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


    Construction Group Seeks Defense Coverage for Hard Rock Stadium Claims

    Are You Taking Full Advantage of Available Reimbursements for Assisting Injured Workers?

    Rhode Island Examines a Property Owner’s Intended Beneficiary Status and the Economic Loss Doctrine in the Context of a Construction Contract

    Insurer Motion to Intervene in Underlying Case Denied

    Keep It Simple: Summarize (Voluminous Evidence, That Is...)

    Renters Trading Size for Frills Fuel U.S. Apartment Boom

    Construction Contract Clauses Only a Grinch Would Love – Part 4

    20 Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2020 Top Lawyers!

    Professional Malpractice Statute of Limitations in Construction Context

    Genuine Dispute Summary Judgment Reversed for Abuse of Discretion and Trial of Fact Questions About Expert Opinions

    Jason Feld Awarded Volunteer of the Year by Claims & Litigation Management Alliance

    Two Lawyers From Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group, Andrea DeField and Latosha Ellis, Selected for American Bar Association’s 2022 “On The Rise” Award

    Construction Defect Attorneys Call for Better Funding of Court System

    Short-Term Rental Legislation & Litigation On the Way!

    Hotel Claims Construction Defect Could Have Caused Collapse

    Six-Month Prison Term for Role in HOA Scam

    Three-Year Delay Not “Prompt Notice,” But Insurer Not “Appreciably Prejudiced” Either, New Jersey Court Holds

    What a Difference a Day Makes: Mississippi’s Discovery Rule

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

    Filing Motion to Increase Lien Transfer Bond (Before Trial Court Loses Jurisdiction Over Final Judgment)

    Agile Project Management in the Construction Industry

    Contract, Breach of Contract, and Material Breach of Contract

    An Increase of US Metro Areas’ with Normal Housing & Economic Health

    "Multiple Claims" Provisions on Contractor's Professional Liability Policy Creates a Trap for Policyholders

    Sixth Circuit Holds that Some Official Actions Taken in the “Flint Water Crisis” Could Be Constitutional Due Process Violations

    CRH to Buy Building-Products Firm Laurence for $1.3 Billion

    What Is a Construction Defect in California?

    Product Liability Alert: “Sophisticated User” Defense Not Available by Showing Existence of a “Sophisticated Intermediary”

    Connecting Construction Project Information: Open Technology Databases Improve Project Communication, Collaboration and Visibility

    AI Systems and the Real Estate Industry

    Associated Builders and Contractors Northern California Chapter Announces New President/CEO

    Oregon Supreme Court Confirms Broad Duty to Defend

    The Status of OSHA’s Impending Heat Stress Standard

    Ninth Circuit Court Weighs In On Insurance Coverage For COVID-19 Business Interruption Losses

    Last Parcel of Rancho del Oro Masterplan Purchased by Cornerstone Communties

    English v. RKK- There is Even More to the Story

    Newmeyer & Dillion Welcomes Three Associates to Newport Beach Office

    Anti-Assignment Provision Unenforceable in Kentucky

    Lewis Brisbois Moves to Top 15 in Law360 2022 Diversity Snapshot

    History and Gentrification Clash in a Gilded Age Resort

    Cliffhanger: $451M Upgrade for Treacherous Stretch of Highway 1 in British Columbia

    Complying With Data Breach Regulations in the Construction Industry

    Delaware Settlements with Minors and the Uniform Transfer to Minor Act

    Road Project to Improve Access to Peru's Machu Picchu Site

    With an Eye Already in the Sky, Crane Camera Goes Big Data

    OSHA Again Pushes Back Record-Keeping Rule Deadline

    Texas Supreme Court Authorizes Exception to the "Eight-Corners" Rule

    Structural Engineer Found Liable for Defects that Rendered a Condominium Dangerously Unsafe

    Behavioral Science Meets Construction: Insights from Whistle Rewards

    Yet ANOTHER Reason not to Contract without a License
    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

    Construction Defects Lead to “A Pretty Shocking Sight”

    October 14, 2013 —
    Walls black with mold. Grass growing on carpets. The board chair of the Penhorwood condos, Christine Burton, describes the photos as “a pretty shocking sight.” The residents were all evicted in 2011 and given only fifteen minutes to gather what possessions they could after the buildings were found to be structurally unsound. An attempt was made to stabilize the buildings, but they kept shifting and cracking, exposing the interiors to the elements. The owners of the Fort McMurray condominium complex are suing the developer, contractor, and others for $60 million. Fort McMurray has ordered that the buildings be torn down, although the condo owners don’t have the funds for this. Even the funds for continuing the lawsuit are hard to come by. Ms. Burton notes “because of the evacuation and the cost of stabilizing the building so that we could go in and get people’s furniture and personal effect out has pretty much depleted our funds.” The owners “have no more money.” The condo owners are hoping that they can sell the land where their former homes are in order to recoup some of their losses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Appellate Team Secures Victory in North Carolina Governmental Immunity Personal Injury Matter

    January 23, 2023 —
    Atlanta, Ga. (January 12, 2023) - Atlanta Appellate Partners Seth M. Friedman and Christopher Meeks obtained a significant appellate win on behalf of a city in North Carolina when the North Carolina Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s denial of the city’s motion for summary judgment. In the underlying case, Lewis Brisbois’ client was sued for injuries that occurred during the construction of a dog park. The city moved for summary judgment on the grounds that it was immune from suit under the doctrine of governmental immunity. The trial court denied the motion and held that the city waived its governmental immunity through the purchase of a liability insurance policy. Lewis Brisbois was subsequently retained to handle the appeal. Before the North Carolina Court of Appeals, Lewis Brisbois argued, on behalf of its client, that well-established North Carolina law, along with a particular provision in the city’s insurance policy, rendered the city immune from the plaintiff’s claims. The appellate court agreed, holding that the city was immune from all liability and entitled to summary judgment on all of the plaintiff’s claims. The court's full opinion can be read here. Reprinted courtesy of Sam Friedman, Lewis Brisbois and Christopher Meeks, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Friedman may be contacted at Seth.Friedman@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Meeks may be contacted at Christopher.Meeks@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Can a Home Builder Disclaim Implied Warranties of Workmanship and Habitability?

    August 30, 2021 —
    In a recent Arizona Court of Appeals case, Zambrano v. M & RC II LLC, 2021 WL 3204491 (7/29/2021), the Court of Appeals addressed the question whether a home builder’s attempt to disclaim implied warranties of workmanship and habitability was effective. In that case, the buyer initialed the builder’s prominent disclaimer of all implied warranties, including implied warranties of habitability and workmanship. After the purchase, the buyer sued the builder, claiming construction defects. The builder moved for summary judgment, seeking enforcement of the disclaimer of warranties. The trial court granted the builder’s motion for summary judgment, thereby enforcing the disclaimers. The buyer appealed. The Court of Appeals addressed the question whether – as a matter of public policy – the implied warranties of workmanship and habitability were waivable. The Court of Appeals started the analysis by noting that the Arizona Supreme Court had, in a 1979 case, judicially eliminated the caveat emptor rule for newly built homes. The court further noted the long history of cases detailing the public policy favoring the implied warranties. But the court also noted the competing public policy of allowing parties to freely contract; explaining that the usual and most important function of the courts is to maintain and enforce contracts rather than allowing parties to escape their contractual obligations on the pretext of public policy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kevin J. Parker, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Parker may be contacted at kparker@swlaw.com

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    January 04, 2018 —
    Originally Published by CDJ on January 5, 2017 A performance bond is a valuable tool designed to guarantee the performance of the principal of the contract made part of the bond. But, it is only a valuable tool if the obligee (entity the bond is designed to benefit) understands that it needs to properly trigger the performance bond if it is looking to the bond (surety) to remedy and pay for a contractual default. If the performance bond is not properly triggered and a suit is brought upon the bond then the obligee could be the one materially breaching the terms of the bond. This means the obligee has no recourse under the performance bond. This is a huge downside when the obligee wanted the security of the performance bond, and reimbursed the bond principal for the premium of the bond, in order to address and remediate a default under the underlying contract. A recent example of this downside can be found in the Southern District of Florida’s decision in Arch Ins. Co. v. John Moriarty & Associates of Florida, Inc., 2016 WL 7324144 (S.D.Fla. 2016). Here, a general contractor sued a subcontractor’s performance bond surety for an approximate $1M cost overrun associated with the performance of the subcontractor’s subcontract (the contract made part of the subcontractor’s performance bond). The surety moved for summary judgment arguing that the general contractor failed to property trigger the performance bond and, therefore, materially breached the bond. The trial court granted the summary judgment in favor of the performance bond surety. Why? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Insurer Must Defend Faulty Workmanship Claims

    May 02, 2022 —
    The court determined that the insurer improperly denied a defense for construction defect claims made against the insured. Amerisure Mut. Ins. Co. v. McMillin Tex. Homes, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEIS 40363 (W.D. Texas March 8, 2022). McMillin was a developer, general contractor and home seller. It constructed multiple homes in various communities in the San Antonio area. After the homes were completed, homeowners observed defects in the artificial stucco exterior finish. After claims were lodged against McMillin, the various claims were tendered to Amerisure. Amerisure filed for declaratory judgment that it had to duty to defend or indemnify and moved for summary judgment. Amerisure first argued the homeowners' faulty workmanship claims did not allege "property damage" under the policies. It argued there were no allegations that any property damage existed, but merely that the stucco suffered from construction defects. The court disagreed. Among the allegations was the statement that due to the construction defects, the homes suffered damage "not only to the exterior stucco, but also to the underlying wire lath, paper backing, house wrap, flashing, water resistive barriers, sheathing, interior walls, interior floors and/ or other property." Consequently, the underlying claims amounted to property damage. 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

    SIG Earnings Advance 21% as U.K. Construction Strengthens

    August 13, 2014 —
    SIG Plc (SHI) earnings surged 21 percent in the first half as the distributor of building products benefited from a strengthening recovery in the U.K. housing market as well as procurement savings. Underlying operating profit rose to 47.8 million pounds ($80 million) from 39.6 million pounds a year earlier, the Sheffield, England-based company said in a statement today. Sales in the U.K. and Ireland from continuing operations climbed 14 percent to 650 million pounds, offsetting flat revenue in continental Europe. “Trading conditions in the U.K. have continued to gather momentum, led by the revival in the housing market,” Chief Executive Officer Stuart Mitchell said in the statement. “The group’s first-half performance and progress on its strategic initiatives provide a strong base on which to achieve its full-year expectations.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Benjamin Katz, Bloomberg
    Mr. Katz may be contacted at bkatz38@bloomberg.net

    Quick Note: Lis Pendens Bond When Lis Pendens Not Founded On Recorded Instrument Or Statute

    May 20, 2019 —
    If a lis pendens is recorded and the lis pendens is NOT founded on a duly recorded instrument (e.g., mortgage) or a statute (e.g., construction lien), a lis pendens bond should be recorded. The lis pendens bond should cover prospective damages associated with the wrongful / unjustified recording of a lis pendens that were suffered by the property owner. The reason being is that the lis pendens has an effect on the title to the property as long as the lis pendens is recorded. Damages could stem from a decline in the market value of the property, continued upkeep and maintenance of the property, and there may also be (and, really, should be) consideration for loss of investment return associated with the equity in that property. 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

    Construction Defect Fund Approved for Bankrupt Las Vegas Builder

    February 11, 2013 —
    A federal bankruptcy judge has given his approval to a fund set up to settle potential construction defect claims as a Las Vegas home builder, America West Development, works its way out of bankruptcy. The U.S. Trustee had objected to the trust fund's structure, and claimed that it was insufficiently independent from America West. Judge Mike Nakagawa found no legal objections to the trust. The trust will be initially funded from $1.5 million of the $10 million that Lawrence Canarelli will be paying to buy back the company he founded. Construction defect claims against the company could possibly reach $20.9 million. The Las Vegas Review-Journal reports that the fund "could pick up funding from certain legal claims and insurance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of