BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect 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


    Arbitration Clause Found Ambiguous in Construction Defect Case

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    Colorado Adopts Twombly-Iqbal “Plausibility” Standard

    Hawaii Appellate Court Finds Duty to Defend Group Builders Case

    Court of Appeal Holds Only “Named Insureds” May Sue for Bad Faith Under California FAIR Plan Policy

    Mediation Fails In Federal Lawsuit Seeking Damages From Sureties for Alleged Contract Fraud

    A Quick Checklist for Subcontractors

    California Committee Hosts a Hearing on Deadly Berkeley Balcony Collapse

    Never, Ever, Ever Assume! (Or, How a Stuck Shoe is Like a Construction Project Assumption)

    Firm Pays $8.4M to Settle Hurricane Restoration Contract Case

    Coverage Article - To Settle or Not To Settle?

    Endorsement to Insurance Policy Controls

    Insured Cannot Sue to Challenge Binding Appraisal Decision

    CSLB Reminds California Public Works Contractors to Renew Their Public Works Registration

    “Unwinnable”: Newark Trial Team Obtains Unanimous “No Cause” Verdict in Challenging Matter on Behalf of NYC Mutual Housing Association

    Florida Supreme Court Adopts Federal Summary Judgment Standard, Substantially Conforming Florida’s Rule 1.510 to Federal Rule 56

    Two Things to Consider Before Making Warranty Repairs

    Power Point Presentation on Nautilus v. Lexington Case

    Collapse Claim Dismissed

    Defining Constructive Acceleration

    Chambers USA Names Peckar & Abramson to Band 1 Level in Construction Law; 29 P&A Lawyers Recognized as Leading Attorneys; Six Regions and Government Contracts Practice Recognized

    Meet D1's Neutrals Series: KENNETH FLOREY

    Repair Cost Exceeding Actual Cash Value Does Not Establish “Total Loss” Under Fire Insurance Policy

    Congratulations to Las Vegas Partner Jeffrey W. Saab and Associate Shanna B. Carter on Obtaining Another Defense Award at Arbitration!

    Wildfires Threaten to Make Home Insurance Unaffordable

    President Trump Repeals Contractor “Blacklisting” Rule

    'Taylor Swift Is an Economic Phenomenon': CE's Q1 2024 Economic Update and Forecast

    Lending Plunges to 17-Year Low as Rates Curtail Borrowing

    Brief Overview of Rights of Unlicensed Contractors in California

    Public Law Center Honors Snell & Wilmer Partner Sean M. Sherlock As Volunteers For Justice Attorney Of The Year

    Chicago Cubs Agree to Make Wrigley Field ADA Improvements to Settle Feds' Lawsuit

    Construction Wall Falls, Hurts Three

    Construction Halted in Wisconsin Due to Alleged Bid Issues

    A Court-Side Seat: May Brings Federal Appellate Courts Rulings and Executive Orders

    No Coverage for Alleged Misrepresentation Claim

    Trade Contract Revisions to Address COVID-19

    It’s a Jolly Time of the Year: 5 Tips for Dealing with Construction Labor Issues During the Holidays

    Virtual Mediation – How Do I Make It Work for Me?

    NY Supreme Court Rules City Not Liable for Defective Sidewalk

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment Based Upon Vandalism Exclusion

    How You Plead Allegations to Trigger Liability Insurer’s Duties Is Critical

    Brad Pitt’s Foundation Sues New Orleans Architect for Construction Defects

    There Are Consequences to Executed Documents Such as the Accord and Satisfaction Defense

    Second Month of US Construction Spending Down

    The Colorado Supreme Court affirms Woodbridge II’s “Adverse Use” Distinction

    The Colorado Court of Appeals Rules that a Statutory Notice of Claim Triggers an Insurer’s Duty to Defend.

    What You Need to Know to Protect the Project Against Defect Claims

    The U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Rules on Greystone

    Unfinished Building Projects Litter Miami

    Resolving Subcontractor Disputes with Pass-Through Claims and Liquidation Agreements
    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

    Interior Designer Licensure

    October 11, 2017 —
    An interior designer that provides residential interior design services does NOT need to be registered or licensed with the state. On this point, Florida Statute s. 481.229(6)(a) specifies: (6) This part shall not apply to: (a) A person who performs interior design services or interior decorator services for any residential application, provided that such person does not advertise as, or represent himself or herself as, an interior designer. For purposes of this paragraph, “residential applications” includes all types of residences, including, but not limited to, residence buildings, single-family homes, multifamily homes, townhouses, apartments, condominiums, and domestic outbuildings appurtenant to one-family or two-family residences. However, “residential applications” does not include common areas associated with instances of multiple-unit dwelling applications. 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

    Surety’s Several Liability Under Bonds

    March 20, 2023 —
    When a payment or performance bond is issued on behalf of its bond-principal, the surety is jointly and severally liable with its bond-principal. This means the surety has several liability under the bond, i.e., you don’t need to pursue the principal of the bond to pursue liability under the bond, which is a separate written intrument. Thus, if you are claiming damages of $500,000, by way of example, you can sue both the principal and surety under the bond, you can ONLY sue the principal under the bond (which is rarely practical), or you can ONLY sue the surety under the bond (which, oftentimes, is very practical). In many instances where I am pursuing a bond claim on behalf of a client, particularly a payment bond claim, I only sue the surety and do not sue the bond-principal unless there are certain strategic reasons in doing so. This is because of the surety’s several liability under the bond and there may be solvency issues with the principal or contractual reasons that, strategically, make much more sense to exclude the principal from the action. In MJM Electric, Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, 2023 WL 2163087 (M.D.Fla. 2023), an electrical subcontractor was hired to perform electrical work by the prime contractor. The prime contractor had a payment bond. The project was delayed for two years. The electrical subcontractor claimed the prime contractor failed to compensate it for significant delays and out of scope work. 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

    Transportation Officials Make the Best of a Bumpy 2020

    January 18, 2021 —
    The year 2020 provided a bumpy budgetary ride for all modes of transportation, and some industry insiders don’t expect airport and transit ridership to return to pre-pandemic levels for years. Agencies are taking lessons learned, coupled with hopes for the new Biden administration, to carry on as best they can. Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, Engineering News-Record and Aileen Cho, Engineering News-Record Ms. Cho may be contacted at choa@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Clarifies Its Inverse Condemnation Standard

    December 30, 2019 —
    In City of Oroville v. Superior Court, 446 P.3d 304 (Cal. 2019), the Supreme Court of California considered whether the City of Oroville (City) was liable to a dental practice for inverse condemnation damages associated with a sewer backup. The court held that in order to establish inverse condemnation against a public entity, a property owner must show that an inherent risk in the public improvement was a substantial cause of the damage. Since the dental practice did not have a code-required backwater valve — which would have prevented or minimized this loss — the court found that the city was not liable because the sewage system was not a substantial cause of the loss. This case establishes that a claim for inverse condemnation requires a showing of a substantial causal connection between the public improvement and the property damage. It also suggests that comparative negligence can be a defense to inverse condemnation claims. In December 2009, a dental practice, WGS Dental Complex (WGS), located in the City, incurred significant water damage as a result of untreated sewage from the City’s sewer main backing up into WGS’ building. WGS submitted a claim to its insurance carrier, The Dentists Insurance Company (TDIC) and, in addition, sued the City for its uninsured losses, alleging inverse condemnation and nuisance. TDIC joined the litigation, alleging negligence, nuisance, trespass and inverse condemnation. Under California law, when a government entity fails to recognize that an action or circumstance essentially amounts to a taking for public use, a property owner can pursue an inverse condemnation action for compensation. The City filed a cross-complaint against WGS for failing to install a code-required backwater valve on their lateral sewer line, which would have prevented or minimized the backup. The City filed a motion for summary judgment, which the trial court denied. WGS then sought a judicial determination on the issue of inverse condemnation. The City presented evidence that the sewage system was designed in accordance with industry standards, and that WGS failed to comply with the City’s plumbing code by failing to install a backwater valve on its private sewer lateral. The trial court found the City liable for inverse condemnation because the blockage that caused the backup originated in the City’s sewer line. The court held that the blockage was an inherent risk of sewer operation. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision, holding that the City would have had to prove that the WGS’s lack of a backwater valve was the sole cause of the loss in order to absolve itself of liability. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Is Construction in Arizona Back to Normal?

    September 10, 2014 —
    The Phoenix Metro area is finally pulling out of the Great Recession of 2008. Potential homebuyers are frantically looking to buy a home before interest rates rise and prices continue their ascent to normalcy. For the last several months, residential construction builders have continued to buy more land around the Valley of the Sun for new subdivisions, especially in North Phoenix and the East Valley. In fact, from January through May of 2013, in the Phoenix Metro area alone, 86 new communities have come to fruition—more than all of 2012. Nationally, single-family housing starts reached 667,000 in December 2013 according to the National Association of Home Builders tracking of single-family home starts, which is comparable to 1985 levels. It has been well documented that since the conclusion of World War II, Arizona’s population growth fostered new home construction at a rapid, almost unmatched pace. At the 2006 construction peak, Arizona’s residential construction output climbed to 64,000, more than double the average 20,000 to 30,000 new homes that are typically constructed annually. Building rates have not come close to the 2006 numbers, but new home starts increased 70 percent since 2012. So after six years after the real estate bubble popped, is the construction industry in Arizona finally back to normal? It depends on your definition of “normal.” In 2009, foreclosures reached alarming proportions. However, in 2010, the engine of Arizona’s population growth, the Phoenix Metro area, began to grow again. Since 2010, Maricopa County had added 125,000 residents. There is strong demand for new housing, and appreciating housing prices has let the construction industry get back on its feet. In residential construction, supply is tight, and all cash offers are common. We all know that Wall Street played a huge role in creating the housing bubble, and eventual bust, by facilitating the use of risky, sub-prime mortgages and turning them into securities that were sold to investors, pension-funds, and the like. Reprinted courtesy of William M. Kaufman, Lockhart Park LP Mr. Kaufman may be contacted at wkaufman@lockhartpark.com, and you may visit the firm's website at www.lockhartpark.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Philadelphia Revises Realty Transfer Tax Treatment of Acquired Real Estate Companies

    January 05, 2017 —
    On December 8, 2016, the Philadelphia City Council voted unanimously to amend the ordinance governing realty transfer taxes in an effort to increase tax revenue. The current combined realty transfer tax rate in Philadelphia is 4.0% and will increase to 4.1% after December 31, 2016.[1] The amendment significantly impacts how taxes are imposed upon transfers of ownership in so-called “real estate companies” and effectively eliminates deals commonly referred to as 89-11 transactions. The amendment mainly focuses on transfers of real estate companies, rather than direct transfers of real estate, but it also affects certain direct transfers of real estate in exchange for noncash consideration. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP Nancy Frantz, Kevin Koscil and James Vandermark Ms. Frantz may be contacted at frantzn@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Koscil may be contacted at koscilk@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Vandermark may be contacted at vandermarkj@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    White and Williams Earns National "Best Law Firm" Rankings from US News

    November 02, 2017 —
    White and Williams has achieved national recognition from US News and World Report as a "Best Law Firm" in the practice areas of Insurance Law and Media Law. Our Philadelphia, Boston, and New York offices have also been recognized in their respective metropolitan regions in several practice areas. Firms included in the “Best Law Firms” list are recognized for professional excellence with persistently impressive ratings from clients and peers. Achieving a tiered ranking signals a unique combination of quality law practice and breadth of legal experience. National Tier 1 Insurance Law National Tier 3 Media Law Metropolitan Tier 1 Boston Insurance Law Product Liability Litigation - Defendants Philadelphia Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants Real Estate Law Tax Law Metropolitan Tier 2 Philadelphia Appellate Practice Commercial Litigation Construction Law First Amendment Law Insurance Law Legal Malpractice Law- Defendants Media Law Trust & Estates Law Metropolitan Tier 3 New York City Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights/ Insolvency and Reorganization Law Philadelphia Patent Law Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insured Under Property Insurance Policy Should Comply With Post-Loss Policy Conditions

    June 10, 2019 —
    Your property insurance policy will contain post-loss policy conditions. Examples include submitting a sworn statement in proof of loss, providing documentation to your insurer, and sitting for an examination under oath. Insurers will require you, as the insured, to comply with post-loss policy conditions unless they elect to promptly deny coverage. If you do not comply with such post-loss policy conditions you can forfeit coverage under the policy and/or give the insurer the argument that any lawsuit you filed against the property insurer is premature. Thus, there really is no upside in refusing to comply with the post-loss policy conditions, which should be done in consult with an attorney or, as the case may be, a public adjuster. 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