufacturer of Asbestos-Free Product May Still Be Liable for Asbestos Related Injuries

    What a Difference a Day Makes: Mississippi’s Discovery Rule

    Navigating Threshold Arbitration Issues in Construction Contracts

    Toll Brothers Snags Home Builder of the Year Honors at HLS

    Building on New Risks: Construction in the Age of Greening

    Limitations on the Ability to Withdraw and De-Annex Property from a Common Interest Community

    Overtime! – When the Statute of Limitations Isn’t Game Over For Your Claim

    President Obama Vetoes Keystone Pipeline Bill

    Owner’s Slander of Title Claim Against Contractor Recording Four Separate Mechanics Liens Fails Under the Anti-SLAPP Statute

    Additional Elements a Plaintiff Must Plead and Prove to Enforce Restrictive Covenant

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds Fire Damage Resulted from Single Occurrence
    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

    Legal Disputes Soar as Poor Information Management Impacts the AEC Industry

    July 03, 2022 —
    Managers in Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) are facing more disruptive disputes in 2022 compared to last year according to the latest independent research from regulatory compliance company Ideagen. The survey of business leaders from AEC firms in the US and UK revealed that 78% of respondents experienced some kind of dispute in the business, compared to 63% in 2021, with information accessibility and visibility, caused largely by high staff turnover, the main root causes. With the challenges that the industry continues to face following COVID and increasing costs of materials, this is an added but unnecessary challenge facing the industry. Stuart Rowe, Vice President of Collaboration Strategy at Ideagen, whose customers include the US Navy, Gensler, Arup and Ramboll, said: "The working world has continued to change in the last 12 months, which is reflected in the AEC industry's evolving priorities. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a huge shift to remote working which saw an increased need for effective collaboration tools, however, this year is appears that hybrid working is the new normal in the industry. "Four-fifths of the people we spoke to said email is still king for project correspondence. This is a huge concern as most project scope changes reside in email inboxes. Failing to properly manage all information and records also prevents a Golden Thread, or a Single Source of Truth, across projects and businesses." Ideagen undertook the independent survey to support developments to their Mail Manager software, used by 2,500 architecture, engineering and construction firms in 16 countries worldwide. It revealed a number of insights into how the industry is managing changing work patterns. Download the full research here. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Boston Water Main Break Floods Trench and Kills Two Workers

    October 27, 2016 —
    Two workers died in Boston on Friday afternoon after a water main break flooded the trench where they were working, according to the Boston Fire Dept. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Justin Rice, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Rice may be contacted at enrmidatlanticeditor@enr.com

    Ambiguity in Pennsylvania’s Statute of Repose Finally Cleared up by Superior Court

    October 17, 2023 —
    In an unpublished opinion from the Pennsylvania Superior Court handed down on August 31, 2023, a long-standing disagreement about the wording of Pennsylvania's Statute of Repose was finally resolved. In Pennsylvania, “a civil action or proceeding brought against any person lawfully performing or furnishing the design, planning, supervision or observation of construction or construction of any improvement to real property must be commenced within 12 years after completion of construction of such improvement” to recover most forms of damages that are sought in these kinds of cases. A statute of repose is different than a statute of limitations. A statute of repose is a hard line that does not shift. There is no discovery rule with a statute of repose. Most, if not all, states have statutes of repose for construction. The Pennsylvania statute of repose is among the longest in the country. It can be even longer – up to 14 years – if the injury (including property damage) or wrongful death “shall occur more than 10 and within 12 years after completion of construction.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mark L. Parisi, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Parisi may be contacted at parisim@whiteandwilliams.com

    Jean Nouvel’s NYC ‘Vision Machine’ Sued Over Construction Defects

    December 10, 2015 —
    The Telegraph reported that the developers of famed architect Jean Nouvel’s futuristic building are being sued over alleged window pane defects. The building contains a customized, “curving curtain wall of different sized panes of colorless glass—each set in a unique angle and torque,” according to Nouvel’s firm. However, some residents reported “wind whistling through the panes of glass, and water seeping in.” Furthermore, “[t]he draft is so severe in some places that hydronic heating pipes have frozen and burst, according to court papers.” Attorney for the developer told the Telegraph, “Our clients will be vigorously defending this matter and we believe we will prevail in the case.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    That Boilerplate Language May Just Land You in Hot Water

    December 17, 2015 —
    The following post originally appeared in my partnerKevin Brodehl‘s informative blog, Money and Dirt. If you’re involved in real estate investment, development and/or secured lending in California, it’s a must read. While Kevin’s post below discusses a case involving a real estate purchase agreement, it applies equally to construction contracts, perhaps even more so, since I can’t think of any other type of contract in which indemnity and integration clauses are as common, or as integral. Almost all real estate purchase and sale agreements contain provisions relating to integration and indemnity. In the “boilerplate” worldview, these provisions are standard, generic, and basically all the same — integration clauses prohibit extrinsic evidence that would contradict the terms of the agreement, and indemnity clauses force the seller to protect the buyer from third party claims arising after closing. But a recently published opinion by the California Court of Appeal (Fourth District, Division Three in Santa Ana) — Hot Rods, LLC v. Northrop Grunman Systems Corp. — clarifies that integration and indemnity clauses can have vastly different effects depending on how they are drafted. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kevin Brodehl, California Construction Law Blog
    Mr. Brodehl may be contacted at kbrodehl@wendel.com

    Spearin Doctrine 100 Years Old and Still Thriving in the Design-Build Delivery World

    January 09, 2019 —
    The Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Spearin, [1] also referred to as the Spearin doctrine, is a landmark construction decision.[2] The Spearin doctrine provides that the Owner impliedly warrants the information, plans and specifications which an Owner provides to a General Contractor. If a Contractor is bound to build according to plans and specifications prepared by the Owner, the Contractor will not be responsible for the consequences of defects in the plans and specifications. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at john.ahlers@acslawyers.com

    Liquidated Damages: Too High and It’s a Penalty. Too Low and You’re Out of Luck.

    November 21, 2022 —
    Liquidated damages provisions in commercial and residential real estate contracts play a vital role when a transaction goes south, and should be given careful consideration when negotiating a real estate contract. Liquidated damages may be referred to in a variety of ways, such as “earnest money,” a “good-faith deposit,” or a “non-refundable deposit,” but each typically denote a negotiated amount of money that a seller is entitled to retain should a buyer breach a purchase and sale agreement. The purpose of liquidated damages is to provide the parties with certainty when actual damages arising from a breach of contract may be difficult to calculate. Accordingly, liquidated damages provisions alleviate the need for potentially expensive litigation associated with proving damages. While parties are free to negotiate the amount of liquidated damages, the amount must approximate the loss anticipated at the time of contracting, or the loss that actually occurs as a result of a breach. Arizona courts have held that where the amount of liquidated damages is unreasonably large when compared to the anticipated loss or actual loss, the liquidated damages provision is unenforceable as a penalty. A breaching party faced with high liquidated damages will often seek to invalidate the provision as a penalty. If a court agrees, the non-breaching party may still recover damages, but must go through the process of proving such damages. Therefore, when negotiating a real estate contract, consideration should be given as to whether a liquidated damages amount is arbitrarily high when compared to an anticipated loss in the event of a breach. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christian Fernandez, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Fernandez may be contacted at cfernandez@swlaw.com

    Alabama Supreme Court States Faulty Workmanship can be an Occurrence

    July 16, 2014 —
    Carl A. Salisbury of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP in his Lexology article, stated that “it is now official and final: Alabama is no longer one of the outlier jurisdictions on the issue of coverage for faulty workmanship.” In the case Owners v. Jim Carr Homebuilders, in September 2013 the Alabama Supreme Court had “sided with insurers in holding that construction defects can never be accidental and, therefore, can never be covered by Commercial General Liability insurance.” However, in March “the Court withdrew that decision and reversed course,” holding “that faulty workmanship can, in fact, constitute a covered ‘occurrence,’ which CGL policies define as ‘an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to the same generally harmful conditions.’” “This is obviously good news for construction contractors that do work in the state of Alabama,” Salisbury stated. “It is also good news for policyholders in general as it continues the strong trend among state high courts that have been finding in favor of coverage in this important area of insurance law.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of