BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut architectural 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


    As Natural Gas Expands in Gulf, Residents Fear Rising Damage

    2019 Legislative Session

    Three lawyers from Haight were recognized in The Best Lawyers in America© 2020 Edition

    The Regulations on the Trump Administration's Chopping Block

    Nebraska Joins the Ranks—No CGL Coverage for Faulty Work

    Drop in Civil Trials May Cause Problems for Construction Defect Cases

    A Court-Side Seat: Recent Legal Developments at Supreme and Federal Appeals Courts

    What to Know Before Building a Guesthouse

    Specific Performance: Equitable Remedy to Enforce Affirmative Obligation

    “Source of Duty,” Tort, and Contract, Oh My!

    Design & Construction Case Expands Florida’s Slavin Doctrine

    Mega-Consulate Ties U.S. to Convicted Billionaire in Nigeria

    Does the Russia Ukraine War Lead to a Consideration in Your Construction Contracts?

    Happenings in and around the 2016 West Coast Casualty Seminar

    CDJ’s #2 Topic of the Year: Ewing Constr. Co., Inc. v. Amerisure Ins. Co., 2014 Tex. LEXIS 39 (Tex. Jan.17, 2014)

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2020

    Alaska Supreme Court Finds Insurer Owes No Independent Duty to Injured Party

    MBS’s $500 Billion Desert Dream Just Keeps Getting Weirder

    Connecticut Court Finds Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Enforceable

    South Africa Wants Payment From Colluding World Cup Builders

    Generally, What Constitutes A Trade Secret Is A Question of Fact

    Bad Faith in the First Party Insurance Context

    Colorado’s Abbreviated Legislative Session Offers Builders a Reprieve

    Labor Under the Miller Act And Estoppel of Statute of Limitations

    Wisconsin Court Applies the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Negligence Claims for Purely Economic Losses

    What Does “Mold Resistant” Really Mean?

    In Contracts, One Word Makes All the Difference

    Manhattan Home Prices Top Pre-Crisis Record on Luxury Deals

    When it Comes to COVID Emergency Regulations, Have a Plan

    Consider Arbitration Provision in Homebuilder’s Warranty and Purchase-and-Sale Agreement

    Sewage Treatment Agency Sues Insurer and Contractor after Wall Failure and Sewage Leak

    Big Policyholder Win in Michigan

    Is Construction Heading Off the Fiscal Cliff?

    Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion to Reject Claim for Construction Defects Upheld

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Los Angeles Tier 1 “Best Law Firm” and Tier 2 for Orange County by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2023

    Affordable Global Housing Will Cost $11 Trillion

    Indicted Union Representatives Try Again to Revive Enmons

    Senate Overwhelmingly Passes Water Infrastructure Bill

    New York’s 2022 Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act: Significant Amendments to the C.P.L.R.

    Waiver Of Arbitration by Not Submitting Claim to Initial Decision Maker…Really!

    The 2023 Term of the Supreme Court: Administrative and Regulatory Law Rulings

    Florida Adopts Less Stringent Summary Judgment Standard

    Washington State Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision on Spearin Doctrine

    Construction Defect Bill Introduced in California

    New Illinois Supreme Court Trigger Rule for CGL Personal Injury “Offenses” Could Have Costly Consequences for Policyholders

    Legal Disputes Soar as Poor Information Management Impacts the AEC Industry

    The Prolonged Effects on Commercial Property From Extreme Weather

    Reinventing the Building Envelope – Interview with Gordon A Geddes

    Nine Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    California Appellate Court Rules That Mistakenly Grading the Wrong Land Is Not an Accident
    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

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    August 04, 2011 —

    On July 28, the Washington Court of Appeals ruled in Clasen Fruit & Cold Storage v. Frederick & Michael Construction Co., Inc. that more than six years had passed since a contractor had concluded work and so granted a summary dismissal of the suit.

    Frederick & Michael Construction Co., Inc. (F&M) was contracted to construct several buildings for Clasen Fruit and Cold Storage. These were completed in March, 1999. The buildings suffered wind damage to the roofs in 2001, 2003, 2005, and 2006. In the first two incidents, F&M repaired the roofs with Clasen paying for repairs.

    In 2005, Clasen hired Continuous Gutter to make repairs. The final incident was the collapse of the roof of one building. This was attributed to “excessive moisture in the roof’s vapor barriers.” At this point, Clasen demanded that F&M pay for repair and replacement costs. In 2008, Clasen sued F&M for damages for breach of contract and negligent design and construction of the roof.

    The decision then covered the meanings, in Washington law, of “termination of services” and “substantial completion.” The panel concluded that construction was “substantially completed in 1997” and “relevant services” by 2001. “But Clasen did not sue until 2008, some seven years after termination of any roof related services.”

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Developer Boymelgreen Forced to Hand Over Financial Records for 15 Broad Street

    September 24, 2014 —
    The Manhattan Supreme Court “denied a last-ditch effort by Jeshayahu Boymelgreen to avoid handing over financial records as part of a state investigation into the development of 15 Broad Street in the Financial District,” according to The Real Deal. Attorney General Eric Schneiderman had ordered Boymelgreen to turn over the records. Futhermore, according to court records (as reported in The Real Deal), “the developer was also seeking to reduce the amount of money required to fund a $470,000 escrow account to make repairs at the condo — known as Downtown by Starck — which Boymelgreen jointly developed with Africa Israel.” “We’re glad to see that the courts are rejecting Boymelgreen’s arguments why he shouldn’t be required to maintain an escrow account as security for the sponsor to obtain a permanent certificate of occupancy for 15 Broad, as was set forth in the very offering he participated in with Africa Israel,” Steven Sladkus, attorney for unit owners at the condo, stated. “Accountability is one step closer to the light at the end of the tunnel.” Brian Itzkowitz, an attorney representing Boymelgreen, did not return The Real Deal’s calls or emails. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Faulty Workmanship an Occurrence in Iowa – as Long as Other Property Damage is Involved

    November 30, 2016 —
    The Eighth Circuit recently weighed in on one of the more contentious issues in insurance coverage litigation: is faulty workmanship an occurrence? In Decker Plastics Inc. v. West Bend Mut. Ins. Co., the Eighth Circuit ruled that, under Iowa law, faulty workmanship is an occurrence – as long as it leads to other property damage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Austin D. Moody, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Moody may be contacted at adm@sdvlaw.com

    Supreme Court Rejects “Wholly Groundless” Exception to Question of Arbitrability

    February 06, 2019 —
    In newly appointed Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s first opinion, the United States Supreme Court held that the “wholly groundless” exception to arbitrability, which some federal courts had relied on as justification to decide questions of arbitrability over the express terms of a contract, was inconsistent with the Federal Arbitration Act and Supreme Court precedent. Based on this decision, where a contract delegates the question of arbitrability to an arbitrator, courts must respect the parties’ contract and refer the question to the arbitrator. Schein v. Archer & White, 586 U.S. __ (2019). In Schein, Archer & White brought a lawsuit against Henry Schein alleging violations of federal and state antitrust laws and seeking both monetary damages and injunctive relief. The relevant contract between the parties contained an arbitration provision that provided:
    “Any dispute arising under or related to this Agreement (except for actions seeking injunctive relief . . .) shall be resolved by binding arbitration in accordance with the arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Justin Fortescue, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Fortescue may be contacted at fortescuej@whiteandwilliams.com

    Hawaii Federal District Court Grants Preliminary Approval of Settlement on Volcano Damage

    September 13, 2021 —
    The federal district court granted preliminary approval of the class action settlement reached on behalf of insureds who suffered property damage due to the 2018 Kilauea eruption on the Big Island. Aquilina v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152614 (D. Haw. Aug. 13, 2021). After destruction of their homes due to lava flow, plaintiffs sued various insurers and agents as a putative class action. Plaintiffs claimed they purchased surplus lines policies brokered and underwritten by various defendants. The policies each contained an exclusion for the peril of lava flow, which plaintiffs claimed rendered them worthless or unsuitable given that their properties were located in a high-risk lava zone. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants breached obligations under the Hawaii Surplus Lines Act, which required that surplus lines insurers conduct a diligent search for other available coverage before placing a homeowner with surplus lines coverage. Plaintiffs alleged defendants should have advised them of the availability of lava-damage coverage through the Hawaii Property Insurance Association (HPIA), a statutorily created association of admitted insurers established in part in response to Kilauea's eruption patterns, which made the private insurance market less likely to Insure certain high-risk areas. 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

    What You Need to Know About Enforcement Actions by the Contractors State License Board

    April 15, 2015 —
    I questioned whether to even write this post. Because, of course, YOU would never find yourself hightailing it out of town with the California Contractor’s State License Board (“CSLB”) sniffing down your tail pipes. Then again, mistaken identities occur all the time. So, here’s what you need to know if the CSLB mistakes you for one of “those” contractors. What violations are subject to CSLB enforcement actions? The CSLB can take enforcement actions based on any one of numerous violations set forth under the California Business and Professions Code (“B&P Code”), including: 1. B&P Code §7107: Abandonment of a construction project or operation without legal excuse. 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

    Recommendations for Property Owners After A Hurricane: Submit a Claim

    October 04, 2021 —
    If you suffered damage as a result of a hurricane, you should submit a claim under any insurance policy you have that might apply. This includes:
    • Flood insurance
    • Homeowner’s insurance
    • Renter’s insurance
    • Condo insurance
    • Auto insurance
    Steps for Handling Your Hurricane Insurance Claim
    1. Submit Your Claim. As soon as possible, provide a written notice of claim to your insurer according to the notice provision of your policy. Keep a copy for your records. If you don’t have a copy of your policy, call the insurance company, ask them how to submit your claim, and request a copy of your policy.
    Reprinted courtesy of Kelly A. Johnson, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, Stephanie A. Giagnorio, Saxe Doernberger & Vita and Gregory D. Podolak, Saxe Doernberger & Vita Ms. Johnson may be contacted at KJohnson@sdvlaw.com Ms. Giagnorio may be contacted at SGiagnorio@sdvlaw.com Mr. Podolak may be contacted at GPodolak@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Key Takeaways For Employers in the Aftermath of the Supreme Court’s Halt to OSHA’s Vax/Testing Mandate

    January 24, 2022 —
    Political pundits and legal scholars have been engaged in frenzied debate trying to decipher the fallout of the United States Supreme Court’s decision that stopped stopped the Occupational Safety and Hazard Administration (OSHA) from enforcing its Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) which mandated that employers with 100 or more employees require workers to show proof of vaccination against COVID-19 or submit to weekly testing. The Court’s decision prevents OSHA from enforcing its ETS until all legal challenges have been heard. Because the Court concluded that those legal challenges are “likely to succeed on the merits” of their argument that OSHA does not have the statutory authority to issue its vaccine and testing mandates, there is significant doubt that they will ever come to fruition. While the pundits and scholars have now had their say, employers, who are struggling to manage a highly contagious variant, a tight labor market, and employees with divergent and staunch views on vaccination, are also left wondering what the Court’s decision means for them and what they should be doing. Here are some key takeaways for employers in the aftermath of the Court’s decision. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Laura H. Corvo, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Corvo may be contacted at corvol@whiteandwilliams.com