BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut building expert
    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


    Congratulations 2020 DE, MA, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    OSHA Announces Expansion of “Severe Violator Enforcement Program”

    BHA Attending the Construction Law Conference in San Antonio, Texas

    Angela Cooner Receives Prestigious ASA State Advocate Award

    New York Court Rejects Owner’s Bid for Additional Insured Coverage

    Contractors with Ties to Trustees Reaped Benefits from LA Community College Modernization Program

    Suzanne Pollack Elected to Lawyers Club of San Diego 2021 Board of Directors

    Fewer NYC Construction Deaths as Safety Law Awaits Governor's Signature

    U.K. to Set Out Plan for Fire-Risk Apartment Cladding Crisis

    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

    Housing Sales Hurt as Fewer Immigrants Chase Owner Dream

    New Homes in Palo Alto to Be Electric-Car Ready

    Key Legal Considerations for Modular Construction Contracts

    Insured's Motion for Reconsideration on Protecting the Integrity of Referral Sources under Florida Statute s. 542.335

    General Liability Alert: A Mixed Cause of Action with Protected and Non-Protected Activity Not Subject to Anti-SLAPP Motion

    London’s Best Districts Draw Buyers on Italian Triple Dip

    Does a Contractor (or Subcontractor) Have to Complete its Work to File a Mechanics Lien

    California’s Right To Repair Act Is The Sole Remedy For Damages For Construction Defects In New Residential Construction

    City of Sacramento Approves Kings NBA Financing Plan

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Too Soon?”

    ASCE Statement On White House "Accelerating Infrastructure Summit"

    California Court of Appeal Clarifies Intent of Faulty Workmanship Exclusions

    Congratulations to Haight’s 2019 Northern California Super Lawyers

    Alarm Cries Wolf in California Case Involving Privette Doctrine

    Angela Cooner Appointed Vice-Chair of Arizona’s Inaugural Board of Legal Specialization Construction Defect Law Advisory Commission

    NAHB Speaks Out Against the Clean Water Act Expansion

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    Understanding Insurance Disputes in Construction Defect Litigation: A Review of Acuity v. Kinsale

    Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 Not Just for Individual Homeowners Anymore?

    Congress to be Discussing Housing

    Facebook Posts “Not Relevant” Rules Florida Appeals Court

    Traub Lieberman Partner Greg Pennington Wins Summary Judgment in Favor of Property Owner

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (08/17/22) – Glass Ceilings, Floating Homes and the Inflation Reduction Act

    Thirteen Payne & Fears Attorneys Honored by Best Lawyers

    Sanctions of $1.6 Million Plus Imposed on Contractor for Fabricating Evidence

    Insolvency of Primary Carrier Does Not Invoke Excess Coverage

    More (and Simpler) Options Under New Oregon Retention Law

    Assignment of Insured's Policy Ineffective

    Turmoil Slows Rebuilding of Puerto Rico's Power Grid

    Superior Court Of Pennsylvania Holds That CASPA Does Not Allow For Individual Claims Against A Property Owner’s Principals Or Shareholders

    Plaintiffs In Construction Defect Cases to Recover For Emotional Damages?

    "Repair Work" Endorsements and Punch List Work

    No Retrofit without Repurposing in Los Angeles

    Relying Upon Improper Exclusion to Deny Coverage Allows Bad Faith Claim to Survive Summary Judgment

    Do We Really Want Courts Deciding if Our Construction Contracts are Fair?

    Emergency Paid Sick Leave and FMLA Leave Updates in Response to COVID-19

    S&P 500 Little Changed on Home Sales Amid Quarterly Rally

    Temporary Obstructions Are a Permanent Problem Under the Americans with Disabilities Act

    More Details Emerge in Fatal Charlotte, NC, Scaffold Collapse

    Scientists Are Trying to Make California Forests More Fire Resilient
    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

    Ohio Rejects the Majority Trend and Finds No Liability Coverage for a Subcontractor’s Faulty Work

    December 11, 2018 —
    In Ohio N. Univ. v. Charles Constr. Servs., 2018 Ohio LEXIS 2375 (No. 2017-0514, October 9, 2018), the Supreme Court of Ohio was recently called upon to determine if a general contractor’s Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurance policy provided coverage for defective work completed by its subcontractor. Rejecting the majority trend, the court held that, because the subcontractor’s faulty work was not an “occurrence” caused by an accident – i.e. a fortuitous event – within the meaning of the contractor’s CGL policy, the insurer did not have to defend or indemnify the contractor with respect to the plaintiff’s claims. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shannon M. Warren, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Warren may be contacted at warrens@whiteandwilliams.com

    Ways of Evaluating Property Damage Claims in Various Contexts

    February 18, 2020 —
    Potential damages in a lawsuit may come in many forms depending on the facts of the case. Common damages include medical expenses, loss of earnings, property loss, physical pain, and mental suffering. Of the many damages Plaintiffs may claim, one of the most prevalent and recognizable is property damage. This article briefly discusses these types of damages which fall under two major categories – Real Property and Personal Property. Broadly speaking, “real property” means land, and “personal property” refers to all other objects or rights that may be owned. Ballentine’s Law Dictionary defines “real property” as: “Such things as are permanent, fixed, and immovable; lands, tenements, and hereditaments of all kinds, which are not annexed to the person or cannot be moved from the place in which they subsist. . . .” (Ballentine’s Law Dict. (3d ed. 2010).) “Personal property” is defined as: “Money, goods, and movable chattels . . . . All objects and rights which are capable of ownership except freehold estates in land, and incorporeal hereditaments issuing thereout, or exercisable within the same.” (Id. (emphasis added).) Real Property Real property may be damaged or “harmed” through trespass, permanent nuisance, or other tortious conduct. The general rule is that Plaintiffs may recover the lesser of the two following losses: (1) the decrease in the real property’s fair market value; or (2) the cost to repair the damage and restore the real property to its pre-trespass condition plus the value of any lost use. (Kelly v. CB&I Constructors, Inc.) However, an exception to this general rule may be made if a Plaintiff has a personal reason to restore the real property to its former condition, sometimes called the “personal reason” exception. In such cases, a Plaintiff may recover the restoration costs even if the costs are greater than the decrease in the real property’s value, though the restoration cost must still be “reasonable” in light of the value of the real property before the injury and the actual damage sustained. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Millennium’s Englander Buys $71.3 Million Manhattan Co-Op

    September 03, 2014 —
    Israel Englander, the founder and chief executive officer of hedge-fund firm Millennium Management LLC, bought a duplex apartment on New York’s Park Avenue for $71.3 million, a record price for a Manhattan co-op. The seller was the government of France, New York City property records filed on Aug. 30 show. The six-bedroom unit at 740 Park Ave. was listed for $48 million in April, according to real estate website StreetEasy.com. The Park Avenue tower, completed in 1931 and designed by Rosario Candela and Arthur Loomis Harmon, has been home to John D. Rockefeller Jr. and Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, according to StreetEasy. Its 31 units include duplexes and triplexes of as much as 20,000 square feet (1,900 square meters). The 18-room co-op bought by Englander includes a private elevator, 35-foot (10.6-meter) marble gallery and five fireplaces, said the listing by John Burger of Brown Harris Stevens. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Oshrat Carmiel, Bloomberg
    Ms. Carmiel may be contacted at ocarmiel1@bloomberg.net

    Design Immunity Defense Gets Special Treatment on Summary Judgment

    March 29, 2021 —
    This may be one that is more for the lawyers than it is for the contractors or owners. If you’ve ever filed a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication you know the standard is clear. You’re going to lose if the court finds a disputed issue of material fact. In other words, since summary judgment or summary adjudication is such an extreme remedy – you win without having to go to trial after all – the standard is pretty high. Thus, if there’s a dispute as to a material fact (was the light green or was it red?) it’s enough that the court will deny your motion. That is, unless you’re seeking summary judgment or adjudication on a design immunity defense as the next case, Menges v. Department of Transportation, Case No. G057643 (December 24, 2020), reveals. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Wait! Don’t Sign Yet: Reviewing Contract Protections During the COVID Pandemic

    April 13, 2020 —
    As the circumstances of the COVID pandemic change day by day, and we all rush to keep business moving where and when we can, companies should consider hitting the “pause button” before renewing or executing any new contracts. Developing contracts often takes considerable time and expense, and companies are not in the habit of reworking them often. A change in law may prompt a company to revisit their contract terms, but otherwise business is often carried out with a standard form contract for a period of years. With the COVID pandemic affecting nearly every business and industry, life is not business as usual, and companies should make sure their contracts consider what previously seemed like an unforeseeable event. Force Majeure clauses are included in many contracts to excuse contract performance when made impossible by some unforeseen circumstance. These clauses typically fall under two categories: general and specific. General force majeure clauses excuse performance if performance is prevented by circumstances outside the parties’ control. By contrast, specific force majeure clauses detail the exhaustive list of circumstances (acts of god, extreme weather, war, riot, terrorism, embargoes) which would excuse contract performance. Force majeure clauses are typically interpreted narrowly. If your contract has a specific clause and pandemic or virus is not one of the listed circumstances it may not apply. Whether a particular existing contract covers the ongoing COVID pandemic will vary depending on the language of the contract. Force majeure clauses previously made headlines when the great economic recession hit in 2008. A number of courts held that simple economic hardship was not enough to invoke force majeure. The inability to pay or lack of desire to pay for the contracted goods or services did not qualify as force majeure. In California, impossibility turns on the nature of the contractual performance, and not in the inability of the obligor to do it. (Kennedy v. Reece (1964) 225 Cal. App. 2d 717, 725.) In other words, the task is objectively impossible not merely impossible or more burdensome to the specific contracting party. California has codified “force majeure” protection where the parties haven’t included any language or the circumstances in the clause don’t apply to the situation at hand. Civil Code section 1511 excuses performance when “prevented or delayed by an irresistible, superhuman cause, or by the act of public enemies of this state or of the United States, unless the parties have expressly agreed to the contrary.” (Civ. Code § 1511.) What qualifies as a “superhuman cause”? In California, the test is whether under the particular circumstances there was such an insuperable interference occurring without the party's intervention as could not have been prevented by the exercise of prudence, diligence and care. (Pacific Vegetable Oil Corp. v. C. S. T., Ltd. (1946) 29 Cal.2d 228, 238.) If you find yourself in an existing contract without a force majeure clause, or the statute does not apply, you may consider the doctrine of frustration of purpose. This doctrine is applied narrowly where performance remains possible, but the fundamental reason the parties entered into the contract has been severely or substantially frustrated by an unanticipated supervening circumstance, thus destroying substantially the value of the contract. (Cutter Laboratories, Inc. v. Twining (1963) 221 Cal. App. 2d 302, 314-15.) In other words, performance is still possible but valueless. Note this defense is not likely to apply where the contract has simply become less profitable for one party. Now that COVID is no longer an unforeseeable event, but rather a current and grave reality, a party executing a contract today without adequate protections may have a difficult time proving unforeseeability. Scientists are not sure whether warm weather will suppress the spread of the virus, as it does with the seasonal flu, but to the extent we get a reprieve during the summer we may see a resurgence of cases this Fall or Winter. Companies should take care in reviewing force majeure clauses, and other clauses tied to timely performance such as delay and liquidated damages before renewing or executing new contracts. Your contract scenario may vary from the summary provided above. Please contact legal counsel before making any decisions. During this critical time, BPH’s attorneys can be reached via email to answer your questions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Danielle S. Ward, Balestreri Potocki & Holmes
    Ms. Ward may be contacted at dward@bph-law.com

    Outcry Over Peru’s Vast Graft Probe Prompts Top Lawyer to Quit

    January 15, 2019 —
    Peru’s Attorney General Pedro Chavarry quit his post amid allegations he sought to sabotage a plea deal with a major construction company and derail the country’s biggest corruption probe. The board of supreme prosecutors accepted his resignation Tuesday and appointed Zoraida Avalos as his replacement, according to a post on the account of the attorney general’s office. Chavarry will continue to sit on the five-member board. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Quigley, Bloomberg

    Construction Contracts and The Uniform Commercial Code: When Does it Apply and Understanding the Pre-Dominant Factor Test

    November 01, 2022 —
    The Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”) replaces the common law in many commercial transactions, providing provisions and a framework governing the conduct of business. The UCC attempts to develop uniformity among state laws on commercial matters as many of these contracts involve parties from different states. The UCC has been adopted in almost all states, including Washington, and substantially mirror each other throughout the country. The question that is most commonly presented, in the Construction law context, is when does the UCC apply and control? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Keith Sparks, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Sparks may be contacted at keith.sparks@acslawyers.com

    Evaluating Construction Trends From 2023 and Forecasting For 2024

    February 12, 2024 —
    As we begin 2024, it is informative to evaluate what transpired in 2023 in the construction industry, and especially the use of construction technology. 2023 ushered in a variety of newly implemented construction technologies including 3D printed entire houses, improved wearables that detect all aspects of the construction worker from location to temperature to heart rate, increased use of modular construction for entire apartments, hotels, and condominium projects, and eco-friendly and conservation minded technologies to minimize carbon footprint, water preservation and sustainable construction methods, to name a few. 2023 also identified some significant issues in the construction industry. First and foremost, the labor shortages and hiring of skilled and qualified workers continued to be an issue resulting in increased delays, construction accidents, and project mismanagement. The skyrocketing interest rates, decline in commercial/office projects, supply chain issues, material price fluctuation and increase changes in scope of projects all negatively impacted the construction industry in 2023. There is also the demand for renewable and infrastructure projects put strain on construction resources as the projects became “mega” with larger and more complex construction leading to multi-party, high dollar, and more complex claims. Finally, there is a growing trend of construction claims and litigation being financed by third party litigation funding sources for personal/bodily injury claims and construction defect claims. Reprinted courtesy of Jason Feld, Kahana Feld and Dominic Donato, Kahana Feld Mr. Feld may be contacted at jfeld@kahanafeld.com Mr. Donato may be contacted at ddonato@kahanafeld.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of