BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction 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


    A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules

    Colorado’s Workers’ Compensation Act and the Construction Industry

    Indemnification Against Release/“Disposal” of Hazardous Materials

    Hunton Insurance Partner Syed Ahmad Serves as Chair of the ABA Minority Trial Lawyer Committee’s Programming Subcommittee

    CSLB “Fast Facts” for Online Home Improvement Marketplaces

    Navigating Threshold Arbitration Issues in Construction Contracts

    Eleventh Circuit Finds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Claims

    Mobile Home Owners Not a Class in Drainage Lawsuit

    NYC Airports Get $500,000 Makeover Contest From Cuomo

    Predicting Our Future with Andrew Weinreich

    California Court of Appeal Finds Alleged Inadequate Defense by Insurer-Appointed Defense Counsel Does Not Trigger a Right to Independent Counsel

    California Indemnity and Defense Construction Law Changes for 2013

    The Brooklyn Condominium That’s Reinventing Outdoor Common Space

    2022 Construction Outlook: Continuing Growth But at Slower Pace

    Eleven Payne & Fears Attorneys Honored by Best Lawyers

    Ohio Court of Appeals Affirms Judgment in Landis v. Fannin Builders

    Fact of Settlement Communications in Underlying Lawsuits is Not Ground for Anti-SLAPP Motion in Subsequent Bad Faith Lawsuit

    Construction Slow to Begin in Superstorm Sandy Cases

    A Look Back at the Ollies

    Some Construction Contract Basics- Necessities and Pitfalls

    Jury Could Have Found That Scissor Lift Manufacturer Should Have Included “Better” Safety Features

    Alabama Supreme Court Reverses Determination of Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    Allegations of Actual Property Damage Necessary to Invoke Duty to Defend

    ASCE Statement on Congress Passage of National Debt Limit Suspension

    Privity Problems Continue for Additional Insureds in the Second Circuit

    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

    When Can a General Contractor’s Knowledge be Imputed to a Developer?

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    Damages in First Trial Establishing Liability of Tortfeasor Binding in Bad Faith Trial Against Insurer

    Hurricane Milton Barrels Toward Florida With 180 MPH Winds

    Homebuilding Continues to Recover in San Antonio Area

    Reservation of Rights Letter Merely Citing Policy Provisions Inadequate

    What is a Personal Injury?

    Contractors and Owners Will Have an Easier Time Identifying Regulated Wetlands Following Recent U.S. Supreme Court Opinion

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    Protect Projects From Higher Repair Costs and Property Damage

    Last, but NOT Least: Why You Should Take a Closer Look at Your Next Indemnification Clause

    Motion to Strike Insurer's Expert Opinion Granted

    Haight Brown & Bonesteel Attorneys Named Super Lawyers in 2016

    Houston’s High Housing Demand due to Employment Growth

    The Sounds of Silence: Pennsylvania’s Sutton Rule

    Canada Housing Surprises Again With July Starts Increase

    Sales of New U.S. Homes Surged in August to Six-Year High

    9th Circuit Closes the Door on “Open Shop” Contractor

    Colorado HB 13-1090: Concerning Payment of Amounts Due Under a Construction Agreement

    Home-Sales Fall in 2014 Has U.S. Waiting for 2015: Economy

    Lorelie S. Masters Nominated for Best in Insurance & Reinsurance for the Women in Business Law Awards 2021

    Economic Waste Doctrine and Construction Defects / Nonconforming Work

    The Road to Rio 2016: Zika, Super Bacteria, and Construction Delays. Sounds Like Everything is Going as Planned

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap - Guided Choice Mediation
    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

    Hawaiian Electric Finalizes $2 Billion Maui Fire Settlement

    November 18, 2024 —
    Hawaiian Electric Industries formalized a $2 billion agreement to settle damage claims from a wildfire that razed the historic town of Lahaina and killed more than 100 people. The utility-owner had reached a tentative agreement in August in which it, along with other defendants including the state of Hawaii, Maui County and landowners, would pay $4 billion to resolve hundreds of lawsuits stemming from last year’s wildfire, according to a filing Tuesday. The settlements don’t resolve claims with insurers that are part of separate lawsuits. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mark Chediak, Bloomberg

    Did You Really Accept That Bid? – How Contractors Can Avoid Post-Acceptance Bid Disputes Over Contract Terms

    July 28, 2016 —
    When California general contractors submit bids to an owner, can they force their subcontractors to honor their bids? Can they recover damages if the subcontractor later refuses to do so? While the general rule in California is that a general contractor who reasonably relies on a subcontractor’s bid may recover damages when the subcontractor reneges, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District recently held that there is a substantial and important exception to the general rule. In Flintco Pacific, Inc. v. TEC Management Consultants, Inc. (LASC No. YC067984), the Court of Appeal held that where a general contractor requires a subcontractor to enter into a “standard-form subcontract” which materially differs from the subcontractor’s bid, the general contractor has rejected the subcontractor’s bid and has instead issued a counteroffer. The subcontractor is thereafter free to walk, or accept the new terms. If the subcontractor walks, the general contractor may not seek to enforce the terms of the subcontract or seek reliance damages. Reprinted courtesy of David A. Harris, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Steven M. Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Harris may be contacted at dharris@hbblaw.com Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    How New York City Plans to Soak Up the Rain

    May 02, 2022 —
    When the remnants of Hurricane Ida pummeled New York City with more than 3 inches of rain in just one hour, the city struggled to soak it up. Instead, streets and subways flooded as storm drains were overwhelmed, basement apartments were inundated, and more than a dozen people died. That September 2021 storm and the ones before it, including a cloudburst downpour during Tropical Storm Elsa in July, have forced New York to take a hard look at becoming a “spongier” city — one that combines nature-based green infrastructure like street-side rain gardens with gray infrastructure like storm drains to divert or absorb water and prevent catastrophic flooding. “New York City is preparing for both chronic storm events — these cloudburst events that we see occurring more and more frequently — as well as extreme storm events like Ida,” says Jennifer Cherrier, a professor of earth and environmental sciences at Brooklyn College. On top of that, the city also faces mounting risks from storm surges, like during Hurricane Sandy in 2012. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Linda Poon, Bloomberg

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives First Tier Ranking

    January 28, 2015 —
    We try to limit our narcissism here at Wendel Rosen but every once in a while we toot our own horn. Lawyers are, after all, a rather sad, competitive, yet insecure bunch (i.e., we eat this stuff up). We’re proud to announce that Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group has received a first tier ranking in U.S. News & World Reports’ Best Law Firms for 2015. This is the second year the Construction Practice Group has received a first tier ranking. Yay us! 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

    Client Alert: Court of Appeal Applies Common Interest Privilege Doctrine to HOA Litigation Meetings

    March 19, 2014 —
    In Seahaus La Jolla Owners Assoc. v. Superior Court (No. D064567, March 12, 2014), the California Court of Appeal held a homeowners association’s (“HOA”) litigation meetings related to the HOA’s construction defect lawsuit were subject to protection under the attorney-client privilege. Specifically, the court concluded the common interest doctrine applied to the subject litigation meetings, thereby barring the defendants in the HOA’s lawsuit from seeking discovery related to the content and disclosures made during those meetings. The plaintiff HOA initiated a construction defect lawsuit against a residential developer and builder, seeking damages for construction defects related to common areas. The defendants took the depositions of individual homeowners and inquired regarding the communications and disclosures made at informational litigation update meetings. The meetings were conducted by the HOA’s counsel with groups of homeowners, some of whom had filed their own, separate lawsuits against the same defendants. Motions to compel were filed after attorney-client privilege objections were asserted by counsel for the HOA. After the court-appointed discovery referee opined that the common interest doctrine applied and that the communications presented at the meetings were subject to the attorney-client privilege, the trial court rejected this recommendation and overruled the HOA’s privilege objections. The HOA filed a petition for a writ of mandate. The defendants argued the privilege had been waived based on the presence of persons who were not the clients of the HOA’s attorney, that the subject communications were not “confidential communications” and that the individual homeowners and the HOA did not share common interests at the time. After setting forth a comprehensive discussion of the statutory principles underlying the attorney-client privilege and the bases for waiver, as provided in California Evidence Code §§ 912 and 952, and summarizing applicable decisional law, the court specifically analyzed the question of whether the common interest doctrine applied in the context of the disputed HOA litigation meetings. The common interest doctrine protects confidential communications made by counsel to third parties if the third parties are present to further the interest of the client or are those to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for the transmission of the information or the accomplishment of the purpose for which the lawyer was consulted. Reprinted courtesy of David W. Evans, Steven M. Cvitanovic, and Michael C. Parme of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Evans may be contacted at devans@hbblaw.com, Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com, and Mr. Parme may be contacted at mparme@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Requirement to Post Collateral Under General Agreement of Indemnity Is Real

    May 16, 2022 —
    In prior postings, I have discussed the all-powerful General Agreement of Indemnity (click here and here). This is the document a bond-principal executes to obtain bonds (e.g., performance and payment bonds). Not only does the bond-principal execute this General Agreement of Indemnity, but typically, so do other indemnitors such as the company’s principals and their spouses, other related companies, etc. The objective is that the surety has financial comfort that if a claim is made against the bond, there are avenues where it will get reimbursed and indemnified for any cost it incurs, or payment it makes, relative to that claim against the bond. When a surety issues bonds, the objective is that all losses it incurs gets reimbursed because the bonds are NOT insurance policies. One of the powerful tools the surety can exercise in the General Agreement of Indemnity is to demand the bond-principal and other indemnitors to post collateral in an amount the surety deems sufficient to cover any losses it may incur. This is a right in any General Agreement of Indemnity I have seen and is a right the surety can rightfully exercise. A recent example is shown from the opinion in Philadelphia Indemnity Ins. Co. v. Quinco Electrical, Inc., 2022 WL 1230110 (M.D.Fla. 2022), which pertains to the surety’s motion for preliminary injunction. 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

    Amazon Can be Liable in Louisiana

    August 05, 2024 —
    In June 2024, the Supreme Court of Louisiana held that: (1) Amazon can be considered a “seller” of defective products sold by third parties on its website; and (2) Amazon can be liable under a theory of negligent undertaking for third-party products. In Pickard v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 2023-CQ-01596, 2024 La. LEXIS 1112, a Louisiana man, Archie Pickard, died from burns sustained in a house fire allegedly caused by a defective battery charger purchased on Amazon from a third-party seller located in China. Mr. Pickard’s family filed a lawsuit against Amazon in the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana alleging claims under the Louisiana Products Liability Act (LPLA) and for negligent undertaking. Amazon filed a motion for summary judgment, which prompted the federal court to certify questions to the Supreme Court of Louisiana regarding these two claims. Amazon Can be a “Seller” Under the Louisiana Products Liability Act Amazon does not neatly fit within the definition of “seller” under the LPLA because the LPLA was drafted in 1988, before the internet existed. The LPLA defines a “seller” as a person or entity (who is not the manufacturer) who conveys title or possession of the product to another for something of value. La R.S. 9.2800.53(s) (emphasis added). The Supreme Court of Louisiana determined that Amazon was a “seller” because it conveyed “possession” of the charger to Mr. Pickard through the “Fulfillment by Amazon” (FBA) program, which provides storage, delivery, customer service, and returns of third-party products sold on Amazon. Most products on Amazon are sold by third parties, rather than Amazon. Many third-party sellers are small or medium-size companies, and some are individuals seeking to make supplemental income. Amazon offers the FBA program to handle storage and logistics to third-party sellers. When a product is sold through the FBA program, the seller sends the product to Amazon’s warehouses, where it is stored until it is purchased. When an FBA-product is purchased, Amazon collects payment, delivers the product (often in an Amazon van), and handles the potential return of the product. The Supreme Court of Louisiana determined that Amazon was a “seller” of the battery charger even though Amazon did not pass title to Mr. Pickard because: (1) Amazon had physical custody of the charger while stored in the warehouse; and (2) Amazon controlled the transaction and logistics through its FBA program. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael J. Ciamaichelo, White and Williams
    Mr. Ciamaichelo may be contacted at ciamaichelom@whiteandwilliams.com

    How the Jury Divided $112M in Seattle Crane Collapse Damages

    April 04, 2022 —
    The jury verdict in a wrongful death lawsuit against companies involved in a 2019 Seattle crane collapse that killed four people split damages among three different companies—and also blamed a fourth firm that wasn't a defendant—but not in a way that matched the state safety fines proposed against the firms. Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of