BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultant
    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


    Ex-San Francisco DPW Director Sentenced to Seven Years in Corruption Case

    Because I Haven’t Mentioned Mediation Lately. . .

    Insurers Refuse Indemnification of Subcontractors in Construction Defect Suit

    Statute of Limitations and Bad Faith Claims: Factors to Consider

    Contractors Sued for Slip

    Housing Sales Hurt as Fewer Immigrants Chase Owner Dream

    Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Strikes a Deathblow to Substantial Factor Causation in Most Cases; Is Asbestos Litigation Next?

    Floating Crane on Job in NYC's East River Has a Storied Past of Cold War Intrigue

    No Coverage for Building's First Collapse, But Disputed Facts on Second Collapse

    Colorado Passes Construction Defect Reform Bill

    Be Strategic When Suing a Manufacturer Under a Warranty with an Arbitration Provision

    Death of Subcontractor’s Unjust Enrichment Claim Against Project Owner

    Recession Graduates’ Six-Year Gap in Homeownership

    Construction Contract’s Scope of Work Should Be Written With Clarity

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    Three lawyers from Haight were recognized in The Best Lawyers in America© 2020 Edition

    Smart Construction and the Future of the Construction Industry

    Investigation Continues on Children Drowning at Construction Site

    Coverage Issues: When You Need Your Own Lawyer in a Construction Defect Suit

    No Coverage Under Property Policy With Other Insurance and Loss Payment Provisions

    An Increase of US Metro Areas’ with Normal Housing & Economic Health

    Short on Labor, Israeli Builders Seek to Vaccinate Palestinians

    Legal Implications of 3D Printing in Construction Loom

    Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Duty to Defend When Case Law is Uncertain

    Construction Feb. Jobs Jump by 61,000, Jobless Rate Up from Jan.

    Faulty Workmanship an Occurrence in Iowa – as Long as Other Property Damage is Involved

    To Require Arbitration or Not To Require Arbitration

    The Law of Patent v Latent Defects

    The Investors Profiting Off Water Scarcity

    You Don’t Have To Be a Consumer to Assert a FDUTPA Claim

    Workers on Big California Bridge Tackle Oil Wells, Seismic Issues

    Nine ACS Lawyers Recognized by Best Lawyers®

    Solar Energy Isn’t Always Green

    California Supreme Court Upholds Precondemnation Procedures

    Draft Federal Legislation Reinforces Advice to Promptly Notify Insurers of COVID-19 Losses

    Toll Brothers Surges on May Gain in Deposits for New Homes

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2020 Southern California Rising Stars List

    Difficulty in Defending Rental Supplier’s Claim Under Credit Application

    Buyer's Demolishing of Insured's Home Not Barred by Faulty Construction Exclusion

    FEMA Fire Management Assistance Granted for the French Fire

    Insurance Policies and Indemnity Provisions Are Not the Same

    Addressing the Defective Stucco Crisis

    Lake Texoma, Texas Condo Case may go to Trial

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (4/10/24) – Hotels Integrate AI, Baby-Boomers Stay Put, and Insurance Affects Housing Market

    The G2G Mid-Year Roundup (2022)

    Feds OK $9B Houston Highway Project After Two-Year Pause

    Illinois Court Assesses Factual Nature of Term “Reside” in Determining Duty to Defend

    Biden Administration Focus on Environmental Justice Raises Questions for Industry

    Recent Supreme Court Decision Could Have Substantial Impact on Builders

    Stormy Seas Ahead: 5th Circuit to Review Whether Maritime Law Applies to Offshore Service Contract
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    General Liability Alert: A Mixed Cause of Action with Protected and Non-Protected Activity Not Subject to Anti-SLAPP Motion

    February 18, 2015 —
    In Baral v. Schnitt (filed 2/5/2015, No. B253620), the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, held that California’s anti-SLAPP statute does not authorize the striking of allegations of protected activity in a cause of action that also contains meritorious allegations of non-protected activity not within the purview of the statute. In so holding, the court attempted to resolve, or at least add its voice to, the growing conflict among appellate districts on the issue. A SLAPP lawsuit (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) seeks to chill or punish the exercise of constitutional rights to free speech and to petition the government for redress of grievances. California’s Legislature enacted the anti-SLAPP statute to permit a defendant to file a special motion to strike as to any cause of action that arises out of an act in furtherance of such rights. In Baral, the plaintiff alleged that his business partner had violated fiduciary duties in usurping the plaintiff’s ownership and management interests in their jointly owned company, so that the defendant could benefit from a secret sale of the company. The complaint alleged that the defendant hired a public accounting firm and prevented the plaintiff from participating in its investigation in order to force the plaintiff's cooperation of the sale of the company. The defendant filed an anti-SLAPP motion, seeking to strike all references to the accounting firm's audit. The trial court denied the motion, on the ground that the anti-SLAPP statute applies to causes of action, not allegations. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys Valerie A. Moore, Lawrence S. Zucker II and Blythe Golay Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com. Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com. Ms. Golay may be contacted at bgolay@hbblaw.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    “A No-Lose Proposition?”

    October 07, 2024 —
    A Miller Act payment bond surety and its principal general contractor both sued in federal court in New Orleans by a project subcontractor sought to compel arbitration the claims against both contractor and surety based on an indisputably enforceable arbitration clause in the subcontract. This was urged to avoid separate actions against the contractor (arbitration) and its surety (litigation), even though the surety was not a party to the subcontract and, therefore, not a party to the arbitration clause. In the face of the lack of an express agreement to arbitrate, the contractor and contractor argued that “no federal statute or policy prohibits all of Plaintiff’s claims from proceeding to arbitration….” Additionally, those parties urged that the surety should be allowed to affirmatively compel arbitration because the surety “would otherwise have the ability to assert the right to compel arbitration as a defense….” The New Orleans federal district court was unpersuaded:
    “[D]istrict courts within this circuit have recognized that ‘Miller Act claims by a subcontractor for unpaid labor and materials are separate and distinct from those for general breach of contract… [and] arbitration and Miller Act suits, are not, per se, inconsistent with one another.’…[A]bsent express contractual intent to subject Miller Act claims to arbitration, the court [will] not force the parties to arbitrate claims against nonparties to the contract at issue…. [C]laims against a surety, which was a non-signatory to the contract, would not be subject to arbitration without any contractual basis to do so.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Construction Law Job Opps and How to Create Them

    October 24, 2021 —
    For this weeks Guest Post Friday, Kirsten Grant (@kgrantcareers on Twitter) has graced us with her thoughts on a very timely topic: How to get a job as a construction attorney. Before becoming a career specialist at Kaplan University, one of the largest online universities in the nation, Kirsten Grant had faxed almost 1000 resumes, e-mailed close to 300 resumes, personally mailed 20 resumes with each one featuring “special inserts” to encourage hiring managers to read her resume (50% of those resumes received calls for an interview) and interviewed with 50 companies over the course of 5 months. Based on the feedback hiring managers provided, in addition to 10 years experience in human resources, training, recruiting and staffing she REALLY learned what hiring managers look for in a candidate and today helps over 40,000 adult learners understand how to conduct successful job searches and earn a promotions. As the real estate industry makes torrid adjustments to right itself due to foreclosures, short sales, and falling house prices, court rooms are seeing more construction law cases. As houses and properties fall into states of disrepair and as efforts are taken to repair them a chain of events take place:
    1. Property is purchased
    2. Contractors are hired to make repairs to a property
    3. The selected contractor files permits for the type of work performed
    4. After work has been performed, contactor receives compensation
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Greystone on Remand Denies Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment To Bar Coverage For Construction Defects

    June 28, 2013 —
    A prior post here discussed the Tenth Circuit's decision in Greystone Constr., Inc. v. National Union Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 661 F. 3d 1272 (10th Cir. 2011). The court found a duty to defend construction defect claims where damage caused by the faulty workmanship was unintentional. The Tenth Circuit remanded for a determination on whether any policy exclusions precluded a defense or indemnity for damage arising from faulty workmanship. On remand, the district court denied National Union's Motion for Summary Judgment, seeking to establish the policy exclusions precluded its duty to defend and to indemnify. See Greystone Constr., Inc. v. v. National Union Fire & Marine ins. Co., 2013 U. S. LEXIS 46707 (D. Colo. March 31, 2013). Greystone was sued for construction defects in homes it built. The suit alleged that Greystone failed to recognize defects in the soil where the house was built. National Union refused to defend. The district court initially granted summary judgment to National Union because claims arising from construction defects were not covered. As noted above, the Tenth Circuit vacated because the damage in the underlying suit did not categorically fall outside coverage under the policy. On remand, National Union first argued there was no duty to defend based upon an exclusion precluding coverage for damage arising out of work done by subcontractors unless the subcontractors agreed in writing to defend and indemnify the insured and carried insurance with coverage limits equal to or greater than that carried by the insured. The Tenth Circuit rejected this argument because National Union had to rely on facts outside of the underlying complaint. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    What You Need to Know About Additional Insured Endorsements

    August 30, 2017 —
    A well-drafted insurance clause is an integral part of a construction contract because it sets forth a subcontractor’s obligations to add the general contractor to its policies of insurance as an additional insured and identifies the manner by which the general contractor will qualify as an additional insured. In a typical construction contract, the general contractor will be an additional insured via a scheduled endorsement or a blanket endorsement. Scheduled Endorsements A scheduled endorsement contains a “schedule” in which the person or organization that is named in the schedule is added to the policy as an additional insured. The following scheduled endorsements are commonly used in construction contracts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gary Barrera, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Barrera may be contacted at gbarrera@wendel.com

    Vinci Will Build $580M Calgary Project To Avoid Epic Flood Repeat

    June 20, 2022 —
    Vinci Construction has begun work on a giant flood control project in Alberta designed to prevent a repeat of one of the most devastating natural disasters in Canadian history. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Van Voorhis, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Utah’s Highest Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Properly Commence an Action to Rely on the Relation-Back Doctrine to Overcome the Statute of Repose

    August 20, 2018 —
    Earlier this summer, in Gables & Villas at River Oaks Homeowners Ass’n v. Castlewood Builders LLC, 2018 UT 28, the Supreme Court of Utah addressed the question of whether the plaintiff’s construction defects claims against the general contractor for a construction project were timely-filed, or barred by the statute of repose. In Utah, the statute of repose requires that an action be “commenced within six years of the date of completion.” The plaintiff alleged that its 2014 amended complaint naming the general contractor as a defendant was timely-commenced because, before the date on which Utah’s statute of repose ran, a defendant filed a motion to amend its third-party complaint to name the general contractor as a defendant, and the defendant subsequently assigned its claims to the plaintiff. The plaintiff argued that the filing of its 2014 amended complaint related back[1] to the date of its original complaint. The Supreme Court disagreed, holding that an action is “commenced” by filing a complaint and that a motion for leave to amend does not count as “commencing” an action. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shannon M. Warren, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Warren may be contacted at warrens@whiteandwilliams.com

    A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

    April 06, 2016 —
    Remember all of my posts about how fraud and contract claims don’t usually play well in litigation? Well, as always with the law, there are exceptions. For instance, a well plead Virginia Consumer Protection Act claim will survive a dismissal challenge. A recent opinion out of the Alexandria division of the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia sets out another exception, namely so called fraudulent inducement. In XL Specialty Ins. Co. v. Truland et al, the Court considered the question of whether both a tort and contract claim can coexist in the same lawsuit when the tort claim is based upon the information provided to the plaintiff when that information proves false. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Construction Law Musings
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com