BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut consulting architect 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


    Forget Palm Springs—Santa Fe Is the New Mecca for Modern Architecture

    Barratt Said to Suspend Staff as Contract Probe Continues

    Chinese Lead $92 Billion of U.S. Home Sales to Foreigners

    Ohio “property damage” caused by an “occurrence.”

    New Executive Order: Revitalizing Our Nation’s Commitment to Environmental Justice for All

    SEC Approves New Securitization Risk Retention Rule with Broad Exception for Qualified Residential Mortgages

    Helsinki is Building a Digital Twin of the City

    Court of Federal Claims: Upstream Hurricane Harvey Case Will Proceed to Trial

    Breach Of Duty of Good Faith And Fair Dealing Packaged With Contract Disputes Act Claim

    From the Ashes: Reconstructing After the Maui Wildfire

    ASHRAE Seeks Comments by May 26 on Draft of Pathogen Mitigation Standard

    What You Don’t Know About Construction Law Can Hurt Your Engineering Firm (Law Note)

    Funding the Self-Insured Retention (SIR)

    Co-Housing Startups Fly in the Face of Old-School NYC Housing Law

    Bank Window Lawsuit Settles Quietly

    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    Prior Occurrence Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defects

    Want to Make Your Jobsite Safer? Look to the Skies.

    Drafting or Negotiating A Subcontract–Questions To Consider

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Reimbursement of Defense Costs Paid by Other Insurers

    What to do about California’s Defect-Ridden Board of Equalization Building

    Be Aware of Two New Statutes that Became Effective May 1, 2021

    Pensacola Bridge Repair Plan Grows as Inspectors Uncover More Damage

    Restoring the USS Alabama: Surety Lessons From an 80-Year-Old Battleship

    Tightest Credit Market in 16 Years Rejects Bernanke’s Bid

    Thieves Stole Backhoe for Use in Bank Heist

    San Diego Developer Strikes Out on “Disguised Taking” Claim

    Safety Guidance for the Prevention of the Coronavirus on Construction Sites

    Yellowstone Park Aims for Quick Reopening After Floods

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2023 “Atlanta 500” List

    The Investors Profiting Off Water Scarcity

    Subcontractor’s Claim against City Barred by City’s Compliance with Georgia Payment Bond Statute

    Construction Mediation Tips for Practitioners and 'Eyes Only' Tips for Construction Mediators

    HHMR Celebrates 20 Years of Service!

    How Long Does a Civil Lawsuit Take?

    City Drops Impact Fees to Encourage Commercial Development

    Engineers Propose 'River' Alternative to Border Wall

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2022 New York – Metro Super Lawyers®

    Comparing Contracts: A Review of the AIA 201 and ConsensusDocs - Part II

    After 15 Years, Settlement Arrested at San Francisco's Millennium Tower

    US Appeals Court Halts OSHA Vaccine Mandate, Unclear How Long

    Builder’s Be Wary of Insurance Policies that Provide No Coverage for Building: Mt. Hawley Ins. Co v. Creek Side at Parker HOA

    It’s Time for a Net Zero Building Boom

    The Secret to Success Is Doing Things a Little Bit Differently

    Forcible Entry and Detainer Actions: Courts May Not Consider Tenant’s Hardship

    2017 Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure

    SunEdison Gets Shinsei Bank Funding for Japan Solar Power Plant

    High-Rise Condominium Construction Design Defects, A Maryland Construction Lawyer’s Perspective

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    Chinese Brooklyn-to-Los Angeles Plans Surge: Real Estate
    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

    Second Circuit Finds Potential Ambiguity in Competing “Anti-Concurrent Cause” Provisions in Hurricane Sandy Property Loss

    November 28, 2018 —
    The Second Circuit recently held that competing “anti-concurrent cause” provisions in a commercial property policy present a potential ambiguity that could result in favor of coverage for losses sustained by Madelaine Chocolate after storm surge from Hurricane Sandy combined to cause substantial damage to Madelaine’s property and a resulting loss of income. Madelaine was insured under an all-risk insurance policy issued by Chubb subsidiary Great Northern Insurance Company. By endorsement, Madelaine’s policy added “windstorm” as a covered peril and defined “windstorm” as “wind… regardless of any other cause or event that directly or indirectly contributes concurrently to, or contributed in any sequence to, the loss or damage.” The policy also included a common flood exclusion that removed coverage for loss or damage caused by or resulting from waves, tidal water, or tidal waves, or the rising, overflowing, or breaking of any natural harbors, oceans, or any other body of water, whether driven by wind or not. Like the windstorm endorsement, the flood exclusion contained concurrency language that broadened the exclusion to any loss to which flood contributed, regardless of any other cause or event that directly or indirectly contributed to the loss. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Tae Andrews, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Andrews may be contacted at tandrews@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Shares Fall on Wind-Down Measure

    March 12, 2014 —
    Common shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac experienced their biggest intraday drop in 10 months after leaders of the Senate Banking Committee announced plans to eliminate the companies in a new bill. Fannie Mae shares tumbled as much as 44 percent, paring the losses to 31 percent to close in New York at $4.03, after Edwin Groshans, a managing director at Washington-based equity research firm Height Analytics LLC, described the proposal as holder-negative. Freddie Mac fell 27 percent to close at $4.04. Preferred shares also dropped, some by as much as 12 percent. The bipartisan measure, drafted with input from President Barack Obama’s administration, would replace the U.S.-owned mortgage financiers with government bond insurance that would kick in only after private capital suffered losses of at least 10 percent, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson and Senator Mike Crapo said in a statement today. The bill would require most borrowers to make down payments of at least 5 percent. Ms. Benson may be contacted at cbenson20@bloomberg.net; Ms. Hopkins may be contacted at chopkins19@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Clea Benson and Cheyenne Hopkins, Bloomberg

    Thank You!

    February 28, 2022 —
    I would like to thank the Construction Law Subsection of the Los Angeles County Bar Association for awarding me today (on 2/22/22 nonetheless) the 2022 James Acret Award for Outstanding Achievement in Construction Law Legal Writing. The nominating committee of the subsection includes a veritable Who’s Who of construction law attorneys including Donna Kirkner (Chair), Michael J. Bayard, Theresa C. Tate, Aaron J. Flores, Marilyn Klinger, Marion Hack, John D. Hanover, James C. Earle, L. Adam Winegard, Bernard S. Kamine and Ashley B. Jordan. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Insurance Alert: Insurer Delay Extends Time to Repair or Replace Damaged Property

    November 26, 2014 —
    In Stephens & Stephens XII v. Fireman's Fund Ins. (No. A135938, filed November 24, 2014), the plaintiffs obtained property insurance on a warehouse. Within a month, it was discovered to be stripped of all wiring and metal. Fireman's Fund paid for emergency repairs but nothing more, concerned that the damage had occurred outside the policy period. The policy provided for valuation of either "replacement cost," meaning the expenditure required to replace the damaged property with "new property of comparable material and quality," or "actual cash value," defined as the actual, depreciated value of the damaged property. For replacement cost, Fireman’s Fund was not required to pay "until the lost or damaged property is actually repaired ... as soon as reasonably possible after the loss or damage," and only "[t]he amount [the insured] actually spend[s]...." In the subsequent bad faith lawsuit, the jury awarded the full cost of repair, despite there being no repairs. The appeals court reversed, holding that there was no right to an immediate award for the costs of repairing the damage; however, the court nonetheless held that the insured was entitled to a "conditional judgment," awarding those costs if repairs were actually made. Reprinted courtesy of Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com; Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Beyond the Statute: How the Colorado Court Upheld Modified Accrual in Construction Contracts

    November 13, 2023 —
    In a case of first impression, the First Division of the Colorado Court of Appeals recently reviewed whether parties may contractually alter the accrual time established by Colorado’s statute of limitations for construction defect actions, C.R.S. § 13-80-104, in South Conejos Sch. Dist. RE-10 v. Wold Architects, Inc., 2023 COA 85 (2023), decided on September 21, 2023. The Court held that sophisticated parties may contractually alter the accrual time standards, enlarging the accrual time as was the issue in this case. Notably, the Court’s decision was made in the context of commercial construction, not residential. The issue in South Conejos Sch. Dist. RE-10 arose from the construction of a school in Antonito, Colorado. Prior to construction, the South Conejos School District RE-10 (the “School District”) and Wold Architects, Inc. (“Wold”) entered a contract that provided: Unless a longer period is provided by law, any action against [Wold] brought to recover damages for deficiency in the design, planning, supervision, inspection, construction or observation of construction or for injury to person or property shall be brought within two years after the claim for relief arises and is discovered by [the District]; … “Discovered” as used herein means detection and knowledge by [the District] of the defect in the improvement that ultimately causes the injury, when such defect is of a substantial or significant nature. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hal Baker, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Baker may be contacted at baker@hhmrlaw.com

    Defense Victory in Breach of Fiduciary Action

    February 26, 2015 —
    Earlier this month, Scott Calkins and Anthony Gaeta of Collinsworth, Specht, Calkins & Giampaoli, LLP obtained a defense verdict in a breach of fiduciary duty action involving a high-rise condominium in downtown San Diego, California. The Association asked for excess of over $3 million, however, the jury returned with a 10-2 defense verdict in favor of K. Hovnanian. Cortez Blu Community Association, Inc. v. K. Hovnanian at Cortez Hill, LLC, et al. initially involved construction defect claims against the developer, K. Hovnanian, and the general contractor, Turner Construction, as well as a claim of breach of fiduciary duty. However, the construction defect claims settled prior to trial leaving only the breach of fiduciary claim. “While it is now becoming ever more common for attorneys representing homeowners associations to allege a breach of fiduciary duty by the developer, there has been little actual litigation of the issues surrounding those claims which test the viability of the allegations or the defenses to them,” defense attorney Anthony Gaeta stated. “A breach of a fiduciary duty by a developer, which is demonstrated to damage the viability of an HOA either to perform regularly scheduled maintenance, or replace building components from its reserves, has the potential in economic terms to surpass the damages from purported construction defects. The Plaintiff argued that K. Hovnanian breached its fiduciary duty to the Association by failing to set adequate reserves within the initial Department of Real Estate budget (“DRE”) for painting, caulking, and power washing the exterior of the building, referencing Raven’s Cove Townhomes, Inc. v. Knuppe Development Co., Inc. (1981) 114 Cal. App. 3d 783. In response, K. Hovnanian stated that in part, the initial reserves as set forth in the DRE budget were adequate, good faith estimates and, therefore, there was no liability for breach of fiduciary duty. “Our case was exclusively concerned with the duties of the developer when forming the initial HOA, preliminary budgets, and reserves,” Gaeta said. “We litigated the duties and responsibilities of the initial board and whether a developer may rely on reports prepared by third-parties during the formation of a common interest development. The jury found our client’s actions and reliance on third-parties was reasonable and, thus, no breach of fiduciary duty occurred.” Collinsworth, Specht, Calkins & Giampaoli is a general civil litigation firm representing clients throughout California and Arizona. You may learn more about the firm at www.cslawoffices.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer's Refusal to Consider Supplemental Claim Found Improper

    June 17, 2024 —
    The Eleventy Circuit reversed the district court's finding that the insurer had properly rejected the insured's supplemental claim. Great Lakes Ins. SE v. Concourse Plaza A Condomiium Association, Inc., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 8958 (11th Cir. April 15, 2024). On September 10, 2017, Hurrican Irma struck Concourse Plaza's building, causing wind and water damage. Great Lakes sent a adjuster to inspect the property. The adjuster found damages to the building were $31,035.21, well below the policy's deductible. Accordingly, Great Lakes advised that the net amount of the claim was zero. Concourse Plaza responded on September 4, 2020, just shy of three years after the cliam accured. Concourse Plaza disputed the damages estimate, but did not include a competing estimate. The letter said an estimate was being prepared and Great Lakes should consider the letter as notice of the intent to pursue additional benefits for the loss pursuant to the policy's notice provisions and Florida law. 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

    Congratulations to Partner Alex Giannetto for Being Named to San Diego Business Journal’s Top 100 Leaders in Law List

    December 03, 2024 —
    Congratulations to Partner Alexander Giannetto for being selected as a “2024 Leaders of Influence in Law” by the San Diego Business Journal! To read and download the SDBJ publication, please click here. Alex Giannetto is a managing partner with Bremer, Whyte, Brown & O’Meara LLP’s San Diego office. He has extensive experience in all aspects of civil litigation handling liability matters including slip and falls, catastrophic injuries, wrongful death, traumatic brain injuries, landslides, and construction claims. He has obtained favorable trial results defending clients on personal injury and premises matters in San Diego and Los Angeles. He also has appellate experience. He is an AV-rated attorney by Martindale-Hubbell who has been voted Best of the Bar in San Diego as well as a Top Lawyer in San Diego. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP