BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield 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


    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Burks Smith and Katie Keller Win Daubert Motion Excluding Plaintiff’s Expert’s Testimony in the Middle District of Florida

    Lawsuit Gives Teeth to Massachusetts Pay Law

    Brazil Congress Chiefs Deny Wrongdoing in Petrobras Scandal

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    Las Vegas, Back From the Bust, Revives Dead Projects

    Appraisal Appropriate Despite Pending Coverage Issues

    OSHA Finalizes Rule on Crane Operator Qualification and Certification

    Broker Not Negligent When Insured Rejects Additional Coverage

    Home Builders and Developers Beware: SC Supreme Court Beats Up Hybrid Arbitration Clauses Mercilessly

    The Proposed House Green New Deal Resolution

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/27/21)

    Georgia Amends Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Virginia General Assembly Tweaks Pay-if-Paid Ban

    Traub Lieberman Partner Michael Logan and Associate Christian Romaguera Obtain Voluntary Dismissal in Favor of Construction Company Under the Vertical Immunity Doctrine

    Mississippi Sues Over Public Health Lab Defects

    Duty to Defend Sorted Between Two Insurers Based Upon Lease and Policies

    In Pricey California, Renters Near Respite From Landlord Gouging

    Be Careful with Good Faith Payments

    One Word Makes All The Difference – The Distinction Between “Pay If Paid” and “Pay When Paid” Clauses

    William Lyon Homes Unites with Polygon Northwest Company

    Construction Contract Terms Matter. Be Careful When You Draft Them.

    Tokyo's Skyline Set to See 45 New Skyscrapers by 2020 Olympics

    Private Statutory Cause of Action Under Florida’s Underground Facility Damage Prevention and Safety Act

    Connecticut Supreme Court Rules Matching of Materials Decided by Appraisers

    California Supreme Court Finds Negligent Supervision Claim Alleges An Occurrence

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    World's Longest Suspension Bridge Takes Shape in Turkey

    Arizona – New Discovery Rules

    Lending Plunges to 17-Year Low as Rates Curtail Borrowing

    Existence of “Duty” in Negligence Action is Question of Law

    Factories Boost U.S. Output as Builders Gain Confidence: Economy

    Language California Construction Direct Contractors Must Add to Subcontracts Beginning on January 1, 2022, Per Senate Bill 727

    An Occurrence Under Builder’s Risk Insurance Policy Is Based on the Language in the Policy

    Court Retained Jurisdiction to Enforce Settlement Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6 Despite Dismissal of Complaint

    Enforceability of Contract Provisions Extending Liquidated Damages Beyond Substantial Completion

    Hold on Just One Second: Texas Clarifies Starting Point for Negligence Statute of Limitations

    When Construction Contracts Go Sideways in Bankruptcy

    Houston Office Secures Favorable Verdict in Trespass and Nuisance Case Involving Subcontractor’s Accidental Installation of Storm Sewer Pipe on Plaintiff’s Property

    Approaches in the Absence of a Differing Site Conditions Clause

    Certificates of Insurance May Confer Coverage

    California Supreme Court Declares that Exclusionary Rule for Failing to Comply with Expert Witness Disclosures Applies at the Summary Judgment Stage

    Contractors May be Entitled to Both Prompt Payment Act Relief and Prejudgment Interest for a Cumulative 24%!

    Homebuilder Immunity Act Dies in Committee. What's Next?

    Fluor Agrees to $14.5M Fixed-Price Project Cost Pact with SEC

    Homebuilding Design Goes 3D

    State Audit Questions College Construction Spending in LA

    Why A Jury Found That Contractor 'Retaliated' Against Undocumented Craft Worker

    Florida’s Fourth District Appeals Court Clarifies What Actions Satisfy Florida’s Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    Don’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public Project.

    Richest NJ Neighborhood Fights Plan for Low-Cost Homes on Toxic Dump
    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

    Massachusetts Federal Court Rejects Adria Towers, Finds Construction Defects Not an “Occurrence”

    July 03, 2022 —
    In an important ruling for insurers, U.S. District Court Judge Patti Saris found that Massachusetts does not follow the position taken in Cypress Point Condo Association v. Adria Towers, LLC, 226 N.J. 403, 418 (2016), i.e., it does not hold that "faulty workmanship claims [should be recognized] as ... an 'occurrence,' thus triggering coverage, 'so long as the allegedly defective work [was] performed by a subcontractor rather than the policyholder itself."[1] Instead, Judge Saris reaffirmed earlier Massachusetts authority holding faulty work is not an "occurrence" for coverage purposes,[2] and found this authority applied whether or not the work in question was subcontracted. In the alternative, Judge Saris found, even if a contractor's faulty work could be deemed an an "occurrence," such work did not constitute covered "property damage," because none of the alleged damage was "outside the scope of the work that Tocci was contractually required to fulfill as general contractor."[3] Reprinted courtesy of Eric B. Hermanson, White and Williams and Austin D. Moody, White and Williams Mr. Hermanson may be contacted at hermansone@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Moody may be contacted at moodya@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    CDJ’s #7 Topic of the Year: The Las Vegas Harmon Hotel Year-Long Demolition & Trial Begins

    December 31, 2014 —
    The 26-story tower in MGM’s $9 billion Las Vegas, Nevada CityCenter project, is being demolished piece by piece after a structural engineer reported that an earthquake of 7.7 could bring it down. While litigation began as early as 2010, the trial didn’t begin until October of 2014, and expectation is it will last through almost all of 2015 as well, according to Carri Geer Thevenot of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    For US Cities in Infrastructure Need, Grant Writers Wanted

    July 22, 2024 —
    It’s a big windfall of federal investment. Together, bills like the Inflation Reduction Act, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and the CHIPS Act present a substantial shift in how the US government funds local economic development, clean energy and environmental justice efforts, potentially giving cities and towns a huge boost. That is, if the nation’s 90,000-plus municipalities and tribal governments can finish filling out all the paperwork. The trillion-dollar trifecta of Biden administration legislation from 2022 underscores just how important grant writing has become. In many ways, the ability of cities to enact new policies and tap federal resources rests on the desks of the staffers or contract workers who research, write and submit applications for funding. Uncle Sam will cheerfully write a check for cities to install solar panels via Clean Electricity Investment and Production Tax Credits, for example, or provide tax credits for buying electric vehicles. But first, you have to ask. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Sisson, Bloomberg

    Third Circuit Holds That Duty to Indemnify "Follows" Duty to Defend

    December 27, 2021 —
    In a win for policyholders, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed a District Court’s 2018 ruling, which held that the duty to indemnify follows the duty to defend where a settlement precludes a determination on the facts of the case relative to liability and apportionment. In Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Penn National Mutual Casualty Insurance Co.,1 a large concrete panel collapsed and killed a construction worker at a construction site in New Kensington, Pennsylvania. Cost Company (“Cost”), Liberty Mutual’s insured, was a masonry subcontractor on the project and had further subcontracted with Pittsburgh Flexicore Co. (“Flexicore”), Penn National’s insured, for the concrete panels. Cost’s subcontract agreement required Flexicore to name Cost as an additional insured under its general liability policy issued by Penn National. When the construction worker’s widow filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Cost and Flexicore, Cost demanded that Penn National defend and indemnify it as an additional insured under the policy. Penn National refused, arguing that any additional insured status had terminated at the conclusion of Flexicore’s work for Cost. As a result, Liberty Mutual defended Cost in the lawsuit, which was ultimately settled. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey J. Vita, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Vita may be contacted at JVita@sdvlaw.com

    Illinois Supreme Court Limits Reach of Implied Warranty Claims Against Contractors

    April 10, 2019 —
    In a recent decision, the Illinois Supreme Court held that a purchaser of a newly constructed home could not assert a claim for breach of the implied warranty of habitability against a subcontractor where the subcontractor had no contractual relationship with the purchaser. Sienna Court Condo. Ass’n v. Champion Aluminum Corp., 2018 IL 122022, ¶ 1. The decision overruled Minton v. The Richards Group of Chicago, which held that a purchaser who “has no recourse to the builder-vendor and has sustained loss due to the faulty and latent defect in their new home caused by the subcontractor” could assert a claim of a breach of the warranty of habitability against the subcontractor. 116 Ill. App. 3d 852, 855 (1983). In Sienna Court Condo. Ass’n, the plaintiff alleged that the condo building had several latent defects which made individual units and common areas unfit for habitation. 2008 IL 122022 at ¶ 3. The Court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that privity should not be a factor in determining whether a claim for a breach of the warranty of habitability can be asserted. Id. at ¶ 19. The Court also rejected the plaintiff’s argument that claims for a breach warranty of habitability should not be governed by contract law but should instead be governed by tort law analogous to application of strict liability. Id. The Court reasoned that the economic loss rule, as articulated in Moorman Manufacturing Co. v. National Tank Co., 91 Ill. 2d 69, 91 (1982), refuted the plaintiff’s argument that the implied warranty of habitability should be covered by tort law. 2008 IL 122022 at ¶ 20. Under the economic loss rule, a plaintiff “cannot recover for solely economic loss under the tort theories of strict liability, negligence, and innocent misrepresentation.” National Tank Co., 91 Ill. 2d at 91. The Court explained that the rule prevented plaintiffs from turning a contractual claim into a tort claim. 2008 IL 122022 at ¶ 21. The Court further noted that contractual privity is required for a claim of economic loss, and an economic loss claim is not limited to strict liability claims. Id. Because the plaintiff’s claim was solely for an economic loss, it was a contractual claim in nature; therefore, the Court concluded that “the implied warranty of habitability cannot be characterized as a tort.” Id. at ¶ 22. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Thomas Cronin, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Mr. Cronin may be contacted at tcronin@grsm.com

    Consider Manner In Which Loan Agreement (Promissory Note) Is Drafted

    March 02, 2020 —
    Consider who you loan money too and, perhaps more importantly, the manner in which your loan agreements (promissory notes) are drafted. By way of example, in what appears to be a failed construction project in Conrad FLB Management, LLC v. Diamond Blue International, Inc., 44 Fla. L. Weekly D2897a (Fla. 3d DCA 2019), a group of lenders lent money to a limited liability company (“Company”) in connection with the development of a project. Promissory notes were executed by Company and executed by its managing member as a representative of Company, and not in a personal capacity. Company, however, did not own the project. Rather, an affiliated entity owned the project (“Affiliated Entity”). Affiliated Entity had the same managing member as Company. Once the Company received the loan proceeds, it transferred the money to Affiliated Entity, presumably for purposes of the project. The loans were not repaid and the lenders sued Company, Affiliated Entity, and its managing member, in a personal capacity. The lenders claimed they were all jointly liable under the promissory notes. Although the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the lenders, this was reversed on appeal as to the Affiliated Entity and the managing member because there was a factual issue as to whether they should be bound by the note executed on behalf of Company. First, Florida Statute s. 673.4011(1) provides that “a person is not liable on a promissory note unless either (a) the person signed the note, or (b) the person is represented by an agent who signed the note.” Conrad FLB Management, LLC, supra. Affiliated Entity is a separate entity and did not execute the note. 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

    25 Days After Explosion, Another Utility Shuts Off Gas in Boston Area

    October 30, 2018 —
    Three hundred thirty-nine homes in Woburn, Mass., were without power on Oct. 8 after National Grid shut off gas meters following the inadvertent over-pressurization of the natural gas line on Oct. 8, according to the Woburn Fire Dept. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Johanna Knapschaefer, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 45 White and Williams Lawyers

    September 25, 2023 —
    Thirty-two White and Williams lawyers were recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® 2024. Inclusion in Best Lawyers® is based entirely on peer-review. The methodology is designed to capture, as accurately as possible, the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical area and legal practice area. Best Lawyers® employs a sophisticated, conscientious, rational, and transparent survey process designed to elicit meaningful and substantive evaluations of quality legal services. In addition, thirteen lawyers were recognized as Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America. This recognition is given to attorneys who are earlier in their careers for outstanding professional excellence in private practice in the United States. The firm is also pleased to announce Best Lawyers® has recognized Christopher P. Leise as a 2024 "Lawyer of the Year" for Litigation – Insurance in Cherry Hill, NJ. Chris works with regional and national brokerage firms defending professional liability claims and handling disputes with insurance companies throughout the mid-Atlantic region, as well as with commercial insurance carriers defending allegations of bad faith. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP