BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim 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


    Architect Blamed for Crumbling Public School Playground

    Hilary Soaks California With Flooding Rain and Snarls Flights

    Failure to Allege Property Damage Within Policy Period Defeats Insured's Claim

    10 Safety Tips for General Contractors

    Stacking of Service Interruption and Contingent Business Interruption Coverages Permitted

    Glendale City Council Approves Tohono O’odham Nation Casino

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Ursinus is Cleared!”

    Court Provides Guidance on ‘Pay-When-Paid’ Provisions in Construction Subcontracts

    Alleged Negligent Misrepresentation on Condition of Home is Not an Occurrence Causing Property Damage

    Construction Upturn in Silicon Valley

    A License to Sue: Appellate Court Upholds Condition of Statute that a Contracting Party Must Hold a Valid Contractor’s License to Pursue Action for Recovery of Payment for Contracting Services

    CDJ’s #10 Topic of the Year: Transport Insurance Company v. Superior Court (2014) 222 Cal.App.4th 1216.

    Struggling Astaldi Announces Defaults on Florida Highway Contracts

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Based on New Information …”

    SCOTUS to Weigh Landowners' Damage Claim Against Texas DOT

    Court Finds That Split in Underground Storage Tank is Not a Covered Collapse

    Is the Manhattan Bank of America Tower a Green Success or Failure?

    NYC Hires Engineer LERA for Parking Garage Collapse Probe

    How You Plead Allegations to Trigger Liability Insurer’s Duties Is Critical

    Genuine Dispute Summary Judgment Reversed for Abuse of Discretion and Trial of Fact Questions About Expert Opinions

    Courthouse Reporter Series: The Bizarre Case That Required a 117-Year-Old Expert

    Issue and Claim Preclusion When Forced to Litigate Similar Issues in Different Forums: White River Village, LLP v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland

    As Natural Gas Expands in Gulf, Residents Fear Rising Damage

    Florida Court of Appeals Holds Underlying Tort Case Must Resolve Before Third-Party Spoliation Action Can Be Litigated

    DC Wins Largest-Ever Civil Penalty in US Housing Discrimination Suit

    Background Owner of Property Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate Construction Defects

    Personal Thoughts on Construction Mediation

    Construction Defects Are Not An Occurrence Under New York, New Jersey Law

    Rio Olympics Work Was a Mess and Then Something Curious Happened

    Anchorage Building Codes Credited for Limited Damage After Quakes

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

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    Lawsuits over Roof Dropped

    Traub Lieberman Partner Stephen Straus Wins Spoliation Motion in Favor of Defendant

    Denver’s Mayor Addresses Housing and Modifying Construction Defect Law

    Settlement Payment May Preclude Finding of Policy Exhaustion: Scottsdale v. National Union

    Specific Performance of an Option Contract to Purchase Real Property is Barred Absent Agreement on All Material Terms

    Breaking the Impasse by Understanding Blame

    Jobsite Safety, Workforce Shortage Drive Innovation in Machine Automation

    Continuous Injury Trigger Applied to Property Loss

    White and Williams Selected in the 2024 Best Law Firms ranked by Best Lawyers®

    Subcontractor Allowed to Sue Designer for Negligence: California Courts Chip Away at the Economic Loss Doctrine (Independent Duty Rule)

    Living With a Millennial. Or Grandma.

    California Insurance Commissioner Lacks Authority to Regulate Formula for Estimating Replacement Cost Value

    CLB Recommends Extensive Hawaii Contractor License Changes

    The Law Clinic Paves Way to the Digitalization of Built Environment Processes

    Points on Negotiating Construction Claims

    How Technology Reduces the Risk of Façade Defects

    Construction Executives Should Be Dusting Off Employee Handbooks

    Cal/OSHA Approves COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards; Executive Order Makes Them Effective Immediately
    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

    Justin Clark Joins Newmeyer & Dillion’s Walnut Creek Branch as its Newest Associate

    May 03, 2017 —
    WALNUT CREEK, Calif. – APR. 28, 2017 – Up and coming associate and insurance attorney Justin Clark is the newest associate to join the ever-growing litigation practice at Newmeyer & Dillion LLP’s Walnut Creek office. Clark brings experience in the areas of insurance litigation, construction defect litigation, and business transactions. Walnut Creek’s managing partner Brian Morrow explained why he is so excited by the addition of Clark: “We are thrilled to have Clark on board, as his emphasis on insurance coverage will assist in a key area for our clients, and further expand our capabilities in our northern California office.” Clark has a background in a variety of practice areas, including insurance coverage, products liability, and asbestos litigation. He advocates for manufacturers, suppliers, distributers, and contractors in all phases of litigation. Clark represents developers, builders, and general contractors in construction and insurance disputes. He also helps small business clients draft commercial contracts to better serve their growing business needs. Clark can be reached at justin.clark@ndlf.com or 925-988-3263. About Newmeyer & Dillion For more than 30 years, Newmeyer & Dillion has delivered creative and outstanding legal solutions and trial results for a wide array of clients. With over 70 attorneys practicing in all aspects of business, employment, real estate, construction and insurance law, Newmeyer & Dillion delivers legal services tailored to meet each client’s needs. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, with offices in Walnut Creek, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, Newmeyer & Dillion attorneys are recognized by The Best Lawyers in America©, and Super Lawyers as top tier and some of the best lawyers in California, and have been given Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review's AV Preeminent® highest rating. For additional information, call 949-854-7000 or visit www.ndlf.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is the Obsession With Recordable Injury Rates a Deadly Safety Distraction?

    May 16, 2022 —
    On the first morning of 2021, laborer Mason Mack Harris, 25, reported for work that would have qualified for extra holiday pay. On that New Year’s Day, the onsite manager for his employer, Midwest Demolition Co., assigned Harris and a workmate to complete demolition of a 9-ft-high concrete balcony slab at a children’s home renovation project in Lincoln, Neb. According to U.S. Labor Dept. records, they used a concrete saw since neighbors had complained about jackhammer noise from earlier work. 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

    Potential Coverage Issues Implicated by the Champlain Towers Collapse

    March 21, 2022 —
    In June 24, 2021, the Champlain Towers South in Surfside, Florida collapsed, killing nearly 100 individuals (the “Collapse”). As experts uncover more information regarding the cause of the Collapse, those individuals who have filed lawsuits as well as the potentially culpable defendants are looking to insurers for coverage of their bodily injury and property damage claims. Contractors, engineers, and other professionals are or anticipate being sued for their roles in the Collapse. Those professionals have professional liability policies and/or director and officer liability policies. Likewise, the condominium association’s commercial general liability (CGL) policies and its business property policy may have a duty to defend and/or indemnify their insureds as well. Finally, individual unit owners/renters may look to their homeowners’ insurance, auto insurance, health insurance, and/or life insurance policies for coverage.1 The potential breadth of insurance coverage issues raised by the Collapse is beyond the scope of this article. The article will consider some concerns that could impact insurance coverage under a standard CGL policy in the case of a building collapse. Reprinted courtesy of Theresa A. Guertin, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Holly A. Rice, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Guertin may be contacted at TGuertin@sdvlaw.com Ms. Rice may be contacted at HRice@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Why Builders Should Reconsider Arbitration Clauses in Construction Contracts

    October 21, 2019 —
    My advice to home builders has long been to arbitrate construction defect claims instead of litigating them in front of juries. Based on my experience and watching others litigate claims, I have learned that home builders usually fare better in arbitration than in jury trials, both in terms of what they have to pay the homeowners or HOAs and also in what they recover from subcontractors and design professionals. Because of these dynamics, conventional wisdom has been that builders should arbitrate construction defect claims. For several reasons, I am now questioning whether the time is right to consider a third option. First, plaintiffs’ attorneys dislike arbitration and will continue their attempts to do away with arbitration for construction defect claims. In 2018, the Colorado Legislature considered HB 18-1261 and HB 18-1262. While both bills were ultimately killed, they showed the plaintiffs’ attorneys disdain for arbitration, and serve as a warning that attempts to prevent arbitration legislatively will continue. If the legislature does away with the ability to arbitrate construction defect claims, and that is the only means of dispute resolution contained in a builder’s contracts, that builder may find itself in front of a jury. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Newport Beach Team for Prevailing on a Highly Contested Motion to Quash!

    January 08, 2024 —
    Congratulations to Newport Partners Tyler Offenhauser and Jonathan Cothran, and Associate Anisha Kohli, who recently prevailed on behalf of BWB&O’s client before the Orange County Superior Court on a highly contested Motion to Quash Service based on Plaintiff’s failure to timely file and serve a DOE Amendment, naming our client. BWB&O’s client was the owner of a building where Plaintiff, a licensed electrician, was electrocuted while performing an upgrade to the building’s electrical infrastructure. Plaintiff’s original lawsuit named only the building’s tenant, who was also represented by BWB&O. BWB&O was successful earlier this year on a Motion for Summary Judgment under the Privette Doctrine and won judgment on behalf of the client/tenant. While that MSJ was pending, Plaintiff surreptitiously added the building’s owner to the suit with a DOE Amendment, after several months earlier learning the owner and then tenant were entities operated by the same individual. However, Plaintiff never informed counsel or any other party of the filing. Moreover, after the MSJ was granted, Plaintiff then waited several more months to serve the building’s owner. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    In Midst of Construction Defect Lawsuit, City Center Seeks Refinancing

    October 02, 2013 —
    The owners of the City Center complex in Las Vegas are going through with a refinancing of their $1.8 of debt while they still seek to demolish the Harmon Tower. The cost of building City Center was $8.5 billion, making it the most expensive development on the Las Vegas strip. Unfortunately for the owners, the Harmon Tower isn’t the only empty space in the complex. MGM Resorts is currently in the midst of a construction defect lawsuit against the builder of the Harmon Tower. The judge in the case has given a go-ahead to tear down the building. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Not So Unambiguous: California Court of Appeal Finds Coverage for Additional Insured

    October 11, 2017 —
    California’s Fourth District Court of Appeal recently determined that manuscript additional insured endorsements (AIEs), which purportedly provided coverage for ongoing operations only, were ambiguous. The court also found the insurer that issued the policies, American Safety Indemnity Co. (American Safety), acted in bad faith due to its systematic efforts to deny coverage to general contractors as additional insureds. In Pulte Home Corp. v. American Safety Indemnity Co.,1 Pulte Home Corporation (Pulte Home), a general contractor, sued American Safety for failure to defend Pulte Home as an additional insured in connection with two underlying construction defect lawsuits. American Safety contended that it did not have a duty to defend Pulte Home because the loss occurred after the construction project was complete and the applicable AIEs did not provide coverage for completed operations, and/or because the policy’s faulty workmanship exclusions applied. The trial court awarded $1.4 million in compensatory and punitive damages to Pulte Home, and American Safety appealed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Malcom Ranger-Murdock, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Ranger-Murdock may be contacted at mrm@sdvlaw.com

    Difference Between a Novation And A Modification to a Contract

    May 10, 2022 —
    In contract law, there are two doctrines that have similarities but are indeed different. These doctrines are known as novation and modification. There are times you may want to make arguments relative to these doctrines because they are important for your theory of the dispute. Thus, you want to make sure you understand them so you can properly plead and prove the required elements to substantiate the basis of the theories. Understanding the elements will help you understand the evidence you will need to best prove your factual theories. A novation is essentially substituting a new contract for an old contract.
    “‘A novation is a mutual agreement between the parties for the discharge of a valid existing obligation by the substitution of a new valid obligation.’” Thompson v. Jared Kane Co., Inc., 872 So.2d 356, 361 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (citation omitted). To prove a novation, a party must prove four elements: “(1) the existence of a previously valid contract; (2) the agreement of the parties to cancel the first contract; (3) the agreement of the parties that the second contract replace the first; and (4) the validity of the second contract.” Id. at 61. Whether the parties consented to the substitute contract can be implied from the factual circumstances. Id.
    Parties are more familiar with a modification because it is not uncommon that parties may agree to modify contractual terms. The contract remains in effect but certain terms or obligations are modified. For example, a change order to a contract is a modification. 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