BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut multi family design 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


    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment in Pinellas County Circuit Court

    Toll Brothers Shows how the Affluent Buyer is Driving Up Prices

    Excess Must Defend After Primary Improperly Refuses to Do So

    Determination That Title Insurer Did Not Act in Bad Faith Vacated and Remanded

    New York State Legislature Passes Legislation Expanding Wrongful Death Litigation

    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

    Georgia Local Government Drainage Liability: Nuisance and Trespass

    Contractor Sues Golden Gate Bridge District Over Suicide Net Project

    Slavin Doctrine and Defense from Patent Defects

    Thanks to All for the 2024 Super Lawyers Nod!

    Funding the Self-Insured Retention (SIR)

    Avoid Drowning in Data: Keep Afloat with ESI in Construction Litigation

    Connecticut Federal District Court Keeps Busy With Collapse Cases

    Acquisition, Development, and Construction Lending Conditions Ease

    Court of Appeals Rules that HOA Lien is not Spurious, Despite Claim that Annexation was Invalid

    Supreme Court of New York Denies Motion in all but One Cause of Action in Kikirov v. 355 Realty Assoc., et al.

    Dallas Home Being Built of Shipping Containers

    California Court Forces Insurer to Play Ball in COVID-19 Insurance Coverage Suit

    The 2024 Colorado Legislative Session Promises to be a Busy One for the Construction Industry and its Insurers

    Around the State

    Manhattan Home Sales Rise at Slower Pace as Prices Jump

    Daily Construction Reports: Don’t Leave the Job Without Them

    Illinois Appellate Court Addresses Professional Services Exclusion in Homeowners Policy

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

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

    How Artificial Intelligence Can Transform Construction

    North Dakota Universities Crumble as Oil Cash Pours In

    Couple Sues for Construction Defects in Manufactured Home

    What to Expect From the New Self-Retracting Devices Standard

    The Business of Engineering: An Interview with Matthew Loos

    Uniwest Rides Again (or, Are Architects Subject to Va. Code Section 11-4.1?)

    Thank You for 17 Years of Legal Elite in Construction Law

    Las Vegas HOA Conspiracy & Fraud Case Delayed Again

    Meet BWBO’s 2024 San Diego Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    Blue Gold: Critical Water for Critical Energy Materials

    Key Legal Considerations for Modular Construction Contracts

    Bankrupt Canada Contractor Execs Ordered to Repay $26 Million

    Oregon to Add 258,000 Jobs by 2022, State Data Shows

    Bad Faith Claim for Investigation Fails

    Regional US Airports Are Back After Years of Decay

    Third Circuit Court of Appeals Concludes “Soup to Nuts” Policy Does Not Include Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    Insurer Entitled to Reimbursement of Defense Costs Under Unjust Enrichment Theory

    The NAR asks FAA to Amend their Drone Rules for Real Estate Use

    Professional Liability Alert: Joint Client Can't Claim Privilege For Communications With Attorney Sued By Another Joint Client

    Building Growth Raises Safety Concerns

    What You Need to Know About “Ipso Facto” Clauses and Their Impact on Termination of a Contractor or Subcontractor in a Bankruptcy

    Georgia Update: Automatic Renewals in Consumer Service Contracts

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    COVID-19 Response: Key Legal Considerations for Event Cancellations

    Miller Act Statute of Limitations and Equitable Tolling
    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

    Insured Cannot Sue to Challenge Binding Appraisal Decision

    December 16, 2023 —
    The court dismissed the insured condominium association's challenge to an appraisal award. The Courtyards at Prairie Fields Condominium Association v. West Band Mut. Ins. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169458 (N. D. Ill. Sept. 22, 2023). In July 2020, the insured filed a claim with West Bend for damage to the property's roof and other building components as a result of wind and hail. West Bend inspected and estimated the replacement cost for the damage was $60,989.54. This amount was paid to the insured minus the $10,000 deductible. The insured believed the damage was so severe that the roofs need to be replaced, which the insured estimated would cost $1,389,600. The insured demanded an appraisal. 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

    Client Alert: California’s Unfair Competition Law (B&P §17200) Preempted by Federal Workplace Safety Law

    September 24, 2014 —
    In Solus Industrial Innovations LLC v. Superior Court (No. G047661, filed 9/22/2014) (“Solus”) the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, held California’s Unfair Competition Law (Business & Professions Code §17200) is preempted by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (“Fed/OSHA”) because the Unfair Competition law, as approved by the United States Secretary of Labor, does not include any provision for civil enforcement of workplace safety standards by a state prosecutor through a complaint for penalties. Solus Industrial Innovations, LLC (“Solus”) is a plastics manufacturer. In 2007, Solus installed a residential water heater at its commercial facility in Orange County. The water heater exploded in March 2009, killing two workers. California’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health (“Cal/OSHA”) investigated and determined the explosion was caused by a failed safety valve and lack of any proper safety feature on the water heater. Cal/OSHA charged Solus with five violations of Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations. Because deaths were involved, Cal/OSHA forwarded the results of its investigation to the Orange County District Attorney. In March 2012, the Orange County District Attorney filed criminal charges against Solus’ plant manager and maintenance supervisor. The District Attorney also filed a civil action against Solus, including two causes of action for violation of California Business & Professions Code §17200 – the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”). The action sought civil penalties under the UCL in the amount of $2,500 per day, per employee, from November 29, 2007 through March 19, 2009. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys R. Bryan Martin, Yvette Davis and Kristian Moriarty Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com Ms. Davis may be contacted at ydavis@hbblaw.com Mr. Moriarty may be contacted at kmoriarty@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Best Practices: Commercial Lockouts in Arizona

    March 19, 2024 —
    If a tenant defaults under a commercial lease, Arizona law permits the landlord to re-take possession of the premises by locking out the defaulting tenant. However, if the landlord’s lockout is wrongful, the landlord may be liable for the damages the tenant sustains because of the wrongful lockout. To minimize such liability, here are some general best practices to follow when locking out a defaulting tenant:
    • Do Not Breach the Peace. It is vital when performing a lockout to not breach the peace. What constitutes a “breach of the peace” depends on the particular circumstances at hand. For example, if a tenant arrives during the lockout and becomes angry or threatens violence, the landlord should stop performing the lockout and return at a later time. As a general rule of thumb, it is best to perform lockouts in the early morning hours or in the late evening hours when the landlord is less likely to encounter the tenant.
    • Provide A Notice of Default. Many commercial leases require the landlord to provide a notice of default before the landlord can lock out a defaulting tenant. Check, double check, and triple check that the landlord followed the lease’s notice of default provisions correctly, including that the landlord sent the notices to all required parties in accordance with the time requirements set forth in the lease.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Tighe, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Tighe may be contacted at ptighe@swlaw.com

    Colorado Trench Collapse Kills Two

    July 30, 2019 —
    Federal safety officials are investigating the April 16 collapse of a trench that killed two construction workers in northern Colorado. The two men—Cristopher Lee Ramirez, 26, and Jorge Baez Valadez, 41—were installing utilities at a site being developed by D.R. Horton Express Homes in Windsor, Colo., when they were trapped by soil and rocks in the 15-ft-deep trench. The rescue attempt lasted seven hours and involved small shovels because of fears of a second collapse. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Federal Court Requires Auto Liability Carrier to Cover Suit Involving Independent Contractor Despite “Employee Exclusion”

    August 30, 2017 —
    A recent federal court decision rendered in July of 2017 highlights the importance of worker classification in the transportation industry and the potential insurance implications. In Spirit Commercial Auto Risk Retention Grp., Inc. v. Kailey, 1 the court determined that an “employee exclusion” in a motor carrier’s automobile liability insurance policy did not exclude coverage for liability resulting from the bodily injury of an independent contractor operating the motor carrier’s tractor-trailer. In April of 2014, a team of two drivers hired by the motor carrier, Kailey Trucking Line (KTL), were involved in a collision while operating KTL’s truck. The passenger in the truck, who was not operating the vehicle at the time, was killed in the accident. Subsequently, the spouse of the decedent filed suit against KTL as well as the driver of the truck. KTL sought coverage for the suit under its automobile liability insurance policy, issued by Spirit Commercial Auto Risk Retention Group, Incorporated (Spirit). However, Spirit took the position that it had no duty to defend or indemnify KTL, and ultimately filed a declaratory judgment action in United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The policy issued to KTL provided coverage for damages due to bodily injury or property damage caused by an accident resulting from the ownership, maintenance, or use of a covered auto. However, the policy excluded from coverage any bodily injury to an employee or fellow employee of the insured arising out of and in the course of employment of the insured. Accordingly, to the extent that the decedent qualified as an “employee” of KTL, Spirit had no duty to indemnify KTL in the litigation. Reprinted courtesy of H. Scott Williams, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Brendan C. Colt, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Holt may be contacted at bch@sdvlaw.com Mr. Williams may be contacted at hsw@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Owners Bound by Arbitration Clause on Roofing Shingles Packaging

    December 04, 2018 —
    In today’s age, you are probably familiar with terms such as a shrinkwrap contract (terms and conditions), which is a boilerplate contract included with a retained product, or a clickwrap contract (terms and conditions), which is generally a boilerplate contract that is digitally accepted when purchasing software or an electronic product. These are are boilerplate terms from manufacturers or vendors of products or software. Arbitration provisions in these types of agreements have generally found to be enforceable. In the recent ruling by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Dye v. Tamko Building Products, Inc., 2018 WL 5729085 (11th Cir. 2018), the court held that an arbitration provision included in a product-purchase limited warranty agreement on the package of every roofing shingles binds a homeowner to arbitrating disputes over the opened and retained product with the manufacturer, irrespective of whether the shingles were purchased by an owner’s roofer. The shingles do not have to be purchased and opened by the owner for the arbitration provision to apply. If the roofer uses or retained the shingles for purposes of the owner’s home, such knowledge of the product-purchase limited warranty agreement on the packaging of the shingles is imputed to the owner (end-user of the shingles). 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

    Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Rise to One-Year High

    October 22, 2014 —
    Sales of previously owned homes climbed in September to the highest level in a year, pointing to growing confidence in the U.S. economy as employment firms. Purchases advanced 2.4 percent to a 5.17 million annual rate, the National Association of Realtors reported today in Washington. Demand was up 1.9 percent compared with the same month last year before adjusting for seasonal patterns. Americans are returning to the real-estate market as employers have added 2 million workers to payrolls so far this year. Sales stand to get an additional boost in the final months of 2014 as the drop in mortgage rates caused by slowing growth in Europe and emerging nations makes properties more affordable for first-time buyers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michelle Jamrisko, Bloomberg
    Ms. Jamrisko may be contacted at mjamrisko@bloomberg.net

    Latin America’s Biggest Corporate Crime Gets a Worthy Epic

    January 04, 2021 —
    As much as pouring cement and building towers, Brazilian construction dynasty Odebrecht was famed for its political panache. “I get down in the mud with the pigs but come out the other side clean in my white suit,” Norberto Odebrecht, founder of the legacy contractor, liked to boast back in the 1970s and 1980s. The catchphrase was shorthand for what became a patently Brazilian way of doing business – the art of buying influence and coming away unsoiled, or at least unincarcerated – among porcine politicians and bribe-truffling officials. In half a century and over three generations, the family firm from northeast Brazil grew into a multinational engineering colossus, hurling up grand public works from the Andes to Angola. Shady pacts with political grifters and bagmen were just part of the deal behind the build-up and seemingly nothing a little Brazilian bonhomie and contract skimming couldn’t tidy up. Until it didn’t. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mac Margolis, Bloomberg
    Mr. Margolis may be contacted at mmargolis14@bloomberg.net