BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims 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


    Texas exclusions j(5) and j(6).

    Failure to Consider Safety Element in Design Does Not Preclude Public Entity’s Discretionary Authority Under Design Immunity Defense

    Illinois Attorney General Warns of Home Repair Scams

    Top Developments March 2024

    Bally's Secures Funding for $1.7B Chicago Casino and Hotel Project

    BHA Attending the Construction Law Conference in San Antonio, Texas

    Unlicensed Contractors Caught in a Sting Operation

    Award Doubled in Retrial of New Jersey Elevator Injury Case

    “Genuine” Issue of “Material” Fact and Summary Judgments

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/8/24) – Hotel Labor Disputes, a Congressional Real Estate Caucus and Freddie Mac’s New Policies

    Previously Owned U.S. Home Sales Rise to Eight-Month High

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Special Events

    Top 10 Cases of 2019

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

    New Jersey Court Rules on Statue of Repose Case

    Five Years of Great Legal Blogging at Insurance Law Hawaii

    Congratulations to Partner John O’Meara for Being Named as One of America’s Top 100 Civil Defense Litigators for Three Consecutive Years!

    Insured's Complaint Against Flood Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Reduce Suicide Risk Among Employees in Remote Work Areas

    Bats, Water, Soil, and Bridges- an Engineer’s dream

    Brown Paint Doesn’t Cover Up Construction Defects

    Washington, DC’s COVID-19 Eviction Moratorium Expires

    San Diego Developer Strikes Out on “Disguised Taking” Claim

    Barratt Said to Suspend Staff as Contract Probe Continues

    Indiana Court Enforces Contract Provisions rather than Construction Drawing Markings

    Hong Kong Buyers Queue for New Homes After Prices Plunge

    California Case Adds Difficulties for Contractors & Material Suppliers

    Why Federal and State Agencies are Considering Converting from a “Gallons Consumed” to a “Road Usage” Tax – And What are the Risks to the Consumer?

    Treasure Island Sues Beach Trail Designer over Concrete Defects

    Commonwealth Court Strikes Blow to Philly Window and Door Ordinance

    Insurer in Bad Faith For Refusing to Commit to Appraisal

    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    Inside New York’s Newest Architectural Masterpiece for the Mega-Rich

    Insurer Not Required to Show Prejudice from an Insured’s Late Notice When the Parties Contract for a Specific Reporting Period

    Lien Actions Versus Lien Foreclosure Actions

    New York Climate Mobilization Act Update: Reducing Carbon Emissions and Funding Solutions

    Quick Note: Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    Congratulations 2022 DE, MA, NJ, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Structural Health Check-Ups Needed but Are Too Infrequent

    Does the New Jersey Right-To-Repair Law Omit Too Many Construction Defects?

    Pipeline Safety Violations Cause of Explosion that Killed 8

    A Look at Trending Legislative Changes Impacting Workers' Comp

    Appraisal Ordered After Carrier Finds Loss Even if Cause Disputed

    Happy Thanksgiving from CDJ

    Buy a House or Pay Off College? $1.2 Trillion Student Debt Heats Up in Capital

    2021 California Construction Law Update

    Reminder: Know Your Contractor Licensing Rules

    How Fort Lauderdale Recovered a Phished $1.2M Police HQ Project Payment

    He Turned Wall Street Offices Into Homes. Now He Vows to Remake New York

    Court Finds That $400 Million Paid Into Abatement Fund Qualifies as “Damages” Under the Insured’s Policies
    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

    Walmart Seeks Silicon Valley Vibe for New Arkansas Headquarters

    June 18, 2019 —
    Walmart Inc. took inspiration from McDonald’s Corp., Apple Inc. and locations like Stanford University when designing the new headquarters that will start taking shape this summer. The 350-acre campus will be located just a few blocks east of Walmart’s current home, a patchwork of more than 20 buildings in Bentonville, Arkansas. It will feature bike paths, food trucks and outdoor meeting areas -- part of an effort to lure younger, digitally-savvy workers to northwestern Arkansas. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Matthew Boyle, Bloomberg

    Baltimore Project Pushes To Meet Federal Deadline

    July 22, 2019 —
    Two giant anaerobic digesters shaped like Faberge eggs have for years served as landmarks for commuters traveling on Interstate-695 east of downtown Baltimore. And cranes, recently removed, signaled the location of one of the latest projects in a years-long, $1.6-billion construction program to upgrade the 100-year-old Back River Wastewater Treatment Plant. “You probably won’t see a collection of this many ‘sticks’ anywhere else in the city,” Shane Lippert noted back in October. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Justin Rice, ENR
    Mr. Rice may be contacted at ricej@enr.com

    Road to Record $199 Million Award Began With Hunch on Guardrails

    June 17, 2015 —
    It started with a hunch about malfunctioning highway guardrails. It led to the biggest known whistle-blower award in U.S. history. Joshua Harman, a Virginian with two small highway safety companies, made a discovery in late 2011 that perhaps only a guardrail maker could: A big competitor had changed the dimensions of its roadside safety device by as much as an inch here and there, he said, without telling federal regulators. As designed, Trinity Industries Inc.’s ET-Plus system was meant to turn the end of a guardrail into a de facto shock absorber. The altered units, as Harman saw it, were locking up when hit, spearing cars and their occupants. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick G. Lee, Bloomberg

    Nevada Supreme Court Rejects Class Action Status, Reducing Homes from 1000 to 71

    July 02, 2014 —
    The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that the “Nevada Supreme Court has rejected a request for class action status for claims of damaged stucco from faulty construction by Del Webb Communities involving nearly 1,000 Sun City Summerlin residents,” however, “the court upheld the award of damages to 71 homeowners following a jury trial in Clark County District Court in 2008.” The case began in 2003, and the Las Vegas Review-Journal referred to it as “one of the largest construction-defect cases in Nevada history.” But District Judge Allan Earl denied class action lawsuit in 2006. “Attorneys were seeking $70 million for the homeowners.” In 2008, another court “determined that only 71 homeowners merited compensation totaling $4 million for the stucco issues.” According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, “[h]omeowners alleged that Del Webb failed to install metal screeds that would protect homes from water damage, and as a result, the homes suffered from cracked stucco, mold and weakened walls.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Homeowners Not Compelled to Arbitration in Construction Defect Lawsuit

    January 06, 2012 —

    A California appeals court has ruled that developers cannot enforce CC&Rs in a case where a developer cited an arbitration clause it had inserted into the CC&R. The homeowners are alleging construction defect and wished to sue the developer who claimed a right to this under the CC&Rs.

    The Marina del Rey Argonaut reports that particular appeal dealt only with whether the developer could compel arbitration. The underlying construction defect issues will subsequently have to be determined at trial.

    The attorney for the homeowners’ association, Dan Clifford, noted that “arbitration has to be agreed to by both parties.” The covenant was drafted by the developer and in addition to requiring arbitration, it had a clause that it could not be amended without the consent of the developers. The court ruled that CC&Rs “can be enforced only by the homeowners association, the owner of a condominium or both.”

    Read the full story…

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

    Florida Adopts Daubert Standard for Expert Testimony

    October 07, 2019 —
    Seven months ago, the Florida Supreme Court declined to adopt Daubert as the standard for admitting expert testimony in Florida state courts. In DeLisle v. Crane Co., 258 So. 3d 1219 (2018), the court reaffirmed that “Frye, not Daubert, is the appropriate test in Florida.” On May 23, 2019, however, Florida’s high court did an about-face. In In Re: Amendment to the Florida Evidence Code, No. SC19-107, the Florida Supreme Court overruled its decision in DeLisle and declared that Florida will now apply the Daubert standard to determine whether scientific evidence is admissible. The Daubert standard comes from the case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), which held that the longstanding Frye test[1] for admitting expert testimony was superseded by Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Daubert instructed that federal judges should act as “gatekeepers” to ensure expert testimony is rooted in scientifically valid principles and that those principles are properly applied to the facts at issue. In determining whether scientific evidence should be admitted, Daubert sets forth several factors to consider: the testability of the theory or technique; the peer review and publication of the theory or technique; the error rate for the technique; the standards controlling the technique’s operation; and the general acceptance of the theory or technique.[2] The Daubert standard is generally considered a more onerous test than Frye, precluding expert testimony that might otherwise go to the jury under Frye.[3] Whereas Frye is a single factor test that applies only to new or novel science, Daubert is a multifactor test that applies to all expert testimony. Since Daubert, a growing number of states have moved away from the Frye test in favor of the Daubert standard; it is now followed by a majority of jurisdictions in the country. In 2013, the Florida State legislature attempted to move Florida in this direction by amending the Florida Evidence Code to codify the Daubert standard. But because the Florida Supreme Court is vested with the power to make procedural rules and it was unclear whether the Daubert standard was a procedural or substantive rule, it was uncertain whether the 2013 Daubert amendments were controlling law. Then in 2017, in In Re: Amendment to the Florida Evidence Code, No. SC16-181, the Florida Supreme Court expressly declined adopting the Daubert amendments to the extent they were procedural. This decision signaled that, if faced with the Daubert standard on appeal from a litigated case, the Florida Supreme Court would reaffirm that Frye – not Daubert – controlled the admissibility of expert testimony in Florida state courts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael L. DeBona, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. DeBona may be contacted at debonam@whiteandwilliams.com

    Modular Homes Test Energy Efficiency Standards

    August 06, 2014 —
    The Systems Building Research Alliance (SBRA) will be putting three different energy standards to the test, according to Big Builder. Clayton Homes has been selected to build three modular homes, which will be used in a 15-month energy performance test conducted by Southern Energy Homes (SEHomes). Each home will comply with a different standard: “one complies with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) thermal standards, one is an Energy Star-qualified home and one meets the DOE requirements for the Challenge Home Program, also known as a DOE Zero Energy Ready Home.” Testing is expected to be completed July 2015. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    June 21, 2021 —
    Recently, I was talking with my friend Matt Hundley about a recent case he had in the Charlottesville, VA Circuit Court. It was a relatively straightforward (or so he and I would have thought) breach of contract matter involving a fixed price contract between his (and an associate of his Laura Hooe) client James River Stucco and the Montecello Overlook Owners’ Association. I believe that you will see the reason for the title of the post once you hear the facts and read the opinion. In James River Stucco, Inc. v. Monticello Overlook Owners’ Ass’n, the Court considered Janes River Stucco’s Motion for Summary Judgment countering two arguments made by the Association. The first Association argument was that the word “employ” in the contract meant that James River Stucco was required to use its own forces (as opposed to subcontractors) to perform the work. The second argument was that James River overcharged for the work. This second argument was made without any allegation of fraud or that the work was not 100% performed. 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