BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect 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


    Singapore Unveils Changes to Make Public Housing More Affordable

    Insured Versus Insured Clause Does Not Bar Coverage

    Spain Risks €10.6 Billion Flood Damage Bill, Sanchez Says

    Flint Water Suits Against Engineers Will Go to Trial, Judge Says

    Montana Federal Court Holds that an Interior Department’s Federal Advisory Committee Was Improperly Reestablished

    How Tech Is Transforming the Construction Industry in 2019

    U.K. to Set Out Plan for Fire-Risk Apartment Cladding Crisis

    CA Supreme Court Rejects Proposed Exceptions to Interim Adverse Judgment Rule Defense to Malicious Prosecution Action

    Construction Defect Claim Must Be Defended Under Florida Law

    Developer’s Fraudulent Statements Are His Responsibility Alone in Construction Defect Case

    DC Circuit Rejects Challenge to EPA’s CERCLA Decision Regarding Hardrock Mining Industry

    Float-In of MassDOT Span Sails, But Delay Dispute Lingers

    Newmeyer & Dillion Ranked Fourth Among Medium Sized Companies in 2016 OCBJ Best Places to Work List

    CLB Recommends Extensive Hawaii Contractor License Changes

    Reminder: Quantum Meruit and Breach of Construction Contract Don’t Mix

    Construction Professionals Could Face More Liability Exposure Following California Appellate Ruling

    What is Toxic Mold Litigation?

    National Lobbying Firm Opens Colorado Office, Strengthening Construction Defect Efforts

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorney Casey Quinn Selected to the 2017 Mountain States Super Lawyers Rising Stars List

    Washington Supreme Court Upholds King County Ordinance Requiring Utility Providers to Pay for Access to County’s Right-of-Way and Signals Approval for Other Counties to Follow Suit

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

    Timber Prices Likely to Keep Rising

    COVID-19 Business Closure and Continuity Compliance Resource

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at a Faster Pace in October

    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

    New Mexico Adopts Right to Repair Act

    Is Your Construction Business Feeling the Effects of the Final DBA Rule?

    Improper Means Exception and Tortious Interference Claims

    Administration Launches 'Buy Clean' Construction Materials Push

    Settlement Agreement? It Ain’t Over ‘Til it’s . . . Final, in Writing, Fully Executed, and Admissible

    Connecticut Supreme Court Further Refines Meaning of "Collapse"

    An Insurance Policy Isn’t Ambiguous Just Because You Want It to Be

    BWB&O’s Los Angeles Office Obtains Major Victory in Arbitration!

    California Supreme Court Finds that When it Comes to Intentional Interference Claims, Public Works Projects are Just Different, Special Even

    Three Attorneys Elevated to Partner at Newmeyer & Dillion, LLP

    Amazon Feels the Heat From Hoverboard Fire Claims

    Is it the End of the Lease-Leaseback Shootouts? Maybe.

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/10/24) – New Type of Nuclear Reactor, Big Money Surrounding Sports Stadiums, and Positivity from Fannie Mae’s Monthly Consumer Survey

    New American Home Construction Nears Completion Despite Obstacles

    Exponential Acceleration—Interview with Anders Hvid

    New Jersey Appellate Court Reinstates Asbestos Action

    Framework, Tallest Mass Timber Project in the U.S., Is On Hold

    End of an Era: Los Angeles County Superior Court Closes the Personal Injury Hub

    Colorado Defective Construction is Not Considered "Property Damage"

    Skyline Cockpit’s Game-Changing Tower Crane Teleoperation

    NJ Transit’s Superstorm Sandy Coverage Victory Highlights Complexities of Underwriting Property Insurance Towers

    No Coverage For Construction Defects When Complaint Alleges Contractual Damages

    Is It Time to Get Rid of Retainage?

    Goldman Veteran Said to Buy Mortgages After Big Short

    Performance Bond Surety Takeover – Using Terminated Contractor To Complete The Work
    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. Leveraging 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

    The Importance of the Subcontractor Exception to the “Your Work” Exclusion

    May 16, 2018 —
    Commercial General Liability (CGL) policies typically include a “your work” exclusion, excluding coverage for “’property damage’ to ‘your work’ arising out of it or any part of it and included in the ‘products-completed operations hazard.’” These CGL policies define “your work,” in pertinent part, as “work or operations performed by you or on your behalf.” (emphasis added). As the recent case of Mid-Continent Cas. Co. v. JWN Construction, Inc., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20529 (S.D. Fla. 2018) reminds us, the “your work” exclusion can serve to eliminate coverage for a general contractor, even when property damage is caused by a subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John J. Kozak, Esq., Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.
    Mr. Kozak may be contacted at john.kozak@csklegal.com

    Demonstrating A Fraudulent Inducement Claim Or Defense

    May 18, 2020 —
    In a recent case, Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court’s denial of a motion for a temporary injunction sought by an employer due to an independent contractor’s violation of a non-compete and non-solicitation provision in an employment / independent contractor agreement (“employment agreement”). You can find more on this case and the enforcement of the non-compete and non-solicitation clause here. A worthy discussion in this case centers on the independent contractor’s fraudulent inducement defense. Specifically, the independent contractor, as a defense to the injunction, claimed that he was fraudulently induced into entering into the employment agreement because the employer promised he would make a certain amount of money and he would work predominantly in one geographic location. The employment agreement contained NO such representations. Instead, the employment agreement contained a fee and services schedule and the independent contractor would be compensated based on that schedule. It stated nothing as to the independent contractor only having to work, or predominantly working, in one geographic location, or that the independent contractor would be guaranteed “X” amount of money working in that location. Why is this important? 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

    Giant Floating Solar Flowers Offer Hope for Coal-Addicted Korea

    March 21, 2022 —
    More than 92,000 solar panels in the shape of plum blossoms, floating on the surface of a reservoir in South Korea, offer a vision of how land-scarce developed nations can overcome local resistance to giant renewable-energy projects. The 17 giant flowers on the 12-mile-long reservoir in the southern county of Hapcheon are able to generate 41 megawatts, enough to power 20,000 homes, according to Hanwha Solutions Corp., which built the plant. It’s one of the biggest floating solar plants in the world, and it’s in a nation that has been a laggard in adopting renewable energy, even though South Korea’s industrialized economy relies heavily on imported fossil fuels. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Heesu Lee, Bloomberg

    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    September 09, 2011 —

    A summary judgment was affirmed in the case of Brown v. Farmers Group, by the California Court of Appeals. The Browns bought a new home in Oakley, California. At the time, they signed disclosure statement “acknowledging that the area around their home experienced gusty winds and would be in development for years to come, which might result in dust and airborne mold.”

    The Browns found an unusual amount of dust in their home, which became worse when they ran their heating and air conditioning system. Shelia Brown was later diagnosed with chronic valley fever, which was attributed to airborne mold. The Browns contacted Farmers which investigated the house. Although the adjustor from Farmers said the Browns would be covered, Farmers denied the claim.

    After the Browns moved out of the house, an inspector found that the HVAC line in the attic was disconnected, sending dust into the home. The Browns brought action against Mid-Century Insurance, which managed the policy, and Farmers. The identified the HVAC defect, window problems, and valley fever as causes, suing for breach of contact, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and the intentional infliction of emotional distress.

    The court rejected all these claims. The policy with Farmers excluded losses due to defective construction. This ruled out the faulty HVAC system and any problems there might have been from the windows. The policy also specifically excluded losses from contamination, fungi, pathogens, and noxious substances. The court further found that the adjustor’s opinion was irrelevant to the question of what the policy actually covered. Finally, the court found no evidence of intentional infliction of emotional stress.

    On review, the appeals court upheld the trial court’s conclusions and affirmed the summary judgment.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Construction Industry Outlook: Building a Better Tomorrow

    July 25, 2021 —
    COVID-19 plunged the business world into one of the most challenging times not seen since the Great Depression. The construction industry, deemed an essential business, had to quickly innovate to find new ways of working to weather this storm. Several of these seemingly temporary solutions have spawned positive trends that are here to stay. Not Just Green, But Healthy Too The safety culture that exists on today’s jobsites helped contractors stay productive through the pandemic. However, because of the pandemic, project owners and construction firms are evaluating their sites from a new perspective. In a recent meeting, the construction head for a healthcare system stated he knows a safe jobsite but doesn’t know what he doesn’t know about a healthy site. Reprinted courtesy of Michael Alberico, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Alberico may be contacted at malberico@assuranceagency.com

    Recent Supreme Court Decision Could Have Substantial Impact on Builders

    January 23, 2023 —
    On October 27, 2022, the Washington State Supreme Court issued a decision which could have a substantial impact on the enforceability of contract clauses that require litigation to be commenced within a stated period of time from project completion. In Tadych v. Noble Ridge Construction, Inc.,the Supreme Court held that the contractual one-year statute of limitations for bringing claims against the contractor was substantively unconscionable and reversed the Court of Appeals. In Tadych, plaintiff owners (the Tadychs) contracted with defendant contractor (Noble Ridge Construction, Inc., or NRC) for the construction of a custom home in 2012. The contract included a one-year claim limitations clause that required claims to be raised within a one year period from project completion and that any claims not raised during the one-year period would be waived. In December 2013, as the project neared completion, the Tadychs met with NRC to identify any outstanding project issues. The Tadychs noted several, including rainwater pools at the landing at the bottom of the stairs and several nicks and cracks on the stucco exterior walls. The Tadychs moved into the home on April 8, 2014, and the City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development conducted its final site inspection on April 15 and approved the residence for occupancy on April 23. In January or February of 2015, the Tadychs began to notice a shift in their home. In February of 2015, the Tadychs engaged the Construction Dispute Resolution (CDR) to review NRC’s work. CDR raised concerns about the adequacy of the home’s construction and prepared a written report in March 2015 indicating several deviations from the architectural plans and building codes. The Tadychs sent this report to NRC, who assured the Tadychs that NRC’s work followed all requirements and rejected any claims that there were deviations from the plans. The Tadychs continued to notice issues with the home through October 2016. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cassidy Ingram, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight
    Ms. Ingram may be contacted at cassidy.ingram@acslawyers.com

    There’s the 5 Second Rule, But Have You Heard of the 5 Year Rule?

    April 23, 2024 —
    They’re called deadlines for a reason. Usually, because something really bad could happen if you fail to meet the deadline. For those in the construction industry, you probably aware of the “deadline” to bring a claim for latent defects (10 years from substantial completion); the deadline to file suit to foreclose on a mechanics lien (90 days from the date of recording the mechanics lien), and the deadline for serving a preliminary notice (generally, 20 days from the date labor and/or materials are first furnished). Well, here’s another deadline: Under Code of Civil Procedure section 585.310, you have 5 years after a complaint is filed to bring a case to trial, absent the court granting relief. I could leave it at that, but in the next case, Oswald v. Landmark Builders, Inc., 97 Cal.App.5th 240 (2023), was too interesting to pass up. The Oswald Case On June 28, 2016, homeowners Jack Oswald and Anne Seley sued their general contractor and its subcontractors alleging construction defects at their home. Answers and cross-complaints were filed and on February 2017 the trial court determined the case to be complex and appointed a discovery master. A discovery master, for those who may be unfamiliar, is usually a retired judge or third-party lawyer appointed by a court to oversee discovery in a case such as written discovery, depositions, site inspections, etc. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Lower Manhattan Condos Rival Midtown’s Luxury Skyscrapers

    April 09, 2014 —
    Manhattan developer Bill Rudin hadn’t planned to start selling apartments at his Greenwich Village project until the end of this year. He began rethinking that strategy after getting cornered at a cocktail party. “People came up to me and said, ‘We want to buy, we want to buy. When can we buy?’” Rudin said in an interview. He opened a sales office in October for the Greenwich Lane, a complex under construction at the site of the shuttered St. Vincent’s Hospital, after an online sign-up list of would-be buyers for the 200 condominiums drew 1,100 names. More than half of the units at the development, still largely a field of dirt and skeletal towers, have sold at prices averaging $3,500 a square foot, in line with other projects downtown and a new luxury benchmark for the area. While Midtown skyscrapers fringing Central Park are setting sales records and attracting international investors, downtown Manhattan’s new condos are breaking their own price barriers with a focus on local buyers. From the cobblestone streets of Tribeca to the low-rise landmarks of Greenwich Village, builders are accelerating projects with features and costs that rival high-end offerings farther north. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Oshrat Carmiel, Bloomberg
    Ms. Carmiel may be contacted at ocarmiel1@bloomberg.net