BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield 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


    Construction Insurance Rates Up in the United States

    Construction Lien Waiver Provisions Contractors Should Be Using

    #12 CDJ Topic: Am. Home Assur. Co. v. SMG Stone Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75910 (N. D. Cal. June 11, 2015)

    Another TV Fried as Georgia Leads U.S. in Lightning Costs

    Colorado Rejects Bill to Shorten Statute of Repose

    Challenging a Termination for Default

    Engineer at Flint Negligence Trial Details Government Water Errors

    Traub Lieberman Partner Rina Clemens Selected as a 2023 Florida Super Lawyers® Rising Star

    Rachel Reynolds Selected as Prime Member of ADTA

    CDJ’s #6 Topic of the Year: Does Colorado Need Construction Defect Legislation to Spur Affordable Home Development?

    Confidence Among U.S. Homebuilders Little Changed in January

    Amid the Chaos, Trump Signs Executive Order Streamlining Environmental Permitting and Disbands Infrastructure Council

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (01/11/23) – Construction Tech, Housing Market Confidence, and Decarbonization

    Nevada Bill Aims to Reduce Legal Fees For Construction Defect Practitioners

    Contractual Warranty Agreements May Preclude Future Tort Recovery

    The Private Works: Preliminary Notice | Are You Using the Correct Form?

    Owner Can’t Pursue Statutory Show Cause Complaint to Cancel Lien… Fair Outcome?

    Eleventh Circuit Finds No “Property Damage” Where Defective Component Failed to Cause Damage to Other Non-Defective Components

    Australians Back U.S. Renewables While Opportunities at Home Ebb

    Client Alert: Absence of a Court Reporter at a Civil Motion Hearing May Preclude Appellate Review

    Constructive Suspension (Suspension Outside of an Express Order)

    Badly Constructed Masonry Walls Not an Occurrence in Arkansas Law

    Encinitas Office Obtains Complete Defense Verdict Including Attorney Fees and Costs After Ten Day Construction Arbitration

    Unlocking the Potential of AI and Chat GBT in Construction Management

    A Court-Side Seat: Clean Air, Clean Water, Citizen Suits and the Summer of 2022

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

    Amazon HQ2 Puts Concrete on an Embodied Carbon Diet

    The Cross-Party Exclusion: The Hazards of Additional Named Insured Provisions

    How Philadelphia I-95 Span Destroyed by Fire Reopened in Just 12 Days

    The Court-Side Seat: FERC Reviews, Panda Power Plaints and Sovereign Immunity

    Renovation Makes Old Arena Feel Brand New

    Morrison Bridge Allegedly Crumbling

    No Coverage For Construction Defects Under Alabama Law

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (02/08/23) – The Build America, Buy America Act, ESG Feasibility, and University Partnerships

    Out of the Black

    Insurer Granted Summary Judgment on Faulty Workmanship Claim

    Building and Landscape Standards Enacted in Response to the Governor's Mandatory Water Restrictions Dealing with the Drought and Possible Effects of El Niño

    Insurer’s Confession Of Judgment Through Post-Lawsuit Payment

    Design Immunity Does Not Shield Public Entity From Claim That it Failed to Warn of a Dangerous Condition

    Construction Contracts Fall in Denver

    Appellate Court of Maryland Construes Notice Conditions of A312 Performance Bond in Favor of Surety

    Duty To Defend PFAS MDL Lawsuits: Texas Federal Court Weighs In

    Cities' Answer to Sprawl? Go Wild.

    Rebuilding the West: Construction Considerations After the Smoke Clears

    Home Numbers Remain Small While Homes Get Bigger

    “Bound by the Bond”

    Pre-Suit Settlement Offers and Construction Lien Actions

    BWB&O’s Los Angeles Office Obtains Major Victory in Arbitration!

    Another Guilty Plea in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    Hammer & Hand’s Top Ten Predictions for US High Performance Building in 2014
    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

    Ensuing Loss Provision Found Ambiguous

    April 25, 2012 —

    After the insurer denied coverage in a homeowner’s policy for construction defects under various exclusions, the court found the ensuing loss provision was ambiguous.Kesling v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38857 (D. Colo. March 22, 2012).

    After purchasing a home from the sellers, the insureds noticed problems with the deck of the home. Massive cracking appeared, causing lifting and leaking on the deck and water running through the exterior foundation wall into the home. There was also damage to the roof and crawlspace.

    The insureds had a homeowner’s policy with American Family, which covered accidental direct physical loss to property described in the policy unless the loss was excluded. They requested coverage for "conditions, defects and damages." American Family denied coverage because wear and tear, as well as damage to foundations, floors and roofs were excluded. The policy did provide coverage, however, for "any resulting loss to property described . . . above, not excluded or excepted in this policy.

    When coverage was denied, the insureds sued American Family.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Wins Summary Judgment in Favor of Third-Party Defendant

    May 06, 2024 —
    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle won summary judgment in favor of Third-Party Defendant, a general contracting company (the “Contracting Company”), in a personal injury action brought in Suffolk County. In the underlying matter, the Plaintiff—an employee of the Contracting Company—alleged that they sustained injuries from an incident which occurred when they were struck by a skid-steer loader owned by the Co-Defendant masonry company (the “Masonry Company”) and operated by the president and owner of the Co-Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff construction company (the “Construction Company”). The Plaintiff brought claims against the Defendant companies for common law negligence and violations of Labor Law § § 200, 240, and 241, as well as Industrial code (12 NYCRR) subpart 23-2. Reprinted courtesy of Lisa Rolle, Traub Lieberman Ms. Rolle may be contacted at lrolle@tlsslaw.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Burden of Betterment

    February 23, 2017 —
    The concept of betterment has long been used by defendants in cases involving defective design or construction to limit the damages awarded to a plaintiff.[1] The theory behind betterment is that: “if in [the] course of making repairs [an] owner adopts a more expensive design, recovery should be limited to what would have been the reasonable cost of repair according to original design.”[2] Betterment is often raised as an affirmative defense, requiring a defendant to prove that the plaintiff has received a good or service that is superior to that for which the plaintiff originally contracted. A recent South Florida case seems, at first blush, to suggest the burden of establishing the value of betterments may fall to the plaintiff, although a closer reading indicates the decision is likely to have limited applicability. In Magnum Construction Management Corp. v. The City of Miami Beach, the Third District Court of Appeal was asked to review the damages award to the City for construction defects associated with the redesign and improvement of a park.[3] The completed project contained landscaping deficiencies, along with other “minor defects” in the playground’s construction.[4] After a unilateral audit, and without providing the contractor its contractually required opportunity to cure the defects, the City “removed, redesigned, and replaced the playground in its entirety.”[5] It did so despite no recommendation by the City’s own expert to perform such work.[6] During the bench trial, the “only measure of damages provided by the City was the costs associated with the planning, permitting, and construction of a park that is fundamentally different from the one it contracted with [the contractor] to build.”[7] Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryan M. Charlson, Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.
    Mr. Charlson may be contacted at ryan.charlson@csklegal.com

    If Passed, New Bill AB 2320 Will Mandate Cyber Insurance For State Government Contractors

    September 07, 2020 —
    Earlier this year, Assemblyman Edwin Chau (D-Monterey Park) introduced Assembly Bill 2320. AB 2320, if passed, would require any business that contracts with the state and has access to records containing personal information protected under the state’s Information Practices Act (IPA) to maintain cyber insurance coverage. Information covered under the IPA includes names, social security numbers, physical descriptions, home addresses, home telephone numbers, education, financial matters, and medical or employment history. Requiring contractors to maintain cyber insurance will likely both shift the costs of cyberattacks from taxpayers to the private sector, while also encouraging robust cyber security practices among businesses of all sizes. While the bill has not yet passed, businesses will be best served by implementing and improving cybersecurity practices now in order to attain lowest premium rates in the future. Incentivizing Best Practices With the adoption of AB 2320, businesses will be incentivized to increase their security posture in order to receive lower premiums from insurers. Simultaneously, insurers will be incentivized to mandate best practices from their insureds in order to mitigate their risk of having to pay out on cyber insurance policies. Thus, cyber insurance will work as a vehicle to increase best practices in businesses and subsequently decrease vulnerabilities to cyberattacks. Reprinted courtesy of Makenna Miller, Newmeyer Dillion and Jeffrey Dennis, Newmeyer Dillion Ms. Miller may be contacted at makenna.miller@ndlf.com Mr. Dennis may be contacted at jeff.dennis@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Lakewood Introduced City Ordinance to Battle Colorado’s CD Law

    September 24, 2014 —
    According to The Denver Post, the Lakewood City Council “introduced an ordinance that would make it more difficult for homeowners associations to sue developers for construction defects and give builders more opportunity to fix problems before litigation begins.” A hearing and final vote is scheduled for October 13th. "If there are defects, we want to get them fixed rather than dragging this through the courts for years," Lakewood Mayor Bob Murphy told The Denver Post. Murphy believes the ordinance will bring “more diverse housing options to Lakewood, especially around stations along the Regional Transportation District’s West Rail Line.” Lakewood’s City Planner Travis Parker also declared that the defects law is to blame for the lack of condos in the area. However, some believe that “Lakewood is overstepping its bounds as a home-rule city,” according to The Denver Post. "What they're trying to do is use an ordinance to circumvent state law in order to make it impossible for homeowners to seek redress against builders for defects," Molly Foley-Healy an attorney who serves as legislative liaison for the Community Associations Institute's Legislative Action Committee told the Post. “Mayor Murphy needs to incentivize quality construction in Lakewood instead.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Design & Construction Case Expands Florida’s Slavin Doctrine

    January 21, 2015 —
    According to Amanda Baggett of Rogers Towers, Florida’s “Fourth District Court of Appeal appears to have expanded the Slavin doctrine in the context of design professional liability” in the case McIntosh v. Progressive Design and Engineering, Inc. (Jan. 7, 2015). McIntosh, a personal injury case, involved whether the design and construction of an intersection with multiple traffic signals in close proximity created confusion for drivers. Baggett stated that McIntosh expanded the Slavin doctrine in two ways: “first, the ruling eliminates the requirement that the ultimate owner of a project accept the project before the Slavin doctrine may be invoked. Second, the decision applies the Slavin doctrine to completed and accepted design plans without regard to the completion of the project for which they were prepared.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Brooklyn’s Industry City to Get $1 Billion Modernization

    March 12, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- A late 19th century industrial complex on New York’s Brooklyn waterfront is slated for a $1 billion makeover that aims to transform the property into a modern hub for manufacturing and technology. The owners of Industry City, Atlanta-based Jamestown and its partners, plan to invest about $890 million over the next 12 years, and anticipate tenants will put in about $150 million of their own money, according to a proposal announced Monday. The project will create one of the largest centers for the “innovation economy” in the U.S., and one of New York’s biggest engines of job growth, said Andrew Kimball, chief executive officer of Industry City. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. Levitt, Bloomberg
    Mr. Levitt may be contacted at dlevitt@bloomberg.net

    Home Builder Doesn’t See Long Impact from Hurricane

    November 07, 2012 —
    No one needs to tell Toll Brothers about the impact of Hurricane Sandy. The Wall Street Journal reports that the home building company lost power as a result of the storm. Martin Connor, the company’s CFO, told the Journal that he did not expect the hurricane to have a big effect on sales. Luckily for the company, many of its large projects are either sufficiently completed to provide shelter or too early in the process to be affected by the storm. “This type of weather event has limited impact on the market. It may move settlements later, and may defer people a weekend or two until they go out shopping. But it doesn’t have a long impact.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of