BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield 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


    Architect Not Responsible for Injuries to Guests

    Renee Mortimer Recognized as "Defense Lawyer of the Year" by DTCI

    California’s Skilled and Trained Workforce Requirements: Public Works and AB 3018, What You Need to Know

    Litigation Counsel of America Honors Partner Victor Anderson with Peter Perlman Award

    Addenda to Construction Contracts Can Be an Issue

    Patagonia Will Start Paying for Homeowners' Solar Panels

    Florida Former Public Works Director Fined for Ethics Violation

    Insurer's In-House Counsel's Involvement in Coverage Decision Opens Door to Discovery

    Buffett Says ‘No-Brainer’ to Get a Mortgage to Short Rates

    Eleventh Circuit Upholds Coverage for Environmental Damage from Sewage, Concluding It is Not a “Pollutant”

    California Bullet Train Clears Federal Environmental Approval

    Illinois Court Addresses Rip-And-Tear Coverage And Existence Of An “Occurrence” In Defective Product Suit

    Construction Defect Headaches Can Be Avoided

    Insurance Policy Provides No Coverage For Slab Collapse in Vision One

    Wait, You Want An HOA?! Restricting Implied Common-Interest Communities

    Will a Notice of Non-Responsibility Prevent Enforcement of a California Mechanics Lien?

    General Contractor Supporting a Subcontractor’s Change Order Only for Owner to Reject the Change

    New Jersey Appellate Decision Reminds Bid Protestors to Take Caution When Determining Where to File an Action

    HHMR is pleased to announce that David McLain has been selected as a 2020 Super Lawyer

    Florida Governor Bans Foreign Citizens From Buying Land in Florida

    Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies the Meaning of "Living in the Same Household" for Purposes of Coverage Under a Homeowners Policy

    Pending Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Rise Most in Four Years

    Hunton Offers Amicus Support in First Circuit Review of “Surface Water” Under Massachusetts Law

    Chambers USA 2019 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    Let it Shine: California Mandates Rooftop Solar for New Residential Construction

    Key Takeaways For Employers in the Aftermath of the Supreme Court’s Halt to OSHA’s Vax/Testing Mandate

    Second Circuit Brings Clarity To Scope of “Joint Employer” Theory in Discrimination Cases

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

    Flag on the Play! Expired Contractor’s License!

    President Trump Nullifies “Volks Rule” Regarding Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Recordkeeping Requirements

    Biden Unveils $2.3 Trillion American Jobs Plan

    BHA’s Next MCLE Seminar in San Diego on July 25th

    Arizona Is the No. 1 Merit Shop Construction State, According to ABC’s 2020 Scorecard

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

    Golf Resorts Offering Yoga, Hovercraft Rides to the Green

    Mold Due to Construction Defects May Temporarily Close Fire Station

    Caltrans Hiring of Inexperienced Chinese Builder for Bay Bridge Expansion Questioned

    The New Industrial Revolution: Rebuilding America and the World

    Some Coastal Cities Are Sinking Even Faster Than Seas Are Rising

    Hawaii Federal District Court Compels Appraisal

    Subprime Bonds Are Back With Different Name Seven Years After U.S. Crisis

    Congratulations to Wilke Fleury’s 2024 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!!

    The Future of Pandemic Coverage for Real Estate Owners and Developers

    Restrictions On Out-Of-State Real Estate Brokers Being Challenged In Nevada

    New Window Insulation Introduced to U.S. Market

    Mental Health and Wellbeing in Construction: Impacts to Jobsite Safety

    Witt Named to 2017 Super Lawyers

    Top Five General Tips for All Construction Contracts

    Court Addresses When Duty to Defend Ends

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Additional Insured in Construction Defect Case
    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

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

    April 25, 2022 —
    Phishing schemes target the mortgage industry, housing prices rise in Europe as Ukrainian refugees flee from their home country, the SEC announces new climate change regulations that will impact commercial real estate, and more. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    3D Printing: A New Era in Concrete Construction

    April 11, 2022 —
    The construction of buildings using concrete has been around since the time of the Romans. In all those centuries, concrete structures have been built using essentially the same method: forms, reinforcement, mixing, pouring, setting, repeat. The process is costly and time-consuming. The construction of the forms alone demands dozens of workers and requires a substantial amount of lumber, keeping labor and materials costs high. Builders might save some time using prefabricated concrete blocks, but such materials are not appropriate for every construction project and carry their own expenses. For the first time in history, builders have an alternative to traditional concrete construction methods that are more cost-effective, less expensive, more environmentally friendly and allow for a wide range of possible construction projects. Three-dimensional concrete printing for construction has emerged in the building field as a viable and efficient alternative. Reprinted courtesy of Zoey Zhao, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Ms. Zhao may be contacted at zoey@aictbuild.com

    Water Drainage Case Lacks Standing

    March 28, 2012 —

    The Texas Court of Appeals has ruled in the case La Tierra de Simmons Familia Ltd. V. Main Event Entertainment, LP. The trial court had found for Main Event. On appeal, the court threw out some of the grounds on which the trial court had reached its decision.

    The case involved two commercial lots in northwest Austin, Texas. The uphill tract (Phase III of the Anderson Arbor development) diverts its runoff onto the lower tract (the “Ballard tract”). The owners of the Ballard tract claim that “the drainage system was designed or constructed in a manner that has damaged and continues to damage the Ballard tract.”

    Both tracts have undergone changes of ownership since the construction of the drainage system in 2004. At the time the drainage system was constructed, the parcel was owned by Sears Roebuck and Co. Sears later sold the property. Main Event Entertainment is the current tenant. Likewise, the Ballard tract was previously owned by the Ballard Estate which sold the property to La Tierra on an “as is” basis in 2007.

    After La Tierra bought the Ballard tract, La Tierra’s engineer “witnessed and videotaped what he described as ‘flooding’ on the Ballard tract caused by storm water discharge from the Anderson Arbor drainage system during a rainfall event.” La Tierra determined that an adequate drainage system would cost about $204,000. Development plans were put on hold.

    La Tierra sued Main Event and various other parties associated with the uphill tract, seeking “actual damages for (1) decrease and loss in rental income due to delay in obtaining the development permit, (2) interest on carrying costs during that time period, (3) the cost to build a water conveyance system on the Ballard tract, (4) engineering fees incurred to redesign the water conveyance system, (5) unspecified out-of-pocket real estate expenses, and (6) property devaluation occasioned by the need to construct an expensive water conveyance system.” The trial court never reached these claims, ruling instead that La Tierra lacked standing, that its claims were barred under the statute of limitations, and that there was no evidence of damage.

    La Tierra appealed, arguing that “(1) the summary-judgment evidence does not conclusively establish that property damage claims accrued or were discovered prior to September 11, 2007, which is within the limitations period and was after La Tierra purchased the property; (2) even if the property was damaged before La Tierra acquired ownership of the Ballard tract, standing exists based on the assignments of interest from the Ballard Estate heirs, and the discovery rule tolls limitations until the injury was discovered on September 11, 2007; (3) limitations does not bar La Tierra's request for injunctive relief; (4) La Tierra's water code claim against Main Event and M.E.E.P. is viable based on their control over the drainage system, which makes them necessary and indispensable parties for injunctive relief; (5) La Tierra presented more than a scintilla of evidence to raise a fact issue on damages, causation, and other essential elements of its causes of action; and (6) the trial court abused its discretion when it sustained the defendants' objections to La Tierra's summary-judgment evidence.”

    The appeals court concluded that La Tierra’s second claim was irrelevant to standing, as La Tierra “obtained assignments from the Ballard Estate heirs ? nearly one year after the lawsuit was initially filed.” Nor did the court accept their first point. The water system had been operating unaltered since January, 2004, with monthly maintenance and inspection to maintain its designed operation. Further, a feasibility report La Tierra received stated that “over sixteen acres drain into those ponds, and thus onto this site.” The court noted that “the underlying facts giving rise to a cause of action were known before La Tierra acquired ownership of the Ballard tract.”

    The court concluded that the drainage issue is a permanent injury, but that it “accrued before La Tierra acquired an ownership interest in the property.” As La Tierra has standing, the appeals court ruled that it was improper for the trial court to rule on the issues. The appeals court dismissed the questions of whether the case was barred under the statute of limitation and also the question of whether or not La Tierra had damages.

    As the issue of standing would not allow La Tierra to bring the suit, the appeals court found for the defendants, dismissing the case for this single reason, and otherwise affirming the ruling of the lower court.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “A Fastball Right to the Bean!”

    May 06, 2024 —
    The Metropolitan Municipality of Lima, Peru, filed suit in federal court in Washington DC to vacate two separate arbitration awards rendered against the city in international arbitration proceedings subject to the Federal Arbitration Act. The city had contracted to build, improve, and maintain various highways in and around the city. To pay for this infrastructure, Lima agreed that the contractor would “receive revenues from existing and new toll booths.” Apparently, the City of Lima forgot how much citizens of the area loathed tolls, and, according to the court, the local public officials “quickly truckled” (how apropos for a road project!) to the pressure. As a result, revenues promised to the contractor were not forthcoming, and the city did nothing about it. The contractor initiated arbitration, and the city countered by arguing that the contractor had bribed its way into the contract. The city lost and was held in breach. 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

    Atlantic City Faces Downward Spiral With Revel’s Demise

    August 13, 2014 —
    The shuttering next month of Revel, the $2.6 billion hotel and casino that was meant to usher in a new era of opulence in Atlantic City when it opened in 2012, is set to quicken the seaside community’s downward spiral. Five years after the longest recession since the 1930s, hotel rooms sit vacant and revenue keeps falling in what was once the second-largest U.S. casino market. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s turnaround plan for the municipality, begun in 2011 and hinged on Revel’s success, hasn’t delivered, prompting Moody’s Investors Service to cut the city’s $245 million of general-obligation debt to junk last month. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Terrence Dopp, Bloomberg
    Mr Dopp may be contacted at tdopp@bloomberg.net

    Florida Insurance Legislation Alert - Part I

    April 18, 2023 —
    On March 24, 2023, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed into law House Bill 837 which significantly impacts several critical aspects of modern Florida civil litigation, particularly insurance disputes. SDV has actively monitored the evolution of this legislation, including substantial commentary from the legal and insurance communities that followed its enactment. In this multi-part series, we will explore the critical developments impacting policyholders and what to expect moving forward. The insurance-related headlines overwhelmingly concentrate on one key area: the elimination of one-way attorney fee recovery for property insurance policyholders. This development represents a key change in longstanding Florida insurance law and is worthy of attention - but it doesn’t tell the whole story. Reprinted courtesy of Gregory D. Podolak, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Holly A. Rice, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Podolak may be contacted at GPodolak@sdvlaw.com Ms. Rice may be contacted at HRice@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Appeals Court Affirms Civil Engineer Owes No Duty of Care to General Contractor

    August 20, 2014 —
    According to Shareholder Karen Holmes and Law Clerk Justin Reid of Balestreri Potocki & Holmes, in Atlas-Allied v. SD Community College District, the California Court of Appeal “confirmed that a civil engineer owes no duty of care to the General Contractor absent privity of contract.” The Appellate court considered Beacon Residential Community Association v. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP to reach that conclusion. Holmes and Reid commented that the Atlas-Allied decision “can assist in clarifying the extent liability is owed when no contract exists. Here, while unpublished, the 4th District clearly refused to extend a duty by the civil engineer to the general contractor on a public works project, giving counsel guidance on the application of Beacon and prior decisions on design professionals’ liability.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Montana Federal District Court Finds for Insurer in Pollution Coverage Dispute

    October 24, 2021 —
    Applying Louisiana law, a recent federal court decision exemplifies why policyholders should thoroughly read claims-made policies to understand when notice is due to insurers and truthfully complete policy applications. In Admiral Insurance Company v. Dual Trucking, Inc.,1 the Court determined the insurer, Admiral Insurance Company (“AIC”), owed no duty to defend or indemnify Dual Trucking and Transport, LLC (“DTT”), Dual Trucking of Montana, LLC (“DTM”), and Dual Trucking, Inc. (“DTI”) (collectively, the “Dual Entities”) under two Environmental Impairment Liability Policies (“EIL Policies”) and four Contractor Pollution Liability Policies (“CPL Policies”). The Court justified its decision because the Dual Entities: 1) did not give notice during the 2012-2013 EIL Policy period; 2) had discovered or knew of, but did not disclose, potential pollution conditions before the inception of the 2013-2014 EIL Policy and before the expiration of the extended reporting period of the 2012-2013 EIL Policy; 3) failed to provide AIC with notice during the extended reporting period of the 2013-2014 EIL Policy of claims for which the Dual Entities were seeking coverage; and 4) materially misrepresented known facts on the CPL Policy applications. I. Factual Background. The Dual Entities were Louisiana-based companies that provided oilfield equipment rental services. In 2011, the Dual Entities leased land in Montana under three leases, collectively referred to as “the Bainville site.” Shortly afterward, the Dual Entities applied for, and AIC issued, an EIL Policy and two CPL Policies with a policy period of October 1, 2012, to October 1, 2013. AIC renewed all three policies for the October 1, 2013, to October 1, 2014, policy period. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melanie A. McDonald, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Ms. McDonald may be contacted at MMcDonald@sdvlaw.com