BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut construction claims 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


    Construction Contract Basics: Venue and Choice of Law

    'You're Talking About Lives': The New Nissan Stadium

    Funding the Self-Insured Retention (SIR)

    Quick Note: Independent Third-Party Spoliation Of Evidence Claim

    Emotional Distress Damages Not Distinct from “Annoyance and Discomfort” Damages in Case Arising from 2007 California Wildfires

    Earthquake Hits Mid-Atlantic Region; No Immediate Damage Reports

    It Ain’t Over Till it’s Over. Why Project Completion in California Isn’t as Straightforward as You Think

    Insurance Company’s Reservation of Rights Letter Negates its Interest in the Litigation

    Policyholders' Coverage Checklist in Times of Coronavirus

    First Circuit Limits Insurers’ Right to Recoup Defense Costs or Settlement Payments

    Not So Fast, My Friend: Pacing and Concurrent Delay

    Pandemic-Related Construction Materials Pricing Poses Challenges in Construction Lawsuits

    Applying Mighty Midgets, NY Court Awards Legal Expenses to Insureds Which Defeated Insurer’s Coverage Claims

    No Damages for Delay May Not Be Enforceable in Virginia

    Ninth Circuit Court Weighs In On Insurance Coverage For COVID-19 Business Interruption Losses

    Ohio Supreme Court Holds No Occurence Arises from Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship

    Two-Part Series on Condominium Construction Defect Issues

    Hawaii State Senate Requires CGL Carriers to Submit Premium Information To State Legislature

    Improvements to AIA Contracts?

    Use Your Instincts when Negotiating a Construction Contract

    Winners Announced in Seattle’s Office-to-Residential Call for Ideas Contest

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Despite Construction Defects

    Bert Hummel Appointed Vice Chair of State Bar of Georgia Bench & Bar Committee

    Judicial Panel Denies Nationwide Consolidation of COVID-19 Business Interruption Cases

    How A Contractor Saved The Day On A Troubled Florida Condo Project

    California Appeals Court Says Loss of Use Is “Property Damage” Under Liability Policy, and Damages Can be Measured by Diminished Value

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    COVID-19 Response: Executive Order 13999: Enhancement of COVID-19-Related Workplace Safety Requirements

    Legislative Update – The CSLB’s Study Under SB465

    Glendale City Council Approves Tohono O’odham Nation Casino

    Illinois Court of Appeals Addresses What It Means to “Reside” in Property for Purposes of Coverage

    The Word “Estimate” in a Contract Matters as to a Completion Date

    Haight Expands California Reach – Opens Office in Sacramento

    Consequential Damage Claims for Insurer's Bad Faith Dismissed

    Another Law Will Increase Construction Costs in New York

    New NEPA Rule Restores Added Infrastructure Project Scrutiny

    Quick Note: Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    The Right to Repair Act (Civ.C §895 et seq.) Applies and is the Exclusive Remedy for a Homeowner Alleging Construction Defects

    Repair Cost Exceeding Actual Cash Value Does Not Establish “Total Loss” Under Fire Insurance Policy

    Changes to Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act in New York Introduced

    Texas Windstorm Insurance Agency Under Scrutiny

    Auburn Woods Homeowners Association v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    Client Alert: Catch Me If You Can – Giorgio Is No Gingerbread Man

    Hunton Offers Amicus Support in First Circuit Review of “Surface Water” Under Massachusetts Law

    Anticipatory Repudiation of a Contract — The Prospective Breach

    Emerging World Needs $1.5 Trillion for Green Buildings, IFC Says

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Best Lawyers®

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “A Close Call?”

    Measure of Damages for a Chattel Including Loss of Use

    New California Standards Go into Effect July 1st
    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

    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment

    November 19, 2021 —
    On September 14, 2021, Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian secured summary judgment on behalf of a City which operated a park containing a natural bathing spring in Sarasota County, Florida. The underlying loss occurred when the Plaintiff went to the park, entered the spring without incident, swam for more than an hour, then exited the spring and was returning to the area where she had stored her belongings when she slipped and fell on mud and grass, sustaining an open angulated fracture of her right tibia and fibula. The Plaintiff was rushed to the hospital where she underwent open reduction, internal fixation surgery on her right leg which consisted of implantation of a metal rod into the medullary cavity of her tibia that was secured by two proximal and two distal interlocking screws. She was in the hospital for four days. Upon discharge, the Plaintiff was placed in a walking boot and confined to a wheelchair for several months. The Plaintiff incurred nearly $100,000 in medical expenses. The Plaintiff filed a premises liability action against the City claiming it failed to maintain its premises in a reasonably safe condition. The Plaintiff also alleged that the City failed to warn her that the area where she had stored her belongings had become saturated and slippery proximately causing her fall and resulting injuries. After the close of discovery, Mr. Guldalian filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on behalf of the City arguing the wet grass and mud upon which the Plaintiff fell and injured herself was a byproduct of patrons going in and out of the water and walking to and from the area where they stored their belongings, was open and obvious, and did not constitute a dangerous condition as a matter of law. Citing to case law from the Florida Supreme Court which held that it is common knowledge that walks adjacent to, leading to, or surrounding a bathing area generally have water constantly thrown upon them and are in a slippery condition, as well as deposition testimony from the Plaintiff confirming she had been swimming at the spring for the past eighteen plus years and was “very familiar” with the park, the spring, and the area where she normally stored her belongings, Mr. Guldalian argued that some injury-causing conditions, like wet grass and mud surrounding a swimming area, are simply so open and so obvious that they cannot be held, as a matter of law, to give rise to liability as dangerous conditions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bradley T. Guldalian, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Guldalian may be contacted at bguldalian@tlsslaw.com

    Motion to Dismiss Insurer's Counterclaim for Construction Defects Is Granted

    June 29, 2017 —
    The court granted the insured's motion to dismiss the insurer's counterclaim arising out of construction defects. Centrex Homes v. Zurich Specialties London Limited, et al., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77212 (D. Nev. May 19, 2017). Centrex, the general contractor, was sued by homeowners in a residential development known as Liberty Hill Estates. The suit alleged that defective work had been performed by Centrex's subcontractors, one of which was Valley Concrete Company, Inc. The insurer had issued a policy to Valley and Centrex was an additional insured. The insurer agreed to defend, but only paid a portion of the defense fees and costs because the policy only covered Centrex as to liability arising from Valley's work. The insurer refused to pay defense costs incurred prior to March 28, 2012 the date of notice of claims arising from Valley's work. Centrex then filed suit against the insurer alleging breach of contract and bad faith. The insurer filed a counterclaim seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend. The insurer claimed that Centrex failed to cooperate by unilaterally switching counsel without prior notification to the insurer. This deprived the insurer of the right to control the defense and discharged the insurer's obligations under the policy. Centrex moved to dismiss the counterclaim. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Traub Lieberman Partner Adam Joffe Named to 2022 Emerging Lawyers List

    February 01, 2022 —
    Traub Lieberman is pleased to announce that Adam Joffe has been selected by his peers as a 2022 Emerging Lawyer in Leading Lawyers Magazine in the area of Insurance, Insurance Coverage & Reinsurance Law. Those selected as Emerging Lawyers have been identified by their peers to be among the TOP LAWYERS who are age 40 or younger unless they have practiced for no more than 10 years. Less than 2% of all lawyers licensed in each state have received the distinction of Emerging Lawyer. Reprinted courtesy of Adam P. Joffe, Traub Lieberman Mr. Joffe may be contacted at ajoffe@tlsslaw.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

    January 06, 2012 —

    In their fourth quarter earnings call, executives of Hovnanian Enterprises made some projections for investors, covering the company’s plans for 2012. During the call, Ara K. Hovnanian, the firm’s CEO, discussed their reserves to meet construction defect claims. The firm does an annual actuarial study of their construction defect reserves.

    Mr. Hovnanian noted that there have been no changes for the past several years, but this year they are increasing their reserves by about $6.3 million. Additionally, the firm has added $2.5 million to their legal reserves. Mr. Hovnanian stated “we do not anticipate that changes of this magnitude will be recurring as we look forward to 2012.”

    Read the full story…

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

    California’s One-Action Rule May Apply to Federal Lenders

    June 09, 2016 —
    California’s one-action rule provides that “[t]here can be but one form of action for the recovery of any debt or the enforcement of any right secured by mortgage upon real property or an estate for years therein . . . .” Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 726(a). In other words, the one-action rule prescribes that the only process for recovery of a debt secured by a mortgage or deed of trust is to foreclose on the lien. The rule aims to prevent a multiplicity of actions and vexatious litigation, and to force a beneficiary to look to all of the security as the primary fund for payment of a debt before looking to the trustor’s other assets. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony J. Carucci, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Carucci may be contacted at acarucci@swlaw.com

    CDJ’s Year-End Review: The Top 12 CD Topics of 2015

    December 30, 2015 —
    As a new year begins, Construction Defect Journal has put together the most important issues and topics relating to the construction defect industry in 2015. New cases have arisen to challenge Right to Repair laws and other construction-related claim procedures, some states have made legislative or code changes, as well as other intriguing topics have been discussed in board rooms and over conference calls. We hope you enjoy the look-back at 2015, and we wish you and yours a prosperous 2016. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Product Manufacturers Beware: You May Be Subject to Jurisdiction in Massachusetts

    July 05, 2023 —
    Say you are a Floridian product manufacturer that does business in Massachusetts and you receive a Complaint filed in Massachusetts that alleges your product injured a Nova Scotian resident in Nova Scotia. You know that the only time that product was in Massachusetts was during its transport up the eastern seaboard to its final destination at a retailer in Nova Scotia. Can you be hailed into a Massachusetts court for this accident? The answer is seemingly not so simple following the Supreme Judicial Court’s holding in Doucet v. FCA US LLC. On June 8th, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, in Doucet v. FCA US LLC, held that FCA US LLC is subject to jurisdiction in Massachusetts for a personal injury action arising out of a motor vehicle accident that occurred in New Hampshire. No. SJC-13354, slip. op. (Mass. June 8, 2023). The vehicle had been purchased in New Hampshire by a New Hampshire resident. The Court explained that federal due process does not require a causal connection between a company’s business dealings with the jurisdiction and the injury; instead, a mere relationship between the business dealings and the injury will suffice to establish jurisdiction. Because the vehicle at issue was first sold in Massachusetts and FCA US LLC had extensive business dealings unrelated to the vehicle in question in Massachusetts, the Court concluded that a strong enough relationship existed between FCA US LLC, Massachusetts, and the litigation for jurisdiction to exist. Reprinted courtesy of Timothy Keough, White and Williams LLP and Audrey Schoenike, White and Williams LLP Mr. Keough may be contacted at keought@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Schoenike may be contacted at schoenikea@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    French President Vows to Rebuild Fire-Collapsed Notre Dame Roof and Iconic Spire

    June 03, 2019 —
    Two British masonry experts familiar with centuries-old stone structures voiced concern that the catastrophic fire that collapsed the roof and spire of Notre Dame on April 15 could also have damaged stonework of the iconic Paris cathedral that may affect its stability. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Blair, ENR and Peter Reina, ENR Mr. Blair may be contacted at blairs@enr.com Mr. Reina may be contacted at reina@btinternet.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of