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


    Land a Cause of Home Building Shortage?

    Five Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers in America© 2021

    Port Authority Approves Subsidies for 2 World Trade Project

    Decline in Home Construction Brings Down Homebuilder Stocks

    Everyone Wins When a Foreclosure Sale Generates Excess Proceeds

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (08/15/23) – Manufacturing Soars with CHIPS Act, New Threats to U.S. Infrastructure and AI Innovation for One Company

    SEC Proposes Rule Requiring Public Firms to Report Climate Risks

    Florida Court Gives Parties Assigned a Subrogation Claim a Math Lesson

    Request for Stay Denied in Dispute Over Coverage for Volcano Damage

    Construction Law- Where Pragmatism and Law Collide

    Stop by BHA’s Booth at WCC and Support the Susan G. Komen Foundation

    UPDATE: Trade Secrets Pact Allows Resumed Work on $2.6B Ga. Battery Plant

    Construction Defect Suit Can Continue Against Plumber

    Boyfriend Pleads Guilty in Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam Suicide

    Surfside Condo Collapse Investigators Have Nearly Finished Technical Work

    California Court of Appeal Clarifies Intent of Faulty Workmanship Exclusions

    We've Surveyed Video Conferencing Models to See Who Fits the CCPA Bill: Here's What We Found

    Texas Supreme Court to Review Eight-Corners Duty-to-Defend Rule

    Oregon agreement to procure insurance, anti-indemnity statute, and self-insured retention

    Congratulations to Haight’s 2019 Northern California Super Lawyers

    New York’s Lawsky Proposes Changes to Reduce Home Foreclosures

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules that Insurance Salesman had No Fiduciary Duty to Policyholders

    Insurance Law Alert: California Supreme Court Limits Advertising Injury Coverage for Disparagement

    Insurer's Withheld Discovery Must be Produced in Bad Faith Case

    Is Arbitration Always the Answer?

    Useful Life: A Valuable Theory for Reducing Damages

    Canada’s Largest Homebuilder Sets U.S. Growth Plan

    Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Clarifies Pennsylvania’s Strict Liability Standard

    The Montrose Language Interpreted: How Many Policies Are Implicated By A Construction Defect That Later Causes a Flood?

    National Coalition to Provide Boost for Building Performance Standards

    Construction Contract Basics: No Damages for Delay

    Colorado Court of Appeals to Rule on Arbitrability of an HOA's Construction Defect Claims

    OH Supreme Court Rules Against General Contractor in Construction Defect Coverage Dispute

    Insurance Law Alert: California Appeals Court Allows Joinder of Employee Adjuster to Bad Faith Lawsuit Against Homeowners Insurer

    California MCLE Seminar at BHA Sacramento July 11th

    Claim for Collapse After Demolition of Building Fails

    Summary Judgment for Insurer on Construction Defect Claim Reversed

    Colorado “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    California Appeals Court Says Loss of Use Is “Property Damage” Under Liability Policy, and Damages Can be Measured by Diminished Value

    Good Ole Duty to Defend

    BHA Sponsors the 9th Annual Construction Law Institute

    Public Contract Code 9204 – A New Mandatory Claims Process for Contractors and Subcontractors – and a Possible Trap for the Unwary

    Faulty Workmanship Causing Damage to Other Property Covered as Construction Defect

    Previously Owned U.S. Home Sales Rise to Eight-Month High

    10 Answers to Those Nagging Mechanics Lien Questions Keeping You Up at Night. Kind of

    Disgruntled Online Reviews of Attorney by Disgruntled Former Client Ordered Removed from Yelp.com

    Challenging Enforceability of Liquidated Damages (In Federal Construction Context)

    Construction Robots 2023

    Mixing Concrete, Like Baking a Cake, is Fraught with Problems When the Recipe is Not Followed

    Extreme Flooding Overwhelms New York Roadways, Killing 1 Person
    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

    What You Need to Know to Protect the Project Against Defect Claims

    October 28, 2024 —
    If a property owner claims there is a construction defect, that not only brings the project’s integrity into question but also your business’s reputation. So, how can you take steps to prevent these claims from causing such damage? Here are three things to know before beginning a project to effectively protect it and manage construction defect claims. 1. Documentation is key California and Los Angeles County require certain permits and documents in order for a construction project to move forward. Los Angeles County will also conduct plan checks to ensure everything is up to code. Detailed documentation will be important while making your plans. However, keeping notes throughout every step of the project will also be essential. Documenting all aspects of the project helps you:
    • Stay updated and aware of the project’s progress
    • Proactively catch and handle issues that could result in disputes
    • Create a record of evidence that can help manage defect claims
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott L. Baker, Baker & Associates
    Mr. Baker may be contacted at slb@bakerslaw.com

    A Riveting (or at Least Insightful) Explanation of the Privette Doctrine

    May 02, 2022 —
    “The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine” – Plutarch And grind they do . . . slowly. For long time readers of the California Construction Law Blog you may recall a case we reported on over three years ago in 2018 – Sandoval v. Qualcomm Incorporated – a rather sad case about a severely injured employee of an electrical subcontractor with an even more surprisingly ending. In Sandoval, the 4th District Court of Appeals affirmed a $7 million judgment against project owner Qualcomm Incorporated in which a jury found that Qualcomm was liable under the Privette doctrine for injuries sustained by the employee who was severely burned over one third of his body by an “arc flash” from a live circuit breaker. The Court of Appeals, in a surprising decision, upheld the verdict holding that Qualcomm was liable even through: (1) Qualcomm had informed the electrical subcontractor that certain live circuit breakers were energized; (2) Qualcomm had not authorized the lower-tiered contractor to remove a panel that resulted in the arc flash; and (3) employees of Qualcomm were not in the room when the accident happened. Fast forward three years to September 2021. Qualcomm attorneys petition the California Supreme Court for review of the Court of Appeal’s decision. And the Supreme Court granted review. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Insurers' Motion to Determine Lack of Occurrence Fails

    August 19, 2024 —
    The federal district court, interpreting Massachusetts law, found there were genuine issues of fact as to whether the insured's mixing of biodiesel with home heating fuel was an occurrence. United States Fire Ins. Co. v. Peterson's Oil Serv., Inc., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106980 (D. Mass. June 17, 2024). Homeowners sued Peterson's Oil Service, alleging that Peterson sold them fuel for home heating which contained more that 5% biodiesel. The homeowners further alleged that fuel containing more than 5% biodiesel did not meet industry standards and caued damage to their home heating equipment. Peterson allegedly did not fully disclose the presence of biodiesel in their fuel, despite knowing the risk posed by high-biodiesel blended fuel. The insurers, United States Fire Insurance Company and The North River Insurance Company, defended Peterson under a reservation of rights. United States Fire issued priomary policies with limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 as a general aggregate limit. An endorsement titled "Limited Coverage - Failure to Supply" limited the amount covered for "property damage arising out of the failure of any insured to adequately supply gas, oil, water, electricty or steam" to $250,000. North River issued umbrella policies with additional coverage in the amount of $15,000,000 per occurrnce and in the aggregate if property damage was caused by an occurrence. The umbrella policies also contained a "Failure to Supply Exclusion" which excluded coverage for "property damage arising out of the failure of an insured to adequately supply gas, oil, water, electricty or steam." 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

    TOLLING AGREEMENTS: Construction Defect Lawyers use them to preserve Association Warranty Claims during Construction Defect Negotiations with Developers

    March 07, 2014 —
    If properly drafted, a tolling agreement stops, or “tolls,” the running of the statue of limitations and other time periods aplicable to an association’s legal claims while it attempts to negotiate the repair of and/or monetary compensation for construction deficiencies with the developer and other responsible parties. In short, it is a “time -out” that allows and association to preserve its legal claim so it can focus on settling its claims rather than pursing them in court. Too often, condominium associations and homeowner associations (“HOA”) unknowingly allow their legal claims for construction defects to expire during lengthy negotiations with developers and builders. If negotiations fail, the association may turn to a construction defect attorney for legal representation only to find their construction defect legal claims are time barred because the statute of limitations or other legal time period has expired. This article explains how condominium associations and HOAs can avoid this scenario by the use of tolling agreements to preserve their legal claims while engaged in potentially lengthy negotiations with developers to correct construction defects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas D. Cowie, Maryland Condo Construction Defect Law Blog
    Mr. Cowie may be contacted at ndc@cowiemott.com

    Texas Federal Court Delivers Another Big Win for Policyholders on CGL Coverage for Construction-Defect Claims and “Rip-and-Tear” Damages

    March 14, 2022 —
    Insurers regularly argue that commercial general liability (“CGL”) policies are not performance bonds and therefore there is no coverage for claims seeking damages for defective or faulty workmanship. Insurers also argue there is no coverage for so-called “tear-out” or “rip-and-tear” damages, where fixing property damage requires replacing defective work that has not itself been damaged. Fortunately, in a newly decided case, a Texas federal district court rejected both arguments by an insurer. Amerisure Mutual Insurance Company v. McMillin Texas Homes, LLC, No. SA-20-CV-01332-XR, 2022 WL 686727 (W.D. Tex. Mar. 8, 2022). As with most construction-defect claims, this case involved homeowner claims against a residential developer, McMillin Texas Homes (“McMillin”). After the homes were completed, homeowners complained about defects in the artificial stucco exterior finish and filed suit. McMillin tendered to its insurer, Amerisure Mutual Insurance Company (“Amerisure”). Amerisure then sued McMillin for declaratory relief, arguing that it had no duty to defend or indemnify the homeowner claims. McMillin filed a counterclaim alleging Amerisure breached its policies by refusing to defend or indemnify McMillin. Reprinted courtesy of Blake A. Dillion, Payne & Fears, Jared De Jong, Payne & Fears and Scott S. Thomas, Payne & Fears Mr. Dillion may be contacted at bad@paynefears.com Mr. De Jong may be contacted at jdj@paynefears.com Mr. Thomas may be contacted at sst@paynefears.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Global MDL for COVID Business Interruption Claims, but Panel Will Consider Separate Consolidated Proceedings for Lloyds, Cincinnati, Hartford, Society

    August 24, 2020 —
    In a widely anticipated ruling, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has denied two motions to centralize pretrial proceedings in hundreds of federal cases seeking coverage for business interruption losses caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the Panel has ordered expedited briefing on whether four separate consolidated proceedings should be set up for four insurers – Cincinnati, Society, Hartford, and Lloyds – who appear to be named in the largest number of claims. In seeking a single, industry-wide MDL proceeding, some plaintiffs had argued that common questions predominated across the hundreds of pending federal suits: namely, [1] the question of what constituted ‘physical loss or damage’ to property, under the allegedly standardized terms of various insurers’ policies; [2] the question whether various government closure orders should trigger coverage under those policies, and [3] the question whether any exclusions, particularly virus exclusions, applied. Reprinted courtesy of Eric B. Hermanson, White and Williams and Konrad R. Krebs, White and Williams Mr. Hermanson may be contacted at hermansone@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Krebs may be contacted at krebsk@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Super Lawyers

    July 08, 2024 —
    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai has been recognized as a 2024 Northern California Super Lawyers honoree in the area of Construction Litigation. This is the eleventh consecutive year that he has been recognized by Super Lawyers. Super Lawyers, an annual listing of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and personal achievement, is limited to no more than five percent (5%) of lawyers in a state who are selected through a multiphase process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent research evaluation and peer reviews by practice area. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Want More Transit (and Federal Funding)? Build Housing That Supports It

    January 08, 2024 —
    After decades of planning (and $2.1 billion spent), Los Angeles’ newest light rail line opened in October 2022. Joined by geeky rail obsessives and chaperoned children, I rode the K Line on opening day. A blend of underground, elevated and at-grade track, it’s a route only a politician could love. Stations were lavished with public art, and when the train wasn’t stuck in traffic, it glided through the sprawl. Yet one year later, it is Los Angeles’ least-used line, averaging just over 2,000 riders on an average weekday this fall. It isn’t hard to see why: The line begins at a vacant patch in Crenshaw and ends in a low-slung industrial park about six miles away, lined by strip malls the entire way. Walk one block east or west from any given station, and you’ll find yourself amid single-story postwar bungalows on 7,500-square-foot lots — all illegal to redevelop into apartments, thanks to local zoning. The Hyde Park Station deposits riders into a cluster of gas stations and drive-thru fast-food joints. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of M. Nolan Gray, Bloomberg