BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestration
    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


    Does the New Jersey Right-To-Repair Law Omit Too Many Construction Defects?

    5 Impressive Construction Projects in North Carolina

    Compliance with Contractual and Jurisdictional Pre-Suit Requirements is Essential to Maximizing Recovery

    South Carolina Supreme Court Finds that Consequential Damage Arise From "Occurrence"

    Insurer’s Duty to Defend: When is it Triggered? When is it Not?

    Texas School System Goes to Court over Construction Defect

    Don’t Miss the 2015 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    Residential Contractors, Be Sure to Have these Clauses in Your Contracts

    Denver Court Rules that Condo Owners Must Follow Arbitration Agreement

    Fundamental Fairness Trumps Contract Language

    Property Damage Caused By Construction Next Door Covered as Ensuing Loss

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2025 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Connecticutt Class Action on Collapse Claims Faces Motion to Dismiss

    What Will the 2024 Construction Economy Look Like?

    Building Permits Hit Five-Year High

    Homebuyers Get Break as Loan Rates Defy Fed Tapering: Mortgages

    Suing A Payment Bond Surety in Different Venue Than Set Forth in The Subcontract

    Quick Note: Steps to Protect and Avoid the “Misappropriation” of a “Trade Secret”

    Defense Victory in Breach of Fiduciary Action

    Deck Collapse Raises Questions about Building Defects

    Nevada Court Adopts Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

    The Trend in the Economic Loss Rule in Construction Defect Litigation

    New York Construction Practice Team Obtains Summary Judgment, Dismissal of Labor Law §240(1) Claim Against Municipal Entities

    Mitsubishi Estate to Rebuild Apartments After Defects Found

    More Fun with Indemnity and Construction Contracts!

    Florida's New Pre-Suit Notification Requirement: Retroactive or Prospective Application?

    Insurer's Bad Faith is Actionable Tort for Purposes of Choice of Law Analysis

    Court Grants Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment After Insured Fails to Provide Evidence of Systemic Collapse

    Follow Up on Continental Western v. Shay Construction

    Home-Building Climate Warms in U.S. as Weather Funk Lifts

    Winners Announced in Seattle’s Office-to-Residential Call for Ideas Contest

    Got Licensing Questions? CSLB Licensing Workshop November 17th and December 15th

    Why A Jury Found That Contractor 'Retaliated' Against Undocumented Craft Worker

    Thirteen Payne & Fears Attorneys Honored by Best Lawyers

    AB 685 and COVID-19 Workplace Exposure: New California Notice and Reporting Requirements of COVID Exposure Starting January 1, 2021

    WSDOT Excludes Non-Minority Women-Owned DBEs from Participation Goals

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 37 White And Williams Lawyers

    A Closer Look at an HOA Board Member’s Duty to Homeowners

    Home Construction Thriving in Lubbock

    Wisconsin High Court Rejects Insurer’s Misuse of “Other Insurance” Provision

    The Devil is in the Details: The Texas Construction Trust Fund Pitfalls Residential Remodelers (and General Contractors) Should Avoid

    Prevailing Payment Bond Surety Entitled to Statutory Attorneys’ Fees Even if Defended by Principal

    Insurer's Withheld Discovery Must be Produced in Bad Faith Case

    Dispute between City and Construction Company Over Unsightly Arches

    The COVID-19 Impact: Navigating the Legal Landscape’s New Normal

    Mediating Contract Claims and Disputes at the ASBCA

    CSLB Begins Processing Applications for New B-2 License

    Construction Defects as Occurrences, Better Decided in Law than in Courts

    Aecmaster’s Digital Twin: A New Era for Building Design
    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

    Affirmed: Insureds Bear the Burden of Allocating Covered Versus Uncovered Losses

    September 28, 2017 —
    The Second Circuit recently affirmed a district court decision that an insured bears the burden of establishing what portion of a jury verdict constitutes covered damages1. The case arose out of claims for property damage resulting from construction defects in a homebuilding project. The homeowners fired the construction manager, J. Barrows, Inc. (“JBI”), who then sued the homeowners in state court for unpaid fees (the “Underlying Action”). The homeowners counterclaimed, alleging breach of contract and negligence. JBI’s commercial general liability insurer, Harleysville Worcester Insurance Company (“Harleysville”), agreed to defend JBI under a reservation of rights. Reprinted courtesy of C. Lily Schurra, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and K. Alexandra Byrd, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Schurra may be contacted at cls@sdvlaw.com Ms. Byrd may be contacted at kab@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Delaware Supreme Court Allows Shareholders Access to Corporation’s Attorney-Client Privileged Documents

    August 13, 2014 —
    Delaware corporations may be required to turn over internal documents of directors and officers, including those of in-house counsel, where the factors enumerated in Garner v. Walfinbarger, 430 F.2d 1093 (5th Cir. 1970) weigh in favor of disclosure. In a July 23, 2014 decision of first-impression, the Delaware Supreme Court ruled in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Indiana Electrical Workers Pension Trust Fund IBEW, that the Garner doctrine applies to plenary shareholder/corporation disputes, as well as to books and records inspection actions under Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. The Garner doctrine provides that a shareholder may invade the corporation’s attorney-client privilege in order to prove fiduciary breaches by those in control of the corporation upon a showing of good cause. The non-exhaustive list of factors by which a finding of good cause should be tested are: “(i) the number of shareholders and the percentage of stock they represent; (ii) the bona fides of the shareholders; (iii) the nature of the shareholders’ claim and whether it is obviously colorable; (iv) the apparent necessity or desirability of the shareholders having the information and the availability of it from other sources; (v) whether, if the shareholders’ claim is of wrongful action by the corporation, it is of action criminal, or illegal but not criminal, or of doubtful legality; (vi) whether the communication is of advice concerning the litigation itself; (vii) the extent to which the communication is identified versus the extent to which the shareholders are blindly fishing; and (viii) the risk of revelation of trade secrets or other information in whose confidentiality the corporation has an interest for independent reasons.” Reprinted courtesy of Marc S. Casarino, White and Williams LLP and Lori S. Smith, White and Williams LLP Mr. Casarino may be contacted at casarinom@whiteandwilliams.com; Ms. Smith may be contacted at smithl@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Eleven Payne & Fears Attorneys Honored by Best Lawyers

    September 06, 2023 —
    Congratulations to the ten Payne & Fears attorneys included in the 2024 Edition of Best Lawyers® In America and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch. Attorneys have been recognized in the following practice areas: Best Lawyers in America (2024) Irvine, CA Employment Law – Management Labor Law – Management Litigation – Labor and Employment Jeffrey K. Brown Daniel F. Fears Commercial Litigation Litigation – Real Estate Daniel M. Livingston Thomas L. Vincent Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Payne & Fears LLP

    Traub Lieberman Partner Gregory S. Pennington and Associate Emily A. Velcamp Obtain Summary Judgment in Favor of Residential Property Owners

    December 13, 2022 —
    Traub Lieberman Partner Gregory S. Pennington and Associate Emily A. Velcamp obtained summary judgment in favor of their clients, owners of a residential property [the “Owners” or “Defendants”] used as a short-term rental in Beach Haven, New Jersey. Plaintiff alleged injuries resulting from a fall into an open water meter pit, located in the public sidewalk abutting the Owners’ property during the time within which the property was rented to plaintiff and his family. According to plaintiff, defendants breached their duty owed to him, relying on a Borough of Beach Haven Ordinance, thereby allowing the water meter pit to be raised in an unsafe manner, which resulted in plaintiff’s fall and subsequent injuries.  After the Court denied defendants’ initial Motion for Summary Judgment on the grounds that issues of material fact existed regarding defendants’ duty and the alleged breach of that duty, a Motion for Reconsideration was filed. Mr. Pennington and Ms. Velcamp argued that their clients, as residential landowners, owed no duty of care to plaintiff for the raised condition of the water meter pit lid, located in the abutting sidewalk, as they did not cause or contribute to the alleged condition. Defendants further argued that even if a duty of care existed, no breach occurred given the lack of notice to defendants, either actual or constructive. Plaintiff attempted to argue that defendants had constructive notice of the lid’s raised condition, relying on his expert report and the fact that defendants had 3.5 months from the date the property was purchased, to the date of the subject accident to discover the lid’s raised condition. Mr. Pennington and Ms. Velcamp successfully argued that despite plaintiff’s allegations and the findings contained in plaintiff’s expert report, authored 2 months after the alleged accident, there was still no credible, material evidence to say how long the water meter pit lid was in that raised condition to allow defendants a reasonable time to discover it, remedy it, or report it to the Borough. Reprinted courtesy of Gregory S. Pennington, Traub Lieberman and Emily A. Velcamp, Traub Lieberman Mr. Pennington may be contacted at gpennington@tlsslaw.com Ms. Velcamp may be contacted at evelcamp@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Supreme Court’s New York Harbor Case Isn’t a ‘Sopranos’ Episode

    August 03, 2022 —
    The long-simmering harbor dispute between New York and New Jersey has observers reaching for illustrations from “The Sopranos” and “On the Waterfront.” But now that the US Supreme Court has agreed to adjudicate the spat, I wonder whether a more useful resource might be “The Paper Chase.” The disagreement stems from New Jersey’s determination to exit the Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, an entity established by the two states back in 1953 in response to news reports of widespread corruption and violence among those who loaded and unloaded ships. New Jersey argues that as a sovereign state, it can’t be forced to remain in the pact forever. New York replies that the deal has the force of law and neither state can quit without the permission of the other. (And Congress!) The Supreme Court is now involved because that’s the venue the Constitution prescribes when one state sues another. Four days before New Jersey’s announced departure date of March 28, the justices issued an injunction preventing the move. This week they agreed to adjudicate the dispute and set an accelerated schedule for briefs and oral argument. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stephen L. Carter, Bloomberg

    Home Prices in U.S. Rose 0.3% in August From July, FHFA Says

    October 28, 2015 —
    U.S. home prices rose in August as low borrowing costs and sustained job growth fueled demand amid a tight inventory of properties on the market. Prices climbed 0.3 percent on a seasonally adjusted basis from July, the Federal Housing Finance Agency said Thursday in a report from Washington. The average estimate of 16 economists was for a 0.5 percent increase, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The gain was 5.5 percent from a year earlier. Values have increased steadily as buyers, bolstered by an improving job market and easing mortgage standards, compete for a limited supply of existing homes. The number of listed properties in August was the second-lowest for that month since 2002, according to the National Association of Realtors. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Prashant Gopal, Bloomberg

    New Jersey’s Independent Contractor Rule

    January 07, 2015 —
    For this week’s Guest Post Friday here at Musings, we welcome back Bennet Susser. Bennet is a founding member and shareholder of the New Jersey law firm, Jardim, Meisner & Susser, P.C. He has over 25 years’ experience in representing clients in all types of complex (and not so complex) litigation, including those involving construction actions. His Construction Law Practice Group has deep experience in the representation of property owners, developers, homeowners, design professionals, materials manufacturers, contractors and subcontractors in connection with construction of high-rise and other residential developments, condominium conversions of older rental properties, commercial property, mixed-use projects, and governmental buildings. Issues handled include: construction defects and deficiencies related to residential and commercial construction, including roofing defects, water intrusion, and structural life safety; construction delays; liens; hurricane recovery and rebuilding; insurance coverage disputes, including negotiation and resolution of insurance claims related to rebuilding; mold and mildew claims; and construction contracts and related documents, including loan documentation. Construction litigation often seeks to foist the culpable conduct of contractors and subcontractors upon an owner or developer of commercial or residential real property. Sometimes, such conduct is warranted, especially when the owner/developer has a significant role in the manner in which the construction project work is to be conducted. However, there are times when the general contractor is the party calling the shots. Why should an owner/developer be charged with the conduct of other independent contractors over whom no control was exercised? Under certain circumstances, such party may be insulated from liability based on the “independent contractor rule.” Put another way, general contractors’ and subcontractors’ status as independent contractors do not impute liability to an owner/developer for their alleged wrongful conduct under the principles of respondeat superior and vicarious liability. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Another Defect Found on the Bay Bridge: Water Leakage

    February 11, 2014 —
    According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the eastern span of the Bay Bridge has dealt with alleged “defective welds” and “cracked steel rods,” and now there are reports of leakage. The Chronicle stated that rainwater “is dripping into the steel structure beneath the road deck on the suspension stretch of the span, which,” according to Caltrans “is supposed to be watertight.” Water corrosion on a bridge could cost $6.4 billion, the San Francisco Chronicle claimed. Caltrans said that they “are going to have teams of engineers and inspectors there this weekend to assess the problem.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of