BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil 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


    South Carolina Supreme Court Finds that Consequential Damage Arise From "Occurrence"

    Federal Court Sets High Bar for Pleading Products Liability Cases in New Jersey

    Nevada’s Changing Liability Insurance Landscape—State Insurance Regulator Issues Emergency Regulation and Guidance Addressing Controversial “Defense-Within-Limits” Legislation

    Know What’s Under Ground and Make Smarter Planning Decisions

    Texas Construction Firm Officials Sentenced in Contract-Fraud Case

    17 Snell & Wilmer Attorneys Ranked In The 2019 Legal Elite Edition Of Nevada Business Magazine

    Mediation is (Almost) Always Worth a Shot

    Coverage for Construction Defect Barred by Contractual-Liability Exclusion

    Caterpillar Said to Be Focus of Senate Overseas Tax Probe

    Edgewater Plans to Sue Over Pollution During Veterans Field Rehab

    Denver Airport Terminates P3 Contract For Main Terminal Renovation

    Idaho Federal Court Rules Against Sacketts After SCOTUS Decided Judicial Review of an EPA Compliance Order was Permissible

    Court of Appeals Issues Decision Regarding Second-Tier Subcontractors and Pre-Lien Notice

    Heatup of Giant DOE Nuclear Waste Melter Succeeds After 2022 Halt

    Attorneys’ Fees Are Available in Arizona Eviction Actions

    Is Construction Defect Notice under Florida Repair Statute a Suit?

    Arkansas Federal Court Fans the Product Liability Flames Utilizing the Malfunction Theory

    Europe’s Satellites Could Help Catch the Next Climate Disaster

    Settling with Some, But Not All, of the Defendants in a Construction Defect Case

    Professional Liability Alert: Joint Client Can't Claim Privilege For Communications With Attorney Sued By Another Joint Client

    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    California Department of Corrections Gets Hit With the Prison Bid Protest Blues

    The Fair Share Act Impacts the Strategic Planning of a Jury Trial

    Construction Law Alert: Builder’s Alternative Pre-litigation Procedures Upheld Over Strong Opposition

    Georgia State and Local Governments Receive Expanded Authority for Conservation Projects

    Suffolk Stands Down After Consecutive Serious Boston Site Injuries

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

    On Rehearing, Fifth Circuit Finds Contractual-Liability Exclusion Does Not Apply

    Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 Not Just for Individual Homeowners Anymore?

    Factual Issues Prevent Summary Judgment Determination on Coverage for Additional Insured

    Defects, Delays and Change Orders

    The Risk of A Fixed Price Contract Is The Market

    Hake Law Attorneys Join National Law Firm Wilson Elser

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    Know your Obligations: Colorado’s Statutory Expansions of the Implied Warranty of Habitability Are Now in Effect

    Gillotti v. Stewart (2017) 2017 WL 1488711 Rejects Liberty Mutual, Holding Once Again that the Right to Repair Act is the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    SB 939 Proposes Moratorium On Unlawful Detainer Actions For Commercial Tenants And Allows Tenants Who Can't Renegotiate Their Lease In Good Faith To Terminate Their Lease Without Liability

    Loss of Use From Allegedly Improper Drainage System Triggers Defense Under CGL Policy

    Client Alert: Court of Appeal Applies Common Interest Privilege Doctrine to HOA Litigation Meetings

    Deterioration Known To Insured Forecloses Collapse Coverage

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: The Duty to Defend

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: J. PAUL ALLEN

    California Supreme Court Adopts Vertical Exhaustion for Long-Tail Claims

    Safeguarding History: Fire Risks in Renovating Historic Buildings

    House Passes Bill to Delay EPA Ozone Rule

    Payment Bond Surety Entitled to Award of Attorneys’ Fees Although Defended by Principal

    FIFA Inspecting Brazil’s World Cup Stadiums

    You Cannot Arbitrate Claims Not Covered By The Arbitration Agreement

    Malerie Anderson Named to D Magazine’s 2023 Best Lawyers Under 40
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Fairfield's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Pennsylvania Mechanics’ Lien “Waivers” and “Releases”: What’s the Difference?

    March 19, 2015 —
    In the world of Pennsylvania mechanics’ liens there is much confusion about the interchangeable use of the words mechanics lien “waiver” and mechanics’ lien “release.” Many who work in the world of real estate in Pennsylvania, be they contractors, subcontractors, developers, lenders, or attorneys, use these terms interchangeably without understanding that there is a meaningful difference. Failure to understand the difference creates confusion when discussing issues and drafting documents regarding mechanics’ liens. In Pennsylvania a mechanics’ lien “waiver” is the pre-construction waiver of liens that was historically executed by a general contractor and an owner and filed with the Prothonotary in the county in which construction is located. These pre-construction lien “waivers,” assuming they were properly prepared, signed by the contractor and owner and filed in accordance with applicable law, negated the ability of that contractor and its subcontractors to file a mechanics’ lien on the subject property. These pre-construction lien “waivers” were part of every construction loan closing up through the amendments to the Pennsylvania Mechanics’ Lien Act that went into effect in 2007. Since 2007, the Mechanics’ Lien Act has been amended twice to further address those circumstances in which pre-construction lien waivers still have vitality. Except with respect to those narrow situations specifically provided for in the statute, pre-construction lien “waivers” are against public policy in Pennsylvania. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Thomas C. Rogers, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Rogers may be contacted at rogerst@whiteandwilliams.com

    Court Says No to Additional Lawyer in Las Vegas Fraud Case

    October 14, 2013 —
    Leon Benzer, who has been accused of being one of the masterminds of the Las Vegas HOA scam, has been denied in his bid to add an additional attorney to his publicly-funded defense. Daniel Albregts, Benzer’s court-appointed attorney, made the request due to the large amount of evidence in the case. Federal prosecutors have provided the defense with more than 3.4 million pages of documents. According to U. S. Magistrate Judge George Foley Jr., “defendant’s counsel should be able to prepare and provide an adequate defense with the assistance of appropriate paralegal and other support services.” Mr. Albregts is currently assisted by Russell Aoki, whose role is that of technical consultant on matters regarding electronic distribution. Federal prosecutors opposed Mr. Albregts hiring Franny Forsman, a former federal public defender. Had Ms. Forsman been hired, the government would have paid $110 per hour for her services. The government is seeking $25 million in restitution from Mr. Benzer. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Case Is a Reminder That Not All Insurance Policies Are Alike Regarding COVID-19 Losses

    April 05, 2021 —
    A recent case from the Central District of California reminds us that not all insurance policies are alike. Depending on the particular policy, losses from the COVID-19 outbreak could qualify as property damage and therefore could be recoverable under an all-risk insurance policy. COVID-19 has in many cases imposed significant costs on contractors, and in a host of ways. Contractors’ attempts to recover these costs from owners or insurers have at times been frustrated by contractual or policy language written after a lengthy time, during which the risk of a pandemic on the scale of COVID-19 was not as much of a concern as it is now. This has led contractors to explore new, often creative legal theories in their attempts to recover costs flowing from COVID-19. A recent Complaint filed in the Central District of California focuses on all-risk property insurance policies and the potential for contractors who have purchased such policies to classify contamination from COVID-19 as an insurable property loss. In AECOM v. Zurich Insurance Company, Case No. 2:21-cv-00237-JAK-MRW (C.D. Cal), a contractor purchased “all-risk” property insurance from Zurich. This policy covered “economic losses from all risks not expressly excluded.” According to the Complaint, the presence of COVID-19 on its properties “physically alter[ed] air, airspace, and surfaces preventing… (the contractor) from using its properties for their intended purpose and function.” Reprinted courtesy of Neal I. Sklar, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Joshua A. Morehouse, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Sklar may be contacted at nsklar@pecklaw.com Mr. Morehouse may be contacted at jmorehouse@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Untangling Unique Legal Issues in Modern Modular Construction

    September 09, 2024 —
    Modular construction has grown significantly over the last few years and shows no signs of slowing down. This construction method is a departure from traditional approaches where all construction activity occurs onsite. Modular construction involves building standardized project components—usually in an offsite, controlled environment—which are then transported and assembled at the project site. Offsite construction generally allows for better quality control and economic efficiency, as it can utilize an assembly-line process. Modular fabrication can also centralize skilled labor in regions with lower labor costs. Establishing each party's expectations upfront is always important, but even more so in modular construction since much of the construction activity is performed away from the ultimate project site. This requires extensive coordination among designers, fabricators, installers and owners to ensure construction, testing and quality progresses accordingly. Every field change and design clash could have an exponential impact on the modular fabrication efficiencies given the assembly-line approach and remote nature of modular work. Reprinted courtesy of Chad Theriot & Brad Sands, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    South Carolina Law Clarifies Statue of Repose

    July 11, 2011 —

    A new law in South Carolina, H 3375, fixes a loophole in that state’s statute of repose. State law puts a cap of eight years on construction defects, but the 2008 law that set that limit had a loophole that would allow for construction defect claims to start thirteen years after construction. The law also provides a cap on punitive damages.

    The measure was backed by the Carolinas Association of General Contractors. Their spokesperson said that the legislation “increases our state’s ability to be economically competitive and helps protect our members from frivolous lawsuits.”

    Read the full story…

    Read South Carolina H 3375…

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

    “You Can’t Make Me Pay!”

    January 28, 2025 —
    Several years ago, Louisiana enacted a law prescribing a mandamus proceeding for unpaid contract sums purportedly owed by a public entity to a contractor – Louisiana Revised Statute 38:2191. The statute tackles both progress payments and final payment, distinguishing between the two and allowing withholding of a progress payment when there is “reasonable cause” to do so. On the other hand, at least one Louisiana appellate decision held on the topic of final payment: once a final payment amount is “due” per the statute – based upon passage expiration of the lien period following “formal final acceptance” – the act of making the final payment is purely ministerial and not subject to defenses. According to that court, a defense to payment based on assessed liquidated damages – because the damages were disputed by the contractor – could not trump the essence of the statute allowing the contractor to pursue mandamus to collect the final payment. More recently, on a public works levee project in Lafourche Parish, a dispute arose during the work concerning the means to secure material for constructing the levees. The net effect of the dispute entailed a major change in the contract price. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Major Changes in Commercial Construction Since 2009

    December 11, 2013 —
    A new report from Jones Lang LaSalle tracks some of the changes that the commercial building industry has seen since 2009. One important change is that financing has returned. In reviewing the report, Buildings.com notes that “commercial lending conditions are improving.” A less positive change is that construction costs have gone up, with the increase in residential construction pushing prices up in commercial construction. Green construction has gone from a luxury to something owners and developers want. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Group Seeks Defense Coverage for Hard Rock Stadium Claims

    December 09, 2019 —
    In an insurance coverage action pending in the S.D.N.Y., Hunt Construction Group (Hunt) contends that Berkley Assurance Company wrongfully denied defense coverage for claims arising out of the renovation of Hard Rock Stadium (home to the Miami Dolphins and Miami Hurricanes football teams). The stadium owner, South Florida Stadium LLC (SFS), hired Hunt to serve as the construction manager for the renovation project. Hunt subcontracted with Alberici Constructors Inc. (Alberici) to design and fabricate roof structures for the stadium. Hunt and SFS sued Alberici over its work on the project. In March 2017, Alberici asserted counterclaims against Hunt and SFS. In May 2018, SFS sought defense and indemnification from Hunt with respect to Alberici’s coverage claims. Hunt is insured under claims made and reported professional liability insurance policies issued by Berkley with policy periods from June 15, 2016 to June 15, 2017 (with an automatic extended reporting period through August 14, 2017) and from July 15, 2017 to June 15, 2018. Hunt notified Berkley of Alberici’s counterclaim on July 20, 2017 (within the extended reporting period of the 2016-2017 policy) and of SFS’s indemnity claim on June 5, 2018 (within the 2017-2018 policy period). Reprinted courtesy of Sergio F. Oehninger, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Daniel Hentschel, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Oehninger may be contacted at soehninger@HuntonAK.com Mr. Hentschel may be contacted at dhentschel@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of