BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expert
    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


    Suing a Local Government in Land Use Cases – Part 2 – Procedural Due Process

    Toll Brothers to Acquire Shapell for $1.6 Billion

    From Singapore to Rio Green Buildings Keep Tropical Tenants Cool

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces New Partners

    Legislative Update: Bid Protest Law Changes to Benefit Contractors

    Termination of Construction Contracts

    The Looming Housing Crisis and Limited Government Relief—An Examination of the CDC Eviction Moratorium Two Months In

    Commercial Real Estate in 2023: A Snapshot

    Elevators Take Sustainable Smart Cities to the Next Level

    Record-Setting Construction in Fargo

    How to Protect a Construction-Related Invention

    New York City Dept. of Buildings Explores Drones for Facade Inspections

    Title II under ADA Applicable to Public Rights-of-Way, Parks and Other Recreation Areas

    Contractor Wins in Arbitration Only to Lose Before the Superior Court on Section 7031 Claim

    School Board Settles Construction Defect Suit

    Weslaco, Texas Investigating Possible Fraudulent Contractor Invoices

    Bad Faith and a Partial Summary Judgment in Seattle Construction Defect Case

    Insurance Law Alert: California Supreme Court Limits Advertising Injury Coverage for Disparagement

    Los Angeles Wildfires Rage on, Destroying Structures and Displacing Residents

    No Coverage for Installation of Defective Steel Framing

    Discussion of History of Construction Defect Litigation in California

    New Jersey Court Washes Away Insurer’s Waiver of Subrogation Arguments

    Jinx: Third Circuit Rules in Favor of Teamsters in Withdrawal Case

    Illinois Law Bars Coverage for Construction Defects in Insured's Work

    BHA at The Basic Course in Texas Construction Law

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

    SFAA Commends U.S. Senate for Historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Sudden Death”

    Nine Gibbs Giden Partners Listed in Southern California Super Lawyers 2022

    Force Majeure Under the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic

    Trial Court’s Grant of Summary Judgment On Ground Not Asserted By Moving Party Upheld

    Seattle’s Audacious Aquarium Throws Builders Swerves, Curves, Twists and Turns

    Mediating is Eye Opening

    Washington High Court Holds Insurers Bound by Representations in Agent’s Certificates of Insurance

    Chambers USA 2021 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    Global Emissions From Buildings, Construction Climb to Record Levels

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You Have No Class(ification)”

    New California Standards Go into Effect July 1st

    GRSM Named Among 2025 “Best Law Firms” by Best Lawyers

    Building a Case: Document Management for Construction Litigation

    Colorado Supreme Court to Hear Colorado Pool Systems, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance Company, et al.

    Suppliers of Inherently Dangerous Raw Materials Remain Excluded from the Protections of the Component Parts Doctrine

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Just Hanging Around”

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Allegations of Collapse Rejected

    Building Stagnant in Las Cruces Region

    New 2021 ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey Standards Effective February 23, 2021

    Measure Of Damages for Breach of Construction Contract

    New American Home Construction Nears Completion Despite Obstacles

    That’s Common Knowledge! Failure to Designate an Expert Witness in a Professional Negligence Case is Not Fatal Where “Common Knowledge” Exception Applies

    New York Establishes a Registration Requirement for Contractors and Subcontractors Performing Public Works and Covered Private Projects
    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

    Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP Expands into Georgia

    November 03, 2016 —
    Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP (WSHB) has opened a new regional office in Atlanta, Georgia. Richard E. Zelonka, Jr., will be the Managing Partner. With over a decade of trial experience, Mr. Zelonka has handled complex litigation in both state and federal courts throughout the Southeastern United States. “I am thrilled to be joining Wood Smith Henning & Berman. WSHB’s sterling reputation, coupled with its national footprint, is especially attractive. That, coupled with the Firm’s passionate dedication to their clients, made this move a very easy choice for me,” said Mr. Zelonka. “I could not be more excited to lead WSHB’s new Georgia office.” The Firm’s Atlanta office is located at 1170 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 1200, Atlanta, Georgia 30309. The main phone number is (404) 885-5700. The fax number is (404) 506-9108. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado House Bill 20-1290 – Restriction on the Use of Failure to Cooperate Defense in First-Party Claims

    May 18, 2020 —
    On February 7th, Representative Garnett, with Senator Fenberg as the Senate sponsor, introduced HB 20-1290, concerning the ability of an insurer to use a failure-to-cooperate defense in an action in which the insured has made a claim for insurance coverage. If the bill were to pass, in order to plead or prove a failure-to-cooperate defense in any action concerning first-party insurance benefits, the following conditions must be met:
    1. The carrier has submitted a written request for information the carrier seeks to the insured or the insured’s representative, by certified mail;
    2. The written request provides the insured 60 days to respond;
    3. The information sought would be discoverable in litigation;
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    A Court-Side Seat: Recent Legal Developments at Supreme and Federal Appeals Courts

    December 18, 2022 —
    This is a review of initial Supreme Court and Federal Appeals Courts oral arguments and other matters in October 2022. Oral Arguments at the Supreme Court Michael Sackett, et ux., v. Environmental Protection Agency The Supreme Court’s 2022 term began on October 3, 2022, with this important oral argument. For many years, the petitioner has encountered EPA opposition to the construction of a home on his property located near a lake in Idaho. The agency insists that the land is subject to federal regulatory jurisdiction, in that a Clean Water Act permit will be needed before work can proceed. Several courts have already weighed in on this issue; whether the land in question is considered a regulated “wetlands” pursuant to the “significant nexus” test developed by the Court in the Rapanos case decided in 2006. The oral argument was fairly long and spirited. The justices appear to believe that the “significant nexus” is unworkable because in many instances it provides little or no guidance to landowners as to whether their property may be subject to federal jurisdiction, and thus subject to civil and even criminal penalties. Justice Kavanaugh remarked that “this case is going to be important for wetlands throughout the country and we have to get it right.” Later, Justice Gorsuch lamented the fact that implementing a test for federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act test is so difficult to apply: “If the federal government doesn’t know [if a property is adjacent to navigable water and is regulated,] “does a reasonable landowner have any idea.” The issue is very difficult to resolve, and the Congress has indicated that is has no interest in entering this regulatory thicket. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Storm Eunice Damage in U.K. Could Top £300 Million

    February 28, 2022 —
    Hundreds of thousands of homes are still without power due after Storm Eunice tore through the country, while insurers have indicated the clean-up could cost more than £300 million. At least four people were killed in the UK and Ireland during one of the worst storms in decades, with a gust of 122mph provisionally recorded at the Needles on the Isle of Wight, which, if verified, would be the highest ever recorded in England. Energy Networks Association (ENA) has said nearly 400,000 homes had no electricity on Friday night, with network providers recording 156,000 disrupted customers for UK Power Networks, 120,000 for Scottish & Southern, 112,000 for Western Power, 6,000 for Northern Power and 260 for Electricity North West. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg

    Enforceability of Contract Provisions Extending Liquidated Damages Beyond Substantial Completion

    April 15, 2024 —
    This post takes a look at the enforceability of contract provisions providing for liquidated delay damages after substantial completion. Typically, the assessment of liquidated delay damages ends at substantial completion of a project. However, various standard form contracts, including some of the ConsensusDocs and EJCDC contracts, contain elections allowing for the parties to agree on the use of liquidated damages for failing to achieve substantial completion, final completion, or project milestones. The standard language in the AIA A201 leaves it up to the parties to define the circumstances under which liquidated damages will be awarded. Courts are split on the enforceability of provisions that seek to assess liquidated damages beyond substantial completions. Courts in some jurisdictions will not impose liquidated damages after the date of substantial completion on the ground that liquidated damages would otherwise become a penalty if assessed after the owner has put the project to its intended use. Perini Corp. v. Greate Bay Hotel & Casino, Inc., 129 N.J. 479, 610 A.2d 364 (1992). When the terms are clear, other jurisdictions will enforce contract terms providing for liquidated damages until final completion, even if the owner has taken beneficial use of the facility. Carrothers Const. Co. v. City of S. Hutchinson, 288 Kan. 743, 207 P.3d 231 (2009). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stu Richeson, Phelps
    Mr. Richeson may be contacted at stuart.richeson@phelps.com

    Margins May Shrink for Home Builders

    November 06, 2013 —
    Home builders are worried that the rising prices of new homes might not rise enough and be caught by the rising costs of building them, cutting into the profit margin. “If builders say the trajectory of margins is beginning to peak, then in a cyclical business, people tend to go from thinking the best to thinking the worst,” Stephen Kim, a Barclays analyst told the Wall Street Journal. As of the end of October, the U.S. Home Construction Index was 21% below its highest point in 2013, set back in May. Margins are still over those of last year. Meritage Homes saw a gross margin of 22.8% in 2013’s third quarter, when the same quarter in 2012 had a gross margin of 18.6%. Steven Hilton, the firm’s Chairman and CEO, predicted little or no growth and a decline toward 20% or 21%. On the other hand, with margins at 20.6%, Ryland Homes sees itself at a normal point. Larry Nicholson, the President and CEO of Ryland, said “there’s not a lot of room for it to grow.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    More on Fraud, Opinions and Contracts

    February 06, 2019 —
    Here at Construction Law Musings, I have discussed the interaction between fraud and contracts on many occasions. Recently, I got to put my advice into action. I am counsel for the plaintiff in the matter of Environmental Staffing Acquisition Corp. v. Beamon, et. al. in the Portsmouth, VA Circuit Court and recently got a great opinion (.pdf) right on point that was recently featured in Virginia Lawyers Weekly. The basic facts are these. My client, Environmental Staffing (En-Staff) filed a Little Miller Act claim and a claim for breach of contract for Beamon’s failure to pay for temporary staffing that En-Staff provided it at the Jeffry Wilson housing project demolition in Portsmouth, VA. Beamon then counterclaimed for fraud and breach of contract claiming that some statements to the effect that a particular supervisor was qualified along with presentation of the individual’s resume constituted fraud. My client demurred to the two fraud counts (actual and constructive). 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

    Insurer Wrongfully Denies Coverage When Household Member Fails to Submit to EUO

    May 06, 2024 —
    The court determined that coverage for a loss by fire could not be denied when the insured's son failed to appear for a examination under oath (EUO). Adekola v. Allstate Vehicle & Prop. Ins. Co., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27125 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 16, 2024). Plaintiff had a homeowners policy with Allstate. Plaintiff - Michele Adekola - was the named insured under the policy. After the fire, Allstate provided payments for temporary housing. Allstate requested examinations under oath of Plaintiff and her son, Nico. Plaintiff and her son were examined by Zoom. Allstate then sought to examine Plaintiff's other son, Lemmeco, but these efforts were unsuccessful. Allstate then stopped paying for Plaintiff's temporary housing and informed Plaintiff that Lemmeco's failure to participate in an EUO was a material breach of duties under the policy and the breach was prejudicial to Allstate. Allstate further contended that Lemmeco had a duty to submit to an EUO. 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