BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnesses
    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


    The Murky Waters Between "Good Faith" and "Bad Faith"

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Sub-Contractor

    A New Digital Twin for an Existing Bridge

    Construction of World's Tallest Building to Resume With New $1.9B Contract for Jeddah Tower

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/11/23) – Millennials Struggle Finding Homes, Additional CHIPS Act Funding Available, and the Supreme Court Takes up Hotel Lawsuit Case

    THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT HAS RULED THAT THE RIGHT TO REPAIR ACT (SB800) IS THE EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR CONSTRUCTION DEFECT CLAIMS NOT INVOLVING PERSONAL INJURIES WHETHER OR NOT THE UNDERLYING DEFECTS GAVE RISE TO ANY PROPERTY DAMAGE in McMillin Albany LL

    Appellate Court Reinforces When the Attorney-Client Relationship Ends for Purposes of “Continuous Representation” Tolling Provision of Legal Malpractice Statute of Limitations

    Hydrogen Powers Its Way from Proof of Concept to Reality in Real Estate

    As Recovery Continues, Home Improvement Stores Make Sales

    Claim for Vandalism Loss Survives Motion to Dismiss

    China Home Glut May Worsen as Developers Avoid Price Drop

    North Carolina Exclusion j(6) “That Particular Part”

    Depreciating Labor Costs May be Factor in Actual Cash Value

    Montrose III: Vertical Exhaustion Applies in Upper Layers of Excess Coverage

    When a Request for Equitable Adjustment Should Be Treated as a Claim Under the Contract Disputes Act

    Automating Your Home? There’s an App for That

    HVAC System Collapses Over Pool at Gaylord Rockies Resort Colorado

    How to Determine the Deadline for Recording a California Mechanics Lien

    Unesco Denies Claim It Cleared Construction of Zambezi Dam

    Insurance for Large Construction Equipment Such as a Crane

    Staten Island Villa Was Home to Nabisco 'Nilla' Wafer Inventor

    Subsurface Water Exclusion Found Unambiguous

    Candis Jones Named “On the Rise” by Daily Report's Georgia Law Awards

    New Utah & Colorado Homebuilder Announced: Jack Fisher Homes

    CISA Clarifies – Construction is Part of Critical Infrastructure Activities

    California Supreme Court Finds that the Notice-Prejudice Rule Applicable to Insurance is a Fundamental Public Policy of the State

    1 De Haro: A Case Study on Successful Cross-Laminated Timber Design and Construction in San Francisco

    Virtual Mediation – How Do I Make It Work for Me?

    How Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Decision Affects Coverage of Faulty Workmanship Claims

    SunEdison Gets Shinsei Bank Funding for Japan Solar Power Plant

    What Are The Most Commonly Claimed Issues In Construction Defect Litigation?

    Connecticut Grapples With Failing Concrete Foundations

    Florida Insurance Legislation Alert - Part I

    Anti-Concurrent, Anti-Sequential Causation Clause Precludes Coverage

    Quick Note: Remember to Timely Foreclose Lien Against Lien Transfer Bond

    Broker's Motion for Summary Judgment on Negligence Claim Denied

    Contractor Side Deals Can Waive Rights

    Consequential Damages Flowing from Construction Defect Not Covered Under Florida Law

    Attempt to Overrule Trial Court's Order to Produce Underwriting Manual Fails

    Settlement Agreement? It Ain’t Over ‘Til it’s . . . Final, in Writing, Fully Executed, and Admissible

    An Era of Legends

    Tarriffs, a Pandemic and War: Construction Contracts Must Withstand the Unforeseeable

    Will a Notice of Non-Responsibility Prevent Enforcement of a California Mechanics Lien?

    Hawaii Supreme Court Bars Insurers from Billing Policyholders for Uncovered Defense Costs

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2022 Top Lawyers!

    Florida Appellate Courts Holds Underwriting Manuals are Discoverable in Breach of Contract Case

    Prior Occurrence Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defects

    Affordable Housing should not be Filled with Defects

    OSHA Advisory Committee, Assemble!

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

    California Contractor License Bonds to Increase in 2016

    December 02, 2015 —
    The post, which originally appeared on The Surety Bond Insider, was written by Jon Gottschalk, a member of the SuretyBonds.com Educational Outreach team. on SuretyBonds.com helps contractors fulfill their bonding requirements. The Contractors State License Board (CSLB) is requiring all California contractors to purchase a $15,000 bond by January 1, 2016— a $2,500 increase from the $12,500 amount that was previously required. The additional $2,500 was previously accounted for by an additional requirement to obtain a contractor’s license. Those applying for the license had to post the $12,500 surety bond and proof of financial solvency in the amount of $2,500. Essentially, contractors were required to show that their current assets were greater than their liabilities by no less than $2,500. By increasing the bond amount to include that additional $2,500, the CSLB has removed the burden of proving financial solvency from those who wish to obtain their license. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Insurer Rejects Claim on Dolphin Towers

    July 22, 2011 —

    A year after residents were forced to leave Dolphin Towers in Sarasota, Florida because of concrete problems, some residents are defaulting on their obligations, abandoning their units. In June, the building’s insurer, Great American, rejected a claim, arguing that the building’s problems were due to latent defects, not covered under the policy. Repair estimates, previously put at $8.2 million, have now risen to $11.5 million. If homeowners cover this cost, it would require an assessment of about $100,000 for each unit.

    About thirty owners are in arrears on dues and fees. Charlotte Ryan, the president of the Dolphin Tower board, wrote to owners, that “the board will have no choice but to lien your property and pursue foreclosure if you do nothing to bring your delinquencies up to date.” However, as homeowners default, the funding for repairs is imperiled. The board has already spent more than $500,000 on shoring up the building and hiring consultants. Their lawyers, on the other hand, are working on a contingency basis.

    Read the full story…

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

    The Colorado Supreme Court holds that loans made to a construction company are not subject to the Mechanic’s Lien Trust Fund Statute

    February 21, 2013 —
    In a prior blog post, we summarized the Court of Appeals decision in the case of AC Excavating, Inc. v. Yale, ___ P. 3d. ___, 2010 WL 3432219 (Colo. App. Sept. 2, 2010) which provided an interpretation of the Colorado Mechanic’s Lien Trust Fund Statute, C.R.S. § 38-22-127 (hereafter “the Trust Fund Statute”). A divided Court of Appeals reversed the trial court, and held that capital loans infused into a limited liability company which performed construction could be subject to the provisions of the Trust Fund Statute. The Court of Appeals reasoned that this determination was necessary because the statute was considered applicable to “all funds disbursed on a construction project.” Additionally, the Court of Appeals held that the intent of the provider of funds was not relevant, and that the statute applied “irrespective of the [originator of the funds]’s intended use of the funds.” This decision was reviewed by the Colorado Supreme Court in an opinion released on February 4, 2013, and it reversed the Court of Appeals’ decision. See, Yale v. AC Excavating, Inc., ___ P. 3d. ___, 2013 WL 441895 (Colo. Feb. 4, 2013). The Supreme Court strongly disagreed that loaned or infused capital funds which were obtained by the general contractor entity were “funds disbursed on a construction project,” simply because some of the infused monies were used for operational purposes to pay down specific project obligations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of W. Berkeley Mann, Jr.
    mann@hlmrlaw.com

    Congratulations 2019 DE, MA, NJ, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    December 09, 2019 —
    Fifteen White and Williams lawyers have been named by Super Lawyers as a Delaware, New Jersey or Pennsylvania "Super Lawyer" while eight received "Rising Star" designations. Each lawyer who received the distinction competed in a rigorous selection process which took into consideration peer recognition and professional achievement. The lawyers named to this year's Super Lawyer list represent a multitude of practices throughout the firm. Super Lawyers 2019 John Balaguer, PI Defense: Med Mal David Chaffin, Business Litigation Kevin Cottone, PI Defense: Med Mal Steven Coury, Real Estate: Business John Eagan, Tax: Business Randy Friedberg, Intellectual Property Bridget La Rosa, Estate Planning & Probate Christopher Leise, Civil Litigation: Defense Randy Maniloff, Insurance Coverage David Marion, Business Litigation John McCarrick, Insurance Coverage Peter Mooney, Business Litigation Michael Olsan, Insurance Coverage John Orlando, General Litigation Wesley Payne, Insurance Coverage Daryn Rush, Insurance Coverage Anthony Salvino, Workers’ Comp Patricia Santelle, Insurance Coverage Jay Shapiro, Business Litigation Heidi Sorvino, Bankruptcy: Business Craig Stewart, Business Litigation Andrew Susko, Civil Litigation: Defense Robert Wright, Insurance Coverage Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    FIFA Inspecting Brazil’s World Cup Stadiums

    March 26, 2014 —
    Representatives from FIFA have returned to Brazil to conduct inspections of the World Cup stadiums, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. Even though Brazil had told FIFA they would have all twelve done by the end of 2013, only nine are finished. Furthermore, “infrastructure work in many of the 12 host cities remains far from completed.” “This is the last occasion for the organizers to take stock of the operational preparations before the respective FIFA World Cup installations begin to be implemented in all 12 host cities,” FIFA said in a statement, as quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Defect Journal Marks First Anniversary

    January 06, 2012 —

    November 2011 marked the first anniversary of the Construction Defect Journal. During the first year our staff and contributors in the insurance and legal communities have compiled several hundred articles of interest to the construction defect and claims community.

    Each of these articles are maintained in the CDJ archives, and are accessible at http://www.constructiondefectjournal.com/archives.html. Each story in the archives is listed in the order it was posted to the archives. Each story in the archives opens up in its own page, so you can easily locate topics and articles of interest.

    If you’re new to Construction Defect Journal, or just want peruse past articles, please take a moment to visit the CDJ Archives page. Also please feel encouraged to submit your firm’s articles or legal publications of interest to the CD community at http://www.constructiondefectjournal.com/submitStory.html.

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

    As Evidence Grows, Regions Prepare for Sea Level Rise

    July 02, 2018 —
    Cities, states and regions are taking steps to prepare their buildings, infrastructure and homes for the impacts of climate change as bad news continues to mount about rising sea levels. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pam Radtke Russell, ENR
    Ms. Russell may be contacted at Russellp@bnpmedia.com

    Doctrine of Merger Not a Good Blend for Seller of Sonoma Winery Property

    April 15, 2015 —
    In Ram’s Gate Winery, LLC v. Joseph G. Roche, et al. (No. A139189 & A141090, filed 4/9/15) (Ram’s Gate), the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District held the doctrine of merger did not extinguish a seller’s contractual duty to disclose potentially hazardous seismic conditions on a Sonoma winery property. In Ram’s Gate, the buyer of the property filed a lawsuit alleging the seller failed to disclose information relating to earthquake issues prior to the close of escrow. In the parties’ “Purchase and Sales Agreement” (Purchase Agreement) the seller agreed to disclose any information known to it regarding “known geological hazards . . . soil reports . . . geotechnical reports” and other facts “having effect on the value of the ownership or use of the property.” The seller, however, argued this disclosure warranty did not survive the escrow period because it did not expressly provide for survival while other provisions in the Purchase Agreement did. Reprinted courtesy of Kristen Lee Price, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Lawrence S. Zucker II, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Price may be contacted at kprice@hbblaw.com Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of