BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope 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


    Don’t Overlook Leading Edge Hazards

    New York Developers Facing Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Miller Law Firm Helped HOA Recover for Construction Defects without Filing a Lawsuit

    What to Expect From the New Self-Retracting Devices Standard

    Jury Instruction That Fails to Utilize Concurrent Cause for Property Loss is Erroneous

    Presidential Memorandum Promotes Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West

    Saved By The Statute: The Economic Loss Doctrine Does Not Bar Claims Under Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Fifteen White and Williams Lawyers

    Another Reminder that Your Construction Contract is Only as Good as Those Signing It

    Lithium for Batteries from Geothermal Brine

    4 Breakthrough Panama Canal Engineering Innovations

    Los Angeles Could Be Devastated by the Next Big Earthquake

    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

    Construction Warranties: Have You Seen Me Lately?

    Gordon & Rees Ranked #4 of Top 50 Construction Law Firms in the Nation by Construction Executive Magazine

    Proposed Bill Provides a New Federal Tax Credit for the Conversion of Office Buildings

    Follow Up on Continental Western v. Shay Construction

    As Fracture Questions Remain, Team Raced to Save Mississippi River Bridge

    In a Win for Design Professionals, California Court of Appeals Holds That Relation-Back Doctrine Does Not Apply to Certificate of Merit Law

    Texas Federal Court Delivers Another Big Win for Policyholders on CGL Coverage for Construction-Defect Claims and “Rip-and-Tear” Damages

    I.M. Pei, Architect Who Designed Louvre Pyramid, Dies at 102

    Why Federal and State Agencies are Considering Converting from a “Gallons Consumed” to a “Road Usage” Tax – And What are the Risks to the Consumer?

    Consultant Says It's Time to Overhaul Construction Defect Laws in Nevada

    New York Court Holds Radioactive Materials Exclusion Precludes E&O Coverage for Negligent Phase I Report

    Time to Repair Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws?

    Contractor Disputes Report Amid Amazon Warehouse Collapse Lawsuit

    Convictions Obtained in Las Vegas HOA Fraud Case

    Recovering Attorney’s Fees and Treble Damages in Washington DC Condominium Construction Defect Cases

    Homeowner Sues Brick Manufacturer for Spalling Bricks

    Insurer Has No Obligation to Cover Arbitration Award in Construction Defect Case

    New Insurance Case: Owners'​ Insurance Barred in Reimbursement Action against Tenant

    Construction Law Alert: A Specialty License May Not Be Required If Work Covered By Another License

    Mechanics Lien Release Bond – What Happens Now? What exactly is a Mechanics Lien and Why Might it Need to be Released?

    Structural Problems May Cause Year-Long Delay Opening New Orleans School

    Deducting 2018 Real Property Taxes Prepaid in 2017 Comes with Caveats

    Iowa Tornado Flattens Homes, Businesses and Wind Turbines

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 01/26/22

    Judge Tells DOL to Cork its Pistol as New Overtime Rule is Blocked

    Judge Who Oversees Mass. Asbestos Docket Takes New Role As Chief Justice of Superior Court

    California Supreme Court Finds that the Notice-Prejudice Rule Applicable to Insurance is a Fundamental Public Policy of the State

    The Legal 500 U.S. 2024 Guide Names Peckar & Abramson a Top Tier Firm in Construction Law and Recognizes Nine Attorneys

    NYC Building Explosion Kills Two After Neighbor Reports Gas Leak

    Evergrande’s Condemned Towers on China’s Hawaii Show Threat

    Specific Performance: Equitable Remedy to Enforce Affirmative Obligation

    San Diego Developer Strikes Out on “Disguised Taking” Claim

    Beware of Personal-Liability Clauses – Even When Signing in Your Representative Capacity

    California Plant Would Convert Wood Waste Into Hydrogen Fuel

    And the Winner Is . . . The Right to Repair Act!

    Biden Unveils $2.3 Trillion American Jobs Plan

    Carrier Has Duty to Defend Claim for Active Malfunction of Product
    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

    Case Dispositive Motion for Summary Judgment Granted for BWB&O’s Client in Wrongful Death Case!

    November 18, 2024 —
    Congratulations to San Diego Partner JohnPaul Salem on his recent MSJ victory in a wrongful death case! Plaintiffs, the family of a pedestrian who was struck and killed by a train at a San Diego trolley station when he walked onto the tracks while warning lights and bells were active, filed suit for (i) dangerous condition of public property; and (ii) negligence arising out of the accident. Plaintiffs alleged BWB&O’s Client had created a dangerous condition and failed to warn of the alleged danger. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Contractor Entitled to Defense for Alleged Faulty Workmanship of Subcontractor

    February 10, 2020 —
    Applying Nevada law, the Federal District Court in Florida found that the general contractor was entitled to a defense of claims based upon alleged faulty workmanship of a subcontractor. KB Home Jacksonville LLC v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151235 (M.D. Fla. Sept 5, 2019). KB Home completed six residential developments utilizing various subcontractors. One subcontractor was Florida State Plastering, LLC (FSP) for installing stucco. Eighty-eight complaints against KB Home implicated FSP's stucco work. Plaintiffs alleged that the stucco subcontractor's work suffered from construction defects, causing damages not only to the exterior stucco, but also the underling wire lath, paper backing, house wrap, wood sheathing, interior walls, interior floors and other property. Ironshore insured FSP under a CGL policy. KB Home was an additional insured for liability for property damage caused by "your work." KB Home was also insured under its own CGL policy with Liberty Mutual. Both insurers refused to defend. 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

    Mobile Home Owners Not a Class in Drainage Lawsuit

    March 01, 2012 —

    Comparing it to a “complex construction defect action,” the California Court of Appeals for Orange County has rejected the claims of a group of mobile home owners that they should be certified as a class in their lawsuit against Huntington Shorecliffs Mobilehome Park. The Appeals court sustained the judgment of the lower court. The court issued a decision in the case of Criswell v. MMR Family LLC on January 17, 2012.

    The claims made by the group were that the owners and operators of the mobile home park had known of an “on-going and potentially worsening shallow groundwater condition on the property” and had “exacerbated the problem by changing ‘the configuration and drainage related to the hillside that abuts’ the park.” The homeowners claimed that the class should consist of “any past or current homeowner during the same time frame” who had experienced “the accumulation of mold, fungus, and/or other toxins,” “property damage to his/her mobilehome and/or other property resulting from drainage problems, water seepage, water accumulation, moisture build-up, mold, fungus, and/or other toxins,” emotional distress related to drainage problems or mold, and finally health problems “resulting from exposure to drainage problems, water seepage, water accumulation, moisture build-up, mold, fungus, and/or other toxins, in or around one’s home, lot, or common areas of the park.”

    The lower court concluded that while the limits of the class were identifiable, they failed to constitute a class in other ways. First, the people affected were small enough in number that they could be brought together. They “are not so numerous that it would be impracticable to bring them all before the Court.”

    The court noted that while many of the homeowners would have issues in common, they did not find “a well-defined community of interest among the class members.” The Appeals Court wrote that “the individual issues affecting each mobile home and homeowner will predominate over the common issue of the presence of standing or pooling water in and around the park.” The court noted that each home would be affected differently by water and “the ‘accumulation of mold, fungus, and/or other toxins.’”

    While the court conceded that there would be common issues, such as the “defendants’ alleged concealment of excess moisture conditions and their allegedly negligent roadwork and landscaping,” they noted that “these common issues would be swamped by the swarm of individual determinations of property damage, emotional distress, and personal injury.” The Appeals Court cited an earlier case that ruled against certification “if a class action ‘will splinter into individual trials.’” The court affirmed the judgment of the lower court that they could not proceed as a class.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Government Claims Act Does Not Apply to Actions Solely Seeking Declaratory Relief and Not Monetary Relief

    March 25, 2024 —
    Perhaps it should come as no surprise, but public entities get special treatment under the law, and when filing a claim against a public entity, in most cases, a claimant is required to file a claim with the public entity before filing suit under the Government Claims Act (Gov. Code §810 et seq.). But, as the next case demonstrates, that’s not always the case. In Stronghold Engineering Incorporated v. City of Monterey, 96 Cal.App.5th 1203 (2023), the 6th District Court of Appeals examined whether a public works contractor that alleged an extended overhead claim was required to file a Government Claims Act claim before filing suit when its initial complaint was limited to a claim for declaratory relief. The Stronghold Case In December 2015, general contractor Stronghold Engineering Incorporated entered into a construction contract with the City of Monterey for the renovation of the City’s conference center and an adjacent city-owned plaza. The construction contract provided that any modification to the construction contract had to be approved by the City through a written change order. No surprise there. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    A Subcontractor’s Perspective On California’s Recent Changes to Indemnity Provisions

    September 10, 2014 —
    Great news for California subcontractors and suppliers! “Type I” Indemnity provisions in California construction contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2013 are not enforceable. This change in the law prevents owners and general contractors from shifting enormous exposure and costs of litigation downstream to the little guy, namely subcontractors and suppliers. In October 2011, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 474 into law, which represented a major legislative victory for subcontractors and suppliers. The new law also imposed exacting limitations on contractors that attempt to require their subcontractors and suppliers to cover their defense fees and costs in litigation. New Law Prevents Indemnity or Cost of Defense for Active Negligence Under a "Type I" indemnity provision, the downstream subcontractor agrees to indemnify the owner or contractor, even against liability caused by the upstream owner/contractor's own "active negligence." A “Type I” indemnity provision in general contractors’ subcontracts often require their subcontractors to defend and indemnify them from liability regardless of whether the general contractor is partially at fault. Subcontractors and suppliers historically have complained that they have little bargaining power when entering into these contracts and these types of provisions can result in ruinous liability for those in the construction industry that are most vulnerable-subcontractors and suppliers. Before this change, the law allowed a general contractor who is 99 percent at fault for an injury or damage to shift the entire risk to a subcontractor who is only one percent at-fault or a subcontractor who is not at fault at all, but tangentially involved in the claim. Subcontractors and suppliers joined forces and lobbied the legislature. The legislature and Governor Brown agreed. Under the new law, such "Type I" indemnity provisions will no longer be enforceable. SB 474 adds Civil Code section 2782.05 that precludes indemnity where the party to be indemnified is "actively negligent" and makes void and unenforceable these types of clauses. 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

    Building and Landscape Standards Enacted in Response to the Governor's Mandatory Water Restrictions Dealing with the Drought and Possible Effects of El Niño

    January 06, 2016 —
    Earlier this year, with California facing one of the most severe droughts on record, Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. issued Executive Order B-29-15 (the “Executive Order”) aimed at conserving water supplies and reducing water waste throughout the State of California. For the first time in California’s history, this Executive Order directed state agencies to implement immediate measures to save water, increase enforcement against water waste, invest in new technologies, and streamline government response to ongoing drought conditions. In response, various state agencies proposed emergency changes to existing building and landscape standards in the California Green Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations, title 24, part 11) (“CALGreen”) and the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (California Code of Regulations, title 23, part 11) (“Model Ordinance”) pertaining to the use of potable water. In July, the California Building Standards Commission and the California Water Commission adopted the proposed changes after public review and comment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Clayton T. Tanaka, Newmeyer & Dillion, LLP
    Mr. Tanaka may be contacted at clay.tanaka@ndlf.com

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (05/18/22)

    June 13, 2022 —
    Businesses renovate office spaces at a historic pace, China plans to build a 3D-printed hydropower dam without human workers, the U.S. infrastructure package has thousands of projects underway, and more.
    • Miami’s crypto-real estate boom has been challenging all conventional wisdoms as the price of crypto currencies like Bitcoin have surged, which could spill over into other popular real estate markets. (Peter Lane Taylor, Forbes)
    • China is planning to build the world’s first 3D-printed hydropower dam in Tibet, with an AI-powered design and no human workers. (Matthew Loh, Business Insider)
    • With the hybrid work model here to stay, businesses are having their offices renovated at a historic pace. (Joe Dyton, Connected Real Estate Magazine)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Maryland Legislation Prohibits Condominium Developers from Shortening Statute of Limitations to Defeat Unit Owner Construction Defect Claims

    May 16, 2018 —
    New Maryland legislation prevents developers from shortening the time period within which condominium associations and their unit owner members can assert claims for hidden construction defects in newly constructed condominium communities. The legislation known as HB 77 and SB 258 passed both houses of the Maryland General Assembly and was signed into law by Governor Lawrence J. Hogan on April 24, 2018 (see photo above). Nicholas D. Cowie, Esq. is the author of the legislation, which will be codified as Section 11-134.1 of the Maryland Condominium Act, effective October 1, 2018. This article discusses how this new legislation ends the practice by which some condominium developers attempted to use condominium documents to shorten the normal statute of limitations in order to prevent condominium associations and their unit owner members from having a fair opportunity to assert their warranty and other legal claims for latent construction defects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas D. Cowie, Esq., Cowie & Mott
    Mr. Cowie may be contacted at ndc@cowiemott.com