BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction 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


    Delaware “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6)

    The Final Nail: Ongoing Repairs Do Not Toll the Statute of Repose

    Colorado Adopts Twombly-Iqbal “Plausibility” Standard

    Bright-Line Changes: Prompt Payment Act Trends

    Road Project to Improve Access to Peru's Machu Picchu Site

    Thanks for My 6th Year Running as a Construction Litigation Super Lawyer

    Public Projects in the Pandemic Pandemonium

    Charges in Kansas Water Park Death

    National Demand Increases for Apartments, Refuting Calls for Construction Defect Immunity in Colorado

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says South Carolina High Court

    It’s a COVID-19 Pandemic; It’s Everywhere – New Cal. Bill to Make Insurers Prove Otherwise

    Lis Pendens – Recordation and Dissolution

    Reporting Requirements for Architects under California Business and Professions Code Section 5588

    Partners Patti Santelle and Gale White honored by as "Top Women in Law" The Legal Intelligencer

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    An Obligation to Provide Notice and an Opportunity to Cure May not End after Termination, and Why an Early Offer of Settlement Should Be Considered on Public Works Contracts

    How AI Can Become a Design Adviser

    Association Bound by Arbitration Provision in Purchase-And-Sale Contracts and Deeds

    SunTrust Will Pay $968 Million to Resolve Mortgage Probes

    Become Familiar With Your CGL Policy Exclusions to Ensure You Are Covered: Wardcraft v. EMC.

    Pollution Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    Industry Groups Decry Jan. 6 Riot; DOT Chief Chao Steps Down in Protest

    Federal Lawsuit Accuses MOX Contractors of Fraud

    The “Right to Repair” Construction Defects in the Rocky Mountain and Plains Region

    Uniformity in Florida’s Construction Bond Laws Brings About Fairness for the Industry

    Condo Developers Buy in Washington despite Construction Defect Litigation

    Toronto Contractor Bondfield Wins Court Protection as Project Woes Mount

    Ongoing Operations Exclusion Bars Coverage

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

    Tightest Credit Market in 16 Years Rejects Bernanke’s Bid

    Let the 90-Day Countdown Begin

    Automating Your Home? There’s an App for That

    Defining Catastrophic Injury Claims

    Appraisal Panel Can Determine Causation of Loss under Ohio Law

    How Palm Beach Balances Mansion Politics Against Climate Change

    What to do When the Worst Happens: Responding to a Cybersecurity Breach

    Pacing in Construction Scheduling Disputes

    Quick Note: Notice of Contest of Claim Against Payment Bond

    As Evidence Grows, Regions Prepare for Sea Level Rise

    Can a Receiver Prime and Strip Liens Against Real Property?

    Professional Services Exclusion in CGL Policies

    Arbitration Denied: Third Appellate District Holds Arbitration Clause Procedurally and Substantively Unconscionable

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    Cogently Written Opinion Finds Coverage for Loss Caused By Defective Concrete

    Wilke Fleury Secures Bid Protest Denial

    Wisconsin Court Applies the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Negligence Claims for Purely Economic Losses

    How the California and Maui Wildfires Will Affect Future Construction Projects

    Green Energy Can Complicate Real Estate Foreclosures

    The Road to Rio 2016: Zika, Super Bacteria, and Construction Delays. Sounds Like Everything is Going as Planned

    A Compilation of Quirky Insurance Claims
    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. Leveraging 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

    Call to Conserve Power Raises Questions About Texas Grid Reliability

    July 05, 2021 —
    With the days getting hotter and tropical activity picking up in the Gulf of Mexico, concerns are mounting about the reliability of the Texas power supply after the state’s main grid operator asked residents to go on a five-day energy conservation diet. Reprinted courtesy of Autumn Cafiero Giusti, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Appraiser Declarations Inadmissible When Offered to Challenge the Merits of an Appraisal Award

    March 14, 2018 —
    In Khorsand v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co. (No. B280273, filed 2/27/18), a California appeals court affirmed an appraisal award favorable to a homeowners insurer, ruling that it was improper to admit as evidence in opposition to a petition to confirm the award a declaration from the policyholders’ appraiser, except for the limited purpose of showing improprieties in the appraisal, bias, partiality or other improper conduct. The homeowners had a pipe leak and submitted a claim. The insurer responded to an estimate from the owners’ adjuster by retaining an expert and paying an undisputed amount that was significantly less. Eleven months later the owners had upper deck damage and submitted another claim. Relying on the same expert, the insurer paid another undisputed amount significantly less than the owner’s estimate. The owners requested appraisal but the insurer denied the request, contending that the dispute was over coverage and outside the scope of appraisal. The owners’ petition for appraisal was granted, with the court ordering separate listing of items the insurer disputed regarding coverage or causation. The appraisal panel issued an award stating that total damage was $132,293, of which $96,530 was contested by the insurer. The insurer filed a petition to confirm the award, which was granted despite the fact that the owners’ appraiser had refused to sign it. Reprinted courtesy of Valerie Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Caterpillar Said to Be Focus of Senate Overseas Tax Probe

    March 26, 2014 —
    A U.S. Senate investigative panel is examining Caterpillar Inc. (CAT) and whether the company improperly avoided U.S. taxes by moving profits outside the country, said three people familiar with the inquiry. The Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations will hold a hearing in early April, said two of the people. They spoke on condition of anonymity before an official announcement. Rachel Potts, a spokeswoman for Caterpillar, declined to comment. Two staff members for the subcommittee declined to comment. In 2009, Daniel Schlicksup, an employee who had worked on tax strategy, alleged in a lawsuit in federal court that Caterpillar used a “Swiss structure” to shift profits to offshore companies and avoid more than $2 billion in U.S. taxes. He also alleged that Caterpillar used a “Bermuda structure” involving shell companies to return profits to the U.S. without paying required taxes. Mr. Rubin may be contacted at rrubin12@bloomberg.net; Mr. Drucker may be contacted at jdrucker4@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard Rubin and Jesse Drucker, Bloomberg

    No Prejudicial Error in Refusing to Give Jury Instruction on Predominant Cause

    November 11, 2024 —
    The California Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment after the jury determined there was no coverage for a leaking pipe. Mendoza v. Pacific Spec. Ins. Co., 2024 Cal. App. Unpub. EXIS 5477 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 20, 2024). The Mendoza's third amended complaint alleged their home was damaged "by overflow of water from the dwelling's plumbing system resulting from a broken pipe, which overflow undermined the structural integrity of the dwelling." The Mendozas insured their home under a policy issued by Pacific. The policy insured the property against "sudden and accidental direct physical loss" except where expressly excluded. The Mendozas submitted a claim Pacific paid approximately $1800 for the loss and closed the claim. The amount paid did not include payment for any structural damage to the home. The Mendozas alleged that Pacific's failure to conduct a full and fair investigation into the structural damage and its inadequate payment of benefits was a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Settlement Reached in California Animal Shelter Construction Defect Case

    May 13, 2014 —
    A construction defect case involving an animal shelter in Healdsburg, California has settled after two years of litigation, according to The Press Democrat. The $3.5 million, 7,500-square foot building had been “built largely with a behest from the estate of the late vintner Rodney Strong and his wife, Charlotte.” However, “shortly before the facility could be completed in late 2011, general contractor Syd Kelly went bankrupt. Unpaid sub-contractors filed liens for payment against the Healdsburg Animal Shelter, which in turn alleged construction and design defects in the building.” The Press Democrat reported that “[t]he most visible signs of problems were cracks in the cement foundation.” Robert Wilkie, the Healdsburg Animal Shelter board’s secretary-treasurer, stated that the shelter is “perfectly structurally viable and a rather attractive building” and that “the defects that make it not usable today can be mitigated in a variety of different ways.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Governmental Immunity Waived for Independent Contractor - Lopez v. City of Grand Junction

    September 17, 2018 —
    On July 12, 2018, the Colorado Court of Appeals announced its decision in Lopez v. City of Grand Junction, 2018 WL 3384674 (Colo. App. 2018). The Court considered whether immunity is waived under Colorado’s Governmental Immunity Act (“CGIA”), pursuant to section C.R.S. § 24-10-106(1)(f), in situations where the public entity hired an independent contractor to perform the work. The Court held that if the public entity would have been liable under the CGIA for the conduct that caused the injury, had it performed the work itself, then it is liable for the work performed by its independent contractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Frank Ingham, Higgins Hopkins McClain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Ingham may be contacted at ingham@hhmrlaw.com

    Is The Enforceability Of A No-Damage-For-Delay Provision Inappropriate For Summary Judgment

    February 24, 2020 —
    Is the enforceability of a no-damage-for-delay provision inappropriate for resolution on a summary judgment? The recent decision in U.S. f/u/b/o Kingston Environmental Services, Inc. v. David Boland, Inc., 2019 WL 6178676 (D. Hawaii 2019), dealing with Florida law, suggests that it is inappropriate for a summary judgment resolution, particularly when there is a right to a jury trial. In this case, a prime contractor was hired on a federal construction project in Hawaii. The prime contractor hired a subcontractor and the subcontractor sued the prime contractor and its surety under the Miller Act. Of interest, the subcontractor was seeking to recover for the costs it incurred due to construction delays. The prime contractor moved for summary judgment as to the no-damage-for-delay provision in the subcontract. The no-damages-for-delay provision read as follows (and it is a well-written no-damage-for-delay provision): The Subcontractor expressly agrees that the Contractor shall not be liable to the Subcontractor for any damages or additional costs, whether foreseeable or unforeseeable, resulting in whole or in part from a delay, hindrance, suspension, or acceleration of the commencement or execution of the Work, caused in whole or in part by the acts or omissions, whether negligent or not, of the Contractor including other subcontractors or material suppliers to the Project, its agents, employees, or third parties acting on behalf of the Contractor. The Subcontractor’s sole remedy for any such delay, hindrance, suspension, or acceleration shall be a noncompensable time extension. 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

    Avoid Delay or Get Ready to Pay: The Risks of “Time-Is-of-The-Essence” Clauses

    August 29, 2018 —
    Like death and taxes, construction delays are inevitable. Even the most cautious, diligent contractor may face subcontractor disputes, supply shortages, or inclement weather which slows down a project. Even if the contractor avoids unexpected problems, the sheer complexity of a job may cause a contractor to exceed the deadlines proposed in a contract. Fortunately, courts recognize the practical reality of construction projects and the unavoidable delays which may arise. Therefore, as a general rule, a contractor is only liable for delayed completion of a project if the delay resulted from the contractor’s unreasonable performance of his or her work. Reasonable performance will typically serve as a defense to a claim of delayed completion. This defense is a vital asset when a contractor surpasses the project’s expected timeframe. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stephen Orlando, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani