BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildings
    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


    Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds Asbestos Exclusion in Alleged Failure to Disclose Case

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (09/12/23) – Airbnb’s Future in New York City, MGM Resorts Suffer Cybersecurity Incident, and Insurance Costs Hitting Commercial Real Estate

    Contractors’ Right to Sue in Washington Requires Registration

    Pennsylvania Court Finds that Two Possible Causes Can Prove a Product Malfunction Theory of Liability

    Disputes Over Arbitrator Qualifications: The Northern District of California Offers Some Guidance

    Illinois Supreme Court Holds that Constructions Defects May Constitute “Property Damage” Caused By An “Occurrence” Under Standard CGL Policy, Overruling Prior Appellate Court Precedent

    The Need for Situational Awareness in Construction

    “Since You Asked. . .”

    In Florida, Component Parts of an Improvement to Real Property are Subject to the Statute of Repose for Products Liability Claims

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: J. PAUL ALLEN

    San Diego Appellate Team Prevails in Premises Liability Appeal

    Texas Supreme Court Cements Exception to “Eight-Corners” Rule Through Two Recent Rulings

    The Colorado Court of Appeals Rules that a Statutory Notice of Claim Triggers an Insurer’s Duty to Defend.

    Communicate with the Field to Nip Issues in the Bud

    The Biggest Change to the Mechanics Lien Law Since 1963

    "Abrupt Falling Down of Building or Part of Building" as Definition of Collapse Found Ambiguous

    Study Finds San Francisco Bay is Sinking Faster than Expected

    Termination of Construction Contracts

    A Court-Side Seat: Permit Shields, Hurricane Harvey and the Decriminalization of “Incidental Taking”

    A Brief Discussion – Liquidating Agreements

    Congratulations to Karen Baytosh and August Hotchkin on Their Recognition as 2021 Nevada Legal Elites!

    Dispute Resolution Provision in Subcontract that Says Owner, Architect or Engineer’s Decision Is Final

    Weed Property Owner Gets Smoked Under Insurance Policy

    Coping With The New Cap And Trade Law

    Insurance Coverage for COVID-19? Two N.J. Courts Allow Litigation to Proceed

    Construction Laborers Sue Contractors Over Wage Theft

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    Hundreds Celebrated the Grand Opening of the Associated Builders and Contractors of Southern California Riverside Construction Training Center

    The Difference Between Routine Document Destruction and Spoliation

    Arizona Is the No. 1 Merit Shop Construction State, According to ABC’s 2020 Scorecard

    Zurich American Insurance Company v. Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/11/23) – Millennials Struggle Finding Homes, Additional CHIPS Act Funding Available, and the Supreme Court Takes up Hotel Lawsuit Case

    2019 California Construction Law Update

    Matthew Graham Named to Best Lawyers in America

    AI-Powered Construction Optioneering Today

    Newmeyer & Dillion’s Alan Packer Selected to 2018 Northern California Super Lawyers List

    Terminating A Subcontractor Or Sub-Tier Contractor—Not So Fast—Read Your Contract!

    Virtual Jury Trials of Construction Disputes: The Necessary Union of Both Sides of the Brain

    Montreal Bridge Builders Sue Canada Over New Restrictions

    Construction Case Alert: Appellate Court Confirms Engineer’s Duty to Defend Developer Arises Upon Tender of Indemnity Claim

    New Hampshire Applies Crete/Sutton Doctrine to Bar Subrogation Against College Dormitory Residents

    Gillotti v. Stewart (2017) 2017 WL 1488711 Rejects Liberty Mutual, Holding Once Again that the Right to Repair Act is the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    The Coronavirus, Zoom Meetings and Now a CCPA Class Action

    Women in Construction Aren’t Silent Anymore. They Are Using TikTok to Battle Discrimination

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    Why Construction Firms Should Think Differently on the Issue of Sustainability

    Haight Brown & Bonesteel Attorneys Named Super Lawyers in 2016

    Facts about Chinese Drywall in Construction

    Quick Note: Mitigation of Damages in Contract Cases

    Court Rules Planned Development of Banning Ranch May Proceed
    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

    Angela Cooner Appointed Vice-Chair of Arizona’s Inaugural Board of Legal Specialization Construction Defect Law Advisory Commission

    June 20, 2022 —
    Phoenix, Ariz. (May 17, 2022) - Phoenix Partner Angela Cooner has been appointed as the vice-chair of the State Bar of Arizona’s inaugural Board of Legal Specialization Construction Defect Law Advisory Commission. The commission was created pursuant to the Arizona Supreme Court’s recent administrative order recognizing construction defect law as a new area of specialization. The commission will, among other things, create the application, examination, and interview process that Arizona attorneys will be required to complete to earn the construction defect law specialized certification. Ms. Cooner will serve a two-year term that will end on January 31, 2024. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Angela Cooner, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Cooner may be contacted at Angela.Cooner@lewisbrisbois.com

    Terminating A Subcontractor Or Sub-Tier Contractor—Not So Fast—Read Your Contract!

    May 24, 2018 —
    Every few months I receive a call from a general contractor or subcontractor who has just terminated a subcontractor or sub-tier contractor for non-performance and is “checking in with me to see if there are any liability issues.” After the termination has taken place, if the termination is wrongful, there are serious legal consequences. Calling your lawyer after the fact will not cure missteps in the termination process. Termination for non-performance is a common term in most contract documents. As courts interpret contracts, however, the right to earn revenue from a contract is a substantial interest, and courts generally “abhor” forfeitures (termination) of that right. In other words, the courts will strictly determine whether the terminating party to a contract has complied with the termination process to the letter. A recent example from Connecticut is instructive in this regard. [1] The general contractor on a large hospital project in Connecticut terminated its electrical subcontractor, hired others to finish the electrical subcontractor’s work, and then sued the electrical subcontractor for $26 million. The electrical subcontractor countersued the general contractor for $3.6 million of work that it had completed at the time of the termination which had not been paid for. The subcontractor claimed that due to the many changes that had occurred on the project, it stopped work because the changes altered the contract to the point that it was no longer the same contract. The subcontractor walked off the project and the general contractor then terminated the subcontractor and re-procured the work from other subcontractors. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at john.ahlers@acslawyers.com

    Traub Lieberman Partner Stephen Straus Wins Spoliation Motion in Favor of Defendant

    June 05, 2023 —
    Traub Lieberman Partner Steve Straus represented a refrigeration installation and service company in a subrogation action filed by a property insurer after paying a claim related to extensive water damage at premises on Long Island, New York. The premises owner purchased a refrigerator, which was sold without a hose to connect to the water source inside the premises. The defendant retailer retained Traub Lieberman’s client to install the refrigerator. Rather than complete the installation using a new water line, the installer used the existing line from the refrigerator that was being replaced. Approximately one week after installation, the owner’s son discovered water on the floor near the refrigerator, and significant water damage in the basement of the residence. The owner filed a claim with the insurer, which sent an investigator to the premises. The retailer also sent a technician to investigate and replace the water supply line. It was reportedly determined that the original line had failed, causing the water release. After the repair, the owner’s son took possession of the old water line, which he kept for a couple of years and then discarded. The insurer initiated a subrogation action against the retailer and the installation company, alleging that the water release was caused by the defendants’ failure to replace the water line when the new unit was installed. Plaintiff claimed that photographs of the old line established that it had been damaged or defective. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stephen D. Straus, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Straus may be contacted at sstraus@tlsslaw.com

    In Midst of Construction Defect Lawsuit, City Center Seeks Refinancing

    October 02, 2013 —
    The owners of the City Center complex in Las Vegas are going through with a refinancing of their $1.8 of debt while they still seek to demolish the Harmon Tower. The cost of building City Center was $8.5 billion, making it the most expensive development on the Las Vegas strip. Unfortunately for the owners, the Harmon Tower isn’t the only empty space in the complex. MGM Resorts is currently in the midst of a construction defect lawsuit against the builder of the Harmon Tower. The judge in the case has given a go-ahead to tear down the building. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Late Filing Contractor Barred from Involving Subcontractors in Construction Defect Claim

    March 01, 2012 —

    The Colorado Court of Appeals looked at that state’s Construction Defect Action Reform Act in determining if a general contractor could add subcontractors as third-party defendants to a construction defect lawsuit. Shaw Construction, LLC was the general contraction of the Roslyn Court condominium complex, and was sued by the homeowners’ association in a construction defect case. United Builder Services was the drywall subcontractor on the project. MB Roofing had installed roofs, gutters, and downspouts. The certificate of occupancy for the last building was issued on March 10, 2004. The project architect certified completion of all known remaining architectural items in June, 2004.

    The HOA filed a claim against the developers of the property on January, 21, 2009. A week later, the HOA amended its complaint to add Shaw, the general contractor. Shaw did not file its answer and third-party complaint until March 29, 2010, sending its notice of claim under the CDARA on March 30.

    The subcontractors claimed that the six-year statute of limitations had ended twenty days prior. Shaw claimed that the statute of limitations ran until six years after the architect’s certification, or that the HOA’s suit had tolled all claims.

    The trial court granted summary judgment to the subcontractors, determining that “substantial completion occurs ‘when an improvement to real property achieves a degree of completion at which the owner can conveniently utilize the improvement of the purpose it was intended.’”

    The appeals court noted that “Shaw correctly points out that the CDARA does not define ‘substantial completion.’” The court argued that Shaw’s interpretation went against the history and intent of the measure. “Historically, a construction professional who received a complaint responded by ‘cross-nam[ing] or add[ing] everybody and anybody who had a part to play in the construction chain.’” The court concluded that the intent of the act was to prevent unnamed subcontractors from being tolled.

    The court further rejected Shaw’s reliance on the date of the architect’s certification as the time of “substantial completion,” instead agreeing with the trial court that “the architect’s letter on which Shaw relies certified total completion.”

    The appeals court upheld the trial court’s determination that the statute of limitation began to run no later than March 10, 2004 and that Shaw’s complaint of March 29, 2010 was therefore barred. The summary judgment was upheld.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    An Architect Uses AI to Explore Surreal Black Worlds

    October 24, 2023 —
    For architect Curry Hackett, the appeal of using artificial intelligence to design projects isn’t to build the world of the impossibly distant future. Instead he wants to mine the near present, using machine learning to generate postcards from a world that is recognizably our own, but refracted through a lens of Black history and material design. Hackett is the designer behind a series of provocations made using AI to remix Black vernacular architecture in kaleidoscopic Afrofuturist landscapes. Specifically, he’s assembling images with Midjourney, an AI tool favored by architects to imagine what buildings might look like. Hackett’s prompts result in straightforward yet surreal sets, including roadside Popeyes kiosks in rural North Carolina, homes with inflatable porches in the Florida panhandle and park benches made out of the couch from grandma’s living room. Quilts, basket weaving and other cultural modes associated with American South are the building materials for Hackett’s speculative futures. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kriston Capps, Bloomberg

    Stormy Skies Ahead? Important News Regarding a Hard Construction Insurance Market

    August 13, 2019 —
    Word out of the construction insurance brokerage community is that the construction insurance industry has entered a hard market, seemingly overnight. Property (i.e. builder’s risk), liability and wrap-up markets are all reacting unfavorably, resulting in higher premiums and decreased availability of coverage options. The prospect of a hard market has been looming for some time given massive weather driven property losses and historically low rates (among other factors). It appears the time is upon us. Key takeaways for construction professionals are:
    • Expect insurance premiums to go up, potentially significantly, at renewal time and/or when seeking a new project specific program (e.g., an OCIP, CCIP, etc.).
    • Expect that the available coverage will get worse. Carriers may be unable to offer once standard coverage enhancements and/or may add new exclusions.
    • If quotes have been offered consider locking them in now, before the underwriters are forced to increase the rates/restrict coverage, or pull the quotes entirely.
    • With respect to wrap-ups and other project specific programs, consider requesting extensions now if the project is expected to go beyond the current policy term.
    • As always, the risk management team (lawyer, broker, risk manager) should work together to carefully review contracts and coverage. This will become even more important if the carriers start to introduce new exclusions as a result of the hard market.
    Hard markets come and go. The tough times are when true construction insurance professionals separate themselves from the pack and become the key to weathering the storm. Jason M. Adams, Esq. is Senior Counsel at Gibbs Giden representing construction professionals (owners/developers, contractors, architects, etc.) in the areas of Construction Law, Insurance Law and Risk Management, Common Interest Community Law (HOA) and Business/Civil Litigation. Adams is also a licensed property and casualty insurance broker and certified Construction Risk & Insurance Specialist (CRIS). Gibbs Giden is nationally and locally recognized by U. S. News and Best Lawyers as among the “Best Law Firms” in both Construction Law and Construction Litigation. Chambers USA Directory of Leading Lawyers has consistently recognized Gibbs Giden as among California’s elite construction law firms. Mr. Adams can be reached at jadams@gibbsgiden.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    #7 CDJ Topic: Truck Ins. Exchange v. O'Mailia

    December 30, 2015 —
    According to attorney Tred R. Eyerly on a post on his Insurance Law Hawaii blog, “The Montana Supreme Court determined there was no coverage for the insured due to a lack of property damage during the policy period.” Eyerly concluded, “Even if exposure to excessively high temperatures created a harmful condition during the policy period, the existence of that condition did not result in property damage to the water heater occurring during the policy period, and thus did not constitute an ‘occurrence’ as defined by the policy.” Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of