BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut structural concrete 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


    Three White and Williams Lawyers Named Top Lawyers by Delaware Today

    The Activist Group Suing the Suburbs for Bigger Buildings

    Florida Enacts Property Insurance Overhaul for Benefit of Policyholders

    Communications between Counsel and PR Firm Hired by Counsel Held Discoverable

    Couple Claims ADA Renovation Lead to Construction Defects

    Velazquez Framing, LLC v. Cascadia Homes, Inc. (Take 2) – Pre-lien Notice for Labor Unambiguously Not Required

    How VR and AR Will Help in Remote Expert Assistance

    Massive Danish Hospital Project Avoids Fire Protection Failures with Imerso Construction AI

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

    Legal Implications of 3D Printing in Construction Loom

    Illinois Court of Appeals Addresses Waiver and Estoppel in Context of Suit Limitation Provision in Property Policy

    California Court of Appeal Finds Alleged Inadequate Defense by Insurer-Appointed Defense Counsel Does Not Trigger a Right to Independent Counsel

    New Jersey’s Proposed Construction Defect Law May Not Cover Everything

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: Known Loss Doctrine & Interpretation of “Occurrence”

    Haight Lawyers Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America© 2019

    Insured's Motion for Reconsideration on Protecting the Integrity of Referral Sources under Florida Statute s. 542.335

    He Turned Wall Street Offices Into Homes. Now He Vows to Remake New York

    Value in Recording Lien within Effective Notice of Commencement

    Contractor to Repair Defective Stucco, Plans on Suing Subcontractor

    The Washington Supreme Court Rules that a Holder of a Certificate of Insurance Is Entitled to Coverage

    Fifth Circuit Certifies Eight-Corners Duty to Defend Issue to Texas Supreme Court

    How Concrete Mistakes Added Cost to the Recent Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Project

    Force Majeure Under the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic

    State Supreme Court Cases Highlight Importance of Wording in Earth Movement Exclusions

    Evaluating Smart Home Technology: It’s About More Than the Bottom Line

    Blackstone Said to Sell Boston Buildings for $2.1 Billion

    University of Tennessee Commits to $1.9B Capital Plan

    Shoring of Ceiling Does Not Constitute Collapse Under Policy's Definition

    Dealing with Hazardous Substances on the Construction Site

    Foreclosing Junior Lienholders and Recording A Lis Pendens

    Metrostudy Shows New Subdivisions in Midwest

    Municipalities Owe a Duty to Pedestrians Regardless of Whether a Sidewalk Presents an “Open and Obvious” Hazardous Condition. (WA)

    Montana Court Finds Duty to Defend over Construction Defect Allegation

    Judicial Panel Denies Nationwide Consolidation of COVID-19 Business Interruption Cases

    Top Talked-About Tech at the 2023 ABC Joint Tech Summit

    Details of Sealed Whistleblower Charges Over Cuomo Bridge Bolts Burst Into Public View

    A Closer Look at an HOA Board Member’s Duty to Homeowners

    More Regulations for Federal Contractors

    Massachusetts Pulls Phased Trigger On Its Statute of Repose

    Yet ANOTHER Reminder to Always Respond

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured In Northern California Super Lawyers 2021!

    Potential Extension of the Statutes of Limitation and Repose for Colorado Construction Defect Claims

    Duty to Defend For Accident Exists, But Not Duty to Indeminfy

    ASCE Report Calls for Sweeping Changes to Texas Grid Infrastructure

    The Cheap and Easy Climate Fix That Can Cool the Planet Fast

    City Potentially Liable for Cost Overrun on Not-to-Exceed Public Works Contract

    Empire State Building Owners Sue Photographer for Topless Photo Shoot

    EPA Rejects Most of N.Y.’s $511 Million Tappan Zee Loan

    What Happens When Dave Chappelle Buys Up Your Town

    New Jersey Courts Speed Up Sandy Litigation
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    The Condominium Warranty Against Structural Defects in the District of Columbia

    September 07, 2017 —
    The District of Columbia Condominium Act contains a statutory warranty that protects condominium associations and their unit owner members from structural defects in newly constructed and newly converted condominiums. The warranty is backed by a condominium developer’s bond, letter of credit, or other form of security from which monies can be drawn upon if the developer fails to make warranty repairs. This article discusses how the warranty against structural defect works and how to make claims against the developer’s security to fund warranty repairs. THE CONDOMINIUM WARRANTY AGAINST STRUCTURAL DEFECTS Condominium developers in Washington DC are required by statute to warrant against structural defects in the condominium common elements and each condominium unit. District of Columbia Condominium Act (“DC Condo Act”) 42-1903.16(b). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas D. Cowie, Cowie & Mott, P.A.
    Mr. Cowie may be contacted at ndc@cowiemott.com

    Traub Lieberman Partner Greg Pennington Wins Summary Judgment in Favor of Property Owner

    September 12, 2022 —
    In a case brought before the Superior Court of New Jersey, Traub Lieberman Partner Greg Pennington won a motion for summary judgment in favor of their client, the owner of a residential property (“Property Owner”) in Atlantic City, New Jersey. The Property Owner had retained a Construction Company (“Construction Company” or “Contractor”) to perform renovations to the residence, which included building a new staircase. The Plaintiff alleged that while walking down a set of temporary wooden steps on the property, the third step broke, which caused him to fall and resulted in the alleged injuries. The Plaintiff brought suit against the Property Owner and Construction Company for personal injuries as a result of the alleged fall. In the contract between the Property Owner and the Construction Company, it is stated that “[the Contractor] shall be solely responsible for all construction methods and materials and for coordinating all portions of the Work….The Contractor warrants to [the Property Owner] that all materials and equipment incorporated are new and that all work shall be of good quality and free of defects or faults.” The contract continues to state that the Construction Company shall indemnify and hold harmless the Property Owner against all claims, which includes damages, losses, expenses, legal fees and other costs that might arise from the Construction Company’s performance of the work under the contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gregory S. Pennington, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Pennington may be contacted at gpennington@tlsslaw.com

    New York's Highest Court Says Asbestos Causation Requires Evidence Of Sufficient Exposure To Sustain Liability

    May 10, 2022 —
    On April 26, 2022, the New York Court of Appeals described that in toxic tort cases a plaintiff can only establish liability-creating causation for an adverse health effect with “expert testimony based on generally accepted methodologies.” See Francis Nemeth v. Brenntag North America (N.Y. Apr. 26, 2022). The suit involved alleged asbestos exposure from talc. The plaintiff alleged liability for talc contaminated with asbestos that was ultimately used in a commercial talcum powder, Desert Flower, which the decedent applied daily from 1960 to 1971. At trial, the plaintiff proffered two expert witnesses, a geologist, Sean Fitzgerald, who testified about the “glove box test” and a doctor of internal medicine, Dr. Jacqueline Moline. Fitzgerald’s glove box test consisted of agitating a sample of Desert Flower in a Plexiglas chamber. Fitzgerald concluded that the asbestos fibers in the sample of Desert Flower were “significantly releasable” and that the decedent was exposed to thousands to trillions of fibers through repeated use. Dr. Moline concluded Desert Flower was “a substantial contributing factor” to the decedent’s peritoneal mesothelioma. The jury returned a verdict in the plaintiff’s favor. Reprinted courtesy of Rafael Vergara, White and Williams and Jhonattan N. Gonzalez, White and Williams Mr. Vergara may be contacted at vergarar@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Gonzalez may be contacted at gonzalezj@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Alaska Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C-" Grade

    February 28, 2022 —
    JUNEAU, Alaska — The Alaska Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) today released preliminary findings from the 2021 Report Card for Alaska's Infrastructure, with the full report slated to be released in coming weeks. Alaska civil engineers gave 12 categories of infrastructure an overall grade of a 'C-' meaning the state's infrastructure is in mediocre condition and requires attention. Alaska has consistently maintained its transportation infrastructure, solid waste and energy sectors despite omnipresent environmental threats, seismic events, permafrost and shore erosion. However, some sectors such as drinking water, wastewater, and Alaska's marine highways have fallen behind due to a lack of funding to keep up with current and future needs. Civil engineers graded aviation (C), bridges (B-), dams (C), drinking water (D), energy (C-), marine highways (D), ports and harbors (D+), rail (C), roads (C), solid waste (C), transit (B-) and wastewater (D). "Our systems and state agencies have demonstrated commendable resilience in the face of seismic events and other natural disasters," said David Gamez, co-chair, 2021 Report Card for Alaska's Infrastructure. "Unfortunately, we face many other threats, ranging from shore erosion to permafrost, major temperature fluctuations and avalanches. We must keep our foot on the gas to address current and future challenges to prevent power outages, road closures, suspended drinking water services, and many more vital services." To view the report card and all 12 categories, visit https://infrastructurereportcard.org/state-item/alaska/. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 150,000 civil engineers worldwide and is America's oldest national engineering society. ASCE works to raise awareness of the need to maintain and modernize the nation's infrastructure using sustainable and resilient practices, advocates for increasing and optimizing investment in infrastructure, and improve engineering knowledge and competency. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    House Panel Subpoenas VA Documents on Colorado Project

    September 22, 2016 —
    The Dept. of Veterans Affairs has received a subpoena from the House Veterans Affairs Committee, asking for more information about the VA’s long-delayed, far over-budget hospital under construction in Aurora, Colo. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com

    “Bee” Careful: Unique Considerations When Negotiating a Bee Storage Lease Agreement

    March 27, 2019 —
    As demand for commercial bees used to pollinate crops (such as almond trees) has grown, so has the demand for facilities to store bees. Entering a lease agreement for the storage of live bees presents some unique issues the parties need to consider when negotiating the lease agreement. Don’t Bee Short-Sighted: Bees are often transported to different areas depending on the time of year, which means bees are not stored in the same facility all year. The lease agreement will often only provide for the storage of bees during the season when the bees are used for pollination in that particular area, but that does not mean the parties must limit the term of the lease agreement to a single season. The parties may consider entering into a lease agreement for multiple years that only applies during the pollination season each year. Bee Mindful of the Rent: Whereas the parties usually base rent in a typical commercial lease agreement off of the square footage of space the tenant uses in the premises, it often makes more sense for both parties negotiating a lease for the storage of bees to base the rent on the number of beehives or bee colony boxes stored at the facility. Basing the rent on the number of beehives or bee colony boxes provides the landlord with flexibility in storing the bees of multiple tenants in the same facility, and it can give the tenant flexibility with the number of bees it may need stored at the facility in any given season. With such a rental arrangement, a landlord should consider asking for a commitment from the tenant to deliver at least a certain number of beehives or colonies for storage, and the tenant should consider asking for a commitment from the landlord to reserve space in the facility for at least that same number of beehives or colonies as the tenant is giving a commitment for. Additionally, the parties will need to determine when rent will be paid. In a general commercial lease agreement, rent is usually paid monthly. With a bee storage lease agreement, however, a landlord may want to require the tenant to pay all of the rent for the season upon delivery of the bees, and the landlord may also want the tenant to pay a percentage of the rent to reserve space in the facility prior to delivery of the bees. This allows the landlord to get an early indication of what space in the facility it will have available in the facility for other tenants given the somewhat flexible rental arrangement of the parties. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Colton Addy, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Addy may be contacted at caddy@swlaw.com

    Fannie Mae Says Millennials Are Finally Leaving Their Parents' Basements

    December 17, 2015 —
    Parents, rejoice. Your offspring may finally be moving out of the family basement. A new report (PDF) from Fannie Mae, the U.S. government-backed mortgage company, suggests that the millennial generation is getting a move on. "According to the ACS [Census Bureau’s American Community Survey], the number of homeowners aged 25-34 fell by more than 250,000 in each year between 2007 and 2012, but has declined by less than 100,000 annually since then," Fannie Mae said. "In fact, the decline between 2013 and 2014 was statistically insignificant, the first indication of stability in the number of young homeowners since the onset of the Great Recession." So while the number of homeowners in that age range is still on the decline, the trend looks poised for a reversal, and Fannie Mae said it won't take much to see positive growth in millennial homeownership in the near future. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Julie Verhage, Bloomberg

    Liability Cap Does Not Exclude Defense Costs for Loss Related to Deep Water Horizon

    May 01, 2019 —
    The Texas Supreme Court found that Lloyd's endorsement imposing a cap on liability for a joint venture did not exclude coverage for defense costs. Anadarko Petroleum Corp. v. Houston Cas. Co. et al., 2019 Texas LEXIS 53 (Texas Jan. 25 2019j. Pursuant to a joint venture agreement, Anadarko held a 25% ownership interest in the Macondo Well in the Gulf of Mexico. When the well blew out, numerous third parties filed claims against BP entities and Anadarko. Many of the claims were consolidated into a multi-district litigation (MDL). The MDL court granted a declaratory judgment finding BP and Anadarko jointly and severally liable. BP and Anadarko reached a settlement in which Anadarko agreed to transfer its 25% ownership interest to BP and pay BP $4 billion. In exchange, BP agreed to release any claims it had against Anadarko and to indemnify Anadarko against all other liabilities arising out of the Deepwater Horizon incident. BP did not agree, however, to cover Anadarko's defense costs. Anadarko had a policy through Lloyd's. The policy provided excess-liability coverage limited to $150 million per occurrence. Lloyd's paid Anadarko $37.5 million (25% of the $150 million limit) based upon Anadarko 25% ownership in the joint venture. Anadarko argued that Lloyd's still owed all of Anadarko's defense expenses, up to the $150 million limit. 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