BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut architectural 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


    Boston Water Main Break Floods Trench and Kills Two Workers

    Weyerhaeuser Leaving Home Building Business

    Singer Ordered to Deposition in Construction Defect Case

    Hake Law Attorneys Join National Law Firm Wilson Elser

    CAPSA Changes Now in Effect

    Texas Supreme Court Holds Stipulated Extrinsic Evidence May Be Considered in Determining Duty to Defend

    Damage Control: Major Rebuilds After Major Weather Events

    American Arbitration Association Revises Construction Industry Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Legislative Update – The CSLB’s Study Under SB465

    Coronavirus and Contract Obligations

    Musk’s Cousins Battle Utilities to Make Solar Rooftops Cheap

    Conditional Judgment On Replacement Costs Awarded

    Florida Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Homeowners Unaware of Construction Defects and Lack of Permits

    A Behind-the-Scenes Look at Substitution Hearings Under California’s Listing Law

    Massachusetts Affordable Homes Act Provides New Opportunities for Owners, Developers, and Contractors

    Repairing One’s Own Work and the one Year Statute of Limitations to Sue a Miller Act Payment Bond

    How the Cumulative Impact Theory has been Defined

    Should I Pull the Pin? Contractor and Subcontractor Termination for Cause

    Florida Lawmakers Fail to Reach Agreement on Condominium Safety Bill

    Apartment Construction Increasing in Colorado while Condo Construction Remains Slow

    Paycheck Protection Flexibility Act Of 2020: What You Need to Know

    Governor Signs AB5 Into Law — Reshaping California's Independent Contractor Classification Landscape

    Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Calls for CFPB Investigation into Tenant Screening Businesses

    If a Defect Occurs During Construction, Is It an "Occurrence?"

    Holding the Bag for Pre-Tender Defense Costs

    The Enforceability of “Pay-If-Paid” Provisions Affirmed in New Jersey

    Court of Appeal Confirms Privette Doctrine as Applied to Passive Conduct of Property Owner

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition

    Demonstrating A Fraudulent Inducement Claim Or Defense

    No Coverage for Additional Insured

    White and Williams recognized with Multiple Honorees in the Chambers 2023 USA Guide

    Alabama Supreme Court States Faulty Workmanship can be an Occurrence

    New York Court Permits Asbestos Claimants to Proceed Against Insurers with Buyout Agreements

    Cuba: Construction Boom Potential for U.S. Construction Companies and Equipment Manufacturers?

    Seventh Circuit Confirms Additional Insured's Coverage for Alleged Construction Defects

    Meet Some Key Players in 2020 Environmental Litigation

    A Bill for an Act Concerning Workers’ Compensation – 2014 Edition

    Safe Commercial Asbestos-Removal Practices

    University of Tennessee Commits to $1.9B Capital Plan

    City Wonders Who’s to Blame for Defective Wall

    Congratulations to Karen Baytosh and August Hotchkin on Their Recognition as 2021 Nevada Legal Elites!

    Insurer's Appeal of Jury Verdict Rejected by Tenth Circuit

    Hunton Insurance Coverage Group Ranked in National Tier 1 by US News & World Report

    Just a House That Uses 90 Percent Less Energy Than Yours, That's All

    “Other Insurance” and Indemnity Provisions Determine Which Insurer Must Cover

    Rio de Janeiro's Bursting Real-Estate Bubble

    The Jersey Shore gets Beach Prisms Designed to Reduce Erosion

    Is It Time to Revisit Construction Defects in Kentucky?

    The Results are in, CEO/Founding Partner Nicole Whyte is Elected to OCBA’s 2024 Board of Directors!

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Museums
    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. Drawing 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

    Florida “get to” costs do not constitute damages because of “property damage”

    August 11, 2011 —

    In Palm Beach Grading, Inc. v. Nautilus Ins. Co., No. 10-12821 (11th Cir. July 14, 2011), claimant general contractor Palm Beach Grading (?PBG?) subcontracted with insured A-1 for construction of a sewer line for the project.   A-1 abandoned its work and PBG hired another subcontractor to complete construction of the sewer line.   The new subcontractor discovered that A-1?s work was defective requiring repair and replacement of portions of the sewer line which also required the destruction and replacement of surrounding work.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

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

    Read the Property Insurance Policy to be Sure You are Complying with Post Loss Obligations

    January 04, 2021 —
    I have discussed this before in prior postings, but it is worth repeating. It is imperative for an insured to comply with post loss obligations in a property insurance policy. Not doing so gives the insurer the argument that its insured forfeited coverage under the policy. Naturally, this is never what an insured wants as this is contrary to submitting an insurance claim to begin with. To avoid this situation, an insured should consult with counsel and read the policy including endorsements issued to the policy to be sure that post loss obligations are complied with and, if they are not, there is a basis supported by case law. In a recent case, Goldberg v. Universal Property and Casualty Ins. Co., 45 Fla. L. Weekly D2118b (Fla. 4th DCA 2020), the property insurance policy for hurricanes and windstorms contained the following through an endorsement issued to the policy: You must give notice of a claim, a supplemental claim, or reopened claim for loss or damage caused by the peril of windstorm or hurricane, with us in accordance with the terms of this policy and within three years after the hurricane first made landfall or the windstorm caused the covered damage. For purposes of this Section, the term “supplemental claim” or “reopened claim” means any additional claim for recovery from us for losses from the same hurricane or windstorm which we have previously adjusted pursuant to the initial claim. . . . Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Significant Issues Test Applies to Fraudulent Claims to Determine Attorney’s Fees

    January 13, 2017 —
    Construction lienors need to appreciate on the frontend that recovering statutory attorney’s fees in a construction lien action is NOT automatic—far from it. This is because the prevailing party for purposes of attorney’s fees in a construction lien action is determined by the “significant issues test,” a subjective test with no bright line standards based on who the trial court finds prevailed on the significant issues in the case. If you want to talk about the subjective and convoluted nature of recovering attorney’s fees in a construction lien action under the significant issues test, a recent opinion by the Fourth District Court of Appeal is unfortunately another nail in the coffin. In Newman v. Guerra, 2017 WL 33702 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017), a contractor recorded a construction lien on a residential renovation project and filed a lien foreclosure lawsuit. The homeowner countersued the contractor and asserted a fraudulent lien claim pursuant to Florida Statute s. 713.31. An evidentiary hearing was held on whether the lien was a fraudulent lien and the trial court held that the lien was fraudulent (therefore unenforceable) because it included amounts that were not lienable under the law. The remaining claims including both parties’ breach of contract claims proceeded to trial. There was no attorney’s fees provision in the contract. At the conclusion of the trial, the court found that the contractor was entitled a monetary judgment on its breach of contract claim. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    24th Annual West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar A Success

    June 05, 2017 —
    The 24th Annual West Coast Casualty Construction Defect seminar was once again, a huge success . On May 18-19, 2017 attendees from the legal, insurance, builder, contractor, subcontractor and numerous other industries came from across the United States and several foreign countries to the 24th Annual West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar. Caryn Siebert, Vice President and Chief Claims Officer of The Knight Insurance Group was awarded The Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence. This award recognizes a person who has contributed to the betterment of the construction defect community. For more information on the Oliver Award of Excellence, please visit: http://www.westcoastcasualty.com/seminar/ollie-award-voting/ Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc.’s golf challenge raised $2,225.00 for the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans and $1,900 for Final Salute. The grand total for all charitable contributions raised this year at the seminar was $45,300.00. For more information on the National Coalition for Homeless Vets, please visit: http://nchv.org/ To learn more about how Final Salute provides homeless women Veterans with safe and suitable housing, please visit: http://www.finalsaluteinc.org/ Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Meet BWB&O’s 2025 Best Lawyers in America!

    September 09, 2024 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is proud to announce Partners Nicole Whyte, Keith Bremer, Vik Nagpal, John O’Meara, Sheila Stiles, Patrick Au, and Nicole Schmidt have been selected by their peers for inclusion in the 31st edition of The Best Lawyers in America, and Partner Devin Gifford, and Associates Melissa Youngpeter, Ryan Flanagan, and Alexandria Zeis are included in the fifth edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America. Each person is being recognized for their diligent work in the areas of Family Law, Construction, Commercial, Personal Injury, and Real Estate Litigation. Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Important Information Regarding Colorado Mechanic’s Lien Rights.

    November 07, 2012 —
    With payment problems in the construction economy having accelerated over the past few years, there has been a substantial increase in mechanic’s lien activity and associated litigation. The typical mechanic’s lien claimant is a material supplier, a trade subcontractor, or even a general contractor that has not been paid by the developer/owner of the construction project. The reason for filing a mechanic’s lien claim is that it offers the prospect in many cases to make the unpaid construction professional a priority creditor, with a lien on the real estate that is superior to the construction lender. One of the primary rules governing a mechanic’s lien claim is that the creditor’s formal written “Notice of Intent to File a Mechanic’s Lien” (hereafter “Lien Notice”) must be (1) served on the owner of the property for which the work was done or the materials used, and (2) served at the same time on the general contractor who has handled the construction project. After the creditor has made service of the lien claim by USPS certified mail (using the green return receipt card for proof of service) or separate personal delivery of the notice to the property owner and general contractor, ten full days must pass (not including the date of mailing of the notices) before the lien notice is filed in the public records. After ten days have expired following the date of mailing using certified mail, or personal delivery of the notice to the property owner and the general contractor, the lien notice can be filed to make the lien valid. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC.
    Mr. McLain can be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Attorney-Client Privilege in the Age of Cyber Breaches

    October 18, 2021 —
    Investigations and forensic reports relating to a cybersecurity breach may not always be protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product protection. Companies seeking such reports after a data breach must take caution to protect them from a possible waiver of privilege in the event of subsequent litigation relating to a data breach. The following recent cases highlight the potential waiver of privilege in light of the preparation of a forensic report.
    1. In re Capital One Consumer Data Security Breach Litigation, 2020 WL 3470261 (E.D. Va. June 25, 2020)
    • After a data breach occurred, Capital One retained a law firm that later entered into an agreement with Mandiant for various cyber-related services (including incident remediation), which required that Mandiant provide deliverables to the firm, rather than to Capitol One. In re Capital One Consumer Data Security Breach Litigation, 2020 WL 2731238, at *1 (E.D. Va. June 25, 2020). Plaintiffs sought release of the report created by Mandiant (regarding the factors leading to the breach), arguing that it was prepared for business and regulatory purposes and therefore was not privileged, while Capital One argued that the report was privileged because it was prepared in anticipation of litigation. Ibid. The Court determined that Capital One did not carry its burden of establishing that the report was protected by the attorney work-product doctrine and ordered that Capital One produce the report. Id. at *7. In its reasoning, the Court stated that the fact that there is litigation does not, by itself, provide prepared materials with work-product protection. Ibid. The work-product protection applies when a party faces a claim following an event that may result in litigation, and the work product would not have been prepared in a substantially similar form but for the prospect of that litigation. Ibid.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shaia Araghi, Newmeyer Dillion
    Ms. Araghi may be contacted at shaia.araghi@ndlf.com

    Prison Time and Restitution for Construction Fraud

    February 14, 2013 —
    Federal prosecutors have obtained prison sentences and fines for the two leaders of a construction kickback scheme. Others are awaiting sentencing. The Chicago Sun-Times reports that John Paderta the former president of Krahl Construction has been sentenced to five years in prison and must pay $10 million in restitution. His executive vice president, Doug Harner will be spending five years in prison and has been ordered to pay $9.6 million in restitution. Paderta and Harner overbilled two clients on renovation projects, giving kickbacks to employees at the client companies. Two employees of these client companies have pled guilty. A further five employees of the three companies have admitted that they were involved in the fraud. They are yet to be sentenced. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of