BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim 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


    Experts: Best Bet in $300M Osage Nation Wind Farm Dispute Is Negotiation

    Know What You’ve Built: An Interview with Timo Makkonen of Congrid

    Circumstances In Which Design Professional Has Construction Lien Rights

    How Long does a Florida Condo Association Have to File a Construction Defect Claim?

    Hurricane Ian: Florida Expedites Road Work as Damage Comes Into Focus

    Mendocino Hospital Nearing Completion

    Mitigation, Restructuring and Bankruptcy: Small Business Tools in the Era of COVID-19

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

    Manhattan Home Prices Top Pre-Crisis Record on Luxury Deals

    Newport Beach Partners Jeremy Johnson, Courtney Serrato, and Associate Joseph Real Prevailed on a Demurrer in a Highly Publicized Shooting Case!

    The Great Skyscraper Comeback Skips North America

    You’re Only as Good as Those with Whom You Contract

    U.S. Codes for Deck Attachment

    In Hong Kong, You Can Find a Home Where the Buffalo Roam

    BHA has a Nice Swing Benefits the Wounded Warrior Project

    In Colorado, Primary Insurers are Necessary Parties in Declaratory Judgment Actions

    Finding of No Coverage Overturned Due to Lack of Actual Policy

    Is it the Dawning of the Age of Strict Products Liability for Contractors in California?

    How Robotics Can Improve Construction and Demolition Waste Sorting

    Colorado Court of Appeals Enforces Limitations of Liability In Pre-Homeowner Protection Act Contracts

    Contractors: Revisit your Force Majeure Provisions to Account for Hurricanes

    White and Williams Announces Partner and Counsel Promotions

    Montana Supreme Court: Insurer Not Bound by Insured's Settlement

    Does Your 998 Offer to Compromise Include Attorneys’ Fees and Costs?

    Expanded Virginia Court of Appeals Leads to Policyholder Relief

    Examination of the Product Does Not Stop a Pennsylvania Court From Applying the Malfunction Theory

    Texas Supreme Court Finds Payment of Appraisal Award Does Not Absolve Insurer of Statutory Liability

    Supreme Court of New Jersey Reviews Statutes of Limitation and the Discovery Rule in Construction Defect Cases

    Miller Act and “Public Work of the Federal Government”

    Do Construction Contracts and Fraud Mix After All?

    CSLB “Fast Facts” for Online Home Improvement Marketplaces

    Relying Upon Improper Exclusion to Deny Coverage Allows Bad Faith Claim to Survive Summary Judgment

    Insurer Must Defend Construction Defect Claims

    Construction Defect Class Action Lawsuit Alleges National Cover-up of Pipe Defects

    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    Why A.I. Isn’t Going to Replace Lawyers Anytime Soon

    Clearly Determining in Contract Who Determines Arbitrability of Dispute

    Best Practices After Receiving Notice of a Construction Claim

    Study Finds San Francisco Bay is Sinking Faster than Expected

    Builders Association Seeks to Cut Down Grassroots Green Building Program (Guest Post)

    Sean Shecter to Join American University Environmental and Energy Law Alumni Advisory Council

    “Other Insurance” and Indemnity Provisions Determine Which Insurer Must Cover

    Delaware Supreme Court Choice of Law Ruling Vacates a $13.7 Million Verdict Against Travelers

    California’s Fifth Appellate District Declares the “Right to Repair Act” the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    Architectural Firm, Fired by School District, Launches Lawsuit

    Beam Fracture on Closed Mississippi River Bridge Is at Least Two Years Old

    Owner’s Slander of Title Claim Against Contractor Recording Four Separate Mechanics Liens Fails Under the Anti-SLAPP Statute

    DC District Court Follows Ninth Circuit’s Lead Dismissing NABA’s Border Wall Case

    25 Days After Explosion, Another Utility Shuts Off Gas in Boston Area

    Condos Down in Denver Due to Construction Defect Litigation
    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. Drawing 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

    The California Legislature Passes SB 496 Limiting Design Professional Defense and Indemnity Obligations

    June 15, 2017 —
    Since 2008 when the California legislature limited subcontractor indemnity obligations, the design professional community has been shouting “what about us?” Well, the legislature finally responded and a new law that limits design professional’s defense and indemnity obligations to their percentage of fault goes into effect on January 1, 2018. THE NEW LAW – SB 496 SB 496 amends California Civil Code section 2782.8 and states that indemnity agreements must be limited to the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of the indemnitee (i.e. no more Type I indemnity with design professionals). The amendment also provides that “in no event shall the cost to defend charged to the design professional exceed the design professional’s proportionate percentage of fault”, with a limited opportunity for reallocation in the event another defendant is judgment proof. However, the duty to defend still remains and still arises at the time of the tender of the defense (both issues that were unsuccessfully targeted by the design professional lobbyists). WHAT CAN BE DONE NOW? Developers and Owners should strongly consider reviewing and revising the indemnity provisions in their consultant contracts to comply with the new legislation before the first of the year. This includes master agreements because project addenda entered into after January 1 are subject to the new law. The statute does not apply to current contracts, so these do not need to be amended. Questions? Newmeyer & Dillion is happy to assist in navigating the process to ensure you are compliant prior to January’s deadline. Please let us know how we can help. Mark Himmelstein is a partner focused in the areas of construction, real estate, business and insurance litigation. He has an in-depth experience in drafting and negotiating construction and real estate contracts. You can reach him at mark.himmelstein@ndlf.com. Jenny Guzman is a litigation associate in the Newport Beach office, focusing her practice in the areas of business and real estate litigation and transactions. You can reach her at jenny.guzman@ndlf.com. About Newmeyer & Dillion For more than 30 years, Newmeyer & Dillion has delivered creative and outstanding legal solutions and trial results for a wide array of clients. With over 70 attorneys practicing in all aspects of business, employment, real estate, construction and insurance law, Newmeyer & Dillion delivers legal services tailored to meet each client’s needs. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, with offices in Walnut Creek, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, Newmeyer & Dillion attorneys are recognized by The Best Lawyers in America©, and Super Lawyers as top tier and some of the best lawyers in California, and have been given Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review's AV Preeminent® highest rating. For additional information, call 949-854-7000 or visit http://newmeyeranddillion.com/ Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    TLSS Partner Burks Smith and Associate Katie Keller Win Summary Judgment on Late Reported Water Seepage Case in South Florida

    November 18, 2019 —
    On July 9, 2019, Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP Partner, Burks A. Smith, III and Associate, Kathryn A. Keller, secured Summary Judgment on behalf of a major homeowners’ insurer in a breach of contract action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. See Lehrfield v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company, 2019 WL2994270 (S.D. Fla. 2019). The underlying claim involved a water loss at the Plaintiffs’ residence allegedly resulting in $91,147.32 worth of damage to their home. The claim was reported eight (8) months after the alleged date of loss, and during the inspection, the adjuster observed rot, decay, mold, and warping wood, prompting the carrier to deny the claim based on the Seepage Endorsement. The Plaintiffs filed a breach of contract action alleging that the insurer breached the Policy by denying the claim. Mr. Smith and Ms. Keller argued that Plaintiffs’ Policy with the insurer imposes a duty on the Plaintiffs to comply with the Duties After Loss conditions of the Policy, including the requirement to provide prompt notice of the loss and show the damaged property. As mentioned above, the Plaintiffs provided notice of the claim eight (8) months late, and performed various repairs prior to notifying the insurer of the claim. After the close of discovery, Mr. Smith and Ms. Keller filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on behalf of the insurer based on the late reporting, and further argued that the Plaintiffs had the burden of proving direct physical loss to property within the first 13 days of the loss, given the recent decision of Hicks v. American Integrity Insurance Company of Florida, 241 So.3d 925 (Fla. 3d DCA 1018). In Florida, when an insured fails to comply with their Duties After Loss, a presumption of prejudice to the insurer arises. Bankers Ins. Co. v. Macias, 475 So. 2d 1216, 1218 (Fla. 1985)). In order to recover, the Plaintiffs bear the burden of overcoming the presumption, and must prove that no prejudice existed. Id. Mr. Smith and Ms. Keller’s comprehensive arguments successfully proved to the Court that the Plaintiffs’ failure to timely report the claim prejudiced the insurer by prohibiting the insurer from being able to independently validate the loss, or distinguish between multiple causes of loss. Mr. Smith and Ms. Keller further argued that Plaintiffs did not meet their burden to prove that the insurer was not prejudiced by the Plaintiffs’ failure to comply with the Duties After Loss provision of the Policy. The Motion cited numerous cases and extensive analysis supporting the insurer’s position. Reprinted courtesy of Burks A. Smith, III, Traub Lieberman and Kathryn Keller, Traub Lieberman Mr. Smith, may be contacted at bsmith@tlsslaw.com Ms. Keller may be contacted at kkeller@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractors and Force Majeure: Contractual Protection from Hurricanes and Severe Weather

    October 11, 2017 —
    This week’s Guest Post Friday here at Musings welcomes back Clay Olsen. Clay is is an attorney at Harper Whitwell PLLC. The firm is located in Mississippi and South Carolina where they routinely represent the interests of construction. This season is not special as hurricanes are a part of life on the east coast and gulf shores. From New York to Louisiana, just about every state has seen massive property loss from hurricanes during the past ten years. We often see harsh outcomes for those on the coast living in finished homes. What happens to the unfinished and current projects awaiting completion? If you’re building on the coast, take a look at all of the following risk aversion mechanisms:
    1. Builders Risk Insurance is necessary as is Coverage for named storms. Be sure to review the “excluded perils” or speak to your agent as hurricane coverage best not be omitted.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Offices of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Flood Policy Does Not Cover Debris Removal from Property

    May 07, 2015 —
    The Third Circuit affirmed the granting summary judgment to the insurer over a dispute as to debris removal under a Standard Flood Insurance Policy (SFIP). Torre v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4902 (3rd Cir. March 26, 2015). The Torres' property sustained substantial damage from Hurricane Sandy. Claims for flood damage were submitted to Liberty. Liberty paid a total of $235,751.68, which included the cost of removing debris from the house. An additional $15,520 for the cost of removing sand and other debris deposited on their land in front of and behind the Torres' home was denied on the grounds that the SFIP did not cover such removal. The Torres filed suit and cross-motions for summary judgment were filed. The district court denied the Torres' motion and granted Liberty's motion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    One More Thing Moving From California to Texas: Wildfire Risk

    June 19, 2023 —
    In early January, Keith Elwell was doing one of the things he does best, swinging chainsaws to help save forests from wildfire. Amid groves of junipers and white oak trees, Elwell led a team of a half-dozen volunteers, clearing brush and dead limbs in Twin Springs Preserve in Williamson County, Texas, a 170-acre county preserve a 40-minute drive north of downtown Austin. Set on the northeastern edge of Hill Country, a rolling, rocky landscape of natural springs and wild grasses, it’s also adjacent to Georgetown, the fastest-growing city in the United States according to US Census Bureau data. Once a small farming town, it’s now an Austin suburb of more than 75,000 people with 60 subdivisions under construction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Sisson, Bloomberg

    My Construction Law Wish List

    December 31, 2014 —
    I’ve been good this year. Not great mind you, but good, and good is the standard, right? So, here’s my construction law wish list this holiday season: 1.More Transparency. So much uncertainty and resultant litigation exists for the simple reason that contractors and subs don’t know when a higher tiered contractor or owner (on a lender financed project) has been paid for their work. So how about a requirement that owners, contractors and subcontractors of all tiers be required to disclose when payment applications are submitted, when payments are made and in what amount, and what pay applications have been paid. And because I’m pretty sure I’m at least within the 20th percentile of “good” this year how about a requirement that this information be provided through an online database accessible by all persons working on projects valued at over a certain dollar amount, say $500,000. 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

    Funding the Self-Insured Retention (SIR)

    August 17, 2020 —
    Unlike a deductible, a self-insured retention (referred to an “SIR”) is, as the name suggests, a self-insured obligation of the insured before its insurer picks up coverage. The SIR needs to be exhausted by the insured (as the primary self-insurance component) before the carrier’s excess defense and indemnification obligations kick-in under the terms of the policy. However, an insured can generally exhaust an SIR by paying legal fees and costs associated with a claim. Oftentimes, the language in the policy requires the SIR to be paid for by the named insured or an insured under the policy. This was an issue addressed by the Florida Supreme Court in Intervest Const. of Jax, Inc. v. General Fidelity Ins. Co., 133 So.3d 494 (Fla. 2014). In this matter, a personal injury claimant asserted a claim against the contractor dealing with a residential home. The contractor hired a subcontractor to install attic stairs and the subcontract required the contractor to indemnify it. The owner of the house injured herself on the attic stairs and sued the contractor. The contractor, in turn, sought indemnification against the subcontractor that installed the attic stairs. 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

    World Green Building Council Calls for Net-Zero Embodied Carbon in Buildings by 2050

    November 18, 2019 —
    The World Green Building Council’s latest maneuver in its war against greenhouse gas emissions is a rallying cry for embodied-carbon reduction in buildings that involves global collaboration, communication, education, innovation and regulation. WGBC’s ambitious aim is to get to net-zero EC in all new construction and renovations by 2050. Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of