BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expert
    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


    CDJ’s #9 Topic of the Year: Nevada Supreme Court Denies Class Action Status in Construction Defect Case

    The Families First Coronavirus Response Act: What Every Employer Should Know

    Will the Hidden Cracks in the Bay Bridge Cause Problems During an Earthquake?

    The Future of Pandemic Coverage for Real Estate Owners and Developers

    Timely Legal Trends and Developments for Construction

    “If It Walks Like A Duck . . .” – Expert Testimony Not Always Required In Realtor Malpractice Cases Where Alleged Breach Of Duty Can Be Easily Understood By Lay Persons

    Construction Defect Claim Not Timely Filed

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap - The New Science of Jury Trial Advocacy

    Judgment for Insured Upheld After Insurer Rejects Claim for Hurricane Damage

    Make Your Business Great Again: Steven Cvitanovic Authors Construction Today Article

    Insurers Can Sue One Another for Defense Costs on Equitable Indemnity and Equitable Contribution Basis

    Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review Regarding Necessary Parties in Lien Foreclosure Actions

    Insurer Wrongfully Denies Coverage When Household Member Fails to Submit to EUO

    Connecticut Grapples With Failing Concrete Foundations

    Federal Court Ruling Bolsters the “Your Work” Exclusion in Standard CGL Policies

    Dozens Missing in LA as High Winds Threaten to Spark More Fires

    Tech to Help Contractors Avoid Litigation

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: LESLIE KING O'NEAL

    Flood Insurance Claim Filed in State Court Properly Dismissed

    Homebuilders Go Green in Response to Homebuyer Demand

    How Many Bridges Does the Chesapeake Bay Need?

    Defense Victory in Breach of Fiduciary Action

    California Supreme Court Protects California Policyholders for Intentional Acts of Employees

    Wreckage Removal Underway at Site of Collapsed Key Bridge in Baltimore, But Weather Slows Progress

    Insurer Ordered to Participate in Appraisal

    United States Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in EEOC Subpoena Case

    Equitable Lien Designed to Prevent Unjust Enrichment

    Use It or Lose It: California Court of Appeal Addresses Statutes of Limitations for Latent Construction Defects and Damage to Real Property

    Singapore Unveils Changes to Make Public Housing More Affordable

    Texas Court Requires Insurer to Defend GC Despite Breach of Contract Exclusion

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

    Persimmon Offers to Fix Risky Homes as Cladding Crisis Grows

    Structural Failure of Precast-Concrete Span Sets Back Sydney Metro Job

    What’s in a Name? Trademarks and Construction

    Colorado Homebuyers Must be in Privity of Contract with Developer to Assert Breach of Implied Warranty of Suitability

    Colorado Court of Appeals’ Ruling Highlights Dangers of Excessive Public Works Claims

    New York Court Holds Insurer Can Recover Before Insured Is Made Whole

    Denial of Claim for Concealment or Fraud Reversed by Sixth Circuit

    SIGAR Report Finds +$15 Billion in “Waste, Fraud and Abuse” in Afghanistan

    New Jersey Supreme Court Holding Impacts Allocation of Damages in Cases Involving Successive Tortfeasors

    Changes to Va. Code Section 43-13: Another Arrow in a Subcontractor’s Quiver

    Construction Calamity: Risk Transfer Tips for Contractors After a Catastrophic Loss

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    Inverse Condemnation and Roadwork

    Utah Becomes First State to Enact the Uniform Commercial Real Estate Receivership Act

    Supreme Court Set to Alter Law on Key Project, Workforce Issues

    Zoning Hearing Notice Addressed by Georgia Appeals Court

    Housing Starts Plunge by the Most in Four Years

    New NEPA Rule Restores Added Infrastructure Project Scrutiny

    Over 70 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 4th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America
    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

    California Builders’ Right To Repair Is Alive

    March 19, 2014 —
    The California Supreme Court surprised everyone on December 11, 2013 when it denied Brookfield Homes’ request for review of the ruling in the case of Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove, LLC (2014) 219 Cal.App.4th 98, which was decided by the Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District Division Three (Orange County). In that case the Court of Appeal held that the Right to Repair Act aka SB800 is not the exclusive remedy for a homeowner seeking damages for construction defects that have resulted in property damage. Under the ruling, homeowners may choose to sue builders under common law theories of liability such as strict liability and negligence, in addition to liability under the Act. This ruling made homeowners' compliance with the prelitigation requirements of the Act optional and thereby put builders' “right to repair” in jeopardy. The ruling undermined the expectations of California's homebuilders who, for the past decade, understood that their liability is limited by the Act and that they have a right to repair. Since the Liberty Mutual case was handed down, the topic has become a hotbed item with several divisions of the Court of Appeal. On February 19, 2014, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District Division Three (Los Angeles County) issued a ruling against Premier Homes in the case of Burch v. Superior Court 2014 Cal.App.LEXIS 159 that, without independent analysis, simply adopted the holding in the Liberty Mutual case. But on February 21, 2014, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District Division Four (Los Angeles County) ruled in the case of KB Home Greater Los Angeles, Inc. v.Superior Court 2014 Cal.App.LEXIS 167 that a homeowner's failure to give the builder an opportunity to inspect and repair a construction defect excused the builder's liability under the Act. Additionally, the Court of Appeal went out of its way to state it had ruled earlier in that case that the Act is the exclusive remedy. The various rulings lay a foundation for ultimate intervention by the California Supreme Court. In the meantime, these opposing cases will be cited by counsel for homeowners and builders alike for opposing positions as they continue to navigate construction defect disputes. Mr. Byassee is a strategic litigator specializing in representation of builders and developers. For more information regarding dispute resolution procedures under SB800, Mr. Byassee may be contacted at (949) 250-9797 or by email at dbyassee@ut-law.com. Published courtesy of David J. Byassee, Ulich & Terry LLP Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Contributors to This Blog Are Pleased to Announce That….

    November 02, 2017 —
    Snell & Wilmer’s Real Estate Litigation Group, which provides the content for The Real Estate Litigation Blog, is pleased to announce that it has been recognized in both the national and metropolitan rankings by U.S. News Media Group and Best Lawyers for the 2018 edition of “Best Law Firms.” We achieved the following rankings:
    • National Tier 1: Litigation – Real Estate
    • Phoenix (AZ) Tier 1: Litigation – Real Estate
    • Utah Tier 1: Litigation – Real Estate
    • Colorado Tier 1: Litigation – Real Estate
    • Reno (NV) Tier 1: Litigation – Real Estate
    • Tucson (AZ) Tier 1: Litigation – Real Estate
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nevada Construction Defect Lawyers Dead in Possible Suicides

    March 28, 2012 —

    A number of news sources have reported on the recent death of Nevada construction defect attorney, Nancy Quon. Ms. Quon was implicated in a recent scandal in which a group conspired to control homeowner associations in order to divert construction defect lawsuits to the members of the conspiracy.

    Ms. Quon was found dead in her bathtub. The details are still under investigations. She and her boyfriend were accused of a failed arson/suicide scheme in 2010. Ms. Quon survived an attempt to burn down her home. Subsequently, her boyfriend obtained some gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GBH) for her, as part of another failed suicide attempt.

    Subsequent to Ms. Quon’s death, David Amesbury was found in California dead by hanging. Mr. Amesbury took a plea deal in the case, and he had admitted his role in providing legal and construction contracts to firms in the conspiracy. He was accused of fixing HOA elections.

    Read the full story…

    Read the full story…

    Read the full story…

    Read the full story…

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

    ASHRAE Approves Groundbreaking Standard to Reduce the Risk of Disease Transmission in Indoor Spaces

    July 10, 2023 —
    ATLANTA, June 27, 2023 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- ASHRAE announced the approval for publication of its highly anticipated standard to reduce the risk of airborne infectious aerosol transmission in buildings, bringing numerous benefits to occupants and promoting healthier environments. ASHRAE Standard 241, Control of Infectious Aerosols establishes minimum requirements to reduce the risk of disease transmission by exposure to infectious aerosols in new buildings, existing buildings, and major renovations. Infectious aerosols are tiny, exhaled particles that can carry pathogens that cause infections or disease. These particles are so small that they can remain in the air for long periods of time. Use of this standard could reduce exposure to the SARS-COVID-2 virus, which causes COVID-19, the flu virus and other pathogens. Standard 241 provides requirements for many aspects of air system design, installation, operation, and maintenance. Standard 241 available now for presale in the ASHRAE Bookstore. About ASHRAE Founded in 1894, ASHRAE is a global professional society committed to serve humanity by advancing the arts and sciences of heating ventilation, air conditioning, refrigeration, and their allied fields. For more information and to stay up-to-date on ASHRAE, visit ashrae.org and connect on Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Angels Among Us

    June 21, 2024 —
    In the early morning hours of March 26, 2024, an outbound cargo ship in the Port of Baltimore unexpectedly lost power as it churned toward the Francis Scott Key Bridge. Authorities had just minutes to stop vehicular traffic before the massive vessel—985 feet long and 157 feet wide, nearly as tall as the Eiffel Tower if stood on end—crashed headlong into one of the bridge’s support piers. Quick-acting dispatchers were able to stop the flow of traffic in time, but overnight work crews filling potholes on the bridge didn’t have enough warning. Six workers lost their lives when the bridge collapsed. On top of bringing immense grief, construction fatalities can be financially devastating to the surviving families. Enter Construction Angels, a nonprofit that provides financial assistance, grief counseling and scholarships to families of fallen construction workers. When founder Kristi Ronyak first heard news of the Key Bridge collapse, she immediately jumped into action. “We started getting calls just hours after the crash,” Ronyak says. “When I first heard the news, my heart sank, and I just started crying. Reprinted courtesy of Maggie Murphy, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Property Owner Entitled to Rely on Zoning Administrator Advice

    May 16, 2018 —
    In the recent case of In Re Langlois/Novicki Variance Denial, 175 A.3d 1222, 2017 VT 76 (2017), the Vermont court addressed the question of whether a property owner could enforce – by equitable estoppel principles – a representation by a town zoning administrator that no permit or variance was needed for the property owner’s proposed construction. In that case, a landowner wanted to add a pergola to an existing concrete patio on his land. During a social visit at the property, the property owner asked the town zoning administrator if he needed a permit. The town zoning administrator told the property owner that no permit was needed. The property owner thereafter showed the zoning administrator a sketch of the planned construction, and again asked if a permit was required. The town zoning administrator looked at the sketch and repeated his prior advice that no permit was needed. The property owner then spent $33,000 to build the pergola. After incurring the expense, the property owner was advised that the structure violated zoning regulations. The property owner requested a variance, which the zoning board denied. The Court held that the town was estopped from requiring removal of the pergola. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kevin J. Parker, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Parker may be contacted at kparker@swlaw.com

    BOOK CLUB SERIES: Everything You Want to Know About Construction Arbitration But Were Afraid to Ask

    October 30, 2023 —
    I recently had the pleasure of speaking with construction law notables John Foust and Andy Ness to discuss the release of their new book—Construction Arbitration: The Advocate’s Practical Guide. The goal of their book: to teach attorneys what they need to know to maximize their effectiveness in the arbitration context. To that end, the book covers every aspect of the arbitration process including motion practice, conduct as an advocate, presentation of the case, and post-hearing submissions. Read on for Andy and John’s candid, behind-the-scenes take on how this book came to be and why you should get your copy now, while supplies last! Q: Who is the target audience for this book? Andy: In the editing process (and in writing my own chapter on Navigating an International Construction Arbitration) I pretended that I was speaking with a construction lawyer who was a few years out of law school, with some litigation experience, who was getting ready to take on a significant and complex construction arbitration for the first time. The book presupposes knowledge of the basics and tries to anticipate the questions that would be asked when you are trying to think through the whole arbitration process from start to finish. What should my pleadings look like? How much discovery am I likely to be able to obtain? How should my demeanor be different from what I would do in a courtroom? How much should I object during the hearing? In a nutshell, it’s “What do I need to know to maximize my chances of success in the arbitration setting?” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Marissa L. Downs, Laurie & Brennan, LLP
    Ms. Downs may be contacted at mdowns@lauriebrennan.com

    Performing Work with a Suspended CSLB License Costs Big: Subcontractor Faces $18,000,000 Disgorgement

    September 17, 2015 —
    In what could lead to a draconian result, the Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District held that a contractor who performs work without a valid license can be required to disgorge all payments received, even if the contractor perfectly performed its work. The case, Judicial Council of California v. Jacobs Facilities, Inc. (Ct. of Appeal, 1st App. Dis., Div. One, A140890, A141393), involved an $18,000,000 contract between Jacobs Facilities, Inc. (“Jacobs Facilities”) and the Judicial Council of California (“Judicial Council”). In April 2006, Jacobs Facilities, a wholly owned subsidiary of Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. (“Jacobs Engineering”) entered into a three year contract with the Judicial Counsel to maintain 121 courthouses and other judicial branch buildings throughout Southern California (the “Contract”). Jacobs Facilities contracted to provide maintenance and oversight services, while retaining subcontractors to perform the actual maintenance and repair work. In December 2006, as part of a corporate reorganization, Jacobs Engineering started winding up Jacobs Facilities and transferred its employees to Jacobs Engineering and then subsequently to another wholly owned subsidiary called Jacobs Project Management Co. (“Jacobs Management”). The work that was performed by Jacobs Facilities was taken over by Jacobs Management. As part of the windup, Jacobs Facilities’ Contractor’s State License Board license was allowed to lapse and the license expired by operation of law in November 2008. Although Jacobs Management was now performing the work, it was not added as a party to the contract. Although it appears Judicial Council was aware of the corporate changes, it was not until November 2009 that the parties assigned the contract to Jacobs Management. Reprinted courtesy of Steven M. Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and David A. Harris, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com Mr. Harris may be contacted at dharris@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of