BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing 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


    Lenders and Post-Foreclosure Purchasers Have Standing to Make Construction Defect Claims for After-Discovered Conditions

    2017 Legislative Changes Affecting the Construction Industry

    Balancing Risk and Reward: The Complexities of Stadium Construction Projects

    Trump Administration Issues Proposed 'Waters of the U.S.' Rule

    Patagonia Will Start Paying for Homeowners' Solar Panels

    Beam Fracture on Closed Mississippi River Bridge Is at Least Two Years Old

    You Need to be a Contractor for Workers’ Compensation Immunity to Apply

    How to Build Climate Change-Resilient Infrastructure

    City Council Authorizes Settlement of Basement Flooding Cases

    Circumstances In Which Design Professional Has Construction Lien Rights

    Avoid Drowning in Data: Keep Afloat with ESI in Construction Litigation

    The Future Has Arrived: New Technologies in Construction

    Standard Lifetime Shingle Warranties Aren’t Forever

    Economic Damages and the Right to Repair Act: You Can’t Have it Both Ways

    Arkansas Federal Court Fans the Product Liability Flames Utilizing the Malfunction Theory

    Red Wings Owner, Needing Hockey-Arena Neighborhood, Builds One

    The 2023 Term of the Supreme Court: Administrative and Regulatory Law Rulings

    World Green Building Council Calls for Net-Zero Embodied Carbon in Buildings by 2050

    Julie Firestone & Francois Ecclesiaste Recognized as 2023 MSBA North Star Lawyers

    Kentucky Court Upholds Arbitration Award, Denies Appeal

    Giant Floating Solar Flowers Offer Hope for Coal-Addicted Korea

    Texas exclusions j(5) and j(6).

    Small to Midsize Builders Making Profit on Overlooked Lots

    Court Addresses When Duty to Defend Ends

    FEMA Offers Recovery Tips for California Wildfire Survivors

    Governmental Immunity Waived for Independent Contractor - Lopez v. City of Grand Junction

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Partner John Van Vlear Named to Board Of Groundwater Resources Association Of California

    U.S. Architecture Firms’ Billing Index Faster in Dec.

    Firm Seeks to Squash Subpoena in Coverage CD Case

    U.S. Construction Spending Rose in 2017 by Least in Six Years

    Designing the Process to Deliver Zero-Carbon Construction – Computational Design in Practice

    Circuit Court Lacks Appellate Jurisdiction Over Order Compelling Appraisal

    Counter the Rising Number of Occupational Fatalities in Construction

    Note on First-Party and Third-Party Spoliation of Evidence Claims

    SIG Earnings Advance 21% as U.K. Construction Strengthens

    Evergrande’s Condemned Towers on China’s Hawaii Show Threat

    Brown Act Modifications in Response to Coronavirus Outbreak

    The Colorado Construction Defect Reform Act Explained

    Pennsylvania Considers Changes to Construction Code Review

    Update Regarding McMillin Albany LLC v. Super Ct.

    Consult with Counsel when Preparing Construction Liens

    Attorney-Client Privilege in the Age of Cyber Breaches

    Federal Court Opinion Has Huge Impact on the Construction Industry

    Dangerous Condition, Dangerous Precedent: California Supreme Court Expands Scope of Dangerous Condition Liability Involving Third Party Negligent/Criminal Conduct

    Philadelphia Enacts Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (C-PACE) Program

    Insurer Awarded Summary Judgment on Collapse Claim

    Overview of New Mexico Construction Law

    Spa High-Rise Residents Frustrated by Construction Defects

    How a 10-Story Wood Building Survived More Than 100 Earthquakes

    Agile Project Management in the Construction Industry
    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

    Insurer's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings for Construction Defect Claim Rejected

    January 22, 2024 —
    The magistrate judge recommended that the insurer's motion for judgment on the pleadings be denied in a case involving coverage for the insured subcontractor's alleged faulty workmanship. Evanston Ins. Co. v. Sonny Glasbrenner, Inc., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190019 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 20, 2023). Cone & Graham (C&G), the general contractor, subcontracted with Sonny Glasbrenner, Inc. (SGI) to work on the project. The project involved the rehabilitation of a bridge due to deterioration of the existing concrete bridge deck by adding additional cross bracing to further stiffen the steel girders and using special lightweight concrete. C&G contracted SGH to demolish the existing concrete bridge deck. SGI completed the work. Thereafter, C&G made a demand to SGI for alleged damaged caused by SGI's work. C&G alleged that SGI was negligent in performing the demolition work, causing substantial damage to the existing bridge girders. C&G sued SGI. 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

    Appraiser Declarations Inadmissible When Offered to Challenge the Merits of an Appraisal Award

    March 14, 2018 —
    In Khorsand v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co. (No. B280273, filed 2/27/18), a California appeals court affirmed an appraisal award favorable to a homeowners insurer, ruling that it was improper to admit as evidence in opposition to a petition to confirm the award a declaration from the policyholders’ appraiser, except for the limited purpose of showing improprieties in the appraisal, bias, partiality or other improper conduct. The homeowners had a pipe leak and submitted a claim. The insurer responded to an estimate from the owners’ adjuster by retaining an expert and paying an undisputed amount that was significantly less. Eleven months later the owners had upper deck damage and submitted another claim. Relying on the same expert, the insurer paid another undisputed amount significantly less than the owner’s estimate. The owners requested appraisal but the insurer denied the request, contending that the dispute was over coverage and outside the scope of appraisal. The owners’ petition for appraisal was granted, with the court ordering separate listing of items the insurer disputed regarding coverage or causation. The appraisal panel issued an award stating that total damage was $132,293, of which $96,530 was contested by the insurer. The insurer filed a petition to confirm the award, which was granted despite the fact that the owners’ appraiser had refused to sign it. Reprinted courtesy of Valerie Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    EEOC Builds on Best Practice Guidance Regarding Harassment Within the Construction Industry

    August 12, 2024 —
    In June 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued guidance tailored to the construction industry concerning harassment in the workplace or at the jobsite. The guidance is important for construction industry leaders and employers to understand how to prevent and remedy harassment in the workplace — more than a third of all EEOC discrimination charges filed between 2019 and 2023 asserted harassment. The guidance represents the EEOC’s latest effort in executing its Strategic Enforcement Plan for Fiscal Years 2024 to 2028, which, in part, focuses on combatting systemic harassment and eliminating barriers in recruitment and hiring, particularly for underrepresented groups in certain industries, including women in construction, through the EEOC’s enforcement efforts. In this article, we highlight key principles and practices from this guidance Leadership and Accountability The guidance reiterates that consistent and demonstrated leadership is critical to creating and maintaining a workplace culture where harassment is unacceptable and strictly prohibited. Worksite leaders, including project owners, crew supervisors, and union stewards, are each expected to regularly communicate that harassment is intolerable through several suggested efforts. Reprinted courtesy of Abby M. Warren, Robinson+Cole and Christohper A. Costain, Robinson+Cole Ms. Warren may be contacted at awarren@rc.com Mr. Costain may be contacted at ccostain@rc.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Social Distancing and the Impact on Service of Process Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic

    April 13, 2020 —
    Service of process usually requires person-to-person contact and is an essential part of civil procedure. It notifies the defendant of the legal proceedings against him/her and establishes jurisdiction. “Process” refers to the documents that must be served on a defendant. If service of process is not performed pursuant to the governing rules of civil procedure, a lawsuit cannot proceed. Service of Process in NJ and PA Personal service is required to be the first attempted means of service in New Jersey. If personal service is not successful, then service may be made by mailing a copy of the process via registered or certified mail with return receipt requested to the defendant’s usual place of abode or business/place of employment, or to an authorized agent. The party attempting to serve the defendant by mail can choose to mail the process by regular mail as well, and if the defendant refuses to accept or claim the registered or certified copy, and the regular mail copy is not returned, then service is considered effectuated. Pennsylvania allows for a defendant to be served via personal service by handing a copy to the defendant or by delivering a copy to an adult family household member at the defendant’s residence. Pennsylvania also permits service of process by mail. Process can be served by mail requiring a signature of the defendant. If the mail is unclaimed, alternative service must be attempted. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams attorneys Robert Devine, James Burger and Susan Zingone Mr. Devine may be contacted at deviner@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Burger may be contacted at burgerj@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Zingone may be contacted at zingones@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Louis "Dutch" Schotemeyer Returns to Newmeyer Dillion as Partner in Newport Beach Office

    September 14, 2020 —
    Prominent business and real estate law firm Newmeyer Dillion is pleased to announce that Louis “Dutch” Schotemeyer has rejoined the firm as a partner in the Newport Beach office. Schotemeyer will expand the firm’s Real Estate Litigation, Construction Litigation, Business Litigation and Labor & Employment practices and strengthen the firm’s legal offerings for companies operating without a dedicated in-house legal counsel. “We are thrilled to be welcoming Dutch back to Newmeyer Dillion. He brings a wealth of litigation experience and has served as a trusted advisor to companies facing myriad complex legal disputes,” said the firm’s Managing Partner, Paul Tetzloff. “His experience as in-house counsel will greatly complement Newmeyer Dillion’s business-first mindset when it comes to providing legal counsel to our clients. He is an invaluable asset to the team.” Prior to rejoining Newmeyer Dillion, Schotemeyer was Vice President and Associate General Counsel for William Lyon Homes, Inc. and Vice President and Deputy General Counsel for Taylor Morrison. His experience as a corporate attorney has strengthened his ability to work with in-house counsel and serve as a relationship attorney that assists clients in managing legal needs by building the right team of legal specialists. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Louis "Dutch" Schotemeyer, Newmeyer Dillion
    Mr. Schotemeyer may be contacted at dutch.schotemeyer@ndlf.com

    State Farm Unsuccessful In Seeking Dismissal of Qui Tam Case

    January 26, 2017 —
    In an insurance related case, the United States Supreme Court affirmed the Fifth Circuit's decision that State Farm was not entitled to a dismissal of a qui tam case involving its claims-handling after Hurricane Katrina. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. United States ex rel. Rigsby, ___ U.S. ___, 137 S. Ct. 436 (2016). Before Katrina, State Farm issued two types of policies to homeowners: (1) Federal Government-back flood policies and (2) its own general homeowner policies. After Hurricane Katrina, State Farm's policies were responsible for wind damage, and the government policies were responsible for flood damage. Therefore, it was in State Farm's interest to classify hurricane damage as flood-related. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Contractual Fee-Shifting in Litigation: Who Pays the Price?

    December 31, 2024 —
    When disputes on a construction project escalate to litigation, general contractors may find themselves entangled in a costly and time-consuming legal battle. One important concept to understand is contractual fee-shifting under a “prevailing party” provision, which can significantly impact damages recovered in litigation. The general rule, known as the “American Rule,” requires each party to pay its own legal costs, including attorney’s fees, expert witness expenses, and other court-related costs. This differs from other legal systems where the losing party typically pays the winning party’s fees. One exception to the American Rule is contractual fee-shifting, specifically through “prevailing party” provisions, which allows for the award of attorney’s fees and costs when explicitly provided for in a contract. This article explores this exception to the American Rule, delves into the challenges posed by prevailing party provisions, and shares tips to consider for drafting these clauses to improve clarity and minimize uncertainty in the face of litigation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Caitlin Kicklighter, Jones Walker LLP
    Ms. Kicklighter may be contacted at ckicklighter@joneswalker.com

    Collapse of Improperly Built Deck Not An Occurrence

    August 17, 2017 —
    The court found that the insured's faulty construction of an outside deck did not arise from an occurrence. Employers Mut. Cas. Co. v. West, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113951 (N.D. Miss. July 21, 2017). D.L. Action Construction Company (DLA) constructed multifamily dwellings. They were sued by the homeowners after a deck collapsed at one of the dwellings. Also sued was the subcontractor, Littrell Construction, who installed the deck. The homeowners alleged that Littrell knew that college students would be residing in the units and that the decks would be heavily used. The decks were attached to the building structure using only nails instead of bolts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com