BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window 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


    Tightest Credit Market in 16 Years Rejects Bernanke’s Bid

    Boilerplate Contract Language on Permits could cause Problems for Contractors

    Ninth Circuit Reverses Grant of Summary Judgment to Insurer For Fortuitous Loss

    Court Holds That One-Year SOL Applies to Disgorgement Claims Under B&P Section 7031

    Ivanhoe Cambridge Plans Toronto Office Towers, Terminal

    Idaho Construction Executive Found Guilty of Fraud and Tax Evasion

    Mortgage Bonds Stare Down End of Fed Easing as Gains Persist

    Overruling Henkel, California Supreme Court Validates Assignment of Policies

    Insurer’s Discovery Requests Ruled to be Overbroad in Construction Defect Suit

    General Indemnity Agreement Can Come Back to Bite You

    California Supreme Court Addresses “Good Faith” Construction Disputes Under Prompt Payment Laws

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

    General Contractor/Developer May Not Rely on the Homeowner Protection Act to Avoid a Waiver of Consequential Damages in an AIA Contract

    Court Rejects Efforts to Limit Scope of Judgment Creditor’s Direct Action Under Insurance Code Section 11580

    IoT: Take Guessing Out of the Concrete Drying Process

    Big Bertha Lawsuits—Hitachi Zosen Weighs In

    What is a Subordination Agreement?

    Disputes Over Arbitrator Qualifications: The Northern District of California Offers Some Guidance

    Repairs to Water Infrastructure Underway After Hurricane Helene

    Editorial: Qatar Is Champion of Safety Hypocrisy in Migrant Worker Deaths

    More Regulations for Federal Contractors

    Need and Prejudice: An Eleventh-Hour Trial Continuance Where A Key Witness Is Unexpectedly Unavailable

    Texas Supreme Court Defines ‘Plaintiff’ in 3rd-Party Claims Against Design Professionals

    Yet ANOTHER Reason not to Contract without a License

    Legislative Update – The CSLB’s Study Under SB465

    Rooftop Owners Sue Cubs Consultant for Alleged False Statements

    California Supreme Court Upholds Precondemnation Procedures

    Ex-Construction Firm That Bought a $75m Michelangelo to Delist

    With an Eye Already in the Sky, Crane Camera Goes Big Data

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Rules General Contractors Can Contractually Subordinate Mechanics Lien Rights

    Illinois Favors Finding Construction Defects as an Occurrence

    Claims Against Broker Dismissed

    Counter the Rising Number of Occupational Fatalities in Construction

    Firm Offers Tips on Construction Defects in Colorado

    Federal Lawsuit Accuses MOX Contractors of Fraud

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

    Assembly Bill 1701 Contemplates Broader Duty to Subcontractor’s Employees by General Contractor

    Seattle Independent Contractor Ordinance – Pitfalls for Unwary Construction Professionals

    NYC’s Next Hot Neighborhoods Targeted With Property Funds

    Court Finds That $400 Million Paid Into Abatement Fund Qualifies as “Damages” Under the Insured’s Policies

    Don’t Overlook Leading Edge Hazards

    Multisensory Marvel: Exploring the Innovative MSG Sphere

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Could Cost $1B and Take One Year

    What You Need to Know About Home Improvement Contracts

    California Fire Lawyers File Suit Against PG&E on Behalf of More Than 50 Wildfire Victims

    Fracking Fears Grow as Oklahoma Hit by More Earthquakes Than California

    Identifying and Accessing Coverage in Complex Construction Claims

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa M. Rolle and Vito John Marzano Secure Dismissal of Indemnification and Breach of Contract Claims Asserted against Subcontractor

    Women Make Slow Entry into Building Trades

    Construction Contract Terms Matter. Be Careful When You Draft Them.
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Construction Defects in Home a Breach of Contract

    September 09, 2011 —

    The Supreme Court of North Dakota has ruled in Leno v. K & L Homes, affirming the verdict of the lower court. K & L Homes argued that district court had erred in several ways, including by refusing to instruct the jury on comparative fault, denying a request for inspection, and not allowing a defendant to testify on his observations during jury viewing.

    The Lenos purchased a home constructed by K & L Homes, after which they alleged they found cracks, unevenness, and shifting, which they attributed to improper construction. They claimed negligence on the part of K & L Homes. K & L Homes responded that the Lenos were responsible for damage to the home. The Lenos dropped their negligence claim, arguing breach of contract and implied warranties.

    Before the trial, after the discovery period had passed, K & L Homes requested to inspect the home. This was rejected by the court. Kelly Moldenhauer, the owner of K & L Homes sought to testify about his observations during the jury’s viewing of the house. The court denied this too. The jury found that K & L was in breach of contract and awarded damages to the Lenos.

    The North Dakota Supreme Court noted that K & L Homes gave “warranties that the home had been built according to local building codes and laws, and that the house was fit for its particular purpose as a residence.” The court found that a defective home breached this warranty. Further, the home violated an implied warranty of fitness.

    The district court had denied K & L’s request to inspect the home, as the discovery period had ended and it would not give the Lenos time to do further discovery of their own. At the time of the request, there was only twenty-two days before the trial. The Supreme Court ruled that this was not an abuse of discretion of the part of the district court.

    The Lenos had requested that Moldenhauer’s testimony not be permitted, as it would “have the same effect as if the court had granted K & L Homes’ pretrial request for inspection.” K & L Homes agreed to this in court, replying, “okay.”

    The decision affirms the judgment of the district court and the damages awarded to the Lenos by the jury.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Lenders Facing Soaring Costs Shutting Out U.S. Homebuyers

    October 29, 2014 —
    Clem Ziroli Jr.’s mortgage firm, which has seen its costs soar to comply with new regulations, used to make about three loans a day. This year Ziroli said he’s lucky if one gets done. His First Mortgage Corp., which mostly loans to borrowers with lower FICO credit scores and thick, complicated files, must devote triple the time to ensure paperwork conforms to rules created after the housing crash. To ease the burden, Ziroli hired three executives a few months ago to also focus on lending to safe borrowers with simpler applications. “The biggest thing people are suffering from is the cost to manufacture a loan,” said Ziroli, president of the Ontario, California-based firm and a 22-year industry veteran. “If you have a high credit score, it’s easier. For deserving borrowers with lower scores, the cost for mistakes is prohibitive and is causing lenders to not want to make those loans.” Reprinted courtesy of Alexis Leondis, Bloomberg and Clea Benson, Bloomberg Ms. Leondis may be contacted at aleondis@bloomberg.net; Ms. Benson may be contacted at cbenson20@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Garlock Five Years Later: Recent Decisions Illustrate Ongoing Obstacles to Asbestos Trust Transparency

    September 03, 2019 —
    In In re Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC, 504 B.R. 71 (Bankr. W.D.N.C. 2014), the court confirmed what many asbestos defendants and their insurers long suspected: that “the withholding of exposure evidence by plaintiffs and their lawyers was significant and had the effect of unfairly inflating the recoveries against Garlock” and other defendants. This “startling pattern of misrepresentation” included plaintiffs’ attorneys who, out of “perverted ethical duty,” counseled their clients to file claims against multiple trusts without valid factual grounds for so doing. Such “double dipping” and other abuse not only harms asbestos defendants and insurers, but also dilutes recoveries for legitimate claims. Now – five years after Garlock – the Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched a coordinated initiative to fight asbestos trust fraud and mismanagement. However, a series of recent bankruptcy court rulings suggests that this initiative stumbled out of the gate by focusing on the wrong issues. Asbestos defendants and their insurers can learn from the DOJ’s missteps. In November 2017, invoking Garlock, 20 state attorneys general wrote to then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions asking him to devote DOJ resources to fighting asbestos trust abuse. A September 13, 2018 DOJ press release announced an initiative to increase the transparency and accountability of asbestos trusts. Through its United States Trustee Program (UST), the DOJ objected to the debtors’ proposed legal representative for future claims (FCR) in several Chapter 11 cases involving asbestos liabilities: Lawrence Fitzpatrick in Duro Dyne and James L. Patton, Jr. in Maremont, Fairbanks and Imerys Talc. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Amy E. Vulpio, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Vulpio may be contacted at vulpioa@whiteandwilliams.com

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

    May 03, 2021 —
    Outfitting a commercial real estate space with smart technology can be a significant cost. While the long-term benefits and strategic improvements we’ve discussed previously can make that investment worthwhile, the evaluation period is critical to ensure an impactful ROI. Property developers, owners, and managers should undertake a rigorous evaluation process to ensure the technology procurement aligns with the project’s overall financial plan. And this is not just about getting the cost right. If the technology does not meet the needs of the space, then all the smart technology in the world will not prevent the project from being a sunk cost. Do the Research so You Know … The Technology. While the RFP is a key step of the procurement process, a more informal research phase should be undertaken first. Smart technology is a rapidly evolving field, and before reaching out to vendors, the business should ensure that it understands what is available—both in terms of the kinds of technology that can be implemented, and the various companies that offer solutions. Gathering this information early will yield results that align more closely with a particular building’s needs. Reprinted courtesy of James W. McPhillips, Pillsbury and Rachel Newell, Pillsbury Mr. McPhillips may be contacted at james.mcphillips@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Newell may be contacted at rachel.newell@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractors Prepare for a Strong 2021 Despite Unpredictability

    April 05, 2021 —
    A recent IFS study found many construction and engineering companies are reimagining their business models to ensure a secure future, using the pandemic-induced lull in business to prepare themselves to get back to operations on a strong footing. The research shows 70% of businesses have increased or maintained digital transformation spend, despite the COVID-19 pandemic. In the infrastructure, engineering and construction sectors the figure is more than 75%. There are many challenges the industry will face in the new year following the unpredictability of 2020, but there are also many opportunities. Despite the uncertainties that lay ahead, here are the few trends predicted to impact the sector 2021 and beyond. Reprinted courtesy of Kenny Ingram, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Lewis Brisbois Ranks 11th in Law360’s Glass Ceiling Report on Gender Parity in Law Firms

    October 11, 2021 —
    Lewis Brisbois has ranked 11th in Law360’s 2021 Glass Ceiling report, moving up from 37th place in 2020. The report measures female presence and gender parity in law firms, this year evaluating 269 organizations. As described in the Law360 Pulse article titled "Glass Ceiling Report: How Does Your Firm Stack Up?," the publication redesigned its report this year to evaluate female attorneys’ industry standing from a new angle by showing how the percentage of women across three levels within law firms compared with the potential marketplace of hires. This evaluation resulted in the firms’ "pipeline scores," which measure a firm’s percentage points above or below a set of benchmarks assembled with data from the American Bar Association and previous Law360 submissions. Lewis Brisbois’ Los Angeles Co-Managing Partner Jana Lubert and Chief Strategy Officer Janet Eskow, the co-chairs of Lewis Brisbois' Women's Initiative, each expressed excitement about the report, along with resolve to further promote gender diversity. "We are proud that Lewis Brisbois has moved up in these rankings because we have focused diligently on hiring and retaining the best legal talent from a diverse pool of candidates nationwide," Ms. Lubert said. "At the same time, we recognize that there is more to be done to further improve gender equity and inclusion. We remain committed to this important goal, both as it pertains to Lewis Brisbois and to the entire legal industry," she added. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    How Data Drives the Future of Design

    April 11, 2022 —
    Data has become the currency of modern society. It is the most abundantly generated product of the 21st century. Every action in our lives, from asking for directions using Google Maps to liking a post on social media, produces data that is being mined in a variety of imaginative and profitable ways. If our daily actions generate an avalanche of information, how much data could the design, construction, and operation of a building produce? Sketches and drawings, simulations and building analyses, BIM models, construction logistics and procurement, post-occupancy data gathered by sensors, and 3D scans all produce an abundance of data. It is, therefore, unfortunate that the adoption of Big Data and Cloud Computing in the building industry is substantially less developed than in other fields. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Marcin Kosicki, AEC Business

    Forethought Is Key to Overcoming Construction Calamities

    February 10, 2020 —
    Without warning, an under-construction structure in the southern United States suffered a catastrophic collapse. The tragedy resulted in the death of several people. As a result, engineering and construction post-collapse forensics experts engaged in an 18-month investigation. Those involved in the design and build project included the general contractor hired by the owner, a prime engineer, a consulting peer-review engineer and a prime structural design firm supported by a sub-consulting structural engineer. Although significant cracking was noticed several weeks before the failure, no one sounded the alarm or deemed the cracking worthy of corrective action. In their findings, forensic experts found the collapse resulted from the combined failure of the general contractor, engineers and even the owner, who all failed to shut down the work once the cracking reached unacceptable levels and/or take the appropriate actions needed to secure the public safety and mitigate the risk. This was even after the general contractor requested that the engineer-of-record and design manager assess the structure’s extreme cracking. Consequently, the choice to not seriously investigate the crack or seek an independent peer review to design a rectification plan contributed directly to the tragedy. This is typically referred to within the industry as a “negligent professional design error.” Reprinted courtesy of Mitch Cohen, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Cohen may be contacted at mitch.cohen@rtspecialty.com