BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut defective construction expert
    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


    DoD Testing New Roofing System that Saves Energy and Water

    Just Because I May Be An “Expert” Does Not Mean I Am Giving Expert Testimony

    Traub Lieberman Elects New Partners for 2020

    Lawyer Claims HOA Scam Mastermind Bribed Politicians

    What ‘The Curse’ Gets Wrong About Passive House Architecture

    Condemnation Actions: How Valuable Is Your Evidence of Property Value?

    Affordable Housing, Military Contracts and Mars: 3D Printing Construction Potential Builds

    No Coverage For Construction Defect Under Illinois Law

    Construction Contract Basics: Attorney Fee Provisions

    No Coverage for Property Damage That is Limited to Work Completed by Subcontractor

    New Home Construction Booming in Texas

    UConn’s Law-School Library Construction Case Settled for Millions

    Nevada Provides Independant Counsel When Conflict Arises Between Insurer and Insured

    The Argument for Solar Power

    OSHA Again Pushes Back Record-Keeping Rule Deadline

    Haight’s John Arbucci and Kristian Moriarty Selected for Super Lawyers’ 2020 Southern California Rising Stars

    Good Signs for Housing Market in 2013

    Render Unto Caesar: Considerations for Returning Withheld Sums

    BHA Announces New Orlando Location

    Architect Named Grand Custom Home Winner for Triangular Design

    Blueprint for Change: How the Construction Industry Should Respond to the FTC’s Ban on Noncompetes

    The Godfather of Solar Predicts Its Future

    Rio de Janeiro's Bursting Real-Estate Bubble

    Newmeyer & Dillion’s Alan Packer Selected to 2018 Northern California Super Lawyers List

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

    Why’d You Have To Say That?

    California Fire Lawyers File Suit Against PG&E on Behalf of More Than 50 Wildfire Victims

    Navigating the Hurdles of Florida Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Subsurface Water Exclusion Found Unambiguous

    Digital Twins – Interview with Cristina Savian

    HOA Foreclosure Excess Sale Proceeds Go to Owner

    Protect Your Right To Payment By Following Nedd

    Nevada Assembly Passes Construction Defect Bill

    Fourth Circuit Rejects Application of Wrap-Up Exclusion to Additional Insured

    First Circuit Limits Insurers’ Right to Recoup Defense Costs or Settlement Payments

    The Problem with One Year Warranties

    Four Key Steps for a Successful Construction Audit Process

    Former NYC Condo Empire Executive Arrested for Larceny, Tax Fraud

    Manhattan Homebuyers Pay Up as Sales Top Listing Price

    A Few Green Building Notes

    Break out the Neon: ‘80s Era Davis-Bacon “Prevailing Wage” Definition Restored in DOL Final Rule

    Suppliers of Inherently Dangerous Raw Materials Remain Excluded from the Protections of the Component Parts Doctrine

    Prevent Costly Curb Box Damage Due on New Construction Projects

    How Retro-Commissioning Can Extend the Life of a Building—and the Planet

    Smart Cities Offer New Ideas for Connectivity

    Commonwealth Court Strikes Blow to Philly Window and Door Ordinance

    Delaware Supreme Court Allows Shareholders Access to Corporation’s Attorney-Client Privileged Documents

    Definitions Matter in Illinois: Tenant Held Liable Only for Damage to Apartment Unit

    Lucky No. 7: Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Issues Pro-Policyholder Decision Regarding Additional Insured Coverage for Upstream Parties

    Time is of the Essence, Even When the Contract Doesn’t Say So
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    White and Williams Selected in the 2024 Best Law Firms ranked by Best Lawyers®

    December 04, 2023 —
    White and Williams LLP is proud to be selected in the 2024 Best Law Firms ranked by Best Lawyers®. The firm was recognized in the National Rankings in four practice areas including both Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights/Insolvency and Reorganization Law and Insurance Law (Tier 1). In addition, the firm’s office locations in Philadelphia, New York City, Boston, Baltimore, Delaware and New Jersey were recognized for 30 practice areas in the Metropolitan rankings. Achieving a tiered ranking in Best Law Firms signals a unique combination of quality law practice and breadth of legal expertise. The Best Law Firms research methodology includes the collection of client and lawyer evaluations, peer review from leading attorneys in their field and review of additional information provided by law firms as part of the formal submission process. The 2024 Best Law Firms rankings can be accessed at www.bestlawfirms.com. 2024 Best Law Firms
      National Tier 1
    • Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law
    • Insurance Law
      National Tier 3
    • Construction Law
    • Litigation – Construction
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    Ninth Circuit Resolves Federal-State Court Split Regarding Whether 'Latent' Defects Discovered After Duration of Warranty Period are Actionable under California's Lemon Law Statute

    December 17, 2015 —
    In Daniel v. Ford Motor Company (filed 12/02/15), the Ninth Circuit resolved a federal and state court split on the issue of whether consumers can sustain a breach of implied warranty claim under California’s Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (aka the “lemon law” statute) for “latent” defects discovered after the warranty period has expired. Answering this question in the affirmative, the Ninth Circuit followed the holding in the California state appellate decision of Mexia v. Rinker Boat Co. 95 Cal.Rptr.3d 285 (2009), which definitively determined there is nothing in California’s lemon law that requires a consumer to discover a latent defect during the duration of the warranty. The underlying class action lawsuit was brought in federal district court by purchasers of Ford Focus vehicles. The plaintiffs alleged Ford was aware of, but failed to disclose, a rear suspension defect in the Focus that resulted in premature tire wear which can cause decreased vehicle control, catastrophic tire failure and drifting on wet or snowy roads. The plaintiffs alleged a number of claims including violations of California’s Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and Magnuson Moss Warranty Act. Ford successfully moved for summary judgment on all claims prompting an appeal. Reprinted courtesy of Laura C. Williams, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Williams may be contacted at lwilliams@hbblaw.com Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Following Pennsylvania Trend, Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Construction Defect

    December 08, 2016 —
    Bound by Pennsylvania law, the federal district court found there was no coverage for defects in the installation of a roof. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Kim's Asia Constr., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138915 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 5, 2016). Kim's Asia Construction contracted to remove and dispose of Powerline Imports, Inc.'s roof, and then install a new roof. After completion of the project, Powerline sued, alleging that Kim's Asia's negligent construction of the roof caused the roof to leak, even in minor rain storms. Kim's Asia made additional repairs, but the leaks continued. Powerline had to hire a new contractor to remove and dispose of the roof and install another roof. Powerline then sued Kim's Asia. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Colorado Court of Appeals Confirms Senior Living Communities as “Residential Properties” for Purposes of the Homeowner Protection Act

    November 06, 2023 —
    The Third Division of the Colorado Court of Appeals recently interpreted the Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 (the “HPA”) in Heights Healthcare v. BCER, 2023 COA 44, decided on May 25, 2023. The Court held that a senior living community that is located on a parcel zoned “commercial” or “mixed use” constitutes “residential property” that is protected by the HPA, regardless of the zoning designation. The claims in Heights Healthcare arose from a contract between BCER and Heights Healthcare for BCER to provide mechanical and electrical services relating to the installation of Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner units at the senior living community. The contract between the parties included a limitation of liability clause, limiting BCER’s liability to a total of $22,500 for the total cost of services rendered. After the installation, Heights Healthcare discovered that the air conditioner units were malfunctioning, causing too few of the eighty-four units to run and tripping the breaker—shutting down the entire system—when the outdoor temperature dropped too low. Following the discovery of the malfunction, Heights Healthcare filed suit against BCER for breach of contract under the Construction Defect Action Reform Act (“CDARA”). 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

    James R. Lynch Appointed to the Washington State Capital Project Review Committee

    June 22, 2016 —
    James R. Lynch, one of the attorneys at the law firm of Ahlers & Cressman PLLC, has been appointed to the Washington State Capital Project Review Committee (PRC). Created by the legislature in 2007, the PRC is responsible for reviewing and approving all public projects in the State of Washington using the General Contractor/Construction Manager (GC/CM) and Design-Build (D-B) delivery methods of construction. The PRC also certifies certain qualified government bodies to use these methods more broadly. The PRC consists of key representatives of Washington public project owners, designers, general contractors, specialty/subcontractors, construction managers, construction trades labor, and minority/women businesses. James has been appointed to the PRC’s Private Sector seat for a three-year term. You may learn more about Ahlers & Cressman PLLC at www.ac-lawyers.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Vacation Rentals: Liability of the Owner for Injury Suffered by the Renter

    May 13, 2019 —
    With the explosion of the “private” rental business wherein residential property owners rent their house or condo on a short-term basis to third-parties, certain legal issues have arisen with regard to the duties owed by the property owner to the renter. A recent Virginia Supreme Court case, Haynes-Garrett v. Dunn, 818 S.E.2d 798 (Va. 2018), addressed that issue. In that case, the property owners owned a rental house in Virginia Beach. The property was not the owners’ main residence, but rather a vacation home that was sometimes used by the owners, but mostly used as a rental. The issue addressed by the court was whether – for the purpose of evaluating the owners’ duty of care to the renter – the relationship should be classified as a “landlord-tenant” relationship or an “innkeeper-guest” relationship. This classification was important because the duties of the owner to the renter were significantly different depending on the category. In the landlord-tenant arena, under Virginia law, the landlord has no duty to maintain the property in a safe condition because the property is deemed to be under the tenant’s exclusive control. (An exception being concealment or fraud by the landlord as to some defect in the premises that is known to the landlord but unknown to the tenant.) Assuming that exception does not apply, the tenant takes the premises in whatever condition they may be in, thus assuming all risk of personal injury from defects or dangerous conditions. 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

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (3/6/24) – Steep Drop in Commercial Real Estate Investment, Autonomous Robots Being Developed for Construction Projects, and Treasury Department Proposes Regulation for Real Estate Professionals

    April 08, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, major league sports franchises turn to real estate to increase their value, the Associated Builders and Contractors releases a guide on artificial intelligence, New York City helps landlords convert empty office space into housing, and more!
    • The Treasury Department proposed a regulation that would require real estate professionals to report information to the agency about all-cash sales of residential real estate to legal entities, trusts and shell companies. (Fatima Hussein, AP)
    • For decades, major league teams depended on ticket sales, concessions and TV deals to generate revenue, but team owners in recent years have turned to real estate development to bring in extra cash and drive up the values of their franchises. (Nathaniel Meyersohn, CNN)
    • The U.S. commercial real estate market saw a steep drop in investment last year, with the market plummeting by more than 50% to the lowest level since 2012 and CBRE noting a 91% year-over-year drop in direct real estate company investments. (Yuheng Zhan, Business Insider)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Colorado Supreme Court Rules that Developers Retain Perpetual Control over Construction Defect Covenants

    June 21, 2017 —
    The Colorado Supreme Court ruled today that developers can retain control over community covenants in perpetuity by recording a covenant that requires declarant consent to any amendments. Although the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (CCIOA) states that such controls should be void, the court nevertheless ruled that a declarant may veto amendments that alter the dispute resolution procedures for construction defect actions at any time. The case of Vallagio at Inverness Residential Condominium Ass’n v. Metropolitan Homes, Inc., __ P.3d __, 15CO508, arose when the community’s members discovered widespread construction defects. When the declarant developed the project, it had recorded a declaration of covenants that purported to waive the homeowners’ right to a jury trial and instead require that any construction defect disputes be resolved by a private arbitration panel. The declaration also prohibited the homeowners from recovering attorney fees and costs, and it limited the declarant’s liability for damages. Consistent with CCIOA, the declaration allowed the homeowners to amend their covenants by a 67% vote, but it recited that the declarant could veto any such amendment prior to the sale of the last unit to a homeowner. The covenants further stated that the declarant must consent to any amendment that altered the construction defect restrictions. Reprinted courtesy of Jesse Howard Witt, Acerbic Witt Mr. Witt may be contacted at www.witt.law Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of