BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineer
    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


    An Overview of the New EPA HVAC Refrigerant Regulations and Its Implications for the Construction Industry

    Corps, State Agencies Prep for Flood Risks From California Snowmelt Runoff

    Build Me A Building As Fast As You Can

    Bid Bonds: The First Preventative Measure for Your Project

    Scientists Are Trying to Make California Forests More Fire Resilient

    New York Court of Appeals Addresses Choice of Law Challenges

    Naples, Florida, Is Getting So Expensive That City Workers Can’t Afford It

    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    Cable-Free Elevators Will Soar to New Heights, and Move Sideways

    DRCOG’s Findings on the Impact of Construction Defect Litigation Have Been Released (And the Results Should Not Surprise You)

    Specific Source of Water Not Relevant in Construction Defect Claim

    Oracle Sues Procore, Claims Theft of Trade Secrets for ERP Integration

    Negligent Misrepresentation Claim Does Not Allege Property Damage, Barring Coverage

    Super Lawyers Selects Haight Lawyers for Its 2023 California Rising Stars List

    Subcontractor Strikes Out in its Claims Against Federal Government

    Constructive Notice Established as Obstacle to Relation Back Doctrine

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap – Best Practices for Productive Rule 26(f) Conferences on Discovery Plans

    Floors Collapse at Russian University in St. Petersburg

    Texas and Georgia Are Paying the Price for Sprawl

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    Circuit Court Lacks Appellate Jurisdiction Over Order Compelling Appraisal

    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

    Can a Non-Signatory Invoke an Arbitration Provision?

    Congratulations 2016 DE, NJ, and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: Known Loss Doctrine & Interpretation of “Occurrence”

    Labor Under the Miller Act And Estoppel of Statute of Limitations

    Happy Thanksgiving from CDJ

    Texas Windstorm Insurance Agency Under Scrutiny

    South Carolina School District Investigated by IRS and FBI

    Atlanta Office Wins Defense Verdict For Property Manager On Claims By Vendor, Cross-Claims By Property Owner

    Not If, But When: Newly Enacted Virginia Legislation Bans “Pay-If-Paid” Clauses In Construction Contracts

    NYC Condo Skyscraper's Builder Wins a Round -- With a Catch

    Alleged Serious Defects at Hanford Nuclear Waste Treatment Plant

    Water Drainage Case Lacks Standing

    Florida Condo Collapse Victims Reach $1 Billion Settlement

    Dispute between City and Construction Company Over Unsightly Arches

    Congress Passes, President Signs Sweeping Energy Measure In Spend Bill

    Texas Couple Claim Many Construction Defects in Home

    Congratulations to BWB&O for Ranking #4 in Orange County Business Journal’s 2023 Book of Lists for Law Firms!

    Caution to GCs! An Exception to Privette Can Leave You Open to Liability

    California Indemnity and Defense Construction Law Changes for 2013

    The Future of Airport Infrastructure in a Post-Pandemic World

    New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Coverage Gap Dispute

    Leftover Equipment and Materials When a Contractor Is Abruptly Terminated

    Homeowners Not Compelled to Arbitration in Construction Defect Lawsuit

    “Other Insurance” and Indemnity Provisions Determine Which Insurer Must Cover

    Delaware Strengthens Jurisdictional Defenses for Foreign Corporations Registered to Do Business in Delaware

    Vacation during a Project? Time for your Construction Documents to Shine!

    Code Changes Pave Way for CLT in Tall Buildings and Spark Flammability Debate

    Policy Reformed to Add New Building Owner as Additional Insured
    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

    Standard Lifetime Shingle Warranties Aren’t Forever

    April 03, 2013 —
    Olympia Construction’s roofing division explained to the web site Thurston Talk how long “lifetime” warranties on shingles really last. Your lifetime? You’re likely to live out the effective period of your lifetime shingle warranty. They note that 100% coverage of the shingle replacement typically lasts only for ten years (and does not cover removal of the existing defective shingles). After that, coverage continues to decline without covering any of the labor. And this can be significant, since they noted that they have seen cases in which a batch of defective shingles means that every home on the block has a defect claim. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Leaning Tower of San Francisco

    January 24, 2018 —
    The Millennium Tower located at 301 Mission Street in San Francisco, California opened in 2009 and is fifty-eight stories high. It is comprised of expensive apartments with price tags in the millions. “Yet for all its curb appeal, the building has, quite literally one fundamental problem: it’s sinking into mud and tilting towards its neighbors” reports John Wetheim of CBS News in the 60 Minutes segment about the condition of the tower “San Francisco’s Leaning Tower of Lawsuits.” In the Tower’s basement along columns that protrude from the foundation of the building there are stress gauges lining the walls illustrating cracks with slow growth which is cause for concern. The tower is tilting a total of 14 inches toward the northwest and has sunk 17 inches so far. Petar Marinkovic, an engineer for the European Space Agency estimates that the tower is sinking 1.5 to 2 inches per year. Jerry Cauthen, a local engineer, weighs in on what he believes is the cause of the sinking and leaning; it was built from concrete instead of steel. “Concrete is often cheaper. And it’s just as good, but it is a lot heavier. And so you got to design your foundation and your sub-surface to support that higher weight.” A local geotechnical engineer, Larry Karp agrees stating that the foundation of a building of this size and weight should be on solid rock (bedrock). The Millennium Tower is sitting on layers debris from the 1906 earthquake, a gold rush landfill, as well as clay, mud, and sand. There over 20 parties involved in the Millennium Tower lawsuits so far. Solutions to “fix” the tower’s issues range from removing 20 stories from the top of the building to perpetually freezing the ground beneath the building. There are also ongoing mediation talks to determine the feasibility of drilling down to bedrock under a building where a thousand residents are still upstairs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Crypto and NFTs Could Help People Become Real Estate Tycoons

    June 21, 2021 —
    By using online cryptocurrency technologies like tokens and blockchains, people could participate in real estate transactions that are too unwieldy in the analog world. Soon, these technologies may let anyone with a few thousand dollars play tycoon and buy a part of a condo or iconic building. NFTs, or non-fungible tokens—digital certificates that convey exclusive rights to something—is a new concept being applied to real estate, supporters say they will become standard in the industry. “The NFT operates in many respects exactly like a deed would in real estate transactions,” said Josh Morton, a Real Estate special counsel at Pillsbury. “What a deed ordinarily does is give evidence of ownership to a piece of property.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Josh D. Morton, Pillsbury
    Mr. Morton may be contacted at josh.morton@pillsburylaw.com

    Punchlist: The News We Didn’t Quite Get To – May 2016

    May 12, 2016 —
    If you’re a solar contractor make sure you don’t get burned. The California Contractors State License Board (“CSLB”) is taking a closer look at solar contractors as the industry grows in the Golden State. Only contractors holding a Class “A” Engineering, Class “B” General Contractor, or Class C-46 Solar license can perform solar construction and installation. The CSLB has clarified that C-39 Roofing contractors can install installation as part of an overall roofing job. The CSLB considers such insulation work as “incidental and supplemental” under Section 831 of the California Code of Regulations and does not require a separate C-2 Insulation and Acoustical contractor license. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    California Expands on Scope of Coverage for Soft Cost Claims

    February 14, 2023 —
    The California federal district court case of KB Home v. Illinois Union Insurance Co., No. 8:20-cv-00278-JLS-JDE, (C.D. Cal. August 23, 2022), provides much needed guidance for cases involving builder's risk insurance claims for soft cost coverage. The case stems from damage to several of KB Home’s residential building sites caused by a severe rainstorm in January 2017. Each home site was a smaller part of a large housing development project. The damage caused significant delay in the completion of some individual home sites, although there was limited evidence of delay to the overall housing development project. As a result, KB Home sought coverage under a builder’s risk policy purchased from Illinois Union for both hard costs and soft costs. “Hard costs” are the costs directly associated with repairing property damage to the sites. Conversely, “soft costs” are indirect expenses associated with project delays caused by such property damage and repair efforts. For example, hard costs would include labor and materials, whereas the soft costs claimed by KB Home included additional real estate taxes, construction loan interest, and advertising and promotional expenses incurred because of the delays. Illinois Union paid the claim for the hard costs, but denied the soft costs claim. KB Home filed suit and Illinois Union eventually filed a motion for summary judgment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Caitlin N. Rabiyan, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Rabiyan may be contacted at CRabiyan@sdvlaw.com

    Pinnacle Controls in Verano

    February 21, 2013 —
    The California Court of Appeals has applied the California Supreme Court’s recent Pinnacle decision to a new case, Verano Condominium Association v. La Cima Development. As in Pinnacle, La Cima sought to compel arbitration of construction defect claims with a homeowners association. The trial court denied La Cima’s attempt to compel arbitration on the grounds that the arbitration agreement was made with the individual homeowners and not the homeowners association. Further, it was determined that the CC&Rs “were unenforceable due to unconscionability.” La Cima appealed, and the appeals court affirmed in part and reversed in part. After Pinnacle, La Cima sought a review. The Supreme Court of California directed the appeals court to vacate their earlier decision and reconsider, based on Pinnacle. The Fourth Circuit Court has concluded that this conflicted with the ruling in Pinnacle. There, as in Verano, homeowners signed agreements that disputes with the developer would be settled through binding arbitration. The appeals court had found for the community association, but on review, the California Supreme Court reversed this decision. The California Court of Appeals had two issue to consider in this review: whether the arbitration provisions applied to the homeowners association, and whether these provisions were unconscionable. The court concluded that “in light of Pinnacle it is clear the arbitration provisions set forth in the Verano CC&Rs constitute a valid agreement to arbitrate.” On the second question, the Verano CC&Rs were described by the court as “materially indistinguishable” from those in the earlier case. As the state Supreme Court found that those were not unconscionable, clearly neither were these. The case was remanded for further proceedings and La Cima is entitled to recover the costs of the appeal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Specific Performance: Equitable Remedy to Enforce Affirmative Obligation

    January 18, 2021 —
    When a party breaches an agreement, particularly when dealing with real estate, there is an equitable remedy known as specific performance that requests the trial judge issue an order to affirmatively force the breaching party to perform, i.e., close on the real estate contract. You are asking the court to require the other party to specifically perform an affirmative obligation. See Melbourne Ocean Club Condominium Ass’n, Inc. v. Elledge, 71 So.3d 144, 146 (Fla. 2011).
    A decree of specific performance is an equitable remedy ‘not granted as a matter of right or grace but as a matter of sound judicial discretion’ governed by legal and equitable principles. Specific performance shall only be granted when 1) the plaintiff is clearly entitled to it, 2) there is no adequate remedy at law, and 3) the judge believes that justice requires it. Castigliano v. O’Connor, 911 So.2d 145, 148 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (internal citations omitted).
    An example of specific performance may play out, as mentioned, in a real estate contract where a seller refuses to close on the transaction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    A Changing Climate for State Policy-Making Regarding Climate Change

    February 18, 2020 —
    Issued by 13 federal agencies, the 2018 Fourth National Climate Assessment presented a stark warning on the consequences of climate change for the United States. The report predicts that if significant steps are not taken to rein in global warming, the damage will reduce the U.S. economy by as much as 10 percent by the end of the century. The report, which was mandated by Congress and made public by the White House, is notable not only for the precision of its calculations and bluntness of its conclusions—the 1,656-page assessment lays out the devastating effects of a changing climate on the economy—but also in how it conflicts with President Donald Trump’s environmental deregulation plan. U.S. policy efforts at the state and local levels are ramping up to address this complex topic. These include: Targeting Net-Zero Emissions. Hailed as the most aggressive climate law in the nation, New York State’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act are targeting 100 percent carbon-free electricity by 2040 and economy-wide, net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. California set a statewide target to reach carbon neutrality by 2045. Reducing and Renewing. New Mexico established a statewide goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 45 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. Nevada passed a bill to increase the amount of electricity it gets from renewable resources to 50 percent by 2030. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sheila McCafferty Harvey, Pillsbury
    Ms. Harvey may be contacted at sheila.harvey@pillsburylaw.com