BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer 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


    Alabama Still “An Outlier” on Construction Defects

    Uniwest Rides Again (or, Are Architects Subject to Va. Code Section 11-4.1?)

    Specific Source of Water Not Relevant in Construction Defect Claim

    Changes to Arkansas Construction and Home Repair Laws

    Hunton Andrews Kurth Promotes Insurance Recovery Lawyer Andrea (Andi) DeField to Partner

    No Duty to Defend Suit That Is Threatened Under Strict Liability Statute

    Do Construction Contracts and Fraud Mix After All?

    Contractor Sued for Contract Fraud by Government

    The Quiet War Between California’s Charter Cities and the State’s Prevailing Wage Law

    Oregon Condo Owners Make Construction Defect Claim

    Progress, Property, and Privacy: Discussing Human-Led Infrastructure with Jeff Schumacher

    Recent Third Circuit OSHA Decision Sounds Alarm for Employers and Their Officers

    What You Need to Know About the Recently Enacted Infrastructure Bill

    Not Just Another Client Alert about Cyber-Risk and Effective Cybersecurity Insurance Regulatory Guidance

    Don’t Let Construction Problems Become Construction Disputes (guest post)

    New York Construction Practice Team Obtains Summary Judgment and Dismissal of Labor Law Claims

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

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Nebraska Court of Appeals Vacates Arbitration Award for Misconduct

    Run Spot...Run!

    Eleventh Circuit Affirms Jury Verdict on Covered Property Loss

    Counsel Investigating Coverage Can be Sued for Invasion of Privacy

    Commentary: How to Limit COVID-19 Related Legal Claims

    Recovering For Inflation On Federal Contracts: Recent DOD Guidance On Economic Price Adjustment Clauses

    Providing “Labor” Under the Miller Act

    L.A. Makes $4.5 Billion Bet on Olympics After Boston Backs Out

    Florida Supreme Court Decision Limits Special Damages Presented to Juries

    New Jersey Judge Declared Arbitrator had no Duty to Disclose Past Contact with Lawyer

    How Concrete Mistakes Added Cost to the Recent Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Project

    Is Construction Defect Litigation a Cause for Lack of Condos in Minneapolis?

    Products Liability Law – Application of Economic Loss Rule

    Protect Projects From Higher Repair Costs and Property Damage

    New York Appellate Division Reverses Denial of Landlord’s Additional Insured Tender

    COVID-19 Is Not Direct Physical Loss Or Damage

    After Breaching its Duty to Defend, Insurer Must Indemnify

    Pay Loss Provision Does Not Preclude Assignment of Post-Loss Claim

    Court Grants Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment After Insured Fails to Provide Evidence of Systemic Collapse

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

    Number of Occurrences Is On the Agenda at This Year's ICLC Seminar

    Texas Federal Court Upholds Professional Services Exclusion to Preclude Duty to Defend

    If You Purchase a House at an HOA Lien Foreclosure, Are You Entitled to Excess Sale Proceeds?

    Illinois Appellate Court Finds That Damages in Excess of Policy Limits Do Not Trigger Right to Independent Counsel

    Hurricane Warning: Florida and Southeastern US Companies – It is Time to Activate Your Hurricane Preparedness Plan and Review Key Insurance Deadlines

    Illinois Supreme Court Rules Labor Costs Not Depreciated to Determine Actual Cash Value

    What is Toxic Mold Litigation?

    Short-Term Rental Legislation & Litigation On the Way!

    Woodbridge II and the Nuanced Meaning of “Adverse Use” in Hostile Property Rights Cases in Colorado

    Pennsylvania Modernizes State Building Code

    Thanks to All for the 2024 Super Lawyers Nod!

    10-story Mass Timber 'Rocking' Frame Sails Through Seismic Shake Tests

    Did the Building Boom Lead to a Boom in Construction Defects?
    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

    $1.9 Trillion Stimulus: Five Things Employers Need to Know

    March 15, 2021 —
    On March 11, 2021, President Biden signed H.R.1319 - American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (“Rescue Plan”) into law—a $1.9 trillion stimulus bill. Here are five things every employer should know about the bill. 1. FFCRA Tax Credits Have Been Extended The Rescue Plan extends the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) tax credit provisions—again—through September 30, 2021. (The ability to recoup the cost of FFCRA leave was previously extended in December 2020 through March 31, 2021: See related article here. Employers that opt to voluntarily provide FFCRA leave will be credited 100 percent for all qualifying wages paid under the FFCRA. Any employer already providing FFCRA-like leave to employees under state, county, and/or local paid sick leave ordinances, especially if their business is located in California (e.g., Cal/OSHA’s COVID-19 Prevention Emergency Temporary Standards) should consider opting to voluntarily provide FFCRA-compliant leave, as by doing so they may be able at least partially to recoup the cost of leave they are otherwise already required to provide. Reprinted courtesy of Matthew C. Lewis, Payne & Fears and Rana Ayazi, Payne & Fears Mr. Lewis may be contacted at mcl@paynefears.com Ms. Ayazi may be contacted at ra@paynefears.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    John Paulson’s $1 Billion Caribbean Empire Faces Betrayal

    November 27, 2023 —
    In the decade since hedge fund billionaire John Paulson took a grand gamble on Puerto Rico, he’s faced the wrath of the markets and mother nature. He’s navigated hurricanes, earthquakes, the pandemic and the largest municipal bankruptcy in US history to amass a portfolio of luxury hotels and resorts, high-end office blocks, and auto dealerships catering to the island’s rich. Now, just a few months after breaking ground on one of San Juan’s tallest and most exclusive residential towers, Paulson is facing a new wave of threats: lawsuits that strike at the heart of his Caribbean empire. Reprinted courtesy of Jim Wyss, Bloomberg and Tom Maloney, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Limits Indemnification Obligations of Design Professionals

    August 24, 2017 —
    The California legislature recently enacted legislation – SB 496 – limiting a design professional’s indemnification obligations in private contracts related to design services. The term “design professional” refers to licensed architects, landscape architects and professional land surveyors, and registered professional engineers. As revised, Cal. Civ. Code § 2782.8 states that, for all contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2018 for design professional services, all provisions that purport to have the design professional indemnify the indemnitee for claims against the indemnitee – or require the design professional to provide a defense to the indemnitee – are unenforceable except to the extent that the claims against the indemnitee arise out of, or relate to, the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of the design professional. In addition, as revised, § 2782.8 limits a design professional’s liability for the cost of defense to the design professional’s percentage of fault. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    No Jail Time for Disbarred Construction Defect Lawyer

    May 10, 2013 —
    The New Mexico Supreme Court decided that a lawyer who defrauded clients will not be spending any time in jail, although they did disbar him in February. Bradley R. Sims brought a cashier’s check for $10,000 to repay his former client. Casa Bandera had hired Sims to sue over construction defects at apartment buildings it owned in Las Cruces, New Mexico. The court had found that Sims did not file the lawsuit but that created documents to convince his clients that he had. Sims initially intended to repay Casa Bandera through monies owed him by Sundland Park, New Mexico. When that did not arrive at the court, Sims borrowed the money. He has yet to comply with a court order to turn over his client lists so that the disciplinary board can determine if he owes money to any other clients. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nevada Supreme Court Clarifies the Litigation Waiver of the One-Action Rule

    September 07, 2017 —
    Nevada has a one-action rule which, with limited exceptions, requires a creditor seeking to recover a debt secured by real property to proceed against the security first prior to seeking recovery from the debtor personally. In the event that a law suit is filed in violation of the one-action rule, final judgment may be entered in favor of the creditor but that judgment “releases and discharges the mortgage or other lien.” NRS 40.455(3). Nevada law further provides that, with the exception of certain guaranties, any provision in an agreement relating to the sale of real property which contains a waiver of Nevada’s anti-deficiency laws may not be enforced by a court because doing so violates Nevada’s public policy. NRS 40.453. Nevada law also addresses when the one-action rule may be waived in litigation. In the author’s view, the governing statute, NRS 40.435 is ambiguous. Section 2 of that statute states that if the one-action rule is timely interposed as an affirmative defense, the action must either be dismissed without prejudice or continued to allow the creditor to file amended pleadings to convert the action into one which does not violate the one-action rule. This suggests that the one-action rule must be asserted as an affirmative defense in the debtor’s answer to the complaint or it is waived by the debtor. The first sentence of section 3 of the statute, however, seems to suggest that the debtor has up until the entry of a final judgment to waive the one-action rule by stating: “[t]he failure to interpose, before the entry of a final judgment, the provisions of NRS 40.430 [the one-action rule] as an affirmative defense in such a proceeding waives the defense in that proceeding.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bob L. Olson, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Olson may be contacted at bolson@swlaw.com

    Colorado Nearly Triples Damages Caps for Cases Filed in 2025, Allows Siblings to File Wrongful Death Claims

    July 22, 2024 —
    Denver, Colo. (June 13, 2024) - On June 3, 2024, Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed HB24-1472 to increase the damages caps for personal injury and wrongful death claims. The law nearly triples the amounts available to plaintiffs, which will continue to increase for inflationary adjustments beginning in 2028 and every two years thereafter. These new damages caps affect not only claims that accrue in 2025 and beyond, but they also change the caps for any civil cases filed on or after January 1, 2025. This law was enacted as a compromise to a ballot measure that would have removed any cap on damages. The new caps are as follows:
    • The cap on noneconomic damages for personal injuries will be $1.5 million.
    • The cap on noneconomic damages for wrongful death will be $2.125 million.
    Plaintiffs are likely to delay filing new actions through the rest of 2024 as long as they are not up against a statute of limitations deadline. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Amy Johnson, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Johnson may be contacted at Amy.Johnson@lewisbrisbois.com

    Court Grants Summary Judgment to Insurer in HVAC Defect Case

    August 04, 2011 —

    The US District Court in Colorado has determined in the case of RK Mechanical, Inc. v. Travelers Property Casualty Company of America that Travelers did not breach its insurance contract when it refused to cover RK Mechanical.

    RK Mechanical performed an HVAC installation for a residential project for which J.E. Dunn Rocky Mountain was the general contractor. As part of the work, RK “installed approximately one hundred seventy-one CPVC flanges, which were manufactured by Charlotte Pipe and Foundry Company.” Two of these flanges failed in June, 2009 leading to water damage. RK replaced the cracked flanges and engaged in water remediation. “Travelers paid Dunn and RK for the costs associated with the water damage associated with the Flange Failure.” The court notes that Travelers did not pay for the cracked flanges, however.

    Subsequently, RK examined the remaining flanges, finding many cracked ones. These were replaced with new ones. Later, all the Charlotte flanges were replaced with ones from another manufacturer. RK applied for coverage.

    All sides brought in their experts: “Microbac Laboratories, Inc. prepared a report on behalf of RK concluding that the Flange Failure was due, in part, to an assembly or workmanship defect in addition to manufacturing defects in the flanges. Higgins & Associates prepared a report on behalf of Travelers concluding that the flanges failed due to improper installation. Plastic Failure Labs prepared a report on behalf of the flange manufacturer concluding that the flanges failed due to improper installation by RK.”

    At this point, Travelers denied coverage. RK sued alleging that the coverage for flange failure and water damage implicitly includes mitigation costs. The court rejected this claim, noting it would do so even if Travelers had paid for the replacement of the first two flanges. Nor did the court find that replacement of the faulty flanges is not "a covered cause of loss." RK also argued that as it was required to mitigate, Travelers was obligated to cover costs. However, the court found that “the mitigation costs expended by RK were not incurred in an effort to avoid damages from a potential breach of contract by Travelers.” The court additionally noted that despite RK’s claims, the Colorado courts have not found a common law duty to mitigate. Finally, the court found that the exclusions in the policy were not in violation of public policy.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    As Fracture Questions Remain, Team Raced to Save Mississippi River Bridge

    September 06, 2021 —
    "How is this bridge still standing?” That was the initial reaction of Aaron Stover, Michael Baker International’s vice president and regional bridge practice lead, as he first studied images of a fractured tie beam that forced the May 11 emergency shutdown of the I-40/Hernando de Soto Bridge between Tennessee and Arkansas. Discovered by chance earlier in the day during MBI’s routine above-deck inspection, the fracture on the bridge’s eastbound span affected nearly half the cross-section of a 26-in. by 33-in. welded girder supporting one of the 50-year-old structure’s 900-ft-long, 100-ft-high arched navigation spans across the Mississippi River. Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of