BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance 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


    When Your “Private” Project Suddenly Turns into a “Public” Project. Hint: It Doesn’t Necessary Turn on Public Financing or Construction

    New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ Bill

    Required Contract Provisions for Construction Contracts in California

    Word of the Day: “Contractor”

    Ninth Circuit Reverses Grant of Summary Judgment to Insurer For Fortuitous Loss

    Prison Time and Restitution for Construction Fraud

    Implied Warranty Claims–Not Just a Seller’s Risk: Builders Beware!

    Cooperating With Your Insurance Carrier: Is It a Must?

    Shoring of Problem Girders at Salesforce Transit Center Taking Longer than Expected

    From Both Sides Now: Looking at Contracts Through a Post-Pandemic Lens

    Lasso Needed to Complete Vegas Hotel Implosion

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (02/15/23) – Proptech Solutions, Supply Chain Pivots, and the Inflation Reduction Act

    In Real Life the Bad Guy Sometimes Gets Away: Adding Judgment Debtors to a Judgment

    Chicago Cubs Agree to Make Wrigley Field ADA Improvements to Settle Feds' Lawsuit

    The Contributors to This Blog Are Pleased to Announce That….

    Update Coverage for Construction Defect Claims in Colorado

    How the New Dropped Object Standard Is Changing Jobsite Safety

    Is the Manhattan Bank of America Tower a Green Success or Failure?

    Will Maryland Beltway Developer's Exit Doom $7.6B P3 Project?

    Don MacGregor of Bert L. Howe & Associates Awarded Silver Star Award at WCC Construction Defect Seminar

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in 2019 Edition of Who’s Who Legal

    Foreman in Fatal NYC Trench Collapse Gets Jail Sentence

    Global Emissions From Buildings, Construction Climb to Record Levels

    How AI Can Become a Design Adviser

    Professional Liability Alert: California Appellate Courts In Conflict Regarding Statute of Limitations for Malicious Prosecution Suits Against Attorneys

    London's Walkie Talkie Tower Voted Britain's Worst New Building

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Recognized in “The Best Lawyers in America” & “Best Lawyers: One’s to Watch” 2024 Editions

    Denver Airport's Renovator Uncovers Potential Snag

    City Development with Interactive 3D Models

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine’s 2023 Top Lawyers!

    What Buyers Want in a Green Home—and What They Don’t

    Bidder Be Thoughtful: The Impacts of Disclaimers in Pre-Bid Reports

    No Duty to Defend Faulty Workmanship Under Hawaii Law, but All is not Lost for Insured Contractor

    Idaho Construction Executive Found Guilty of Fraud and Tax Evasion

    Merger to Create Massive Los Angeles Construction Firm

    Out of Eastern Europe, a Window Into the Post-Pandemic Office

    Is a Violation of a COVID-19 Order the Basis For Civil Liability?

    Sixth Circuit Affirms Liability Insurer's Broad Duty to Defend and Binds Insurer to Judgment Against Landlord

    US Supreme Court Backs Panama Canal Owner in Dispute with Builders

    2018 Construction Outlook: Mature Expansion, Deceleration in Some Sectors, Continued Growth in Others

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

    Texas Court of Appeals Conditionally Grant Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Anderson

    "Ongoing Storm" Rules for the Northeast (Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York & Rhode Island)

    CGL Insurer’s Duty to Defend Insured During Pre-Suit 558 Process: Maybe?

    Construction Lien Does Not Include Late Fees Separate From Interest

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss "Redundant Claims" Denied

    Quick Note: Charting Your Contractual Rights With Respect To The Coronavirus

    Texas Supreme Court to Review Eight-Corners Duty-to-Defend Rule

    $1.9 Trillion Stimulus: Five Things Employers Need to Know

    Jury's Verdict for Loss Caused by Collapse Overturned
    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

    Former Zurich Executive to Head Willis North America Construction Insurance Group

    March 01, 2012 —

    Insurance Journal reports that Sean McGroarty will be directing surety operations for their construction practice in North America. Previously, Mr. McGroarty was the senior vice president and head of international surety with Zurich Financial Services. He has also worked for Liberty Mutual Group and the St. Paul Companies.

    Mr. McGroarty will be leading a team of professionals offering brokerage services for contract and commercial surety.

    Read the full story…

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

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    May 09, 2011 —

    California Assemblyman Furutani has introduced a bill that if passed would eliminate the ten year statute of repose in certain construction defect cases. The statute of repose would not apply when “an action in tort to recover damages for damage to real or personal property, or for personal injury or wrongful death from exposure to hazardous or toxic materials, pollution, hazardous waste, or associates environmental remediation activities,” according to the latest amended version of AB 1207.

    When Furutani first introduced the bill, it was aimed at small businesses only. However, the description of the bill, which read, “An act to amend Section 14010 of the Corporations Code, relating to small businesses” has been stricken from the bill, and it has been amended to read, “An act to amend Section 337.15 of the Code of Civil Procedure, relating to civil actions.”

    The change in the bill’s intent has caused some outcry among attorneys in the blogosphere. For instance, Sean Sherlock of Snell & Wilmer stated that “the proposed amendment is unnecessary, and would upset nearly 50 years of deliberative legislation and judicial precedent on construction defects liability and the 10–year statute — all apparently motivated by a decision in a single, isolated Superior Court lawsuit that has not yet been reviewed by the court of appeal.” Sherlock is referring to Acosta v. Shell Oil Company, in which the Superior Court agreed to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims against the developer based in part on the ten year statute of repose. AB 1207 was amended five days after the ruling in Acosta v. Shell Oil Company.

    California AB 1207 has been re-referred to the Judiciary Committee.

    Read the full story…

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

    Subcontractor Not Liable for Defending Contractor in Construction Defect Case

    February 10, 2012 —

    The California Court of Appeals has ruled on January 9, 2012 in Hensel Phelps Construction Company v. Urata & Sons Cement, upholding the judgment of the lower court.

    Hensel Phelps was the general contractor for a high-rise in Sacramento. They were sued by the owners of the building after problems were discovered in the concrete slabs of the building’s parking garage. Instead of welded steel wire mesh, the slabs had been constructed with fiber mesh. Hensel Phelps filed a cross-complaint against Urata Cement, the subcontractor that had performed the cement work. Urata refused to defend Hensel Phelps. The owners’ case was subsequently dismissed due to the statute of limitations.

    Although the original case was over, Hensel Phelps continued in their claims against Urata. “Urata argued that a handwritten interlineation required Hensel Phelps to prove Urata was at fault for the injury alleged in the building owners’ complaint before Urata was obliged to defend Hensel Phelps in that action.”

    The lower court concluded that Urata would have been obligated to defend Hensel Phelps if the owners’ lawsuit had alleged that the damage was due to the subcontractor’s work or if evidence at trial established this. The lower court found neither of these true. Instead, the use of the fiber mesh was a design issue and “that decision was outside the scope of the subcontractor’s work.”

    During the trial, Hensel Phelps conceded that Urata was not at fault. The appeals court could find no reading of the contract that would cause Urata to be obligated to defend Hensel Phelps, calling Hensel Phelps’s reading of the contact as “grammatically infeasible.”

    Judges Nicholson, Raye, and Butz upheld the decision of the lower court and awarded costs on appeal to Urata.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Policy Lanuage Expressly Prohibits Replacement of Undamaged Material to Match Damaged Material

    March 09, 2020 —
    Construing an all-risk Businessowners Policy, the court found that the policy language did not required replacement of undamaged material match materials that were damaged. Pleasure Creek Townhomes Homeowners' Ass'n v. Am. Family Ins. Co., 2019 Minn. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1095 (Minn. Ct. App. Nov. 25, 2019). The policy covered the Association's 14 townhome buildings. In June 2017, a hail storm damaged siding on all 14 buildings. An appraisal panel included the cost to replace the undamaged, faded siding in its appraisal award so that it would match the new siding. American Family refused to pay this component - which was appraised at about $211,382 - of the award. An exclusion in the policy provided,
    We will not pay to repair or replace undamaged material due to mismatch between undamaged material and new material used to repair or replace damaged material.
    We do not cover the loss in value to an property due to mismatch between undamaged material and new material used to repair or replace damaged material.
    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

    Sellers of South Florida Mansion Failed to Disclose Construction Defects

    October 08, 2014 —
    A couple who reportedly sold their custom, beach-front home on Golden Beach for more money than any other home in that town previously, may have failed to disclose construction defects, according to Daily Business Review. The original owners, reported Daily Business Review, claimed (according to court documents) that “they were ‘unable to spend even one night because an overwhelming smell of mold in the home triggered a severe reaction in Mrs. Hochberg.’" They also alleged the new home had “cracked walls, drafty doors, leaky windows, poorly cut marble and peeling stucco.” The owners sued the subcontractors, but lost due to not filing within the four-year statute of limitations. While water leaks were disclosed during the sale with a notation that all leaks had been repaired, “the extent of the home's repair history was not discussed during nearly eight months of haggling over the property, the buyer's broker said.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/1/24) – Hybrid Work Technologies, AI in Construction and the Market for Office Buildings

    November 05, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, commercial mortgage bond market in trouble, commercial real estate investments, pressure on mortgage REITs, and more!
    • Short-term issues facing U.S. commercial real estate have made it an investment opportunity and values have bottomed out. (CNBC)
    • As organizations report plans to shake up their real estate portfolios, the flight to quality spurs interest in space planning, amenities and hybrid work technologies. (Joe Burns, Facilities Dive)
    • The conversation about AI’s potential benefits and risks has been a common refrain in construction recently. (Matthew Thibault, Construction Dive)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Times Square Alteration Opened Up a Can of Worms

    January 26, 2017 —
    Compared with some of its Manhattan neighbors, a high-rise on the corner of Seventh Avenue and West 47th Street looks standard. Like many buildings in Times Square, the 41-story retail-entertainment-hotel development, nearly topped out, has a tower springing from a boxy base that will sport a flashy billboard. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record
    Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com

    Maybe Supervising Qualifies as Labor After All

    May 22, 2023 —
    Remember back in 2021 when I “mused” about Dickson v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland et al.? Remember how the Eastern District of Virginia held that mere supervision does not qualify as “labor” under the federal Miller Act? Well, the 4th Circuit recently weighed in on the appeal of that case and had some interesting things to say about the definition of labor. As a quick reminder, Plaintiff worked as a project manager on a project to repair and upgrade certain stairs at the Pentagon. Plaintiff subcontracted with prime contractor Forney Enterprises Inc. on this project. On Dec. 20, 2018, the prime contract was terminated. Plaintiff filed the Miller Act suit on Feb. 5, 2020. Dickson alleged that Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, or F&D, must pay him, pursuant to the Miller Act, the amount he is owed for the labor he performed on the project. Now before the district court were cross-motions for summary judgment. In evaluating Plaintiff’s claims, the district court examined the defendant’s claims that (1) Dickson’s work did not qualify as “Labor” under the Miller Act, and (2) that the suit was not timely filed. The Eastern District of Virginia court agreed with both arguments. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com