BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractor
    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


    Less Than Perfectly Drafted Endorsement Bars Flood Coverage

    More In-Depth Details on the Davis-Bacon Act Overhaul

    Mitigating FCRA Risk Through Insurance

    Contractor Not Liable for Flooding House

    NYC Luxury-Condo Buyers Await New Towers as Sales Slow

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Brokers' MSJ on Duties Owed In Construction Defect Case

    Alaska District Court Sets Aside Rulings Under New Administration’s EO 13795

    Bank Sues over Defective Windows

    Nevada Supreme Court Declares Subcontractor Not Required to Provide Pre-Litigation Notice to Supplier

    Architectural Firm, Fired by School District, Launches Lawsuit

    Association Insurance Company v. Carbondale Glen Lot E-8, LLC: Federal Court Reaffirms That There Is No Duty to Defend or Indemnify A Builder For Defective Construction Work

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    Foreclosures Decreased Nationally in September

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Newport Beach Team for Prevailing on a Highly Contested Motion to Quash!

    Vacant Property and the Right of Redemption in Pennsylvania

    Subcontractors Aren’t Helpless

    Have the Feds Taken Over Arbitration?

    Third Circuit Court of Appeals Concludes “Soup to Nuts” Policy Does Not Include Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    Be Careful with Good Faith Payments

    Appellate Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    Apartment Building Damaged by Cable Installer’s Cherry Picker

    Federal Court Ruling Bolsters the “Your Work” Exclusion in Standard CGL Policies

    Antitrust Walker Process Claims Not Covered Under Personal Injury Coverage for Malicious Prosecution

    Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case Triggered by Complaint's Allegations

    We Knew Concrete Could Absorb Carbon—New Study Tells How Much

    Lenders Facing Soaring Costs Shutting Out U.S. Homebuyers

    15 Wilke Fleury Lawyers Recognized in 2020 Northern California Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    Overruling Henkel, California Supreme Court Validates Assignment of Policies

    First-Time Buyers Shut Out of Expanding U.S. Home Supply

    “Positive Limiting Barriers” Are An Open and Obvious Condition, Relieving Owner of Duty to Warn

    DHS Awards Contracts for Border Wall Prototypes

    Lewis Brisbois Promotes 35 to Partnership

    Mediation is (Almost) Always Worth a Shot

    Housing Starts in U.S. Climb to an Almost Eight-Year High

    New York Team Secures Appellate Win on Behalf of National Home Improvement Chain

    Bill Taylor Co-Authors Chapter in Pennsylvania Construction Law Book

    Evaluating Smart Home Technology: It’s About More Than the Bottom Line

    Insurer Ordered to Participate in Appraisal

    L.A.’s Modest Solution to the ‘Missing Middle’ Housing Problem

    Oracle Sues Procore, Claims Theft of Trade Secrets for ERP Integration

    Colorado Homes Approved Despite being Too Close Together

    Cameron Kalunian to Speak at Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    Top 10 Construction Contract Provisions – Changes and Claims

    Project-Specific Commercial General Liability Insurance

    The Evolution of Construction Defect Trends at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Insurance Tips for Contractors

    South Africa Wants Payment From Colluding World Cup Builders

    Subsequent Purchaser Can Assert Claims for Construction Defects

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Additional Insured in Construction Defect Case

    Another Smart Home Innovation: Remote HVAC Diagnostics
    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

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    October 10, 2013 —
    An issue that has plagued builders in Colorado construction defect litigation is the difficulty of getting additional insured carriers to fully participate in the builder’s defense, oftentimes leaving the builder to fund its own defense during the course of the litigation. Many additional insurers offer a variety of positions regarding why they will not pay for fees and costs during the course of a lawsuit. Some insurers argue that, until after trial, it is impossible to determine its proper share of the defense, and therefore cannot make any payments until the liability is determined as to all of the potentially contributing policies. (This is often referred to as the “defense follows indemnity” approach.) Others may make an opening contribution to defense fees and costs, but fall silent as fees and costs accumulate. In such an event, the builder may be forced to fund all or part of its own defense, while the uncooperative additional insured carrier waits for the end of the lawsuit or is faced with other legal action before it makes other contributions. Recent orders in two, currently ongoing, U.S. District Court cases provide clarity on the duty to defend in Colorado, holding that multiple insurers’ duty to defend is joint and several. The insured does not have to go without a defense while the various insurers argue amongst themselves as to which insurer pays what share. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bret Cogdill
    Bret Cogdill can be contacted at cogdill@hhmrlaw.com

    Selected Environmental Actions Posted on the Fall 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulator Actions

    November 06, 2018 —
    The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, housed in the Office of Management and Budget, has issued the Fall 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions to be taken over the next several months by federal executive departments and agencies. This report will highlight some of the environmental actions, to be proposed or finalized soon by these agencies. Eventually, the Agenda will be published in the Federal Register. 1. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) EPA, of course, has listed by far the largest number of actions. For instance, EPA’s agenda lists 92 separate actions to be taken under its Clean Air Act (CAA) authority. As an example, EPA reports that it will issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in May 2019 of its proposals to increase consistency and true transparency in considering the cost benefit of its proposed rules, and review the standards of performance for new, modified, and reconstructed sources of greenhouse gas emissions by means of an NPRM to be issued in November 2018. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Construction Defects Are Not An Occurrence Under New York, New Jersey Law

    June 18, 2014 —
    The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, determined there was no coverage for construction defects under New York or New Jersey law. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA v. Turner Constr. Co., 2014 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3546 (N.Y. App. Div. May 15, 2014). The property owner retained Turner Construction to serve as the general contractor. Turner subcontracted with Permasteelisa North America Corporation to design and build the exterior wall, a "curtain wall," which consisted of granite and glass. A segment of the pipe rail system fell to the street from the eighth floor of the building. An investigation determined that more than 20% of the pipe rail connections surveyed did not conform to the building plans. Additional problems included inconsistencies in the method of rail attachment, bent brackets on the pipe rail system, cracked glass louvers, cracked glass panels, and water infiltration. 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

    Difference Between a Novation And A Modification to a Contract

    May 10, 2022 —
    In contract law, there are two doctrines that have similarities but are indeed different. These doctrines are known as novation and modification. There are times you may want to make arguments relative to these doctrines because they are important for your theory of the dispute. Thus, you want to make sure you understand them so you can properly plead and prove the required elements to substantiate the basis of the theories. Understanding the elements will help you understand the evidence you will need to best prove your factual theories. A novation is essentially substituting a new contract for an old contract.
    “‘A novation is a mutual agreement between the parties for the discharge of a valid existing obligation by the substitution of a new valid obligation.’” Thompson v. Jared Kane Co., Inc., 872 So.2d 356, 361 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (citation omitted). To prove a novation, a party must prove four elements: “(1) the existence of a previously valid contract; (2) the agreement of the parties to cancel the first contract; (3) the agreement of the parties that the second contract replace the first; and (4) the validity of the second contract.” Id. at 61. Whether the parties consented to the substitute contract can be implied from the factual circumstances. Id.
    Parties are more familiar with a modification because it is not uncommon that parties may agree to modify contractual terms. The contract remains in effect but certain terms or obligations are modified. For example, a change order to a contract is a modification. 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

    Case Remanded for Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    November 06, 2013 —
    The Florida Court of Appeals remanded the case after the insured was awarded an $8 million dollar judgment against its property insurer for hurricane and other damage to a home. Am. Home Assur. Co. v. Sebo, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 14799 (Fla. Ct. App. Sept. 18, 2013). Sebo purchased his home in April 2005, when it was four years old. It was insured under a manuscript policy issued by AHAC for $8 million. The all-risk policy covered rain, but excluded damage caused by faulty, inadequate or defective planning. After Sebo bought the home, water leaks were noticed. Sebo believed that the house suffered from major design and construction defects. In October 2005, Hurricane Wilma struck and further damaged the home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Florida Courts Say that Developers Are Responsible for Flooding

    July 31, 2013 —
    The Florida Supreme Court recently handed down a decision that developers can be held responsible if problems with infrastructure lead to damage to homes. Aaron Kase, writing on Lawyers.com, reviews the case, noting that the court said that “habitability of a home is impacted by stagnant standing water and the erosion of soil upon which the home is constructed. One need not wait until floodwaters inundate the home or the erosion swallows the residential structure to find protection.” Kase notes that a trial court “sided with the developers’ argument that because the water infrastructure didn’t immediately support the houses, implied warranties of fitness and habitability shouldn’t apply and they shouldn’t be liable.” This was overturned at the district court, with the Supreme Court upholding the district court decision. Lisa Wilcox of Wilcox Law notes that “the Supreme Court determined that the warranty of habitability should be applied to protect home buyers from defects in the construction of these essential services even though they are not part of a home’s completed structure.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Planned Everglades Reservoir at Center of Spat Between Fla.'s Gov.-Elect, Water Management District

    January 02, 2019 —
    Dec. 11 -- Florida's incoming governor stopped short of demanding South Florida water managers step down over a contentious land deal with sugar farmers, saying he would instead await a recommendation from his transition team. That doesn't mean their days may not be numbered. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Housing Starts in U.S. Slumped More Than Forecast in March

    April 20, 2016 —
    New-home construction in the U.S. slumped more than projected in March, reflecting a broad-based retreat that showed the industry lost momentum heading into the busiest time of year. Residential starts decreased 8.8 percent to a 1.09 million annualized rate that was the lowest since October and weaker than any forecast of economists surveyed by Bloomberg, Commerce Department data showed Tuesday in Washington. Permits, a proxy for future construction, also dropped. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sho Chandra, Bloomberg