BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code 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


    Cybersecurity on Your Project: Why Not Follow National Security Strategy?

    FHFA’s Watt Says Debt Cuts Possible for Underwater Homeowners

    Commencing of the Statute of Repose for Construction Defects

    Seattle Independent Contractor Ordinance – Pitfalls for Unwary Construction Professionals

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

    Three Reasons Late Payments Persist in the Construction Industry

    Agile Project Management in the Construction Industry

    Serving Notice of Nonpayment Under Miller Act

    ASCE Statement on Congress Passage of WRDA 2024

    Finding Insurer's Declaratory Relief Action Raises Unsettled Questions of State Law, Case is Dismissed

    Lewis Brisbois Ranked Tier 1 Nationally for Insurance Law, Mass Tort/Class Actions Defense, Labor & Employment Litigation, and Environmental Law in 2024 Best Law Firms®

    Construction Industry Groups Challenge DOL’s New DBRA Regulations

    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    McCarthy Workers Test Fall-Protection Harnesses Designed to Better Fit Women

    New Iowa Law Revises Construction Defects Statute of Repose

    More on Fraud, Opinions and Contracts

    Waiver of Subrogation Enforced, Denying Insurers Recovery Against Additional Insured in $500 Million Off-Shore Oil Rig Loss

    Construction Workers Face Dangers on the Job

    Alabama Supreme Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect to Contractor's own Product

    Hotel Owner Makes Construction Defect Claim

    Poor Pleading Leads to Loss of Claim for Trespass Due to Relation-Back Doctrine, Statute of Limitations

    Drafting the Bond Form, Particularly Performance Bond Form

    Homebuilding Design Goes 3D

    Hilti Partners with Canvas, a Construction Robotics Company

    Occurrence Found, Business Risk Exclusions Do Not Bar Coverage for Construction Defects

    Californians Swarm Few Listings Cuts to Affordable Homes

    Owner Bankruptcy: What’s a Contractor to Do?

    Indiana Court of Appeals Rules Against Contractor and Performance Bond Surety on Contractor's Differing Site Conditions Claim

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

    Consider the Risks Associated with an Exculpatory Clause

    Albert Reichmann, Builder of NY, London Finance Hubs, Dies at 93

    SDNY Vacates Arbitration Award for Party-Arbitrator’s Nondisclosures

    How Your Disgruntled Client Can Turn Into Your Very Own Car Crash! (and How to Avoid It) (Law Tips)

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (02/08/23) – The Build America, Buy America Act, ESG Feasibility, and University Partnerships

    Transition Study a Condo Board’s First Defense against Construction Defects

    The Problem with One Year Warranties

    Updates to AIA Contract Applications

    Texas Plans a Texas-Sized Response to Rising Seas

    Construction Defect Reform Bill Passes Colorado Senate

    ASCE Statement on National Dam Safety Awareness Day - May 31

    In Review: SCOTUS Environmental and Administrative Decisions in the 2020 Term

    Factual Issues Prevent Summary Judgment Determination on Coverage for Additional Insured

    Graham & Who May Trigger The Need To Protest

    Recent Third Circuit OSHA Decision Sounds Alarm for Employers and Their Officers

    Buyer's Demolishing of Insured's Home Not Barred by Faulty Construction Exclusion

    Insurer Must Defend Faulty Workmanship Claims

    Insured's Commercial Property Policy Deemed Excess Over Unobtained Flood Policy

    Did You Get a Notice of Mechanic’s Lien after Project Completion? Don’t Panic!

    Nevada Assembly Bill Proposes Changes to Construction Defect Litigation

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Listed in the Best Lawyers in America© 2017
    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

    Condo Association Settles with Pulte Homes over Construction Defect Claims

    November 06, 2013 —
    The Springton Point Condominium Association has settled its construction defect claims against Pulte Homes for $5.6 million. The residents of the 152-unit condominium community alleged a variety of defects which led to water intrusion, as well as a variety of other problems, including defective fire sprinkler systems and missing insulation. Pulte filed lawsuits against its subcontractors on the project, however all but one of these were settled before the case went to trial. The lawsuit started in 2007, with Pulte adding the subcontractors in 2009. On October 25, a jury had been selected, but the case settled before opening statements. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nevada Supreme Court Clarifies the Litigation Waiver of the One-Action Rule

    September 07, 2017 —
    Nevada has a one-action rule which, with limited exceptions, requires a creditor seeking to recover a debt secured by real property to proceed against the security first prior to seeking recovery from the debtor personally. In the event that a law suit is filed in violation of the one-action rule, final judgment may be entered in favor of the creditor but that judgment “releases and discharges the mortgage or other lien.” NRS 40.455(3). Nevada law further provides that, with the exception of certain guaranties, any provision in an agreement relating to the sale of real property which contains a waiver of Nevada’s anti-deficiency laws may not be enforced by a court because doing so violates Nevada’s public policy. NRS 40.453. Nevada law also addresses when the one-action rule may be waived in litigation. In the author’s view, the governing statute, NRS 40.435 is ambiguous. Section 2 of that statute states that if the one-action rule is timely interposed as an affirmative defense, the action must either be dismissed without prejudice or continued to allow the creditor to file amended pleadings to convert the action into one which does not violate the one-action rule. This suggests that the one-action rule must be asserted as an affirmative defense in the debtor’s answer to the complaint or it is waived by the debtor. The first sentence of section 3 of the statute, however, seems to suggest that the debtor has up until the entry of a final judgment to waive the one-action rule by stating: “[t]he failure to interpose, before the entry of a final judgment, the provisions of NRS 40.430 [the one-action rule] as an affirmative defense in such a proceeding waives the defense in that proceeding.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bob L. Olson, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Olson may be contacted at bolson@swlaw.com

    Illinois Insureds are Contesting One Carrier's Universal Denial to Covid-19 Losses

    May 11, 2020 —
    In response to the large number of COVID-19-related losses that businesses are experiencing, insurers have begun issuing statements informing their insureds of whether their policies will respond to the losses, and if so, what coverage will be afforded. Insurers cannot take a “one-size-fits-all” approach to the COVID-19 losses because, besides factual differences, the losses are occurring within all fifty states which means 50 different state law interpretations will apply. Recently, on March 27, 2020, a number of restaurants and movie theaters located in and around Chicago (the “Insureds”) filed a declaratory judgement action, titled Big Onion Tavern Group, LLC et al. v. Society Insurance, Inc., against their property insurance carrier, Society Insurance, Inc. (“Society”), seeking coverage for business interruption resulting from the shutdown order issued by the governor of Illinois. The suit alleges that Society improperly denied their business interruption claims by using a boiler plate denial. The denial issued by Society is allegedly used for all COVID-19 losses regardless of the applicable jurisdiction’s interpretation of the policy language and the specific coverage purchased by the insured. Further, in its denial, Society takes the position that any loss related to a government-issued closure order is uncovered, even though the Insureds specifically purchased business interruption coverage and their policies did not contain an exclusion for losses caused by viruses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anna M. Perry, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Ms. Perry may be contacted at amp@sdvlaw.com

    Construction Defect Bill a Long Shot in Nevada

    June 28, 2013 —
    Construction defect reform may still be on the table in Nevada, according to the Reno Gazette Journal. Assembly member Pat Hickey got a committee hearing for Assembly Bill 504 on Sunday. The bill is backed by the construction industry and opposed by trial lawyers. Hickey told the Assembly Commerce and Labor committee that “this bill is not perfect, I would like for it to do more,” and said that without changes Nevada will “continue to reward litigation over resolution.” AB504 would, among other provisions, provide some protection to subcontractors from the actions of general contractors, though Ira Hansen, an assembly member from Sparks and the owner of a plumbing business, called it a “backhanded slap.” The Gazette noted that similar language pertaining to subcontractors was in AB367, which is sponsored by Democrats. Hickey and Hansen are both Republicans. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Here's How Much You Can Make by Renting Out Your Home

    August 20, 2014 —
    Oklahoma City and San Jose, California, top lists of cities where homeowners deciding to rent rather than sell their homes could see the biggest gains. That's according to real estate information website Zillow Inc., which ran data to see what current homeowners could make if they became mom-and-pop landlords. The Okies in their state's capital city win when it comes to monthly profits: $536, or $6,431 annually. For long-term gains, the top 10 cities are those where homeowners would lose money every year by renting -- until the big payoff when they sell. Zillow translates that gain, looking back, into monthly and yearly profits. So fast-appreciating Californian cities win big, led by San Jose. (Scroll down to see the Top 10 lists; the entire list is here.) The top 10 short-term gainers range geographically from Rochester, N.Y., to Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas. Monthly rental profits there are $349 and $264, respectively, or annual income of $4,182 and $3,166. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Suzanne Woolley, Bloomberg
    Ms. Woolley may be contacted at swoolley2@bloomberg.net

    Architecture, Robotics, and the Importance of Human Interaction – An Interview with Prof. Kathrin Dörfler

    September 21, 2020 —
    We sat down with Professor Kathrin Dörfler of the Technical University of Munich (TUM) in advance of WDBE 2020. We discussed the importance of innovation and how her research focuses on the need for practical and productive solutions when it comes to on-site support. Digital and technical innovation plays an essential role in optimizing the modern built environment. Now leading the Augmented Fabrication Lab (AFAB) in TUM, Professor Kathrin Dörfler quickly saw the need for practical solutions early in her career. The Importance of ‘Need’ “I’m originally an architect,” she says. “I studied digital art and architecture and my tendency to go toward digital fabrication came from this proximity to computational design and the need to use robots for fabrication. There was no other way to build the things you created in your virtual space without using machinery.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Win Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings In Favor of Insurer

    June 26, 2023 —
    Traub Lieberman Partner Jeremy Macklin and Associate Danielle Kegley obtained judgment on the pleadings in favor of Admiral Insurance Company (“Admiral”), in a matter brought before the Chancery Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois. In the underlying case, an injured employee sued various companies, and their agents, for injuries he sustained on a construction project. The insureds, one of the defendant companies and its employee, sought coverage for the underlying lawsuit under a professional liability policy issued to that company by Admiral. The policy at issue provided coverage for the company and its employees, for negligent acts or omissions committed in the rendering of “professional services,” defined as services “involving specialized training and skill while in the pursuit of” mechanical and process engineering. After initially defending the insureds, Admiral filed a declaratory judgment action asking the Court to declare that the company has no duty to defend or indemnify the insureds in the underlying lawsuit and to allow Admiral to immediately withdraw its defense of the insureds. Admiral argued there is no coverage under the professional liability policy, as the underlying lawsuit does not contain allegations that the underlying plaintiff’s injuries arose from the rendering of or failure to render “professional services.” The insureds argued that since they were hired as mechanical and process engineers for the project, that any lawsuits against them must necessarily arise from their “professional services.” Further, the insureds asked the Court to disregard the express allegations in the underlying lawsuit concerning their role on the project as a general contractor. Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy S. Macklin, Traub Lieberman and Danielle K. Kegley, Traub Lieberman Mr. Macklin may be contacted at jmacklin@tlsslaw.com Ms. Kegley may be contacted at dkegley@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Wisconsin Court Enforces Breach of Contract Exclusion in E&O Policy

    July 21, 2018 —
    In its recent decision in Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co. v. GHD Inc.,2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111827 (E.D. Wisc. July 5, 2018), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin had occasion to consider the application of a breach of contract exclusion in a professional liability policy. Crum’s insured, DVO, was sued in connection with its contract to construct a biogas converter mechanism. The underlying suit alleged a sole cause of action; namely, breach of contract based on DVO’s failure to have fulfilled its obligations to design the mechanism to specification. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP