BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failure
    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


    Duty to Defend Broadly Applies to Entire Action; Insured Need Not Apportion Defense Costs, Says Maryland Appeals Court

    Solar and Wind Just Passed Another Big Turning Point

    Key Legal Issues to Consider Before and After Natural Disasters

    Risk Protection: Force Majeure Agreements Take on Renewed Relevance

    Court Holds That Property Insurance Does Not Cover Economic Loss From Purchasing Counterfeit Vintage Wine

    Hawaii Appellate Court Finds Duty to Defend Group Builders Case

    California’s One-Action Rule May Apply to Federal Lenders

    Massachusetts Roofer Killed in Nine-story Fall

    General Contractor’s Professional Malpractice/Negligence Claim Against Design Professional

    Traub Lieberman Partner Colleen Hastie and Associate Jeffrey George Successfully Oppose Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate Dismissal

    Colorado Senate Committee Approves Construction Defect Bill

    Wyoming Supreme Court Picks a Side After Reviewing the Sutton Rule

    NTSB Issues 'Urgent' Recommendations After Mass. Pipeline Explosions

    Lessons from the Sept. 19 Mexico Earthquake

    What Counts as Adequate Opportunity to Cure?

    Energy Company Covered for Business Interruption Losses Caused by Fire and Resulting in Town-Ordered Shutdown

    Affordable Global Housing Will Cost $11 Trillion

    The Sensible Resurgence of the Multigenerational Home

    Partner Yvette Davis Elected to ALFA International’s Board of Directors

    Fed Inflation Goal Is Elusive as U.S. Rents Stabilize: Economy

    Can a Non-Union Company Be Compelled to Arbitrate?

    Accident/Occurrence Requirement Does not Preclude Coverage for Vicarious Liability or Negligent Supervision

    Canada to Ban Foreigners From Buying Homes as Prices Soar

    Water Backup Payment Satisfies Insurer's Obligation to Cover for Rain Damage

    The Privette Doctrine, the Hooker Exception, and an Attack at a Construction Site

    Congratulations 2019 DE, NJ and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    The Evolution of Construction Defect Trends at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Arctic Roads and Runways Face the Prospect of Rapid Decline

    Rising Construction Disputes Require Improved Legal Finance

    A Murder in Honduras Reveals the Dark Side of Clean Energy

    It Was a Wild Week for Just About Everyone. Ok, Make that Everyone.

    Possible Real Estate and Use and Occupancy Tax Relief for Philadelphia Commercial and Industrial Property Owners

    U.S., Canada, Mexico Set New Joint Clean-Energy Goal

    Return-to-Workplace Checklist: Considerations and Emerging Best Practices for Employers

    What To Do When the Government is Slow to Decide a Claim?

    Insurer’s Optional Appeals Process Does Not Toll Statute of Limitations Following Unequivocal Written Denial

    No Repeal Process for Rejected Superstorm Sandy Grant Applications

    Florida Accuses Pool Contractor of Violating Laws

    Developer Sues TVA After It Halts Nuke Site Sale

    Subcontractors Have Remedies, Even if “Pay-if-Paid” Provisions are Enforced

    Indemnification Provisions Do Not Create Reciprocal Attorney’s Fees Provisions

    BWB&O ranks as a 2025 Best Law Firm by Best Lawyers®

    Contractor Sues Supplier over Defective Products

    Green Investigations Are Here: U.S. Department of Justice Turns Towards Environmental Enforcement Actions, Deprioritizes Compliance Assistance

    DoD Issues Guidance on Inflation Adjustments for Contractors

    Orchestrating Bias: Arbitrator’s Undisclosed Membership in Philharmonic Group with Pauly Shore’s Attorney Not Grounds to Reverse Award in Real Estate Dispute

    Late Notice Bars Insured's Claim for Loss Caused by Hurricane

    Berkeley Researchers Look to Ancient Rome for Greener Concrete

    When Are General Conditions and General Requirements Covered by Builder's Risk

    How Will Today’s Pandemic Impact Tomorrow’s Construction Contracts?
    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

    Windstorm Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    September 10, 2018 —
    The Second Circuit reversed the District Court's issuance of summary judgment to the insurer because a windstorm exclusion was deemed ambiguous. 7001 East 71st Street, LLC v. Continental Cas. Co., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 17334 (2nd Cir. June 26, 2018). A windstorm during Hurricane Sandy caused the roof of 7001 East 71st Street LLC (7001) to tear, allowing rainwater to seep in and damage 7001's "Covered Equipment" as defined by the policy. Continental denied coverage based upon the windstorm exclusion and the district court granted summary judgment to Continental. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Parties to an Agreement to Arbitrate May be Compelled to Arbitrate with Non-Parties

    February 28, 2022 —
    In a recent case decided by Division III of the Washington Court of Appeals, David Terry Investments, LLC – PRC v. Headwaters Development Group LLC,[1] the court held that parties to an arbitration agreement can be compelled to arbitrate related claims with non-parties to the agreement based on the doctrine of equitable estoppel. The case involved six joint venture agreements to develop three separate properties in Spokane, two joint venture agreements per property. One entity, David Terry Investments, LLC – PRC (“DTI”), owned by David Terry, was a partner in each of the six joint venture agreements. DTI joint ventured with S.G. Spady Consulting (“SGSC”) and with Headwaters Development Group LLC (“HDG”) separately for each of the three properties. HDG owned the three properties, and SGSC was to provide construction management advice. Steve Spady was the principal of both HDG and SGSC. Stoneridge was a licensed general contractor, the principal of which was also Steve Spady. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Paul R. Cressman Jr., Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Cressman may be contacted at paul.cressman@acslawyers.com

    Is it time for a summer tune-up?

    September 20, 2017 —
    For this week’s Guest Post Friday readers are in for a treat. Lance Godard, founder of The Godard Group, has provided marketing and business development solutions to global law firms for nearly 20 years. He has particular expertise developing strategies that allow lawyers to identify client opportunities, communicate their messages, and grow their practices. Lance has been called a “provocative and engaging leader in the legal profession and social media” and was named one of the “20 Twitterers Lawyers should follow on Twitter.” He is the founder of 22 Tweets, live Twitter interviews with practicing lawyers, which provides a forum for lawyers to tell their story using social media. The market appears to be picking up. Clients are getting back to work. New opportunities can’t be far behind. What are you doing to find them? To make sure they show up on your radar? To put yourself in a position to see those opportunities that do present themselves, and to land the work when you pitch for it? Maybe it’s time for a marketing tune-up. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Tightest Credit Market in 16 Years Rejects Bernanke’s Bid

    October 08, 2014 —
    James Bregenzer, a 31-year-old marketing strategist in Chicago, was rejected for a mortgage in May after successfully financing two previous home purchases. The hitch this time: his monthly payment would have been $100 more than the lender was willing to approve. Bregenzer is in good company. Standards in the U.S. are so high and inflexible that former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, now a Brookings Institute fellow-in-residence with a net worth of at least $1.1 million, said at a conference last week that he couldn’t refinance his house in Washington. Even some doctors struggle to get home loans if they’re self-employed. “We asked if we could go over by $100 and were told that’s just not going to work,” said Bregenzer, who bought his first home before getting married in 2008. “The process of buying a home used to be stupid easy. Now, my wife and I were buying a home with two salaries, we make a heck of a lot more than I used to, and I have to go into great and terrible detail to show documentation.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Prashant Gopal, Bloomberg
    Mr. Gopal may be contacted at pgopal2@bloomberg.net

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

    January 28, 2015 —
    It is an all-too-common scenario in California construction: Nine and a half years after completion of a major California construction project, immediately before the 10-year “statute of repose” for suing on “latent” construction defects expires, a lawsuit claiming damages for “recently discovered” latent construction defects is filed. The property owner sues the contractor for the alleged defects. The direct contractor sues all its subcontractors for indemnity and defense. The attorneys spontaneously generate. Experts proliferate. Claimed defects are extrapolated. Four or five years later, after a few dozen attorneys earn a small fortune in fees, the insurance companies make payments. Attorneys collect more fees. The owners take what remains. They repair nothing... and buy vacation homes. Perhaps a cynical view, but there are many in the construction defect world who would reach a similar conclusion. The question is: How can you defeat this seemingly inevitable chain of events? Under a case known as Brisbane Lodging L.P. v. Webcor Builders, Inc. 216 Cal.App 4th 1249 (2013) there may be hope. California Code of Civil Procedure sections 337.1 and 337.15 grant a 10-year “statute of repose” for bringing claims for “latent” construction defects. These statutes allow a lawsuit for such claimed defects to be filed in court up until ten years after the project has been completed. Latent defects are generally defined as those which are “not apparent by reasonable inspection” (CCP §337.15(b)). It is extremely common for such claims to be filed immediately before this 10-year deadline expires. When the lawsuit is brought, the cash register begins to ring. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Porter Law Group

    Commentary: How to Limit COVID-19 Related Legal Claims

    January 11, 2021 —
    We are 10 months into the global pandemic. Given the magnitude of additional costs and upended expectations and risk-allocation, we foresee a wave of disputes coming soon. Whether it is large or small depends heavily on how well project team members handle the COVID-19 project impacts now. Reprinted courtesy of Joshua Lindsay, Crowell & Moring (ENR) and Meagan Bachman, Crowell & Moring (ENR) Ms. Bachman may be contacted at mbachman@crowell.com Mr. Lindsay may be contacted at joshlindsay@crowell.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Practical Distinction Between Anticipatory Breach and Repudiation and How to Deal with Both on Construction Projects

    June 10, 2024 —
    When a multilevel construction project is underway and a contractor or subcontractor isn’t performing as expected, it can be difficult to know how to address the low performance without putting the parties’ contract and good working relationship at risk. However, there may come a time when poor performance lapses into a something much worse: an anticipatory breach or repudiation of the subject contract. Imagine Scenario One: You are a general contractor managing a large-scale construction project and one of your subcontractors is falling behind on their work. The project manager for the subcontractor calls you and says, “Look, I don’t think we’re going to be able to hit our next milestone, and probably not the next one after that.” A conversation like this would generally trigger concern for most general contractors, but it would not necessarily invoke panic. These types of delay conversations are not uncommon on large scale projects. Compare that example, however, with Scenario Two, where the subcontractor instead says, “We received an offer to work another job for much more money, so we’re leaving the project site today and will not be returning.” This is obviously different (and potentially worse) than Scenario One, and likely cause for much greater concern. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Devon Griger, Jones Walker
    Ms. Griger may be contacted at dgriger@joneswalker.com

    Facebook Posts “Not Relevant” Rules Florida Appeals Court

    February 07, 2014 —
    A Cape Coral, Florida resident is suing the city and construction companies over alleged negligence “for failing to use reasonable care in keeping the construction site safe for pedestrians,” according to News-Press. The lawsuit was filed after a three-year old boy “jumped out of a wagon pulled by his aunt and darted across the construction zone before being” hit and dragged by a vehicle. The boy “suffers neurological problems from the crash.” The defendants wanted to use Facebook posts made by the Plaintiff about the city, contractors, and subcontractors, as evidence. However, the 2nd District Court of Appeals ruled that the Facebook posts were irrelevant to the case. Todd Robert Falzone, the Plaintiff attorney, said that “it’s becoming more common for defense lawyers to try and introduce social media into any case, but the law is new and there isn’t a lot of guidance for lawyers or judges,” according to News-Press. The defendants’ attorneys did not return News-Press’s calls asking for comments. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of