BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope 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


    Property Owner’s Defense Goes Up in Smoke in Careless Smoking Case

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

    How Will Today’s Pandemic Impact Tomorrow’s Construction Contracts?

    Quick Note: Do Your Homework When it Comes to Selecting Your Arbitrator

    One More Statutory Tweak of Interest to VA Construction Pros

    Intentionally Set Atlanta Interstate Fire Closes Artery Until June

    Staying the Course, Texas Supreme Court Rejects Insurer’s Argument for Exception to Eight-Corners Rule in Determining Duty to Defend

    Supreme Court Upholds Prevailing Wage Statute

    Florida Enacts Property Insurance Overhaul for Benefit of Policyholders

    Modular Homes Test Energy Efficiency Standards

    Risk Management for Condominium Conversions

    Hunton Insurance Practice, Partners Recognized by The Legal 500

    House Bill Clarifies Start Point for Florida’s Statute of Repose

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

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/10/23) – Wobbling Real Estate, Booming (and Busting) Construction, and Eye-Watering Insurance Premiums

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You May Want an Intervention …”

    Court of Appeal Holds Only “Named Insureds” May Sue for Bad Faith Under California FAIR Plan Policy

    Pa. Contractor Pleads No Contest to Prevailing-Wage Charges, Pays Workers $20.7M

    Public-Private Partnerships: When Will Reality Meet the Promise?

    London Office Builders Aren’t Scared of Brexit Anymore

    Insurer Fails to Establish Prejudice Due to Late Notice

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (8/21/24) – REITs Show Their Strength, Energy Prices Increase Construction Costs and CRE Struggles to Keep Pace

    HB 20-1046 - Private Retainage Reform - Postponed Indefinitely

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rise Most Since February 2006

    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

    Recent Decision Further Jeopardizes Availability of Additional Insured Coverage in New York

    Court of Appeal Shines Light on Collusive Settlement Agreements

    EPA Rejects Most of N.Y.’s $511 Million Tappan Zee Loan

    Candlebrook Adds Dormitories With $230 Million Purchase

    Walkability Increases Real Estate Values

    Construction Defect Specialist Joins Kansas City Firm

    California Court of Appeal Holds That the Right to Repair Act Prohibits Class Actions Against Manufacturers of Products Completely Manufactured Offsite

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    Ohio School Board and Contractor Meet to Discuss Alleged Defects

    Points on Negotiating Construction Claims

    Curtain Wall Suppliers Claim Rival Duplicated Unique System

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Allegations of Collapse Rejected

    Window Installer's Alleged Faulty Workmanship On Many Projects Constitutes Multiple Occurrences

    California’s High Speed Rail Project. Are We Done With the Drama?

    Avoid Five Common Fraudulent Schemes Used in Construction

    Coverage Issues: When You Need Your Own Lawyer in a Construction Defect Suit

    Courts Are Ordering Remote Depositions as the COVID-19 Pandemic Continues

    “Other Insurance” and Indemnity Provisions Determine Which Insurer Must Cover

    Insurer's Failure to Settle Does Not Justify Multiple Damages under Unfair Claims Settlement Law

    Mitigating the Consequences of Labor Unrest on Construction Projects

    90 and 150: Two Numbers You Must Know

    Construction Jobs Expected to Rise in Post-Hurricane Rebuilding

    Which Cities have the Most Affordable Homes?

    White and Williams Ranked in Top Tiers of "Best Law Firms"

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

    Design and Construction Defects Not a Breach of Contract

    February 14, 2013 —
    The California Court of Appeals tossed out a breach of contract award in Altman v. John Mourier Construction. The decision, which was issued on January 10, 2013, sent the construction defect case back to a lower court to calculate damages based on the conclusions of the appeals court. The case involved both design issues and construction issues. According to the plaintiffs’ expert, the design plans did not make the buildings sufficiently stiff to resist the wind, and that the framing was improperly constructed, further weakening the structures, and leading to the stucco cracking. Additionally, it was alleged that the roofs were improperly installed, leading to water intrusion. The contractor’s expert “agreed the roofs needed repair, but disputed what needed to be done to repair the roofs and the cost.” The jury rejected the plaintiffs’ claims of product liability and breach of warranty, but found in their favor on the claims of breach of contract and negligence. The plaintiffs were awarded differing amounts based on the jury’s conclusions about their particular properties. Both sides sought new trials. JMC, the contractor, claimed that the jury’s verdicts were “inconsistent in that the relieved JMC of liability for strict products liability and breach of warranty, but found JMC liable for breach of contract and negligence.” The plaintiffs “opposed the setoff motion on the ground that the jury heard evidence only of damages not covered by the settlements.” Both motions were denied. After this, the plaintiffs sought and received investigative costs as damages. JMC appealed this amended judgment. The appeals court rejected JMC’s claims that evidence was improperly excluded. JMC sought to introduce evidence concerning errors made by the stucco subcontractor. Earlier in the trial, JMC had insisted that the plaintiffs not be allowed to present evidence concerning the stucco, as that had been separately settled. When they wished to introduce it themselves, they noted that the settlement only precluded the plaintiffs from introducing stucco evidence, but the trial court did not find this persuasive, and the appeals court upheld the actions of the trial court. Nor did the appeals court find grounds for reversal based on claims that the jury saw excluded evidence, as JMC did not establish that the evidence went into the jury room. Further, this did not reach, according to the court, a “miscarriage of justice.” The court rejected two more of JMC’s arguments, concluding that the negligence award did not violate the economic loss rule. The court also noted that JMC failed to prove its contention that the plaintiffs were awarded damages for items that were covered in settlements with the subcontractors. The appeals court did accept JMC’s argument that the award for breach of contract was not supported by evidence. As the ruling notes, “plaintiffs did not submit the contracts into evidence or justify their absence; nor did plaintiffs provide any evidence regarding contract terms allegedly breached.” The court also did not allow the plaintiffs to claim the full amount of the investigative costs. Noting that the trial court had rational grounds for its decision, the appeals court noted that “the jury rejected most of the damages claimed by plaintiffs, and the trial court found that more than $86,000 of the costs itemized in plaintiffs’ invoices ‘appear questionable’ as ‘investigation’ costs/damages and appeared to the trial court to be litigation costs nonrecoverable under section 1033.5.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Are Mechanic’s Liens the Be All End All of Construction Collections?

    August 12, 2024 —
    For those of you familiar with Construction Law Musings, you are aware of my affinity and discussion of those powerful but tricky collection tools: mechanic’s liens. You have heard me tout their ability to secure payment when a contractor or subcontractor has not been paid on a construction project (even in the face of bankruptcy). If you read my construction law blog regularly (though recently not-so-regularly updated), you could get the impression that a mechanic’s lien is an automatic avenue to payment. While mechanic’s liens can be a powerful collection tool, this post is going to discuss some pros and cons of recording, and ultimately suing to enforce, a mechanic’s lien in Virginia. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Coverage for Collapse Ordered on Summary Judgment

    November 21, 2022 —
    A collapsed floor in a restaurant was found to be covered. J&J Fish on Center Street, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Spec. Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163661 (D. Wis. Sept. 12, 2022). J&J Fish rented property from Vision. Vision was obligated to keep the premises insured under an all-risk policy. Vision was also responsible for maintaining and repairing the property "including the slab flooring exterior walls of the premises." Vision never obtained insurance on the building, but J&J Fish secured a commercial property policy from Crum & Forster. On May 29, 2020, approximately 25% of the building's slab floor, the section beneath the walk-in cooler, collapsed into the crawl space below. Dr. Daniel Wojnowski inspected the crawl space and observed overall dampness as well as a pool of water in the space. He concluded that the collapse occurred because the steel support beams and steel elements of the floor corroded after prolonged exposure to moisture. Based on this report, Crum & Forster denied coverage. J&J Fish sued and the parties moved for summary judgment. 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

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine’s 2023 Top Lawyers!

    October 30, 2023 —
    Wilke Fleury is extremely proud of its incredibly talented attorneys! Congratulations to Steven Williamson, Islam Ahmad, Matthew Powell, Adriana Cervantes, Daniel Foster, Neal Lutterman, Aaron Claxton, George Guthrie, Trevor Stapleton, David Frenznick, Michael Polis, Daniel Egan, and Stephen Marmaduke, who are all featured in Sacramento Magazine’s 2023 List of Top Lawyers! Reprinted courtesy of Wilke Fleury LLP Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Restoring the USS Alabama: Surety Lessons From an 80-Year-Old Battleship

    November 13, 2023 —
    It’s not every day that a construction company gets to renovate an 80-year-old battleship. Yet that’s exactly where Youngblood-Barrett Construction & Engineering workers found themselves when they began restoring the main deck of the USS Alabama, a storied World War II battleship. The USS Alabama has a remarkable past. One of four South Dakota–class battleships, the “Mighty A” was commissioned in 1942. It deployed first to the Atlantic and then to the Pacific, where it earned nine battle stars for meritorious service. At 680 feet long and 108 feet wide, the “Heroine of the Pacific” had a wartime crew of 2,500 men. By 1962, though, the Navy was ready to scrap it. That’s when the state of Alabama decided to acquire the ship and preserve it as a museum. The USS Alabama was moved to Mobile and opened to the public in January 1965. Reprinted courtesy of Richard Sghiatti, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nevada HOA Criminal Investigation Moving Slowly

    January 22, 2014 —
    Six years have passed since the FBI started investigating “allegations of the sweeping scheme to take over valley homeowners associations” in Nevada, according to Jeff German writing for the Las Vegas Review-Journal, however, “the public still doesn’t have the full story of how the scheme unfolded.” Defendants who plead guilty are still awaiting sentencing and no trial has been set for “former construction company boss Leon Benzer, the accused mastermind of the scheme” despite that he and ten others have already been indicted. The trial had been set for March, however, defense lawyers stated “they were overwhelmed by the massive amount of evidence and won’t be prepared for trial until well into 2015.” Benzer, Nancy Quon (late construction defect attorney), and others allegedly “funneled more than $8 million through secret bank accounts to land the lucrative legal and construction defect contracts from the homeowners associations,” according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Quon committed suicide in 2012, and therefore was never charged in the case. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Environmental Regulatory Provisions Embedded in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    January 03, 2022 —
    With the enactment of this important legislation, its impact on environmental regulation and policy will be carefully analyzed by the regulated community. Such a review may be hampered by the fact that the law is not only complex but also very long (over 2000 pages!). The Infrastructure Act is mostly an appropriations and authorization law, but it includes many new policy choices. This is a brief review (which can only scratch the surface of this law) of some of the many environmentally related provisions, which are part of this new law and can be located in the pdf version of the law. The law is composed of nine separate divisions, which are further divided into separate titles and subtitles. Division A is entitled “Surface Transportation”; Division B is the “Surface Transportation Investment Act of 2021”; Division C is “Transit”; Division D is “Energy”; Division E is “Drinking Water and Wastewater”; Division F is “Broadband”; Division G is “Other Authorizations”; Division H is “Revenue Provisions”; Division I is “Other Matters”; Division J is “Appropriations”; and Division K is “Minority Business Development.” It is somewhat bewildering on first reading, as befits a law that is expressing the manifold policy decisions made by the Congress. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Cause Still Unclear in March Retaining Wall Collapse on $900M NJ Interchange

    June 07, 2021 —
    A probe continues by construction engineer Hardesty and Hanover LLC into what caused the late March collapse of a retaining wall that is part of one of New Jersey's largest roadbuilding projects—the already late-running effort called Direct Connection, which aims to untangle the convoluted interchange of north-south I-295 and east-west Route 42 in Camden County. Reprinted courtesy of Stephanie Loder, 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