BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims 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


    L.A. Makes $4.5 Billion Bet on Olympics After Boston Backs Out

    Toll Brothers to Acquire Shapell for $1.6 Billion

    Balancing Risk and Reward: The Complexities of Stadium Construction Projects

    Best U.S. Home Sales Since 2007 Show Momentum in Housing Market

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/13/22

    It Pays to Review the ‘Review the Contract Documents’ Clause Before You Sign the Contract

    Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Found In South Dakota

    Consider the Risks Associated with an Exculpatory Clause

    Are Modern Buildings Silently Killing Us?

    NCCER Celebrates Construction Education Programs and Products in 2024

    Duke Energy Appeals N.C. Order to Excavate Nine Coal Ash Pits

    Alleged Negligent Misrepresentation on Condition of Home is Not an Occurrence Causing Property Damage

    Firm Pays $8.4M to Settle Hurricane Restoration Contract Case

    Manhattan Trophy Home Sellers Test Buyer Limits on Price

    Harvey's Aftermath Will Rattle Construction Supply Chain, Economists Say

    Corps Releases Final Report on $29B Texas Gulf Coast Hurricane Defense Plan

    Pay-if-Paid Clauses, Nasty, but Enforceable

    Deducting 2018 Real Property Taxes Prepaid in 2017 Comes with Caveats

    U.K. Construction Resumes Growth Amid Resurgent Housing Activity

    Mississippi Floods Prompt New Look at Controversial Dam Project

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Despite Construction Defects

    Appraisal Appropriate Despite Pending Coverage Issues

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Awarded Sacramento Business Journal’s Best of the Bar

    Construction Wall Falls, Hurts Three

    Injured Subcontractor Employee Asserts Premise Liability Claim Against General Contractor

    Definitions Matter in Illinois: Tenant Held Liable Only for Damage to Apartment Unit

    A Glimpse Into Post-Judgment Collections and Perhaps the Near Future?

    “But I didn’t know what I was signing….”

    U.S. Homeownership Rate Rises for First Time in Two Years

    Replacing Coal Plants with Renewables Is Cheaper 80% of the Time

    Claims Made Insurance Policies

    New Home Permits Surge in Wisconsin

    Bill Proposes First-Ever Federal Workforce Housing Tax Credit for Middle-Class Housing

    Washington State May Allow Common Negligence Claims against Construction Professionals

    Single-Family Home Gain Brightens U.S. Housing Outlook: Economy

    How to Remove a Mechanics Lien from Your Property

    Tech to Help Contractors Avoid Litigation

    Homeowner Loses Suit against Architect and Contractor of Resold Home

    “Slow and Steady Doesn’t Always Win the Race” – Applicability of a Statute of Repose on Indemnity/Contribution Claims in New Hampshire

    Construction Goes Green in Orange County

    On the Ten Year Anniversary of the JOBS Act A Look-Back at the Development of Crowdfunding

    Untangling Unique Legal Issues in Modern Modular Construction

    Big Bertha Lawsuits—Hitachi Zosen Weighs In

    Before and After the Storm: Know Your Insurance Rights, Coverages and Obligations

    Wendel Rosen Construction Attorneys Recognized by Super Lawyers

    House Passes Bill to Delay EPA Ozone Rule

    Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case Triggered by Complaint's Allegations

    Condo Building Increasing in Washington D.C.

    Wheaton to Require Sprinklers in New Homes

    The Regulations on the Trump Administration's Chopping Block
    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. Leveraging 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

    A UK Bridge That Is a Lesson on How to Build Infrastructure

    November 15, 2017 —
    This country’s infrastructure—bridges, airports, dams and levees—needs wide-scale repair and renewal. The United Kingdom’s new Queensferry Crossing bridge, connecting Edinburgh to Fife in Scotland, sets a new standard for how to do it. The result speaks for itself: The Queensferry Crossing, a three-tower, 1.7-mile-long cable-stayed bridge, debuted in early September well within budget and a manageable eight-month time delay—a rare occurrence among bridges. According to research at the University of Oxford’s Saïd Business School, nine out of 10 fixed links (bridges and tunnels) suffer an average cost overrun of 34% and a time delay of roughly two years. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cameron J. Bell, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    California Team Secures Appellate Victory on Behalf of Celebrity Comedian Kathy Griffin in Dispute with Bel Air Neighbor

    August 04, 2021 —
    San Diego Appellate Partner Jeffry A. Miller, Indian Wells Appellate Partner Wendy S. Dowse, and Los Angeles Partners Dana Alden Fox and Michael Moss recently prevailed in an appeal from a judgment entered after the trial court granted Lewis Brisbois clients Kathy Griffin and Randy Bick, Jr.’s motion for summary adjudication of the plaintiffs’ causes of action for invasion of privacy and violation of California Penal Code section 632, which prohibits recording confidential communications. As reported by Law360 in an article titled "Kathy Griffin Beats Calif. Neighbors' Backyard Spying Suit," and in a Bloomberg Law article titled "Comedian Kathy Griffin Beats Neighbor’s Invasion of Privacy Suit," the plaintiffs initially filed suit against Griffin and Bick, Jr. in 2018, alleging that their home security cameras recorded “every move and every communication” in the plaintiffs’ private backyard. They argued that the defendants' use of the security system invaded their privacy and violated California law. Prior to the lawsuit, Griffin and Bick, Jr. had made noise complaints about the plaintiffs to their homeowners' association and to the Los Angeles Police Department. The plaintiffs learned of the defendants' security cameras after a profane rant directed at the defendants and related to their noise complaint was recorded and reported in the media. Reprinted courtesy of Jeffry Miller, Lewis Brisbois, Wendy Dowse, Lewis Brisbois, Dana Fox, Lewis Brisbois and Michael Moss, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Miller may be contacted at Jeff.Miller@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Dowse may be contacted at Wendy.Dowse@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Fox may be contacted at Dana.Fox@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Moss may be contacted at Michael.Moss@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increase at Slower Pace

    February 25, 2014 —
    Home prices in the U.S. climbed at a slower pace in the year through December, pointing to a moderation in the market that will help keep more properties within reach for prospective buyers. The S&P/Case-Shiller index of property values in 20 cities rose 13.4 percent from December 2012 after increasing 13.7 percent in the year ended in November, the group said today in New York. It was the first deceleration since June. The gain matched the median estimate of 33 economists surveyed by Bloomberg. Price appreciation is slowing as rising mortgage rates combined with harsh winter weather to cool home purchases over the past few months. Smaller increases mean more homes will remain affordable as the labor market improves, helping maintain the rebound in residential real estate that has boosted growth. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Victoria Stilwell, Bloomberg
    Ms. Stilwell may be contacted at vstilwell1@bloomberg.net

    Eye on Housing Examines Costs of Green Features

    July 09, 2014 —
    The National Association of Home Builders’ Eye on Housing reported that it costs more to build a green home, however, builder’s experience with green techniques reduces costs. According to McGraw Hill Construction survey data (as quoted by Eye on Housing), “the incremental cost for builders to construct green homes was 8% in 2013. For remodelers, green projects raised costs by 9% on average.” Furthermore, “McGraw Hill’s analysis found that the cost to build green varied to some degree by the amount of green construction undertaken.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Burden of Betterment

    February 23, 2017 —
    The concept of betterment has long been used by defendants in cases involving defective design or construction to limit the damages awarded to a plaintiff.[1] The theory behind betterment is that: “if in [the] course of making repairs [an] owner adopts a more expensive design, recovery should be limited to what would have been the reasonable cost of repair according to original design.”[2] Betterment is often raised as an affirmative defense, requiring a defendant to prove that the plaintiff has received a good or service that is superior to that for which the plaintiff originally contracted. A recent South Florida case seems, at first blush, to suggest the burden of establishing the value of betterments may fall to the plaintiff, although a closer reading indicates the decision is likely to have limited applicability. In Magnum Construction Management Corp. v. The City of Miami Beach, the Third District Court of Appeal was asked to review the damages award to the City for construction defects associated with the redesign and improvement of a park.[3] The completed project contained landscaping deficiencies, along with other “minor defects” in the playground’s construction.[4] After a unilateral audit, and without providing the contractor its contractually required opportunity to cure the defects, the City “removed, redesigned, and replaced the playground in its entirety.”[5] It did so despite no recommendation by the City’s own expert to perform such work.[6] During the bench trial, the “only measure of damages provided by the City was the costs associated with the planning, permitting, and construction of a park that is fundamentally different from the one it contracted with [the contractor] to build.”[7] Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryan M. Charlson, Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.
    Mr. Charlson may be contacted at ryan.charlson@csklegal.com

    Tennessee Court: Window Openings Too Small, Judgment Too Large

    November 18, 2011 —

    The Tennessee Court of Appeals has issued a ruling in the case of Dayton v. Ackerman, upholding the decision of the lower court, even as they found that the award was incorrectly computed. The Daytons purchased a house that had been designed and built by the Ackermans, who operated a construction business. The court noted that the warranty with the house promised that “for a period of 60 days, the following items will be free of defects in materials or workmanship: doors (including hardware); windows; electric switches; receptacles; and fixtures; caulking around exterior openings; pluming fixtures; and cabinet work.”

    Soon, the Daytons began to experience problems with the house. Many were addressed by the Ackermans, but the Daytons continued to have problems with the windows. Neither side could specify a firm date when the Ackermans were contacted by the Daytons about the window problems. The Ackermans maintained that more than two years passed before the Daytons complained about the windows. The lower court found the Daytons more credible in this.

    Initially, the Daytons included the window manufacturer in their suit, but after preliminary investigations, the Daytons dropped Martin Doors from their suit. Martin Doors concluded that the windows were improperly installed, many of them “jammed into openings that were too small for them.”

    After the Daytons dismissed Martin Doors, the Ackermans sought to file a third party complaint against them. This was denied by the court, as too much time had elapsed. The Ackermans also noted that not all of the window installations were defective, however, the courts found that the Daytons ought not to have mismatched windows.

    Unfortunately for the Daytons, the window repair was done incorrectly and the windows were now too small for the openings. The firm that did the repair discounted the windows and Daytons concealed the problem with plantation shutters, totalling $400 less than the original lowest estimate. However, the appeals court noted that it was here that the trial court made their computation error. Correcting this, the appeals court assessed the Ackermans $12,016.20 instead of $13,016.20.

    Finally, the Ackerman’s expert was excluded as he had changed his testimony between deposition and trial. The trial reviewed the expert’s testimony and had it been admissible, it would not have changed the ruling.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    William Doerler Recognized by JD Supra 2022 Readers’ Choice Awards

    March 14, 2022 —
    Congratulations to Bill Doerler, Counsel of the Subrogation Group who has been recognized as a top author in Product Liability in the 2022 JD Supra Readers' Choice Awards. Bill was ranked number 9 out of a pool of approximately 800 authors writing about product liability matters on JD Supra in 2021. 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 2021. These annual awards (now in their seventh year) recognize JD Supra contributors for the visibility and engagement their thought leadership earned among readers in select subjects during the previous 12 months. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    No Coverage for Alleged Misrepresentation Claim

    January 23, 2023 —
    The court found there was no coverage for a misrepresentation claim against the insured sellers of a residence. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Coyne, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186417 (E.D. Mo. Oct. 12, 2022). Aaron and Tobi Beckman purchased a home from Denise Coyne. The Bockmans alleged in the underlying suit that Coyne represented that the property had a "2-car garage." A disclosure statement signed by Coyne stated she had disclosed all conditions which might lower the value of the property or adversely affect the Bockman's decision to buy the property. After purchasing the property, the Bockmans learned that they could not fit their two vehicles in the attached garage. The Bockmans alleged that substantial remediation was necessary to expand the depth of the garage to fit two cars within it. The underlying suit alleged that Coyne had was engaged in fraud, misrepresentation and concealment by omitting material facts in connection with the sale of the home. Coyne allegedly engaged in negligent misrepresentation by failing to inform the Bockmans of the depth of the attached garage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com