BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultant
    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


    Sales of New U.S. Homes Surged in August to Six-Year High

    COVID-19 Business Closure and Continuity Compliance Resource

    Significant Ruling in PFAS Litigation Could Impact Insurance Coverage

    Arizona Court of Appeals Rules Issues Were Not Covered in Construction Defect Suit

    Ohio Condo Owners Sue Builder, Alleging Construction Defects

    Scaffolding Collapse Kills Workers at China Construction Site

    Illinois Court of Appeals Addresses Waiver and Estoppel in Context of Suit Limitation Provision in Property Policy

    Court of Appeal Puts the “Equity” in Equitable Subrogation

    Capitol View-Corridor Restrictions Affect Massing of Austin’s Tallest Tower

    Is Construction Heading Off the Fiscal Cliff?

    AIA Releases Decennial 2017 Updates to its Contracts Suites

    Forget Palm Springs—Santa Fe Is the New Mecca for Modern Architecture

    DIR Reminds Public Works Contractors to Renew Registrations Before January 1, 2016 to Avoid Hefty Penalty

    EPA Can't Evade Enviro Firm's $2.7M Cleanup Site Pay Claim, US Court Says

    New Jersey Senate Advances Bad Faith Legislation

    Partner Jonathan R. Harwood Obtained Summary Judgment in a Case Involving a Wedding Guest Injured in a Fall

    Haight Ranked in 2018 U.S. News - Best Lawyers "Best Law Firms" List

    Seven Former North San Diego County Landfills are Leaking Contaminants

    Federal District Court Addresses Material Misrepresentation in First Party Property Damage Claim

    A “Supplier to a Supplier” on a California Construction Project Sometimes Does Have a Right to a Mechanics Lien, Stop Payment Notice or Payment Bond Claim

    How Small Mistakes Can Have Serious Consequences Under California's Contractor Licensing Laws.

    Traub Lieberman Partners Ryan Jones and Scot Samis Obtain Affirmation of Final Summary Judgment

    Equal Access to Justice Act Fee Request Rejected in Flood Case

    Housing Starts in U.S. Drop to Lowest Level in Three Months

    Public Contract Code 9204 – A New Mandatory Claims Process for Contractors and Subcontractors – and a Possible Trap for the Unwary

    Quick Note: COVID-19 Claim – Proving Causation

    Restoring the USS Alabama: Surety Lessons From an 80-Year-Old Battleship

    Supreme Court’s New York Harbor Case Isn’t a ‘Sopranos’ Episode

    Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC Announces Leadership Changes and New Vision for Growth

    Colorado Springs may be Next Colorado City to Add Construction Defects Ordinance

    The Benefits of Trash Talking: A Cautionary Tale of Demolition Gone Wrong

    Your Work Exclusion Applies to Damage to Tradesman's Property, Not Damage to Other Property

    Property Insurance Exclusion for Constant or Repeated Leakage of Water

    WARN Act Exceptions in Response to COVID-19

    Federal Court Strikes Down 'Persuader' Rule

    City in Ohio Sues Over Alleged Roof Defects

    After More than Two Years, USDOT Rejects WSDOT’s Recommendation to Reinstate Non-Minority Women-Owned DBEs into DBE Participation Goals

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (01/11/23) – Construction Tech, Housing Market Confidence, and Decarbonization

    Scaffolding Purchase Suggests No New Building for Board of Equalization

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    Irvine Partner Cinnamon J. Carr and Associate Brittney H. Aquino Prevail on Summary Judgment

    Legislative Changes that Impact Construction 2017

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twenty White and Williams Lawyers

    What If an Irma-Like Hurricane Hit the New York City Metro Area?

    Is Drone Aerial Photography Really Best for Your Construction Projects?

    New York Developers Facing Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Is It Time to Get Rid of Retainage?

    New York Court Discusses Evidentiary Standards for Policy Rescission Based on Material Misrepresentation

    FDOT Races to Re-Open Storm-Damaged Pensacola Bridge
    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

    Agree First or it May Cost You Later

    May 08, 2023 —
    Business relationships often begin before parties execute a written agreement containing the terms and conditions by which the relationship will be governed. With little more than a Letter of Intent (“LOI”) or Letter of Award (“LOA”) one party is typically pressured to begin investing time and money to start preliminary work on a project. If such LOI or LOA contains nothing more than an agreement to agree later, the performing party should minimize its investment until the later agreement is executed. A recent court decision in New York confirmed the danger to the performing party under “agreement to agree” provisions. In Permasteelia North America Corp. v. JDS Const. Group, LLC, 2022 WL 2954131 (N.Y. Sup. CT. 7/22/22), the plaintiff subcontractor allegedly performed $1.9 million worth of preliminary work under nothing more than a LOA with an agreement to agree provision. Issues arose, and the parties never entered any later written agreement. The general contractor refused to pay the plaintiff anything for its preliminary work. In response, the plaintiff filed suit against the general contractor asserting four counts: foreclosure of its lien, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and account stated. All four counts were based on an alleged oral “handshake deal” for subcontract work for the project. The general contractor’s LOA stated that neither party would be bound “unless and until the parties actually execute a subcontract.” During discovery, the plaintiff admitted that neither party intended to enter into any contract until its potential terms were negotiated, reduced to writing, and signed. Moreover, the plaintiff only offered one set of meeting minutes and a few project agendas to support its alleged “handshake deal.” Once these necessary undisputed facts were confirmed, the defendant moved for summary judgment on all four counts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bill Wilson, Robinson & Cole LLP
    Mr. Wilson may be contacted at wwilson@rc.com

    Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 Not Just for Individual Homeowners Anymore?

    March 22, 2017 —
    On March 9, 2017, the Colorado Court of Appeals announced its decision in Broomfield Senior Living Owner, LLC v. R.G. Brinkmann Company, No. 16CA0101, 2017 COA 31 (Colo. App. Mar. 9, 2017). As a matter of first impression, the Court evaluated whether a senior living facility constitutes “residential property” protected by the Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 ("HPA") provision of the Construction Defect Reform Act (CDARA). In 2007, Plaintiff Broomfield entered into a contract with Defendant Brinkmann for construction of a senior assisted and independent living facility. The contract contained warranty provisions related to the quality of construction and cautioned that Plaintiff’s failure to provide Defendant with prompt notice of any defects would result in waiver of any claim for breach. The contract also limited Defendant Brinkmann’s liability by identifying three separate accrual provisions that would determine the time period in which Plaintiff could bring a claim. The project was completed in 2009. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Maggie Stewart, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Stewart may be contacted at stewart@hhmrlaw.com

    At Least 46 Killed in Taiwanese Apartment Building Inferno

    November 01, 2021 —
    Kaohsiung, Taiwan (AP) -- At least 46 people were killed and another 41 injured after a fire broke out early Thursday in a run-down mixed commercial and residential building in the Taiwanese port city of Kaohsiung, officials said. Neighborhood residents said the 13-story building was home to many poor, elderly and disabled people and it wasn’t clear how many of the 120 units were occupied. Witnesses said they heard something that sounded like an explosion at about 3 a.m. when the blaze erupted in the building's lower floors, which housed a closed movie theater, abandoned restaurants and karaoke clubs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg

    City Council Authorizes Settlement of Basement Flooding Cases

    March 12, 2014 —
    Last July in Dearborn, Michigan, “torrential rain” caused flooding to hundreds of basements, according to Press & Guide. Of the 250 claims filed by residents, “the city determined that about 150 were caused by defects in its water or sewer lines. About 125 of the claims to be settled are for more than $3,000; 26 are for $3,000 or less.” Press & Guide reported that “Attorney Tarek Baydoun, who is representing some clients whose basements flooded, asked about recourse for ‘botched’ claims, and was concerned because the city hasn’t released the list of those with whom it is settling.” The Mayor, Jack O’Reilly, stated that the law department would release the list to the city council. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Supreme Court Adopts “Vertical Exhaustion” in the Long-Storied Montrose Environmental Coverage Litigation

    June 08, 2020 —
    On April 6, 2020, the California Supreme Court issued a decision that held a policyholder is entitled to access available excess coverage under any excess policy once it has exhausted directly underlying excess policies for the same policy period in Montrose Chemical Corporation v. the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Supreme Court of California, case number S244737. In its unanimous decision adopting this “vertical exhaustion” requirement, the court rejected the “horizontal exhaustion” rule urged by the policyholder’s excess insurers, under which the policyholder would have been able to access an excess policy only after it had exhausted other policies with lower attachment points from every policy period in which the environmental damage resulting in liability occurred. In 1990, Montrose sought coverage under primary policies and multiple layers of excess policies issued for periods from 1961 through 1985 for environmental damage liabilities arising from its production of insecticide in the Los Angeles area between 1947 and 1982. The ongoing dispute currently arises out of Montrose’s Fifth Amended Complaint which was filed in 2015 seeking declarations concerning exhaustion and the manner in which Montrose may allocate its liabilities across the policies. Each of the excess policies at issue contained a requirement of exhaustion of underlying coverage. The various policies described the applicable underlying coverage in four main ways: (1) some policies contained a schedule of underlying insurance listing all of the underlying policies in the same policy period by insurer name, policy number, and dollar amount; (2) some policies referenced a specific dollar amount of underlying insurance in the same policy period and a schedule of underlying insurance on file with the insurer; (3) some policies referenced a specific dollar amount of underlying insurance in the same policy period and identified one or more of the underlying insurers; and (4) some policies referenced a specific dollar amount of underlying insurance that corresponds with the combined limits of the underlying policies in that policy period. The excess policies also provided, in various ways, that “other insurance” must be exhausted before the excess policy can be accessed. Reprinted courtesy of Gregory S. Capps, White and Williams LLP and Michael E. DiFebbo, White and Williams LLP Mr. Capps may be contacted at cappsg@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. DiFebbo may be contacted at difebbom@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Appeals Court Overruled Insured as Additional Insured on Subcontractor’s Commercial General Liability Policy

    April 02, 2014 —
    Scott R. Murphy and Clifford J. Shapiro of Barnes & Thornburg LLP in the publication National Law Review analyzed the findings of the Mississippi case Carl E. Woodward, LLC v. Acceptance Indemnity Insurance: “the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit overruled the district court’s determination that a general contractor was insured as an additional insured on its subcontractor’s commercial general liability (CGL) policy for claims arising out of the allegedly defective work performed by the subcontractor.” “This case underscores the fact that many standard policy forms do not include completed operations coverage for additional insureds,” Murphy and Shapiro declared. “Owners and contractors that desire to have such coverage therefore need to check their contracts to be make sure the contract language requires completed operations coverage for additional insureds, and they also need to obtain and review the actual additional insured endorsement contained in their subcontractors’ insurance policies before work commences to make sure that the required completed operations insurance coverage is provided.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Wall Street Is Buying Starter Homes to Quietly Become America’s Landlord

    February 27, 2023 —
    Javier Vidana started out as a real estate agent in 2013, when Arizona’s Salt River Valley seemed wide open. It was the aftermath of a housing market crash that had seen the typical home value in the Phoenix metro area fall more than 50%, and a single parent with good credit could tap loan programs geared toward first-time homeowners and find a pretty decent place to live. For Vidana, the challenge was convincing potential clients that a house was something they wanted to own. “We were on the phone begging people to buy,” he says. “There was no buyer confidence whatsoever.” The economy crawled forward, and the housing market with it. Vidana made a specialty of tutoring young buyers on real estate basics. Soon he was supplementing his commission income by selling how-to PDFs on his website and collecting ad revenue on his YouTube channel. Then the pandemic sparked a boom that gave him something new to explain. Americans responded to the work-from-home era by house shopping, and no big city was hotter than Phoenix. The median home was worth about $285,000 at the beginning of the pandemic; it was valued at $435,000 two years later. It wasn’t unheard of for a seller to receive 50 offers or more, or for a prospective buyer to make offers on a dozen different homes before finally closing a deal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Clark, Bloomberg

    Supreme Court Rejects “Wholly Groundless” Exception to Question of Arbitrability

    February 06, 2019 —
    In newly appointed Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s first opinion, the United States Supreme Court held that the “wholly groundless” exception to arbitrability, which some federal courts had relied on as justification to decide questions of arbitrability over the express terms of a contract, was inconsistent with the Federal Arbitration Act and Supreme Court precedent. Based on this decision, where a contract delegates the question of arbitrability to an arbitrator, courts must respect the parties’ contract and refer the question to the arbitrator. Schein v. Archer & White, 586 U.S. __ (2019). In Schein, Archer & White brought a lawsuit against Henry Schein alleging violations of federal and state antitrust laws and seeking both monetary damages and injunctive relief. The relevant contract between the parties contained an arbitration provision that provided:
    “Any dispute arising under or related to this Agreement (except for actions seeking injunctive relief . . .) shall be resolved by binding arbitration in accordance with the arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Justin Fortescue, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Fortescue may be contacted at fortescuej@whiteandwilliams.com