BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction code 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


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

    Illinois Town Sues over Construction Defects at Police Station

    California’s Fifth Appellate District Declares the “Right to Repair Act” the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    Melissa Dewey Brumback Invited Into Claims & Litigation Management Alliance Membership

    Massachusetts Roofer Killed in Nine-story Fall

    Leveraging the 50-State Initiative, Connecticut and Maine Team Secure Full Dismissal of Coverage Claim for Catastrophic Property Loss

    Collapse of Improperly Built Deck Not An Occurrence

    A Court-Side Seat: A Poultry Defense, a Houston Highway and a CERCLA Consent Decree that Won’t Budge

    Kahana Feld Welcomes Six Attorneys to the Firm in Q4 of 2023

    How Helsinki Airport Uses BIM to Create the Best Customer Experience

    The Miller Act: More Complex than You Think

    Burlingame Construction Defect Case Heading to Trial

    Judicial Economy Disfavors Enforcement of Mandatory Forum Selection Clause

    Anatomy of a Data Center

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    Confidence Among U.S. Homebuilders Declines to Eight-Month Low

    Zurich American Insurance Company v. Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company

    How to Get Your Bedroom Into the Met Museum

    As Trump Visits Border, Texas Landowners Prepare to Fight the Wall

    Limitation on Coverage for Payment of Damages Creates Ambiguity

    Insurer Unable to Declare its Coverage Excess In Construction Defect Case

    Potential Pitfalls Under the Contract Disputes Act for Federal Government Contractors

    Conflicting Exclusions Result in Duty to Defend

    Coronavirus Is Starting to Slow the Solar Energy Revolution

    When to Withhold Retention Payments on Private or Public Projects

    Bremer Whyte’s Newport Beach Team Prevails on a Motion for Summary Judgment in a Wrongful Death Case!

    Cultivating a Company Culture Committed to Safety, Mentorship and Education

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute Stage 2- Increase the Heat

    Nonparty Discovery in California Arbitration: How to Get What You Want

    FirstEnergy Fined $3.9M in Scandal Involving Nuke Plants

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

    “Professional Best Efforts” part 2– Reservation of Rights for Engineers who agree to “best” efforts? (law note)

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Advances to Debris Removal Phase

    Rio Olympics Work Was a Mess and Then Something Curious Happened

    Contractors May be Entitled to Both Prompt Payment Act Relief and Prejudgment Interest for a Cumulative 24%!

    No Coverage Under Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause

    No Coverage for Homeowner Named as Borrower in Policy but Not as Insured

    Judge Nixes SC's $100M Claim Over MOX Construction Delays

    Newmeyer & Dillion Named for Top-Tier Practice Areas in 2018 U.S. News – Best Law Firms List

    Tishman Construction Admits Cheating Trade Center Clients

    LA Wildfires Push California Insurance Market to Its Limit

    Tesla Powerwalls for Home Energy Storage Hit U.S. Market

    Blindly Relying on Public Adjuster or Loss Consultant’s False Estimate Can Play Out Badly

    Gibbs Giden is Pleased to Announce Four New Partners and Two New Associates

    English v. RKK. . . The Saga Continues

    Strict Rules for Home Remodel Contracts in California

    Serial ADA Lawsuits Targeting Small Business Owners

    Additional Insurance Coverage Determined for General Contractor

    Construction Contractors Must Understand Retainage In 2021

    The Hazards of Carrier-Specific Manuscript Language: Ohio Casualty's Off-Premises Property Damage and Contractors' E&O Endorsements
    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

    Construction Defect Attorneys Call for Better Funding of Court System

    June 28, 2013 —
    The construction defect law firm Anderson Shoech has a solution to some of the problems with the California courts. They note that cases often work their way through the system more slowly than they did in the past, due to “unprecedented cuts of over $1 billion from the State Court budget.” Prior to the cuts, cases were resolved “within six months to a year.” Under the current conditions, those involved in a lawsuit “would be lucky if their case was heard within 18 months of filing and could expect at least two full years to pass.” They recommend that California return to appropriately funding the court system. Failure to do so could cause business to go to states “with a functioning and predictable court system.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Supreme Court Shifts Gears on “Reverse CEQA”

    February 23, 2016 —
    The California Supreme Court has shifted gears on so-called “reverse CEQA” under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The Supreme Court, in a much-anticipated decision, in California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Case No. S213478 (December 17, 2015), held that public agencies subject to CEQA are not required to analyze whether existing environmental conditions may impact a proposed project’s future users or residents – also known as “reverse CEQA” or “CEQA in reverse” – as opposed to the more traditional analysis of a proposed project’s impact on the environment, unless: 1. The proposed project risks exacerbating existing environmental hazards – in which case, it is the proposed project’s impact on the environment not the environment’s impact on the proposed project, which compels the evaluation; or 2. A reverse CEQA analysis is already required under statute, for example, on certain airport, school and housing projects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at Slower Pace in May

    July 30, 2014 —
    Residential real-estate prices rose in the 12 months ended May at the slowest pace in more than a year as a lull in the U.S. housing market limits appreciation. The S&P/Case-Shiller index of property values in 20 cities increased 9.3 percent from May 2013, the smallest year-to-year advance since February 2013, after rising 10.8 percent in the year ended in April, the group said today in New York. The median projection of 30 economists surveyed by Bloomberg called for a 9.9 percent year-over-year advance. Compared with the prior month, prices dropped for the first time in two years. Higher mortgage rates and strict lending requirements are bridling sales, which will probably prompt sellers to lower their expectations of how much they can get for their properties. Continued job growth and greater balance between supply and demand will be needed to bring some potential homebuyers back into the market. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Victoria Stilwell, Bloomberg
    Ms. Stilwell may be contacted at vstilwell1@bloomberg.net

    Funding the Self-Insured Retention (SIR)

    August 17, 2020 —
    Unlike a deductible, a self-insured retention (referred to an “SIR”) is, as the name suggests, a self-insured obligation of the insured before its insurer picks up coverage. The SIR needs to be exhausted by the insured (as the primary self-insurance component) before the carrier’s excess defense and indemnification obligations kick-in under the terms of the policy. However, an insured can generally exhaust an SIR by paying legal fees and costs associated with a claim. Oftentimes, the language in the policy requires the SIR to be paid for by the named insured or an insured under the policy. This was an issue addressed by the Florida Supreme Court in Intervest Const. of Jax, Inc. v. General Fidelity Ins. Co., 133 So.3d 494 (Fla. 2014). In this matter, a personal injury claimant asserted a claim against the contractor dealing with a residential home. The contractor hired a subcontractor to install attic stairs and the subcontract required the contractor to indemnify it. The owner of the house injured herself on the attic stairs and sued the contractor. The contractor, in turn, sought indemnification against the subcontractor that installed the attic stairs. 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

    15 Wilke Fleury Lawyers Recognized in 2020 Northern California Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    August 17, 2020 —
    Wilke Fleury is proud to announce that 15 of our astounding attorneys were featured in the Annual List of Top Attorneys in the 2020 Northern California Super Lawyers magazine. Super Lawyers rates attorneys in each state using a patented selection process; they also publish a yearly magazine issue that regularly produces award-winning features on selected attorneys. Wilke Fleury LLP Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Citigroup Reaches $1.13 Billion Pact Over Mortgage Bonds

    April 09, 2014 —
    Citigroup Inc. (C) agreed to pay $1.13 billion to settle claims from mortgage-bond investors as it seeks to curb liabilities tied to the financial crisis. It took a $100 million first-quarter charge. The 68 securitization trusts covered by the settlement issued a combined $59.4 billion in mortgage-backed securities from 2005 to 2008, the New York-based bank said yesterday in a statement. The agreement covers 18 investors represented by Gibbs & Bruns LLP and trustees have until June 30 to accept the deal, the law firm said in a separate statement. The accord must be approved by the Federal Housing Finance Agency. Citigroup, the third-biggest U.S. bank, is resolving a portion of liabilities tied to mortgages it packaged and sold to investors in the run-up to the 2008 crisis. JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) and Bank of America Corp. (BAC), the two largest U.S. lenders, previously agreed to multibillion-dollar settlements with Gibbs & Bruns clients. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dakin Campbell, Bloomberg
    Mr. Campbell may be contacted at dcampbell27@bloomberg.net

    Las Vegas HOA Conspiracy & Fraud Case Delayed Again

    September 17, 2014 —
    According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, “[T]he federal trial of former construction company boss Leon Benzer and five others in a massive scheme to take over Las Vegas-area homeowners associations” has been delayed to February 2015 by U.S. District Judge James Mahan. Defense attorneys “argued they needed more time to review thousands of pages of new documents provided by prosecutors.” The prosecutors did not object to the delay. Benzer and the other defendants face conspiracy and fraud charges in an HOA takeover scheme that allegedly occurred between 2003 and 2009. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Federal District Court Addresses Material Misrepresentation in First Party Property Damage Claim

    August 26, 2024 —
    In Pittsfield Dev. LLC v. Travelers Indem. Co., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117530 (N.D. Ill. July 3, 2024), the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois addressed an alleged material misrepresentation by an insured during the course of the adjustment of a water loss claim at an insured property. Subsequent to a pipe burst event which caused damage to a number of the floors in the insured building, the insured submitted a claim to Travelers and also submitted, with the assistance of a retained public adjuster, a damage estimate of the damages at the property. Included within the estimate submitted by the insured was a line item for "Lead Paint & Asbestos Removal" with a corresponding dollar amount of $1,140,000. It was this line item which formed the basis of Travelers' claim of misrepresentation. At his deposition, the public adjuster testified that the $1,140,000 figure was an oral estimate received over the phone from an asbestos remediation company. Travelers disputed the testimony and contended that no such estimate was ever provided. For support, Travelers pointed to deposition testimony from a remediation company employee that while rough estimates were occasionally given verbally, the largest over the phone estimate she could recall was in the $20,000-$25,000 range. It was also disputed that the company would ever provide an oral quote of that magnitude sight unseen, especially since the largest project the remediation company had ever completed was less than $250,000. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James M. Eastham, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Eastham may be contacted at jeastham@tlsslaw.com