BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture 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


    District Court denies Carpenters Union Motion to Dismiss RICO case- What it Means

    Where-Forum Art Thou? Is the Chosen Forum Akin to No Forum at All?

    Wall Street’s Palm Beach Foray Fuels Developer Office Rush

    Two New Developments in Sanatoga, Pennsylvania

    Roadway Contractor Owed Duty of Care to Driver Injured Outside of Construction Zone

    Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- A Wrap Up

    How California’s Construction Industry has dealt with the New Indemnity Law

    AB 1701 – General Contractor Liability for Subcontractors’ Unpaid Wages

    CC&Rs Not the Place for Arbitration Agreement, Court Rules

    California Trial Court Clarifies Application of SB800 Roofing Standards and Expert’s Opinions

    Judge Who Oversees Mass. Asbestos Docket Takes New Role As Chief Justice of Superior Court

    Navigating the Construction Burrito: OCIP Policies in California’s Construction Defect Cases

    U.S. Department of Justice Settles against Days Inn

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2023 Illinois Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    DC Circuit Approves, with Some Misgivings, FERC’s Approval of the Atlantic Sunrise Natural Gas Pipeline Extension

    Brenner Base Tunnelers Conquer Peaks and Valleys in the Alps

    Persimmon Offers to Fix Risky Homes as Cladding Crisis Grows

    Settlement Conference May Not Be the End in Construction Defect Case

    Bid Bonds: The First Preventative Measure for Your Project

    Allegations Versus “True Facts”: Which Govern the Duty to Defend? Bonus! A Georgia Court Clears Up What the Meaning of “Is” Is

    Gardeners in the City of the Future: An Interview with Eric Baczuk

    Hunton’s Alice Weeks Selected to the Miami Dade Bar’s Circle of Excellence for Insurance Litigation

    Chinese Billionaire Sues Local Governments Over Project Payment

    The Architecture of Tomorrow Mimics Nature to Cool the Planet

    Experts Weigh In on Bilingual Best Practices for Jobsites

    KONE is Shaking Up the Industry with BIM

    Houston Office Secures Favorable Verdict in Trespass and Nuisance Case Involving Subcontractor’s Accidental Installation of Storm Sewer Pipe on Plaintiff’s Property

    White Collar Overtime Regulations Temporarily Blocked

    Attorney-Client Privilege in the Age of Cyber Breaches

    New Tariffs Could Shorten Construction Expansion Cycle

    Savera Sandhu Joins Newmeyer Dillion As Partner

    Risk-Shifting Tactics for Construction Contracts

    Colorado Mayors Should Not Sacrifice Homeowners to Lure Condo Developers

    Bond Principal Necessary on a Mechanic’s Lien Claim

    Eleven Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2023 U.S. News Best Lawyers in Multiple Practice Areas

    Florida trigger

    New York Appellate Court Expands Policyholders’ Ability to Plead and Seek Consequential Damages

    Repairs Commencing on Defect-Ridden House from Failed State Supreme Court Case

    Court of Appeals Confirms that King County Superior Court’s Jury Selection Process Satisfies Due Process Requirements

    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    The Expansion of Potential Liability of Construction Managers and Consultants

    Mass. Gas Leak Follows NTSB Final Report, Call for Reforms

    Does a Contractor (or Subcontractor) Have to Complete its Work to File a Mechanics Lien

    Environmental Justice Update: The Justice40 Initiative

    Las Vegas Student Housing Developer Will Name Replacement Contractor

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

    Actual Cost Value Includes Depreciation of Repair Labor Costs

    Changes to Judicial Selection in Mexico Create a New Case for Contractual ADR Provisions

    White House’s New Draft Guidance Limiting NEPA Review of Greenhouse Gas Impacts Is Not So New or Limiting

    New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ Bill
    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

    JPMorgan Blamed for ‘Zombie’ Properties in Miami Lawsuit

    June 18, 2014 —
    JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) engaged in a “pattern of discriminatory” lending that led to foreclosures, the city of Miami said in a lawsuit filed last week in federal court, the latest in a series of similar claims against the nation’s largest banks. Last month, Banco Santander SA’s (SAN) U.S. unit was sued by the city of Providence, Rhode Island, over claims it stopped issuing mortgages in minority neighborhoods after the housing bubble burst. Santander Bank, previously named Sovereign Bank, pulled out of the neighborhoods and focused on white communities after being acquired by the Madrid-based lender in 2009, the city alleged. Miami and Los Angeles are among cities to have filed similar lawsuits against Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc. (C) and Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC) for allegedly “red-lining” black and Hispanic areas as no-loan zones, and then “reverse red-lining,” flooding the areas with predatory mortgages even when minorities qualified for better terms. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christie Smythe, Bloomberg
    Ms. Smythe may be contacted at csmythe1@bloomberg.net

    Taylor Morrison v. Terracon and the Homeowner Protection Act of 2007

    June 11, 2014 —
    On January 30, 2014, the Colorado Court of Appeals decided the case of Taylor Morrison of Colorado, Inc. v. Bemas Construction, Inc. and Terracon Consultants, Inc. 2014WL323490. The case addressed a substantial issue of Colorado constitutional law, as well as a variety of procedural issues of potential importance to construction litigation attorneys. Of particular interest is the question of whether the provisions of the 2007 Homeowner Protection Act (“HPA”) are limited in application to contracts between residential homeowners and construction professionals, or whether they have broader application between commercial construction professional parties as well. As discussed below, the Court of Appeals stated that it would not answer the question, and then, separately, implied that the statute might only apply to homeowner transactions – with the resulting exclusion of commercial transactions. However, after its analysis, it left the actual decision of that issue to a future court in a later case. The factual background for the case involved claims of breach of a contract for soils engineering by Terracon Consultants, Inc. (“Terracon”) and negligent excavation work by Bemas Construction, Inc. (“Bemas”). Plaintiff was Taylor Morrison of Colorado (“Taylor Morrison”), the developer and general contractor for a residential subdivision called Homestead Hills. After it constructed many homes, Taylor Morrison began to receive complaints of cracking drywall resulting from foundation movement and it made repairs at significant expense. Taylor Morrison then filed suit against Terracon and Bemas in connection with their respective roles in the original construction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Buck Mann, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Mann may be contacted at mann@hhmrlaw.com

    A New Perspective on Mapping Construction Sites with the Crane Camera System

    November 10, 2016 —
    In this interview, Julian Norton, Business Development Manager of Pix4D, talks about the company’s innovative mapping system for construction sites. Pix4D has just launched an early adopter program and is looking for test users. Can you say a few words about your company’s background and mission? Pix4D was founded in 2011 as a spinoff of EPFL, a leading Swiss tech university. The years of leading scientific research in photogrammetry and computer vision done by our founders was applied to drones long before drone mapping became a “thing.” Fast forward through more years of hard work to now, and you’ll see Pix4D specialized in professional drone mapping software to produce orthomosaics, 3D models, digital surface models, point clouds and more, all from images. Our solutions are purposed towards four main industries: surveying, agriculture, real estate and construction. We want our professional clients to benefit from our unique hybrid approach, which combines mobile data capture with cloud and desktop hardware, to conduct mapping in a way that fits them best. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aarni@aepartners.fi

    Consider the Risks Associated with an Exculpatory Clause

    November 24, 2019 —
    An exculpatory clause in a contract is a clause aimed at relieving another party from certain liability. A disclaimer and insulation from liability. Obviously, if you are the party relieving the other party from liability, you want to consider this risk including the potential enforceability of this risk if something goes wrong. If you are the party asking for the insulation from liability, you do not want to create an exculpatory provision that disclaims and insulates you of all liability arising from the contract as it may create an illusory effect – that the agreement is nothing but a naked promise on your end because your promise is fully disclaimed and you are insulated from liability if you break your promise. This could result in an unenforceable contract. The validity of such an exculpatory clause was at-issue in Pier 1 Cruise Experts v. Revelex Corp., 2019 WL 3024618 (11thCir. 2019). Although not a construction dispute, the exculpatory clause in this case was with two fairly sophisticated parties and expressly insulated one of the contracting parties from “any…damages regardless of kind or type…whether in contract, tort (including negligence), or otherwise.” Pier 1 Cruise Experts, 2019 WL at *7. This is a powerful exculpatory clause because it could be broadly construed to insulate that party from its own breaches of the contract. In Florida:
    [A]n exculpatory clause is enforceable so long as (1) the contracting parties have equal bargaining power and (2) the clause’s provisions are clear and unambiguous. With respect to the latter requirement, ‘the intention to be relieved from liability [must be] made clear and unequivocal and the wording must be so clear and understandable that an ordinary and knowledgeable person will know what he is contracting away.” In the same vein, exculpatory clauses are ‘strictly construed against the party seeking to be relieved of liability.’ Pier 1 Cruise Experts, 2019 WL at *7 (internal citations omitted).
    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

    The 411 on the New 415 Location of the Golden State Warriors

    June 10, 2015 —
    You can feel the buzz here in the Bay Area as the Golden State Warriors enter Game 4 of the NBA Playoffs following a 35 point upset over the Houston Rockets on Saturday, and a chance tonight to sweep the series and head to the NBA Finals for the first time since 1975. Formerly the Philadelphia Warriors from 1946 to 1962, and later the San Francisco Warriors from 1962 to 1971, the Golden State Warriors have played in Oakland’s currently named Oracle Arena since 1966 (except for one year when they played in San Jose while the Oracle Arena was being remodeled). Starting next year, however, construction will begin on the Warriors’ new stadium in the Mission Bay area of San Francisco with completion scheduled for the 2018-2019 season. Although details are just emerging – and even the conceptual plans have changed after some said that the initial design looked like a toilet – here’s the 411 we know on the new 415 location of the Warriors:
    • The cost of the new arena is estimated to be $1 billion.
    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

    Eighth Circuit Rejects Retroactive Application of Construction Defect Legislation

    September 17, 2014 —
    The Eighth Circuit refused to retroactively apply an Arkansas statute establishing coverage for faulty workmanship. J-McDaniel Const. Co., Inc. v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 14911 (8th Cir. Aug. 4, 2014). The homeowners sued J-McDaniel for faulty workmanship in constructing their home. The defective construction work was performed by subcontractors. Mid-Continent refused to defend or indemnify J-McDaniel. The insured sued Mid-Continent. The district court dismissed the claim pursuant to Essex Ins. Co. v. Holder, 261 S.W. 3d 456, 460 (Ark. 2008). In Essex, the Arkansas Supreme Court held that defective workmanship resulting in damages only to the work product itself was not an occurrence. Although The Arkansas legislature overruled Essex by statute, the district court found that the Arkansas case law barred retroactive application of the statute. 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

    Wildfire Risk Harms California Home Values, San Francisco Fed Study Finds

    August 26, 2024 —
    California’s wildfires are weighing on home prices more than in the past, and insurance availability does little to help in areas considered to be at higher risk, according to a Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco study. “Our results suggest that property values have been more adversely impacted in recent years by being close to past wildfires than was the case previously,” economists Leila Bengali, Fernanda Nechio and Stephanie Stewart wrote in a paper published Monday on the Fed bank’s website. While the effect of the proximity may be relatively small now, the economists warned “this pattern may become stronger in years to come if residential construction continues to expand into areas with higher fire risk and if trends in wildfire severity continue,” the study cautioned. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Laura Curtis, Bloomberg

    Miorelli Doctrine’s Sovereign Immunity in Public Construction Contracts — Not the Be-All and End-All

    March 21, 2022 —
    In the Florida commercial contract public arena, there is a sovereign immunity doctrine known as the Miorelli doctrine after 1997 Florida Supreme Court decision, County of Brevard v. Miorelli Eng’g, Inc., 703 So.2d 1049 (Fla. 1997). This doctrine would apply to construction contracts between a contractor and a public body. Through the years, the Miorelli doctrine stands for the proposition in commercial transactions with a Florida public body “that the doctrine of sovereign immunity precludes recovery of the cost of extra work where claims for that extra work are ‘totally outside’ the terms of the contract.” Monroe County v. Ashbritt, Inc., 47 Fla.L.Weekly D594a (Fla. 3d DCA 2022). See also Asbritt, n.2 quoting Posen Construction v. Lee County, 921 F.Supp.2d 1350, 1356 (M.D.Fla. 2013) (“A claim for damages predicated on work ‘totally outside the terms of the contract‘ is barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity, whereas damages caused by extra work done at the state’s behest and in furtherance of the contractual covenants (express or implied) are potentially recoverable.”) 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