BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management 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


    A Teaming Agreement is Still a Contract (or, Be Careful with Agreements to Agree)

    The Problem with One Year Warranties

    California Case Is a Reminder That Not All Insurance Policies Are Alike Regarding COVID-19 Losses

    ICYMI: Highlights From ABC Convention 2024

    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    Court Holds That Public Entity Can Unilaterally Replace Subcontractor Under California’s Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act

    Missouri Construction Company Sues Carpenter Union for Threatening Behavior

    Preparing for the 2015 Colorado Legislative Session

    Reporting Requirements for Architects under California Business and Professions Code Section 5588

    New California Employment Laws Affect the Construction Industry for 2019

    CDC Issues Moratorium on Residential Evictions Through 2020

    Homebuilders Opposed to Potential Change to Interest on Construction Defect Expenses

    A Word to the Wise about Construction Defects

    Why Financial Advisers Still Hate Reverse Mortgages

    California Supreme Court Adopts Vertical Exhaustion for Long-Tail Claims

    Single-Family Home Starts Seen Catching Up to Surging U.S. Sales

    Designed to Expose: Beware Lender Certificates

    Collapse of Improperly Built Deck Not An Occurrence

    Ninth Circuit Rules Supreme Court’s Two-Part Test of Implied Certification under the False Claims Act Mandatory

    Build Back Better Includes Historic Expansion of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program

    Technology and the Environment Lead Construction Trends That Will Continue Through 2019

    Contractors: Revisit your Force Majeure Provisions to Account for Hurricanes

    Fifth Circuit Requires Causal Distinction for Ensuing Loss Exception to Faulty Work Exclusion

    Damp Weather Not Good for Wood

    The Colorado Court of Appeals Rules that a Statutory Notice of Claim Triggers an Insurer’s Duty to Defend.

    No Duty To Defend Additional Insured When Bodily Injury Not Caused by Insured

    Ensuring Arbitration in Construction Defect Claims

    A Court-Side Seat: A FACA Fight, a Carbon Pledge and Some Venue on the SCOTUS Menu

    Designers “Airpocalyspe” Creations

    Court of Appeals Finds Arbitration Provision Incorporated by Reference Unenforceable

    Dusseldorf Evacuates About 4,000 as World War II Bomb Defused

    The Miller Act: More Complex than You Think

    Court Agrees to Stay Coverage Matter While Underlying State Action is Pending

    City Development with Interactive 3D Models

    "Occurrence" May Include Intentional Acts In Montana

    Mold Due to Construction Defects May Temporarily Close Fire Station

    Surplus Lines Carriers Cannot Compel Arbitration in Louisiana

    Insurers Subrogating in Arkansas Must Expend Energy to Prove That Their Insureds Have Been Made Whole

    Insurance Policies Broadly Defining “Suits” May Prompt an Insurer’s Duty to Defend and Indemnify During the Chapter 558 Pre-Suit Notice Process

    Additional Insured Is Covered Under On-Going Operations Endorsement Despite Subcontractor's Completion of Work

    Erector Tops Out 850-Foot-Tall Rainier Square Tower in Only 10 Months

    Napa Quake Seen Costing Up to $4 Billion as Wineries Shut

    The Colorado Supreme Court affirms Woodbridge II’s “Adverse Use” Distinction

    ASCE Statement On House Passage Of The Precip Act

    Another (Insurer) Bites The Dust: Virginia District Court Rejects Narrow Reading of Pollution Exclusion

    Mortgage Applications in U.S. Jump 11.6% as Refinancing Surges

    Trade Contract Revisions to Address COVID-19

    7 Ways Technology is Changing Construction (guest post)

    Join: Computer Science Meets Construction
    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

    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

    Peru’s Former President and His Wife to Stay in Jail After Losing Appeal

    August 10, 2017 —
    Former President Ollanta Humala and his wife Nadine Heredia will remain in jail while they are investigated for campaign donations involving Brazilian construction companies and the Venezuelan government, a Peruvian court said Friday. The couple, who were given pre-trial detention three weeks ago, had asked the appeal court judges to change the order for one requiring them not to leave the country and to appear regularly before the authorities. The couple turned themselves in on July 13 after Judge Richard Concepcion ordered 18 months of preventive detention for suspected money laundering. Concepcion had said there was sufficient evidence of wrongdoing and grounds to believe Humala and his wife would seek to obstruct the ongoing investigation by the Attorney General’s office. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Quigley, Bloomberg

    Architects Should Not Make Initial Decisions on Construction Disputes

    July 05, 2023 —
    A common provision often deleted from the standard form AIA documents is the provision in the AIA A201 General Conditions requiring an Initial Decision Maker (IDM) for claims between the contractor and owner. In the A201, the contracting parties have the option of naming their own IDM for the project. If an IDM is not selected (which is typically the case) the architect serves this role by default. While it is in all parties’ best interests to resolve disputes quickly and efficiently, using the architect as the IDM is not the best way to achieve such a resolution. Several reasons work against using the architect as the IDM. Contractors typically don’t trust architects to be impartial in resolving disputes because the architect is paid by the owner. Most architects don’t have the temperament or any training to facilitate dispute resolution. An architect’s “initial decision” could even drive the parties further apart and lead to further issues later in the project. The architect may also be perceived to be part of the problem that led to the dispute in the first place. Also, many architects simply prefer to avoid serving the thankless role of an IDM altogether. Lastly, inserting the architect into the dispute resolution process as a required IDM adds an additional unnecessary step to dispute resolution, which can delay the overall procedure. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bill Wilson, Robinson & Cole LLP
    Mr. Wilson may be contacted at wwilson@rc.com

    UK Agency Seeks Stricter Punishments for Illegal Wastewater Discharges

    August 07, 2022 —
    Bosses of U.K. water and wastewater utilities that are responsible for illegal, serious pollution should be jailed, said Emma Howard Boyd, head of the government's Environment Agency. She made the recommendation along with release of the agency’s annual report on the nine major companies, which recorded the worst environmental performance in a decade. Reprinted courtesy of Peter Reina, Engineering News-Record Mr. Reina may be contacted at reina@btinternet.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    In One of the First Civil Jury Trials to Proceed Live in Los Angeles Superior Court During Covid, Aneta Freeman Successfully Prevailed on Behalf of our Client and Obtained a Directed Verdict and Non-Suit

    July 05, 2021 —
    In one of the first civil jury trials to proceed live in Los Angeles Superior Court during Covid, Aneta Freeman obtained a rare directed verdict and nonsuit in a complex, high exposure action, after seven days of trial. The dismissal was obtained after the parties rested after the liability phase of the bifurcated trial. Ms. Freeman represented a general contractor in an action in which Plaintiff alleged that the general contractor and the County of Los Angeles (which was dismissed earlier on statutory immunity grounds) created a dangerous condition when they allegedly allowed mosquitos to breed in 2015 during construction at a flood retention basin in Marina Del Rey. Plaintiff contracted West Nile Virus, and subsequently developed myasthenia gravis and a myriad of other conditions and ailments. Plaintiff relied heavily on a 2015 report from the Los Angeles West Vector Control District which suggested that the construction was the source of mosquitos which resulted in a “cluster” of West Nile Virus cases in the Marina Del Rey and surrounding areas. In pretrial motions, Ms. Freeman successfully excluded that report, opinion testimony from the vector control former executive director, narrowed the scope of plaintiff’s entomologist testimony, and excluded Brad Avrit from testifying for the Plaintiff on construction standard of care. The matter proceeded with a stipulated a 10 person jury, and all participants socially distanced and masked throughout the trial. Witnesses appeared live, with the exception of Plaintiff’s entomologist, portions of whose video deposition were played. Following seven days of trial after both parties rested, Judge Mark Young granted the general contractor’s nonsuit and also, in the alternative, a directed a verdict for our client. Plaintiff had demanded $10,000,000 of the County and the general contractor globally prior to trial, and $5,000,000 from the general contractor. The general contractor issued two CCP 998s, which were ignored by Plaintiff. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aneta B. Freeman, Chapman Glucksman Dean & Roeb
    Ms. Freeman may be contacted at afreeman@cgdrlaw.com

    Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Owner’s Claims Based on Contractual One-Year Claims Limitations Period

    October 04, 2021 —
    In a recent unpublished decision – Tadych v. Noble Ridge Construction, Inc.– the Washington State Court of Appeals, Division One, held that a one-year contractual claim limitations clause was valid and enforceable. The Tadych decision is important because it reiterates the strict approach courts will take to a claim limitations clause less than the statutory six years for breach of contract claims prescribed by RCW 4.16.040(1). In other words, when the parties agree to shorten the limitations period, the agreement will be enforced barring any procedural or substantive unconscionability. In Tadych, plaintiff owners (the Tadychs) contracted with defendant contractor (Noble Ridge Construction, Inc., or NRC) for the construction of a custom home in 2012. The contract provided a one-year claim limitations clause in which claims could be raised, and that all claims not raised in the one-year period would be waived. In December 2013, as the project neared completion, the Tadychs met with NRC to identify any outstanding project issues. The Tadychs noted several, including rainwater pools at the landing at the bottom of the stairs and several nicks and cracks on the stucco exterior walls. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cassidy Ingram, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight
    Ms. Ingram may be contacted at cassidy.ingram@acslawyers.com

    Lewis Brisbois Successfully Concludes Privacy Dispute for Comedian Kathy Griffin Following Calif. Supreme Court Denial of Review

    November 19, 2021 —
    Los Angeles, Calif. (October 18, 2021) - On October 13, 2021, the California Supreme Court declined to review a published, unanimous opinion of the Court of Appeal in favor of comedian Kathy Griffin and her husband, Randy Bick. The plaintiff-appellants claimed Ms. Griffin and Mr. Bick violated their privacy rights by using home security cameras to record “every move and every communication” in the plaintiffs’ private back yard. Ms. Griffin and Mr. Bick maintained that the lawsuit was filed by their neighbors in retaliation after the husband directed what the Court of Appeal described as “an expletive-laden rant” at Ms. Griffin and Mr. Bick. The neighbor's rant was recorded by security cameras and reported in the media, as well as publicized during Ms. Griffin’s performances at the Dolby Theater. In the trial court, Ms. Griffin and Mr. Bick successfully moved for summary adjudication of the plaintiffs’ privacy causes of action. In July 2021, the Court of Appeal affirmed, calling the appellants’ claims “hyperbole.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Not Just Another Client Alert about Cyber-Risk and Effective Cybersecurity Insurance Regulatory Guidance

    April 01, 2015 —
    The prefix "cyber" was coined about 70 years ago to describe early stage computers, computer networks and virtual reality. Since then, the term has been used as a prefix for hundreds of words, however, the most recent (and newsworthy) usage is its link to the word “risk” and the correlative term “security.” Two sides of the same coin and not a day goes by when a data breach is not reported and the importance of cyber risk and cybersecurity underscored. Insurers, like other financial institutions, are at the forefront of the “cyber-curve.” Many insurers are particularly vulnerable on at least two fronts: (1) from a cyber risk/ cyber invasion perspective and; (2) an insurer’s insurance policy exposure, intentional and not, to third-parties under cyber policies, and even policies such as CGLs that may inadvertently cover such risks. A number of federal and state regulators have spoken to this issue in an effort to address cyber risks with varying degrees of specificity. At last count, in addition to a myriad of existing and proposed state laws and regulations, there are at least nine federal Bills under consideration by Congress (covering six federal agencies including one new agency) that seek to impose regulatory requirements upon the cyber-arena. Those Bills empower six regulatory agencies; including one new agency. Initially, some states required companies to notify affected persons of a data breach. As breaches became more serious, state and federal regulators sought to increase the industry’s awareness of the potential exposures and provided instructions on appropriate steps to protect data from cyber invasions. Now, state insurance regulators are examining not only the threat of data theft, but the balance sheet impact of insurance exposures for underwriting such risks for third-parties’ under cyber risk policies. The regulatory efforts continue to multiply in an effort to stem some of these risks. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert Ansehl, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Ansehl may be contacted at ansehlr@whiteandwilliams.com