BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design 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


    Have the Feds Taken Over Arbitration?

    Alleged Serious Defects at Hanford Nuclear Waste Treatment Plant

    Los Angeles Is Building a Future Where Water Won’t Run Out

    The Top 3 Trends That Will Impact the Construction Industry in 2024

    Making the Construction Industry a Safer place for Women

    Render Unto Caesar: Considerations for Returning Withheld Sums

    The Peak of Hurricane Season Is Here: How to Manage Risks Before They Manage You

    CDJ’s #8 Topic of the Year: California’s Board of Equalization Tower

    No Occurrence Where Contract Provides for Delays

    Never, Ever, Ever Assume! (Or, How a Stuck Shoe is Like a Construction Project Assumption)

    Working Safely With Silica: Health Hazards and OSHA Compliance

    Insurer Must Defend General Contractor

    Burden Supporting Termination for Default

    Waive Your Claim Goodbye: Louisiana Court Holds That AIA Subrogation Waiver Did Not Violate Anti-Indemnification Statute and Applied to Subcontractors

    Order for Appraisal Affirmed After Insureds Comply with Post-Loss Obligations

    Blog: Congress Strikes a Blow to President Obama’s “Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces” Executive Order 13673

    Common Law Indemnification - A Primer

    Washington Supreme Court Sides with Lien Claimants in Williams v. Athletic Field

    Can an App Renovate a Neighborhood?

    Electrical Subcontractor Sues over Termination

    Philadelphia Proposed Best Value Procurement Bill

    Corps of Engineers to Prepare EIS for Permit to Construct Power Lines Over Historic James River

    Mortgage Applications in U.S. Jump 11.6% as Refinancing Surges

    2018 California Construction Law Update

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Obtains Pre-Answer Motion to Dismiss in Favor of Defendant

    VinFast Breaks Ground in North Carolina on its Promised $4B EV Plant

    The Construction Lawyer as Problem Solver

    Two New Developments in Sanatoga, Pennsylvania

    Five Steps Employers Should Take In the Second Year Of the COVID-19 Pandemic

    Illinois Supreme Court Finds Construction Defect Claim Triggers Initial Grant of Coverage

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    To Catch a Thief

    Changes to Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act in New York Introduced

    Impact of Lis Pendens on Unrecorded Interests / Liens

    Manhattan Bargain: Condos for Less Than $3 Million

    Appellate Division Confirms Summary Judgment in Favor of Property Owners in Action Alleging Labor Law Violations

    Staten Island Villa Was Home to Nabisco 'Nilla' Wafer Inventor

    Home Sales and Stock Price Up for D. R. Horton

    Will The New U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Deal Calm Industry Jitters?

    Lack of Workers Holding Back Building

    Congratulations to Partner Vik Nagpal on his Nomination for West Coast Casualty’s Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence!

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2020 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    North Dakota Universities Crumble as Oil Cash Pours In

    Detect and Prevent Construction Fraud

    Insurer Springs a Leak in Its Pursuit of Subrogation

    Steven L. Heisdorffer Joins Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell

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

    Insurer Granted Summary Judgment on Denial of Construction Defect Claim

    7 Sustainability Ideas for Modular Classrooms in the Education Industry (guest post)

    July Sees Big Drop in Home Sales
    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

    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    February 10, 2012 —

    After suing a contractor for failing to complete the remodeling of their home, an Orange County couple has settled for an apology. Douglas J. Pettibone represented the contractor, who had lost his business after a broken neck, multiple surgeries, and an addiction to pain medicine. Mr. Pettibone represented his client pro bone. The case was settled in arbitration by JAMS.

    Mr. Pettibone noted that his client gave “a heartfelt and very moving apology.” The remodeling was completed by another contractor, two years after Thorp Construction stopped work on the project. After the apology, the case was dismissed.

    Read the full story…

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

    Dealing with Abandoned Property After Foreclosure

    April 10, 2019 —
    California landlords must follow very specific steps before disposing of property that is clearly abandoned, left on real estate which has been the subject of court proceedings such as eviction or foreclosure, or otherwise left behind. Following the statutory procedures relating to abandoned property protects landlords from potential liability for an improper “conversion.” Former tenants/owners and others “reasonably believed” to be owners of the apparently abandoned personal property must be given proper written notice of the right to reclaim the abandoned property. The tenant is presumed to be the owner of any “records” remaining on the property. The California Code of Civil Procedure provides a template for such notice. The notice to be provided to former tenants/owners must be in “substantially” the same form provided in the California Code of Civil Procedure and must contain the following information:
    1. A description of the abandoned property in a manner reasonably adequate to permit the owner of the property to identify it;
    2. The location where the tenant can claim the property;
    3. The time frame that the tenant has to claim the property. The date specified in the notice shall be a date not less than fifteen (15) days after the notice is personally delivered or, if mailed, not less than eighteen (18) days after the notice is deposited in the mail;
    4. A statement that reasonable storage costs will be charged to the tenant/owner and the tenant/owner must pay those costs before claiming the property; and
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight Rated as One of the Top 50 in a Survey of Construction Law Firms in the United States

    July 22, 2019 —
    The magazine, Construction Executive, recently rated the top construction law firms in the United States. We are pleased to announce that our firm was rated as number one in Oregon and Alaska and number two in the state of Washington behind Perkins Coie, LLP. In its inaugural ranking, Construction Executive reached out to hundreds of law firms nationwide with a dedicated construction practice to determine who the industry leaders were. Ahlers Cressman & Sleight ranked 22nd overall in the United States among all construction law firms. This survey considered revenues from each of the law firm’s construction practices, the number of lawyers in the firm’s construction practice, the percentage of the firm’s total revenues derived from construction practice, the number of states in which the firm is licensed to practice and the year in which the construction practice was established. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jonathan Schirmer, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Schirmer may be contacted at jonathan.schirmer@acslawyers.com

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment Based Upon Vandalism Exclusion

    June 18, 2014 —
    The court denied the insurer's motion for summary judgment on plaintiff's breach of contract claim because there was a disputed issue of fact regarding the applicability of the vandalism exclusion. Poole v. Untied Servs. Auto. Assn., 2014 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2394 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. May 16, 2014). The plaintiff rented a residence to tenants. The tenants performed repairs to the residence which resulted in damage in excess of $126,000. The tenants vacated the residence. The plaintiff submitted a claim to USAA for benefits under her homeowners' policy. USAA denied coverage based upon exclusions for damage caused by, among other things, faulty workmanship, renovation and remodeling. Plaintiff sued and USAA moved for summary judgment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    N.J. Governor Fires Staff at Authority Roiled by Patronage Hires

    August 20, 2019 —
    New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy’s administration fired 30 employees of a state authority that finances local school construction after an independent review found that his former appointee stacked it with friends, family and political contacts who were unqualified for their jobs. All but three of those dismissed Tuesday from the Schools Development Authority had been hired by Lizette Delgado-Polanco, the former chief executive officer who resigned in April amid media scrutiny of her oversight. A review by an outside law firm faulted the agency for “patronage-type hires” that undermined its work. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Elise Young - Bloomberg

    Agree to Use your “Professional Best"? You may Lose Insurance Coverage! (Law Note)

    March 01, 2017 —
    Yesterday, I was part of a panel at the NC Bar Association Construction Law Winter Meeting, discussing insurance issues for design professionals. One topic we touched on was how to avoid invalidating your insurance. As most of you know, Errors & Omissions insurance (“E&O” coverage) is meant to provide coverage for mistakes you may make in performing your professional architecture or engineering services. E&O coverage is important to protect you in the event of a lawsuit because, as you know, no set of plans is perfect (nor is perfection the standard of care). Be careful, though. Do not promise to provide a higher standard of care than the “professional standard“. If you are asked to sign a contract that states you will use your “professional best,” “best efforts”, “highest care” or similar, you are being asked to sign something that could cost you your E&O coverage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    Defective Stairways can be considered a Patent Construction Defect in California

    September 24, 2014 —
    Stairs are not safe! At least the Court of Appeal in the Second Appellate District of California doesn’t think so. A rail station in Los Angeles was completed by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“MTA”) in 1993. The rail station was part of the development of the Southern California Rapid Transit District Metro Rail Project. In 2011, the plaintiff fell on a stairway at the station. In August 2012, Plaintiff sued the MTA for dangerous condition of public property, statutory liability, and negligence. Among other defects, plaintiff alleged the banister of the stairwell was “too low” and the stairwell “too small” given the number, age, and volume of people habitually entering and exiting the rail station. In addition, plaintiff alleged that MTA “failed to provide adequate safeguards against the known dangerous condition by, among other acts and omissions, failing to properly design, construct, supervise, inspect and repair the Premises causing the same to be unsafe and defective for its intended purposes.” MTA, in turn, cross-complained against Hampton- the entity that provided design and construction services at the station. Hampton demurred to the first amended cross-complaint, asserting a four year statute of limitations defense pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 337.1, claiming the alleged deficiencies were patent defects. On September 11, 2013, the trial court overruled the demurrer finding that the defect was not patent. Hampton appealed. The appellate court overruled the trial court’s ruling and in fact, granted Hampton’s writ of mandate and even directed the trial court to sustain the demurrer without leave to amend! (Delon Hampton & Associates v. Sup. Ct. (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority) (Cal. App. Second Dist., Div. 3; June 23, 2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 250, [173 Cal.Rptr.3d 407].) The appellate court found that the purpose of section 337.1 is to “provide a final point of termination, to proctect some groups from extended liability.” A “patent deficiency” has been defined as a deficiency which is apparent by reasonable inspection. See Tomko Woll Group Architects, Inc. v. Superior Court (1996) 46 Cal.App.4th 1326, 1336. The court found a patent defect can be discovery by the kind of inspection made in the exercise of ordinary care and prudence, whereas a latent defect is hidden and would not be discovered by a reasonably careful inspection. See Preston v. Goldman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 108, 123. The test to determine whether a construction defect is patent is an objective test that asks “whether the average consumer, during the course of a reasonable inspection, would discover the defect…” See Creekbridge Townhome Owners Assn., Inc. v. C. Scott Whitten, Inc. (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 251, 256. Mr. Kaufman may be contacted at wkaufman@lockhartpark.com, and you may visit the firm's website at www.lockhartpark.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William M. Kaufman, Lockhart Park LP

    2024 Update to CEB’s Mechanics Liens Now Available

    October 15, 2024 —
    For a number of years we have had the honor to serve as update authors for several publications of California’s Continuing Education of the Bar (CEB). I didn’t realize it until now but the CEB, a program of the University of California, was started more than 75 years ago following WWII to provide veterans who were attorneys with practical guidance on changes to the law as they returned to their practices following the war. Pretty cool! Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of