BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut architectural 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


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

    Just How Climate-Friendly Are Timber Buildings? It’s Complicated

    Sixth Circuit Lifts Stay on OSHA’s COVID-19 Temporary Emergency Standards. Supreme Court to Review

    WSDOT Seeks Retraction of Waiver Excluding Non-Minority Woman-Owned Businesses from Participation Goals

    Spearin Doctrine 100 Years Old and Still Thriving in the Design-Build Delivery World

    ICC/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Green Model Code Integrates Existing Standards

    Former NJ Army Base $2B Makeover is 'Buzzsaw' of Activity

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine’s 2023 Top Lawyers!

    Construction Jobs Expected to Rise in Post-Hurricane Rebuilding

    Insurer Must Indemnify Additional Insured After Settlement

    Los Angeles Is Building a Future Where Water Won’t Run Out

    Ten Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    No One to Go After for Construction Defects at Animal Shelter

    Brown and Caldwell Team with AECOM for Landmark Pure Water Southern California Program

    Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act Enacted

    Charges in Kansas Water Park Death

    White and Williams Defeats Policyholder’s Attempt to Invalidate Asbestos Exclusions

    White and Williams Selected in the 2024 Best Law Firms ranked by Best Lawyers®

    Judge Sentences Roofing Contractor Owner in Florida PPP Fraud Case

    Seattle Developer Defaults on Renovated Office Buildings

    Newmeyer Dillion Secures Victory For Crown Castle In Years-Long Litigation With City Council Of Piedmont Over Small Cell Wireless Telecommunications Sites

    Texas EIFS Case May Have Future Implications for Construction Defects

    OSHA: What to Expect in 2022

    A Riveting (or at Least Insightful) Explanation of the Privette Doctrine

    Real Case, Real Lessons: Understanding Builders’ Risk Insurance Limits

    DC Circuit Approves, with Some Misgivings, FERC’s Approval of the Atlantic Sunrise Natural Gas Pipeline Extension

    Fla. Researchers Probe 'Mother of All Sinkholes'

    Crime Policy Insurance Quotes Falsely Represented the Scope of its Coverage

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increased 4.3% in November

    Motion for Reconsideration Challenging Appraisal Determining Cause of Loss Denied

    Professional Liability Alert: California Appellate Courts In Conflict Regarding Statute of Limitations for Malicious Prosecution Suits Against Attorneys

    Fort Lauderdale Partner Secures Defense Verdict for Engineering Firm in High-Stakes Negligence Case

    The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities From Scratch

    Court Requires Adherence to “Good Faith and Fair Dealing” in Construction Defect Coverage

    California Supreme Court Shifts Gears on “Reverse CEQA”

    ASCE Statement on Passing of Senator Dianne Feinstein

    Jobsite Safety Should Be Every Contractors' Priority

    Texas Federal Court Upholds Professional Services Exclusion to Preclude Duty to Defend

    Insurers Must Defend Allegations of Faulty Workmanship

    How Drones are Speeding Up Construction

    Overtime! – When the Statute of Limitations Isn’t Game Over For Your Claim

    New Jersey Legislation Would Bar Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause in Homeowners' Policies

    Notice of Claim Sufficient to Invoke Coverage

    Of Pavement and Pandemic: Liability and Regulatory Hurdles for Taking It Outside

    Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Faulty Work By Subcontractor Constitutes "Occurrence"

    Providing “Labor” Under the Miller Act

    One World Trade Center Tallest Building in US

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Faulty Workmanship Denied

    Single-Family Home Gain Brightens U.S. Housing Outlook: Economy

    Demanding a Reduction in Retainage
    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

    Toll Brothers Report End of Year Results

    December 11, 2013 —
    The largest luxury home builder in the U.S. saw some significant gains in their final quarter for 2013. Their pre-tax income for the year was $150.2 million, up from last year’s $60.7 million, more than doubling. The firm’s revenues went up 65% to $1.04 billion, and the average price of homes was up as well. Toll Brothers is currently selling homes in 232 communities, also increasing over 2012. Due to the upcoming acquisition of Shapell, Toll Brothers projects that at the end of 2014 they will be selling in 250 to 290 communities. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review Regarding Necessary Parties in Lien Foreclosure Actions

    August 17, 2017 —
    For several years, the requirements for which parties must be named in a lien foreclosure action when a release of lien bond is in place have been cloudy. RCW 60.04 et seq., the “mechanics’ lien” or “construction lien” statute, provides protection for a party or person who provides labor, materials, or equipment to a construction project. That person or party, if not paid, can file a lien against the construction project property to secure recovery. As the lien impacts the property by “clouding title” and could potentially result in foreclosure of the property, the statute sets forth strict requirements with respect to timing, notice, and parties. For example, the lien must be recorded within 90 days of the person or party’s last day of work or materials or equipment supplied, and the lien claimant must then give a copy of the claim of lien to the owner or reputed owner within 14 days of the lien recording. RCW 60.04.081. The statute also allows a property owner or other party to “free” the property from the lien prior to the claim being resolved by issuing a release of lien bond. While the claim is still in dispute, the lien then attaches to the bond and not the property. The same rules about foreclosure, however, still apply but not without some confusion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lindsay K. Taft, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Ms. Taft may be contacted at ltaft@ac-lawyers.com

    Georgia Court of Appeals Upholds Denial of Coverage Because Insurance Broker Lacked Agency to Accept Premium Payment

    December 07, 2020 —
    In American Reliable Insurance Company v. Lancaster, the Georgia Court of Appeals reversed the denial of a property insurer’s summary judgment motion concerning the insurer’s denial of a fire loss claim. The basis of the denial was that the policyholders had failed to pay the policy premium. The policyholders, Charlie and Wanda Lancaster, claimed that they had paid their policy premiums for several years to their insurance agent, Macie Yawn. In October 2014, American Reliable mailed a renewal notice to the Lancasters notifying them that premium payments had to be made directly to the insurer. After it did not receive payment from the Lancasters, American Reliable sent them a cancellation notice in December 2014, again notifying them that payments be made directly to the insurer. The Lancasters denied having received either notice from American Reliable, but the record included a receipt for certificate of mailing. After the Lancaster’s home burned down in 2015, American Reliable denied coverage on the grounds that the policy had been cancelled for nonpayment of premium. In the subsequent coverage action, the trial court denied American Reliable’s motion for summary judgment, ruling that a factual issue existed as to the actual and apparent agency of the insurance agent, Yawn. On appeal, the Court of Appeals found that the trial court erred in deciding that there was a factual issue concerning Yawn’s agency. Specifically, the Court of Appeals ruled that the record showed American Reliable had terminated Yawn’s agency to accept policy premiums, and that the Lancaster’s received notice of that termination in the renewal and cancellation notices. In addition to determining that Yawn was not an actual agent, the Court held that Yawn did not have apparent agency, because the notices sent to the Lancasters stated that the premium payment was to be paid to American Reliable, not to the agent. Reprinted courtesy of Lawrence J. Bracken II, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Rachel E. Hudgins, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Bracken may be contacted at lbracken@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Ms. Hudgins may be contacted at rhudgins@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP Expands into Georgia

    November 03, 2016 —
    Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP (WSHB) has opened a new regional office in Atlanta, Georgia. Richard E. Zelonka, Jr., will be the Managing Partner. With over a decade of trial experience, Mr. Zelonka has handled complex litigation in both state and federal courts throughout the Southeastern United States. “I am thrilled to be joining Wood Smith Henning & Berman. WSHB’s sterling reputation, coupled with its national footprint, is especially attractive. That, coupled with the Firm’s passionate dedication to their clients, made this move a very easy choice for me,” said Mr. Zelonka. “I could not be more excited to lead WSHB’s new Georgia office.” The Firm’s Atlanta office is located at 1170 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 1200, Atlanta, Georgia 30309. The main phone number is (404) 885-5700. The fax number is (404) 506-9108. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (2/21/24) – Fed Chair Predicts More Small Bank Closures, Shopping Center Vacancies Hit 15-year Low, and Proptech Sees Mixed Results

    March 19, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, office occupancy rates hit all-time lows, global hotel investment to exceed numbers from 2023, federal courts look into real estate commissions, and more! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 05/04/22

    May 23, 2022 —
    Construction payment apps are on the rise, the European Union proposes to block Russians from buying European real estate, warehouse vacancy rates hit a 27-year low, and more.
    • The Metaverse Group has made itself one of the most prominent virtual land owners, having invested more than $10 million into digital real estate purchases. (Katie Canales, Business Insider)
    • The European Union proposed to block Russians from buying European real estate in its six package of sanctions following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. (Jorge Valero and Alberto Nardelli, Bloomberg)
    • Although smart office buildings are able to easily identify viruses, they are susceptible to hacks, raising privacy and cybersecurity concerns in the market. (Konrad Putzier, The Wall Street Journal)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Receiving a $0 Verdict and Still Being Deemed the Prevailing Party for Purposes of Attorney’s Fees

    May 24, 2018 —
    Low and behold, a party can be the prevailing party for purposes of attorney’s fees even if that party is awarded $0. That’s right, even if the party is awarded a big fat zero, they can still be the prevailing party for purposes of being entitled to attorney’s fees. This is because a party is the prevailing party if they prevail on the significant issues in the case. A party can prevail on the significant issues even if that party is awarded $0. Whoa! For example, in Coconut Key Homeowner’s Association, Inc. v. Gonzalez, 43 Fla.L.Weekly D1045a (Fla. 4th DCA 2018), a homeowner sued her homeowner’s association claiming the association breached its governing documents. There was a basis for fees under Florida’s homeowner’s association law (and there likely was a basis under the governing documents). At trial, the jury held that the association breached its governing documents, but awarded the homeowner nothing ($0). The trial court also issued injunctive relief in favor of the homeowner. The homeowner claimed she should be deemed the prevailing party for purposes of attorney’s fees; however, this was denied by the trial court based on the $0 verdict and no fees were awarded to the homeowner. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    What Should Be in Every Construction Agreement

    November 04, 2019 —
    A detailed and coherent construction agreement in place on every job minimizes confusion, makes clear everyone’s respective responsibilities and reduces disputes. There are six things that should be addressed in every construction agreement. DEFINE THE SCOPE Define what the scope of work is that will be provided. Will it be only materials; will it be materials and labor; or will it be just labor? Be very clear and specific in how the scope of work is spelled out. Many contracts state that the contractor is responsible for all work that’s shown on the plans and specifications, as well as that which is reasonably inferable. While subjective—even if not actually on the plans or specifications, someone may believe that something should be part of the contractor’s work. This could expand what has to be done beyond what was understood or priced. LIST ALL THE EXCLUSIONS Do the parties each have the same understanding as to what is covered in the contract? How often are contractors faced with customers thinking something was included as part of the work? The contractor may have believed that task, or that material, or that specially fabricated item was excluded. But was it? Did the contractor articulate what was and was not in the scope and price? Specifically listing what is excluded can obviate this problem. Articulate what is not in the price or scope and reduce the chance of one party believing that something is to be done when it isn't. Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Barthet, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Barthet may be contacted at pbarthet@barthet.com