BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture 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


    As Trump Visits Border, Texas Landowners Prepare to Fight the Wall

    July 1, 2015 Statutory Changes Affecting Virginia Contractors and Subcontractors

    New York Labor Laws and Action Over Exclusions

    Mark Van Wonterghem To Serve as Senior Forensic Consultant in the Sacramento Offices of Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc.

    Defend Trade Secret Act of 2016–-Federalizing Trade Secret Law

    Massachusetts High Court: Attorney's Fee Award Under Consumer Protection Act Not Covered by General Liability Insurance Policy

    Builder Survey Focuses on Green Practices of Top 200 Builders

    To Require Arbitration or Not To Require Arbitration

    Eighth Circuit Affirms Finding of Bad Faith, Award of Costs and Prejudgment Interest

    DOI Aims to Modernize its “Inefficient and Inflexible” Type A Natural Resource Damages Assessment Regulations

    PFAS and the Challenge of Cleaning Up “Forever”

    Court Clarifies Sequence in California’s SB800

    A Recap of the Supreme Court’s 2019 Summer Slate

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Dining

    Appreciate The Risks You Are Assuming In Your Contract

    Hospital Settles Lawsuit over Construction Problems

    SDNY Vacates Arbitration Award for Party-Arbitrator’s Nondisclosures

    Can General Contractors Make Subcontractors Pay for OSHA Violations?

    Georgia House Bill Addresses Construction Statute of Repose

    California Clarifies Its Inverse Condemnation Standard

    Motion to Dismiss Insureds' Counterclaim on the Basis of Prior Knowledge Denied

    Illinois Appellate Court Addresses Professional Services Exclusion in Homeowners Policy

    No Coverage for Negligent Misrepresentation without Allegations of “Bodily Injury” or “Property Damage”

    ASCE Joins White House Summit on Building Climate-Resilient Communities

    Does the New Jersey Right-To-Repair Law Omit Too Many Construction Defects?

    No Coverage for Roof Collapse During Hurricane

    Energy Efficiency Ratings Aren’t Actually Predicting Energy Efficiency

    U.S. Supreme Court Halts Enforcement of the OSHA Vaccine or Test Mandate

    3 Common Cash Flow Issues That Plague The Construction Industry

    NAHB Examines Single-Family Detached Concentration Statistics

    Red Tape Is Holding Up a Greener Future

    Avoid the Headache – Submit the Sworn Proof of Loss to Property Insurer

    Nuclear Fusion Pushes to Reach Commercial Power Plant Stage

    Jury Awards Aluminum Company 35 Million in Time Element Losses

    Case-Shiller Redo Shows Less Severe U.S. Home-Price Slump

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- The Claim

    Seeking Better Peer Reviews After the FIU Bridge Collapse

    Look Out! Texas Building Shedding Marble Panels

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

    Colorado Adopts Twombly-Iqbal “Plausibility” Standard

    Measure of Damages in Negligent Procurement of Surety Bonds / Insurance

    On Rehearing, Fifth Circuit Finds Contractual-Liability Exclusion Does Not Apply

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

    A Top U.S. Seller of Carbon Offsets Starts Investigating Its Own Projects

    Federal Courts Keep Chipping Away at the CDC Eviction Moratorium

    Limitation on Coverage for Payment of Damages Creates Ambiguity

    Reasonableness of Denial of Requests for Admission Based Upon Expert’s Opinions Depends On Factors Within Party’s Understanding

    Oregon Condo Owners Make Construction Defect Claim

    Court of Appeal Puts the “Equity” in Equitable Subrogation

    Subcontractor Allowed to Sue Designer for Negligence: California Courts Chip Away at the Economic Loss Doctrine (Independent Duty Rule)
    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

    What Every Project Participant Needs to Know About Delay Claims

    August 05, 2024 —
    A “delay” on a construction project is defined as the stretching out of the time for completion of certain key milestone scopes of work which can impact the completion date of an entire project, due to some circumstances or events that were not reasonably anticipated when the project began. 2 Construction Law ¶ 6.01 (Matthew Bender, 2024). While delays can be caused by any number of events, the most common are defective plans and specifications; design changes; severe weather and other, similar unforeseeable events; unforeseen or differing site conditions; unavailability of materials or labor; labor inefficiencies or stoppages; contractor negligence; and owner influences, including construction changes or outright interference by the owner or its agents. If the project schedule is not recovered following a delay, then the project schedule will likely be extended, resulting in an increase in the contractor’s costs of performance. A contractor that has experienced a delay on a project can take certain actions to pursue recovery of any damages the contractor may have incurred. However, to do so it is important to understand the different types of delays and the methods for establishing the delays. I. Types of Delays Delays may be categorized as (1) critical versus non-critical delays, (2) excusable versus non-excusable delays, and (3) compensable versus non-compensable delays. A critical delay is a delay that affects the project completion date and delays the entire project. In essence, a critical delay is one that will extend the critical path of a project. A non-critical delay is a delay that has no effect on the project’s critical path. Courts have recognized that delays to work not on the critical path will generally not delay the completion of a project. G.M. Shupe, Inc. v U.S., 5 Cl. Ct. 662, 728 (1984). Such a non-critical delay may affect the completion of certain activities, but does not affect the completion date of the entire project. In order for a delay to provide the basis for a claim for additional time or money, the delay must impact critical path activities on the project schedule. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Andrew G. Vicknair, D'Arcy Vicknair, LLC
    Mr. Vicknair may be contacted at agv@darcyvicknair.com

    OPINION: Stop Requiring Exhibit Lists!

    September 18, 2023 —
    You are conducting the final hearing of a high-dollar construction arbitration. Opposing counsel hands you the next document that counsel plans to use in questioning the witness on the stand. You notice that the document is bates stamped but has no exhibit number. So, you quickly consult opposing counsel’s exhibit list and – gasp – you find that the document is not on the list. What do you do? Do you object? Assuming this is not your first construction arbitration hearing, you do not object. Why? Because your objection would be futile. Construction arbitrators simply do not exclude evidence on the basis that it does not appear on an exhibit list. (Evidence not produced in discovery or otherwise previously provided might be a different case.) In an informal poll of a dozen construction lawyers conducted by this author, not one reported evidence being excluded solely because it did not appear on an exhibit list. This remained true even when the applicable case management order purported to prohibit the introduction of evidence not on an exhibit list. Thus, to be used in an arbitration hearing, documents must appear on an exhibit list, unless they don’t, in which case you can use them anyway. So far, so pointless. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Todd Heffner, Troutman Pepper
    Mr. Heffner may be contacted at todd.heffner@troutman.com

    Study Finds Construction Cranes Vulnerable to Hacking

    May 20, 2019 —
    When securing a jobsite against malicious hackers, most go to protect computer files, and few look up and worry about the tower cranes. But many cranes—whether tower, mobile or industrial—can be remotely run via radio wireless controllers, a useful feature for when operators need a clearer view of the load from the ground. Unfortunately, these wireless signals are vulnerable to hijacking, according to a study released earlier this year by security research firm Trend Micro. It found that the radio signals these crane controllers use are not encrypted over the air in any way, and can be easily intercepted and spoofed using off-the-shelf equipment and a basic knowledge of electronics and radio engineering. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeff Rubenstone, ENR
    Mr. Rubenstone may be contacted at rubenstonej@enr.com

    Duty to Defend For Accident Exists, But Not Duty to Indeminfy

    March 05, 2015 —
    The Seventh Circuit found there was a duty to defend the additional insured under the policy, but not a duty to indemnify. Kmart Corp. v. Footstar, Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 1775 (7th Cir. Feb. 4, 2015). By agreement, Footstar operated the footwear department in hundreds of Kmart stores around the country. Footstar's footwear departments were in designated areas of the Kmart stores. Section 18.1 of the Master Agreement required Footstar to defend and indemnify Kmart from "all damage . . . arising out of Footstar's performance or failure to perform under this Agreement." The same section also required Footstar to obtain additional insurance coverage for Kmart. 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

    Developer Transition - Maryland Condominiums

    June 21, 2017 —
    INTRODUCTION “Developer transition” is the process by which the governance of a condominium association is transferred from developer to unit owner control. This article provides a brief overview of the legal requirements that govern the developer transition process for Maryland condominiums. This article also as well as a “transition checklist” for transitioning unit owner-controlled boards of directors. PERIOD OF DEVELOPER CONTROL A developer initially controls an association because it owns all unsold units in the newly created condominium community. As such, the developer has the controlling votes associated with majority ownership and can appoint its own employees as the initial members of the board of directors and thereby control how the condominium association conducts its affairs. This is referred to as the “period of developer control,” during which the developer makes all decisions on behalf of the association. The developer also creates an association’s governing documents, allowing it to dictate, subject to applicable law, the procedures and time periods under which control over the association’s board of directors will eventually be transferred to the homeowners. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas D. Cowie, Cowie & Mott, P.A.
    Mr. Cowie may be contacted at ndc@cowiemott.com

    Conspirators Bilked Homeowners in Nevada Construction Defect Claims

    March 28, 2012 —

    Courthouse News has a summary of the current lawsuit over a Nevada conspiracy to defraud homeowners by taking control of homeowner boards and then providing inadequate repairs. Homeowners in eight Las Vegas area communities are involved in the suit, which claims that the conspirators purchased units in the communities and then transferred fractional interests to others to allow them to run for HOA board elections. The suit claims that David Amesbury and his firm helped manipulate the elections.

    Once homeowner boards were controlled by the conspirators, Nancy Quon, the construction defect attorney whose recent death appears to be by suicide, handled the litigation against homebuilders. She would settle out of court, engaging Silver Lining Construction to “do very minor and superficial repairs” to the homes. The remainder of the money was split by the conspirators. The suit also notes that the construction defect claims were “frivolous,” and?in addition to the negative publicity?caused the homes to lose at least 5% of their value.

    Read the full story…

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

    Subcontractor Sued for Alleged Defective Work

    June 11, 2014 —
    The Louisiana Record reported that “[a] construction company is suing a subcontractor for alleged defective work on two construction projects” in New Orleans, Louisiana. New Beginnings Enterprises and J. Fernando Arriola are “accused of providing defective labor and materials, failing to properly supervise construction on the properties, failing to obtain inspections required under building codes, failing to construct dwellings in accordance with plans and specifications and failing to perform agreements in a workmanlike manner,” according to the Louisiana Record. Plaintiffs including Bartel Construction LLC seek $209,500 in damages “as additional sums for defective and incomplete work, lost profits, consequential damages and attorney’s fees.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Lorelie S. Masters Nominated for Best in Insurance & Reinsurance for the Women in Business Law Awards 2021

    November 08, 2021 —
    We are pleased to announce that Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP insurance coverage partner Lorelie S. Masters is one of only eight attorneys throughout the nation shortlisted for the Best in Insurance & Reinsurance category for the Women in Business Law Awards 2021. The award honors “the outstanding achievements of women in over thirty different practice areas in business law from across Americas. These are individuals who stand out as leaders amongst their peers and who have been instrumental to innovative approaches in their field.” A nationally recognized insurance coverage litigator, Ms. Masters has handled and tried cases in state and federal trial and appellate courts across the country and in arbitrations in the United States and abroad. At issue in these cases, typically, have been millions of dollars of insurance coverage for product and environmental liability, like silicone gel breast implant and asbestos claims. She regularly advises clients on a wide range of liability coverages, including insurance for environmental, cyber, directors and officers, property damage, and other liabilities and loss. Most recently, she has advised clients in a variety of industries on COVID-19 losses under a wide variety of first-party property, business-interruption policies and “package policies,” and obtained multi-million dollar settlements under D&O, Side-A Only D&O and E&O policies. Reprinted courtesy of Adriana A. Perez, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Andrea DeField, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Perez may be contacted at pereza@HuntonAK.com Ms. DeField may be contacted at adefield@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of