BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope 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


    Third Circuit Holds That Duty to Indemnify "Follows" Duty to Defend

    Commercial Real Estate in 2023: A Snapshot

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal of Attorney Fee Award Under the Contractor and Subcontractor Payment Act

    Thank Your Founding Fathers for Mechanic’s Liens

    Hawaii Court of Appeals Affirms Broker's Liability for Failure to Renew Coverage

    Going Digital in 2019: The Latest Technology for a Bright Future in Construction

    The “Program Accessibility” Exception for Public Entities Under the ADA

    Home Buyer May Be Third Party Beneficiary of Property Policy

    Progress, Property, and Privacy: Discussing Human-Led Infrastructure with Jeff Schumacher

    Brown Paint Doesn’t Cover Up Construction Defects

    Alleged Damage to Personal Property Does Not Revive Coverage for Construction Defects

    Hawaii Federal District Court Compels Appraisal

    Don MacGregor To Speak at 2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    Benefits to Insureds Under Property Insurance Policy – Concurrent Cause Doctrine

    Smart Contracts Poised to Impact the Future of Construction

    Traub Lieberman Partners Lenhardt and Smith Obtain Directed Verdict in Broward County Failed Repair Sinkhole Trial

    General Partner Is Not Additional Insured For Construction Defect Claim

    Proving Impacts to Critical Path to Defeat Liquidated Damages Assessment

    The Multigenerational Housing Trend

    The Black Woman Architect Who Hopes to Change the Face of Design in America

    Update – Property Owner’s Defense Goes up in Smoke in Careless Smoking Case

    Economic Damages and the Right to Repair Act: You Can’t Have it Both Ways

    Summarizing Changes to NEPA in the Fiscal Responsibility Act (P.L. 118-5)

    Defeating the Ten-Year Statute of Repose For Latent Construction Defects

    Tenth Circuit Finds Appraisal Can Decide Causation of Loss Under Colorado Law

    Assignment of Insured's Policy Ineffective

    Are Defense Costs In Addition to Policy Limits?

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Could Cost $1B and Take One Year

    Pallonji Mistry, Indian Billionaire Caught in Tata Feud, Dies at 93

    Construction Defect Litigation in Nevada Called "Out of Control"

    Consider Short-Term Lease Workouts For Commercial Tenants

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

    New York Court Finds No Coverage Owed for Asbestos Losses Because Insured Failed to Prove Material Terms

    Bridges Crumble as Muni Rates at Least Since ’60s Ignored

    Virtual Jury Trials: The Next Wave of Remote Legal Practice

    Quick Note: Attorney’s Fees on Attorney’s Fees

    Edgewater Plans to Sue Over Pollution During Veterans Field Rehab

    Close Enough Only Counts in Horseshoes and Hand Grenades

    Toll Brothers Shows how the Affluent Buyer is Driving Up Prices

    Time To “Construct” New Social Media Policies

    Anti-Fracking Win in N.Y. Court May Deal Blow to Industry

    Florida Legislative Change Extends Completed Operations Tail for Condominium Projects

    Mitigating FCRA Risk Through Insurance

    John Boyden, Alison Kertis Named “Top Rank Attorneys” by Nevada Business Magazine

    Thank You!

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Where Underlying Claim is Strictly Breach of Contract

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2024 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Righting Past Wrongs Through Equitable Development

    Two Lawyers From Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group, Andrea DeField and Latosha Ellis, Selected for American Bar Association’s 2022 “On The Rise” Award

    Calling the Shots
    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

    Nancy Conrad Recognized in Lehigh Valley Business 2024 Power in Law List

    July 31, 2024 —
    Nancy Conrad, Chair of the Higher Education Group, Managing Partner of the Lehigh Valley Office and the President of the Pennsylvania Bar Association (PBA), has been named to the Lehigh Valley Business 2024 Power in Law List, for her work as a leader in the legal field. This year’s honorees were asked to relate inspiration that pushed the pursuit of their career. One of her inspirations, as explained by Nancy in the article, was the opportunity to instruct and impact students while teaching during the day and pursuing a legal career in the evening at Temple Law which cemented a “commitment to excellence in the practice of law and service to the community.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    ASCE Statement on Congress Passage of National Debt Limit Suspension

    June 12, 2023 —
    The following is a statement by Tom Smith, Executive Director, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): WASHINGTON, D.C. – The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) applauds Congress for passing a measure to avoid a U.S. debt default while safeguarding the critical funding allotments for our nation's infrastructure from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). The bipartisan Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (H.R. 3746) will not only protect funding from the IIJA, but it also takes steps to advance permitting reform, a major priority for ASCE and the civil engineering community. Streamlining permitting is crucial to ensuring we make the most of available funding mechanisms. ASCE is pleased to see that many elements of the BUILDER Act made it into the debt ceiling suspension, including setting deadlines for environmental reviews and providing clarity around permitting requirements. Although further actions are needed to streamline these processes, the Fiscal Responsibility Act is a crucial first step towards implementing much-needed permitting reform to keep valuable projects moving and bring benefits to communities across the country. ASCE once again applauds Congress and the Administration for taking these necessary steps to protect the U.S. economy and infrastructure systems. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 150,000 civil engineers worldwide and is America's oldest national engineering society. ASCE works to raise awareness of the need to maintain and modernize the nation's infrastructure using sustainable and resilient practices, advocates for increasing and optimizing investment in infrastructure, and improve engineering knowledge and competency. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Court of Appeals Conditionally Grant Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Anderson

    April 25, 2011 —

    The Texas Court of Appeals conditionally grant mandamus relief to Anderson Construction Company and Ronnie Anderson (collectively “Anderson”)… from the trial court in a construction defect lawsuit filed by Brent L. Mainwaring and Tatayana Mainwaring. See Tex. Prop. Code Ann. 27.001-.007 (West 2000 & Supp. 2010). Relators contend the trial court abused its discretion by compelling discovery while the case was abated by operation of law.

    The Court of Appeals opinion describes what led up to the proceedings: “The Mainwarings’ original petition identified certain defects in their Anderson-constructed home. Those defects concerned the roof trusses and framing, air conditioning, mortar and masonry, exterior doors and windows, and weep holes. With respect to the five areas of defects identified in their original petition, the Mainwarings gave Anderson the statutorily required notice on January 13, 2010. After implementing agreed extensions, Anderson made an offer of settlement for the defects the Mainwarings identified in their notice. Almost eight months later, the Mainwarings filed an amended petition adding defects they had not included in their original petition and notice. The additional defects the Mainwarings included in their amended petition had not been addressed by Anderson’s offer of settlement.”

    Following these events, Anderson claimed the Mainwarings did not respond in writing to their settlement offer. “Anderson filed a verified plea in abatement on December 2, 2010. In the trial court, Anderson claimed that the Mainwarings failed to respond in writing to Anderson’s settlement offer, as required by Section 27.004(b) of the RCLA. See Tex. Prop. Code Ann. 27.004(b)(1). The Mainwarings moved to compel discovery responses from Anderson. The Mainwarings alleged that they rejected Anderson’s settlement offer, and that if their response was insufficient, they contend that Anderson’s offer was rejected by operation of law on the twenty-fifth day after the Mainwarings received it. See Tex. Prop. Code Ann. 27.004(i). The Mainwarings’ motion to compel was not supported by affidavit. See Tex. Prop. Code Ann. 27.004(d)(2). On January 13, 2011, Anderson filed a verified supplemental plea in abatement. Anderson alleged that the Mainwarings failed to provide written notice concerning the newly alleged defects and complained the Mainwarings were attempting to circumvent the inspection and resolution procedure of the RCLA. Over Anderson’s objection that the lawsuit had been abated, the trial court granted the Mainwarings’ motion to compel discovery.”

    After listening to both sides, the Court of Appeals offered this reasoning for their opinion: “The parties do not dispute that Anderson inspected the property before the Mainwarings alleged the existence of additional defects in their amended pleading, nor do the Mainwarings claim that Anderson has been given an opportunity to inspect the additional defects the Mainwarings identified in their amended pleadings. We conclude the trial court did not have the discretion to deny or lift the abatement until the Mainwarings established their compliance with the statute. In other words, the Mainwarings are required to provide Anderson a reasonable opportunity to inspect the additional defects identified by their amended pleading, which will allow Anderson the opportunity to cure or settle with respect to the newly identified defects.”

    The Court of Appeals spoke directly on the issue of mandamus relief: “The Mainwarings contend that mandamus relief is not available because the trial court’s ruling does not prevent Anderson from making settlement offers during the discovery process. ‘An appellate remedy is “adequate” when any benefits to mandamus review are outweighed by the detriments.’ In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 136 (Tex. 2004). The failure to abate a case is typically not subject to mandamus. See In re Allstate Cnty. Mut. Ins. Co., 85 S.W.3d 193, 196 (Tex. 2002) (citing Abor v. Black, 695 S.W.2d 564, 567 (Tex. 1985)). In this case, however, the case was abated by operation of law. By ignoring the statutory abatement, the trial court interfered with the statutory procedure for developing and resolving construction defect claims. See In re Kimball Hill Homes Tex., Inc., 969 S.W.2d 522, 525 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, orig. proceeding) (An appeal provides an inadequate remedy for the trial court’s failure to observe automatic abatement pursuant to the RCLA.). The benefits of mandamus review are not outweighed by the detriments of mandamus review in this case.“

    In conclusion, “The trial court had no discretion to compel discovery while the case was abated, and Anderson, who has been compelled to respond to discovery during a period the case was under an automatic abatement, has no adequate remedy on appeal. Accordingly, we conditionally grant the petition for writ of mandamus. The writ will issue only if the trial court fails to vacate its order of February 3, 2011, and fails to refrain from proceeding with the case until a motion to reinstate is filed that establishes compliance with the notice and inspection requirements of the Residential Construction Liability Act.”

    Read the trial court’s decision…

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

    Kentucky Court Upholds Arbitration Award, Denies Appeal

    June 15, 2011 —

    The Kentucky Court of Appeals has ruled in Lake Cumberland Community Action Agency v. CMW, Inc. affirming the arbitration award. CMW, Inc. was responsible for the construction of a facility to be used for pre-school students and the housing of Alzheimer patients and senior citizens. An agreement was made that any disputes would be heard by an arbitrator selected by the construction industry.

    The plaintiff alleged that there were design and construction defects in the building trusses, violation of the Kentucky Building Code, and problems with the HVAC system. The arbitrator awarded $106,000 to the plaintiff which then sought to vacate the award. The circuit court upheld the arbitrator’s decision.

    The Court of Appeals found that there was no basis for rejecting the arbitrator’s decision, noting “there is nothing to show that there was any fraud or bias on the part of the arbitrator.” The appeals court, with all three judges concurring, upheld the arbitration award.

    Read the court’s decision

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

    The Brooklyn Condominium That’s Reinventing Outdoor Common Space

    October 24, 2022 —
    Courtyard apartments have a long history in the US, particularly in temperate climes, where shaded outdoor corridors and centralized playspaces can be year-round amenities. New York City, however, has only selectively embraced this approach, with private yards and public parks taking up the slack. A new 18-unit condominium, 450 Warren — one of four planned Brooklyn collaborations between architects SO-IL and developers Tankhouse — aims to change that relationship, while also twisting the idea of common outdoor space into something that gets used. Rather than creating one large courtyard, with the open space protected from the street by an L-shaped plan, SO-IL chopped up the outdoor amenities, betting that smaller, more carefully shaped and planted terraces would be more popular than a large undifferentiated expanse of grass. The building’s plan reads as three towers connected by curvy concrete walkways. The building sits across the street from the Gowanus Houses, a public housing development, completed in 1949 with towers of up to 14 stories. The area was rezoned for denser mixed-use development in 2021, but when SO-IL and Tankhouse were developing the plans, regulations limited building heights to a maximum of five stories. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Alexandra Lange, Bloomberg

    Commercial Development Nearly Quadruples in Jacksonville Area

    December 04, 2013 —
    Construction is up in the Jacksonville area, and no sector is doing better than commercial construction. During the first ten months of 2012, there was $21.2 million of commercial construction, but during the first ten months of 2013, there was been $73.2 million of commercial construction, helped along by a $13.7 million medical complex. In addition to the massive growth in commercial construction, residential construction is up, but by a comparatively modest 52%. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Jersey Judge Declared Arbitrator had no Duty to Disclose Past Contact with Lawyer

    October 22, 2014 —
    According to the New Jersey Law Journal, in a recent ruling, a federal judge in Newark “ruled that an arbitration award should not be vacated based on the arbitrator’s failure to disclose his professional contacts with defense counsel during his prior career as a federal judge.” The plaintiff had sought to vacate an award “because he failed to disclose interactions he had with Dennis Drasco, the lawyer for the defendant, while serving on the bench. But Brown was not required to disclose his contacts with Drasco because they would not cause a reasonable person to question Brown’s impartiality, U.S. District Judge William Walls ruled Oct. 21,” reported the New Jersey Law Journal. The plaintiff’s assertions “suggest nothing more than that Judge Brown and Mr. Drasco were familiar with one another in their professional capacities,” Walls stated, as quoted by the New Jersey Law Journal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    PSA: Pay If Paid Ban Goes into Effect on January 1, 2023

    December 05, 2022 —
    I have written a couple of times here at Musings regarding the new pay-if-paid legislation passed by the General Assembly last session. While the statute has some inconsistencies and a working group has made some recommendations, the legislation as passed will go into effect on January 1, 2023, without any changes (at least until next session). As always, such action by our legislature here in Virginia will create work for construction attorneys assisting their clients to amend contracts to meet the new rules. Essentially (and with minor inconsistencies between public and private contracts), the bill requires that any construction contract entered into after January 1, 2023 have the following provisions:
    • On public projects: A payment clause that obligates a contractor on a construction contract to be liable for the entire amount owed to any subcontractor with which it contracts. Such contractor shall not be liable for amounts otherwise reducible due to the subcontractor’s noncompliance with the terms of the contract. However, in the event that the contractor withholds all or a part of the amount promised to the subcontractor under the contract, the contractor shall notify the subcontractor, in writing, of his intention to withhold all or a part of the subcontractor’s payment with the reason for nonpayment.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com