BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut engineering 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


    Trumark Homes Hired James Furey as VP of Land Acquisition

    Carillion Fallout Affects Major Hospital Project in Liverpool

    Evacuations in Santa Barbara County as more Mudslides are Predicted

    Construction Defect Scam Tied to Organized Crime?

    ASCE Statement on Devastating Tornado Damages Throughout U.S.

    Do Change Orders Need to be in Writing and Other Things That Might Surprise You

    Eleventh Circuit Finds No “Property Damage” Where Defective Component Failed to Cause Damage to Other Non-Defective Components

    Massachusetts Business Court Addresses Defense Cost Allocation and Non-Cumulation Provisions in Long-Tail Context

    Los Angeles Wildfires Will Cause Significant Insured Losses, Ranking Amongst the Most Destructive in California's History

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds Asbestos Exclusion in Alleged Failure to Disclose Case

    Two Texas Cities Top San Francisco for Property Investors

    Which Cities have the Most Affordable Homes?

    Delay In Noticing Insurer of Loss is Not Prejudicial

    City of Pawtucket Considering Forensic Investigation of Tower

    Houston Home Sales Fall for the First Time in Six Months

    UK Agency Seeks Stricter Punishments for Illegal Wastewater Discharges

    A Contractual Liability Exclusion Doesn't Preclude Insurer's Duty to Indemnify

    Franchisors Should Consider Signing a Conditional Lease Assignment Rather Than a Franchisee’s Lease

    Client Alert: Absence of a Court Reporter at a Civil Motion Hearing May Preclude Appellate Review

    Personal Guarantor Cannot Escape a Personal Guarantee By…

    Wilke Fleury Attorney Featured in 2022 Best Lawyers in America and Best Lawyers: Ones To Watch!

    Genuine Dispute Summary Judgment Reversed for Abuse of Discretion and Trial of Fact Questions About Expert Opinions

    North Carolina Supreme Court Addresses “Trigger of Coverage,” Allocation and Exhaustion-Related Issues Arising Out of Benzene-Related Claims

    Unbilled Costs Remain in Tutor Perini's Finances

    PFAS: From Happy Mistake to Ubiquity to Toxic Liability (But is there coverage?)

    Read Carefully. The Insurance Coverage You Thought You Were Getting May Not Be The Coverage You Got

    Deference Given To Procuring Public Agency Regarding Material Deviation

    Peckar & Abramson Once Again Recognized Among Construction Executive’s “Top 50 Construction Law Firms™”

    Eighth Circuit Affirms Judgment for Bad Faith after Insured's Home Destroyed by Fire

    NIBS Consultative Council Issues Moving Forward Report on Healthy Buildings

    Nicholas A. Thede Joins Ball Janik LLP

    California Assembly Passes Expedited Dam Safety for Silicon Valley Act

    Construction Firm Settles Suit Over 2012 Calif. Wildfire

    The Courts and Changing Views on Construction Defect Coverage

    Contractors: Revisit your Force Majeure Provisions to Account for Hurricanes

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

    Erdogan Vows to Punish Shoddy Builders Ahead of Crucial Election

    Reversing Itself, Alabama Supreme Court Finds Construction Defect is An Occurrence

    Partner Jonathan R. Harwood Obtained Summary Judgment in a Case Involving a Wedding Guest Injured in a Fall

    Structural Failure of Precast-Concrete Span Sets Back Sydney Metro Job

    Is an Initial Decision Maker, Project Neutral, or Dispute Resolution Board Right for You?

    Entire Fairness or Business Judgment? It’s Anyone’s Guess

    DRCOG’s Findings on the Impact of Construction Defect Litigation Have Been Released (And the Results Should Not Surprise You)

    Are You Ready For 2015?

    The Privacy Shield Is Gone: How Do I Now Move Data from the EU to the US

    Slowing Home Sales Show U.S. Market Lacks Momentum: Economy

    Federal Judge Refuses to Limit Coverage and Moves Forward with Policyholder’s Claims Against Insurer and Broker

    Alabama Supreme Court States Faulty Workmanship can be an Occurrence

    Claims Litigated Under Government Claims Act Must “Fairly Reflect” Factual Claims Made in Underlying Government Claim

    Colorado Passes Construction Defect Reform Bill
    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

    Thank Your Founding Fathers for Mechanic’s Liens

    August 04, 2015 —
    Yep, our founding fathers, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison specifically, Craig Martin, Construction Attorney Lamson Dugan & Murray LLPwere responsible for proposing the first mechanic’s lien laws in the United States. Mechanic’s liens were not a new concept when the first law was passed in the United States; France, Spain and other countries already had them. But, in England, where landownership was limited to the upper classes, the concept of giving a tradesman an interest in the land for his labors was a truly foreign concept. The Early Years—Pre Mechanic Lien In the 1700s, there was no right to a mechanic’s lien. The possession of land was never deemed to be changed by its improvement and the laborer or material supplier was held to have acquired no right of lien in the property. The only remedy the laborer or material supplier had was to bring an action against the land owner. If the laborer or material supplier obtained a judgment, he would acquire the lien of a judgment creditor. A Treatise on the law of Mechanics’ Liens on Real and Person Property, 1893. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    Dangerous Condition, Dangerous Precedent: California Supreme Court Expands Scope of Dangerous Condition Liability Involving Third Party Negligent/Criminal Conduct

    August 19, 2015 —
    In Cordova v. City of Los Angeles (filed 8/13/15, Case No. S208130), the California Supreme Court held a government entity is not categorically immune from liability where the plaintiff alleges a dangerous condition of public property caused the plaintiff’s injury, but did not cause the third party conduct which precipitated the accident. The case arises out of a traffic collision by which the negligent driving of a third party motorist caused another car to careen into a tree planted in the center median owned and maintained by the City of Los Angeles (“City”). Of the four occupants in the car that collided with the tree, three died and the fourth was badly injured. The parents of two of the occupants sued the City for a dangerous condition of public property under Government Code Section 835. The plaintiffs alleged the roadway was in a dangerous condition because the trees in the median were too close to the traveling portion of the road, posing an unreasonable risk of harm to motorists who might lose control of their vehicles. The City successfully moved for summary judgment, which plaintiffs appealed. On review, the Court of Appeal affirmed holding the tree was not a dangerous condition as a matter of law because there was no evidence that the tree had contributed to the criminally negligent driving of the third party motorist. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys R. Bryan Martin, Laura C. Williams and Lawrence S. Zucker II Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com Ms. Williams may be contacted at lwilliams@hbblaw.com And Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Miller Act and “Public Work of the Federal Government”

    March 01, 2017 —
    The Miller Act applies to the “construction, alteration, or repair of any public building or public work of the Federal Government.” 40 U.S.C. s. 3131. A recent opinion out of the Northern District of Oklahoma sheds light on what the Miller Act means regarding its application to any public work of the Federal Government. See U.S. v. Bronze Oak, LLC, 2017 WL 190099 (N.D.Ok. 2017). If the project is not a public works project of the Federal Government, the Miller Act does not apply. In this case, the Department of Transportation entered into an agreement with the Cherokee Nation where the Department would provide lump sum funding and the Nation would use the money to fund transportation projects. Based on the federal funding, the Nation issued a bid for a transportation project in Mayes County, Oklahoma and the project was awarded to a prime contractor. The prime contractor provided a payment bond that identified the United States as the obligee (as a Miller Act payment is required to do) and stated that it was issued per the Miller Act. Thereafter, the Nation and Mayes County, Oklahoma entered into a Memorandum of Understanding where the County would assume responsibility for the construction and maintenance of the project and the Nation would pay the County an agreed amount upon the completion of the project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    National Coalition to Provide Boost for Building Performance Standards

    March 14, 2022 —
    Energy efficiency advocates are hopeful that a new Biden administration coalition to promote and strengthen building performance standards could accelerate federal, state and local efforts to reduce carbon emissions from buildings. Reprinted courtesy of Pam McFarland, Engineering News-Record Ms. McFarland may be contacted at mcfarlandp@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Spearin Doctrine: Alive, Well and Thriving on its 100th Birthday

    January 15, 2019 —
    On December 9, 2018, United States v. Spearin, [1] a landmark construction law case, will be 100 years old. The Spearin “doctrine”[2] provides that the owner impliedly warrants the information, plans and specifications which an owner provides to a general contractor. The contractor will not be liable to the owner for loss or damage which results from insufficiencies or defects in such information, plans and specifications. Some construction lawyers questioned whether the Spearin doctrine was still viable in Washington after the Washington Court of Appeals decided the recent case of King County v. Vinci Constr. Grand Projets.[3] Some concerned contractor industry groups even considered a “statutory fix” in the wake of the Court of Appeals Vinci decision. It is our opinion that the facts in the Vinci case are distinguishable and the Spearin doctrine is alive and thriving in Washington. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at john.ahlers@acslawyers.com

    A Community Constantly on the Brink of Disaster

    February 06, 2023 —
    In the beautiful coastline region along the famous Pacific Coast Highway between Ventura and Santa Barbara rests the small cottage town of La Conchita. With unobstructed ocean views, this community is only 820 feet wide on a narrow strip of land abutting a 590 feet high cliffside bluff. The bluff has a slope of approximately 35 degrees and consists of poorly cemented marine sediments. This is the perfect recipe for constant disaster from a geological perspective and the site of several major landslides that have devastated this community. Geologic evidence indicates that landslides, which are part of the larger Rincon Mountain slides, have been occurring at and near La Conchita for many thousands of years up to the present with reported landslides beginning as early as 1865. In both 1889 and 1909, the Southern Pacific Rail Line running along the coast was inundated. In the 1909 slide, a train was buried. Since that time, other slides have occurred, covering at times cultivated land, roadways, and the community itself. The two most devastating landslides occurred in 1995 and 2005. 1995 Landslide From October 1994-March 1995, there was double the amount of seasonal rainfall for the area – in excess of 30 inches. The slide occurred on March 3, 1995, when surface cracks in the upper part of the slope opened on the hillside, and surface runoff was infiltrating into the subsurface. The heavy rains essentially saturated the slope causing a massive slide. On March 4, 1995, the hill behind La Conchita failed, moving tens of meters in minutes, and buried nine homes with no loss of life. The County of Ventura immediately declared the whole community a Geological Hazard Area, imposing building restrictions on the community to restrict new construction. On March 10, 1995, a subsequent debris flow from a canyon to the northwest damaged five additional houses in the northwestern part of La Conchita. In total, the slide measured approximately 390 feet wide, 1080 feet long and 98 feet deep. The deposit covered approximately 9.9 acres, and the volume was estimated to be approximately 1.7 million cubic yards of sediment. The devastation was immeasurable and the damage to homes, property and infrastructure was in the millions of dollars to repair. Litigation quickly arose following the 1995 slide with seventy-one homeowners suing the La Conchita Ranch Co. in Bateman v. La Conchita Ranch Co. The judge ruled that irrigation was not the major cause of the slide and that the ranch owners were not responsible. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Daniel Feld, Kahana Feld
    Mr. Feld may be contacted at jfeld@kahanafeld.com

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Sub-Contractor

    July 25, 2022 —
    Interpreting Connecticut law, the federal district court had that the insured sub-contractor was entitled to a defense. County Wide Mech. Servs. LLC v. Regent Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86726 (D. Conn. May 13, 2022). The underlying plaintiff, The Saybrook at Haddam, entered a contract with PAC Group to serve as general contractor for construction of an addition to The Saybrook's facility. PAC Group sub-contracted with County Wide Mechanical Services to install the HVAC system. The HVAC system was put into service on November 14, 2014. In October 2019, The Saybrook filed the underlying action against PAC group, County Wide, and others. The underlying complaint alleged that there had been at least seven "critical failures" of the HVAC system. As a result, The Seabrook had to replace multiple compressors and several circuit boards, valves, and other components. Further, the entire system had to be replaced. The underlying complaint alleged breach of contract against PAC Group and County Wide. In addition to the alleged breach of contract between The Saybrook and County Wide, the Saybrook also alleged it was a third-party beneficiary of PAC Group's contract with County Wide regarding installation of the HVAC system. PAC Group cross-claimed against County Wide, asserting one count of contractual indemnification and one count of breach of contract under the PAC Group's contract with County Wide. 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

    Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Rise to One-Year High

    October 22, 2014 —
    Sales of previously owned homes climbed in September to the highest level in a year, pointing to growing confidence in the U.S. economy as employment firms. Purchases advanced 2.4 percent to a 5.17 million annual rate, the National Association of Realtors reported today in Washington. Demand was up 1.9 percent compared with the same month last year before adjusting for seasonal patterns. Americans are returning to the real-estate market as employers have added 2 million workers to payrolls so far this year. Sales stand to get an additional boost in the final months of 2014 as the drop in mortgage rates caused by slowing growth in Europe and emerging nations makes properties more affordable for first-time buyers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michelle Jamrisko, Bloomberg
    Ms. Jamrisko may be contacted at mjamrisko@bloomberg.net