BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction project management 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


    Ownership is Not a Conclusive Factor for Ongoing Operations Additional Insured Coverage

    No Coverage for Property Damage That is Limited to Work Completed by Subcontractor

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Recognized in “The Best Lawyers in America” & “Best Lawyers: One’s to Watch” 2024 Editions

    BHA Has a Nice Swing

    Claims for Negligence? Duty to Defend Triggered

    Court Finds That SIR Requirements are Not Incorporated into High Level Excess Policies and That Excess Insurers’ Payment of Defense Costs is Not Conditioned on Actual Liability

    Pacing in Construction Scheduling Disputes

    A Lien Might Just Save Your Small Construction Business

    Get Smarter About Electric Construction Equipment

    Brenda Radmacher to Speak at Construction Super Conference 2024

    Subcontractor Not Estopped from Enforcing Lien Not Listed In Bankruptcy Petition

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

    Improper Means Exception and Tortious Interference Claims

    Construction Venture Sues LAX for Nonpayment

    California Court of Appeal Clarifies Intent of Faulty Workmanship Exclusions

    Evergrande’s Condemned Towers on China’s Hawaii Show Threat

    William Doerler Recognized by JD Supra 2022 Readers’ Choice Awards

    TxDOT, Flatiron/Dragados Mostly Resolve Bridge Design Dispute

    Claims for Breach of Express Indemnity Clauses Subject to 10-Year Statute of Limitations

    Home Sales and Stock Price Up for D. R. Horton

    Famed NYC Bridge’s Armor Is Focus of Suit Against French Company

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (8/14/24) – Commercial Real Estate AI, Hotel Pipeline Growth, and Housing Market Improvements

    Differences in Types of Damages Matter

    Massachusetts Clarifies When the Statute of Repose is Triggered For a Multi-Phase or Multi-Building Project

    New Jersey Appellate Court Reinstates Asbestos Action

    Texas covered versus uncovered allocation and “legally obligated to pay.”

    Virtual Jury Trials: The Next Wave of Remote Legal Practice

    Recovering Time and Costs from Hurricane Helene: Force Majeure Solutions for Contractors

    California Condo Architects Not Liable for Construction Defects?

    Lien Law Change in Idaho

    Pay-if-Paid Clauses, Nasty, but Enforceable

    Housing Affordability Down

    Thank You!

    At Least 23 Dead as Tornadoes, Severe Storms Ravage South

    Consequential Damages Flowing from Construction Defect Not Covered Under Florida Law

    Insured's Failure to Prove Entire Collapse of Building Leads to Dismissal

    Construction Defects #10 On DBJ’s Top News Stories of 2015

    Failure to Comply with Contract Leaves No Additional Insured Coverage

    Berger: FIGG Is Slow To Hand Over All Bridge Collapse Data

    Arezoo Jamshidi Selected to the 2023 San Diego Super Lawyers List

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    Lewis Brisbois Appellate Team Scores Major Victory in Bad Faith Insurance Action

    Texas Considers a Quartet of Construction Bills

    Another Reminder that Your Construction Contract Language Matters

    Compliance with Building Code Included in Property Damage

    Guarantor’s Liability on Partially Secured Debts – The Impacts of Pay Down Provisions in Serpanok Construction Inc. v. Point Ruston, LLC et al.

    City Council Authorizes Settlement of Basement Flooding Cases

    No Coverage for Additional Insured After Completion of Operations

    The Advantages of Virtual Reality in Construction

    Five Reasons to Hire Older Workers—and How to Keep Them
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: The Duty to Defend

    February 28, 2022 —
    This post in our Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series discusses the Montana Supreme Court’s consideration of an insurer’s duty to defend in National Indemnity Co. v. State, 499 P.3d 516 (Mont. 2021). For 67 years, W.R. Grace & Company’s mining operations spread asbestos through the town of Libby, Montana, causing elevated rates of asbestosis and asbestos-related cancer in Libby residents – even among those who never worked in the mine. The Environmental Protection Agency deemed the Libby Mine the “most significant single source of asbestos exposure” in US history. In 2000, Libby residents began filing lawsuits against the State of Montana, alleging that the State had failed to warn them about the mine’s danger, and this failure contributed to their bodily injuries. Id. at 521-22. The Libby plaintiffs’ asbestos exposures and related injuries had occurred decades earlier, and so the State searched its storage units for records of any potentially applicable insurance policies. Reprinted courtesy of Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Patrick M. McDermott, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Rachel E. Hudgins, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Mr. McDermott may be contacted at pmcdermott@HuntonAK.com Ms. Hudgins may be contacted at rhudgins@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Difference Between a Novation And A Modification to a Contract

    May 10, 2022 —
    In contract law, there are two doctrines that have similarities but are indeed different. These doctrines are known as novation and modification. There are times you may want to make arguments relative to these doctrines because they are important for your theory of the dispute. Thus, you want to make sure you understand them so you can properly plead and prove the required elements to substantiate the basis of the theories. Understanding the elements will help you understand the evidence you will need to best prove your factual theories. A novation is essentially substituting a new contract for an old contract.
    “‘A novation is a mutual agreement between the parties for the discharge of a valid existing obligation by the substitution of a new valid obligation.’” Thompson v. Jared Kane Co., Inc., 872 So.2d 356, 361 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (citation omitted). To prove a novation, a party must prove four elements: “(1) the existence of a previously valid contract; (2) the agreement of the parties to cancel the first contract; (3) the agreement of the parties that the second contract replace the first; and (4) the validity of the second contract.” Id. at 61. Whether the parties consented to the substitute contract can be implied from the factual circumstances. Id.
    Parties are more familiar with a modification because it is not uncommon that parties may agree to modify contractual terms. The contract remains in effect but certain terms or obligations are modified. For example, a change order to a contract is a modification. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case Cannot Be Overturned While Facts Are Still in Contention in Related Cases

    September 09, 2011 —

    The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals has dismissed an appeal of a summary judgment in the case Bella Investments, Inc. v. Multi Family Services, Inc. MFS was hired by Bella to be the general contractor for a hotel in Gardendale, Alabama. MFS hired various subcontractors, including the architect for the project. After completion of the hotel in April, 2006, Bella made requests for MFS to repair cracked floor tiles.

    In August, 2008, Bella sued MFS, the architect, and various fictitiously named defendants. Subsequently, Bella amended its complaint, naming some of the fictitiously named defendants.

    MFS in turn claimed that Bella’s claims were void under the statute of limitations and that Bella was in beach of contact by failing to pay MFS the full amount owed. MFS moved for summary judgment under the statute of limitations, which was granted by the court.

    Bella requested that the court “alter, amend, or vacate its summary judgment order.” When this was denied, Bella appealed to the Alabama Supreme Court, which transferred the appeal to the Court of Civil Appeals. The Court of Appeals refused to vacate the summary judgment as claims that form part of the case against MFS are also part of Bella’s claims against the other defendants. For this reason, the court upheld the summary judgment.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Hotel Claims Construction Defect Could Have Caused Collapse

    December 30, 2013 —
    The owners of the Crowne Plaza New Orleans Airport, in Kenner, Louisiana, have filed a lawsuit claiming that a defective beam installed during renovations put the building at risk of collapse, reports The Louisiana Record. The hotel was sold to its current owners, 2929 Williams Blvd, LLC, in 2006, and the renovations began after Hurricane Katrina in 2007. The renovations converted an indoor pool area into a ballroom. The renovations were finished in 2008, but hotel staff noticed the walls and ceiling of the ballroom were sagging by September 2011. A structural engineer determined that a main beam had failed, risking collapse of the entire building. The hotel owners set upon repairing the structure and now seek reimbursement. 2929 Williams Blvd., LLC is suing Trimark Constructors LLC, Kyle Associates LLC, and Avengo Baily & Associates, Inc. for an unspecified amount of damages. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Planned Everglades Reservoir at Center of Spat Between Fla.'s Gov.-Elect, Water Management District

    January 02, 2019 —
    Dec. 11 -- Florida's incoming governor stopped short of demanding South Florida water managers step down over a contentious land deal with sugar farmers, saying he would instead await a recommendation from his transition team. That doesn't mean their days may not be numbered. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Structural Health Check-Ups Needed but Are Too Infrequent

    August 16, 2021 —
    Knowing when a building is structurally deteriorating, and actually doing something about it can be very different things, as the collapse in Surfside, Fla., has shown this month. And while onsite visual inspections are still the common kind of structural assessment, other methods can assess the health of a building or piece of infrastructure and determine its soundness (see p. 69). Reprinted courtesy of Jeff Rubenstone, Engineering News-Record Mr. Rubenstone may be contacted at rubenstonej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer Must Pay Portions of Arbitration Award Related to Faulty Workmanship

    October 21, 2019 —
    The court determined that portions of an arbitration award against the insured contractor based upon faulty workmanship were covered by the policy. Wallace v. Nautilus Ins. Co., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122219 (D. N. H. July 23, 2010). Plaintiffs, owners of adjoining homes, hired McPhail Roofing, LLC to replace the roofs of their houses. After installation, the plaintiffs found several problems with their roofs and withheld roughly a third of the agreed-upon contract price from final payments due to McPhail. A roofing consultant found evidence of water leaking through both roofs during rainstorms. Improper installation of the shakes on the roofs allowed rain to seep through to the roof decks (the plywood underneath the roofs) and eventually into the houses. The only way to cure the installation defects was to remove and replace the roofs entirely. Plaintiffs and McPhail went to arbitration. Plaintiffs sought compensation for the damage caused by the leaking and for the replacement costs of the roofs. McPhail sought the remaining payment under the contracts. Nautilus defended McPhail under this CGL policy. 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

    Florida SB 2022-736: Construction Defect Claims

    February 07, 2022 —
    *Special thank you to SDV Law Clerk Iliriana Fteja for contributing to this article. A new bill (SB 2022-736) was recently introduced to the Florida Senate. The proposed amendments to the statutes of limitations and repose could significantly impact construction defect claims by effectively creating additional exposure to contractors and insurance carriers. The proposed bill requires all actions founded on the design, planning, or construction of an improvement to real property to be commenced within four years after the time to commence an action begins. Under the proposed amendment, the time to commence an action runs from the date of actual possession by the owner, the date of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the date of abandonment of construction if not completed, or the date of completion of the contract or termination of the contract between the professional engineer, registered architect, or licensed contractor and their employer. This provision would effectively alter the time to commence an action to whichever triggering event is earliest instead of the latest triggering event per the previous statute. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kelly A. Johnson, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Johnson may be contacted at KJohnson@sdvlaw.com