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


    Contractor Gets Green Light to Fix Two Fractured Girders at Salesforce Transit Center

    SE 2050 Is In Quixotic Pursuit of Eliminating Embodied Carbon in Building Structures

    Trump’s Infrastructure Weak

    Georgia Appellate Court Supports County Claim Against Surety Company’s Failure to Pay

    Buffett’s $11 Million Beach House Is Still on the Market

    NY Estimating Consultant Settles $3.1M Government Project Fraud Case

    Quick Note: Do Your Homework When it Comes to Selecting Your Arbitrator

    Untangling Unique Legal Issues in Modern Modular Construction

    Contract Change #8: Direct Communications between Owners and Contractors (law note)

    SFAA Commends Congress for Maintaining Current Bonding Protection Levels in National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)

    Jury's Verdict for Loss Caused by Collapse Overturned

    Hawaii Federal District Court Rejects Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    Golden Gate Bridge's $76 Million Suicide Nets Near Approval

    California Restricts Principles of “General” Personal Jurisdiction

    Contractors Can No Longer Make Roof Repairs Following Their Own Inspections

    Estoppel Certificate? Estop and Check Your Lease

    Contractor Covered for Voluntary Remediation Efforts in Completed Homes

    Buy America/Buy American, a Primer For Contractors

    What ‘The Curse’ Gets Wrong About Passive House Architecture

    Housing Starts Plunge by the Most in Four Years

    The Insurance Coverage Debate on Construction Defects Continues

    Residential Mortgage Lenders and Servicers Beware of Changes to Rule 3002.1

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Allegations of Collapse Rejected

    There Was No Housing Bubble in 2008 and There Isn’t One Now

    Suspend the Work, but Don’t Get Fired

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    Sales of New Homes in U.S. Increased 5.4% in July to 507,000

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

    Court of Appeal: Privette Doctrine Does Not Apply to Landlord-Tenant Relationships

    Overview of New Mexico Construction Law

    Erdogan Vows to Punish Shoddy Builders Ahead of Crucial Election

    Kadeejah Kelly Named to The National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List

    Recommendations for Property Owners After A Hurricane: Submit a Claim

    NYC-N.J. Gateway Rail-Tunnel Work May Start in 2023

    Don’t Ignore the Dispute Resolution Provisions in Your Construction Contract

    In One of the First Civil Jury Trials to Proceed Live in Los Angeles Superior Court During Covid, Aneta Freeman Successfully Prevailed on Behalf of our Client and Obtained a Directed Verdict and Non-Suit

    Construction on the Rise in Washington Town

    Traub Lieberman Partners Lisa Rolle, Erin O’Dea, and Nicole Verzillo Win Motion for Summary Judgment in Favor of Property Owner

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2025 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Louisiana Supreme Court Holds Architect Has No Duty to Safeguard Third Parties Against Injury, Regardless of Knowledge of Dangerous Conditions on the Project

    Revisiting the CMO; Are We Overusing the Mediation Privilege?

    Lis Pendens – Recordation and Dissolution

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2023 Illinois Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Insurance Bad Faith Trials

    Tennessee Court of Appeals Holds Defendant Has the Burden of Offering Alternative Measure of Damages to Prove that Plaintiff’s Measure of Damages is Unreasonable

    As California Faces Mandatory Water Use Reductions How Will the Construction Industry be Impacted?

    Exploring Architects’ Perspectives on AI: A Survey of Fears and Hopes

    Does a Broker Forfeit His or Her Commission for Technical Non-Compliance with Department of Real Estate Statutory Requirements?

    Zero-Net Energy Homes Costly Everywhere but at the Electric Meter

    Georgia State and Local Governments Receive Expanded Authority for Conservation Projects
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    New 2021 ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey Standards Effective February 23, 2021

    March 01, 2021 —
    The “Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surveys” is a document jointly promulgated by the American Land Title Association (ALTA), representing the title insurance industry, and the National Society of Professional Surveyors (NSPS), representing professional land surveyors, which describes the uniform minimum standards with which surveyors must comply when preparing a survey to be used by a title insurance company for the purpose of deleting the general survey exception from ALTA title policy forms. The first such set of standards was developed in 1962 and has since been revised 10 times. The standards are currently updated every five years and are relied on by real estate professionals, including purchasers, lenders, title insurers and their attorneys, nationwide. In October 2020, a joint committee comprising representatives of both ALTA and NSPS adopted the “2021 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surveys,” which will become effective on February 23, 2021. The significant changes between the 2021 standards and the previous 2016 standards are summarized below. Survey Matters The 2021 standards clarify that only survey-related matters must be summarized on the survey. This revision was intended to foreclose a practice common among some institutional lenders to require that the survey list all items shown in Schedule BII of the title commitment on the face of the survey regardless of whether those items may in fact be survey related. The 2021 standards also add a requirement that the surveyor include a note specifying whether the location of a right of way, easement or other survey-related matter is shown on the survey. This change incorporates common lender and purchaser requirements that were not previously enumerated in the survey standards. Reprinted courtesy of Emily K. Bias, Pillsbury and Josh D. Morton, Pillsbury Ms. Bias may be contacted at emily.bias@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Morton may be contacted at josh.morton@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Code Changes Pave Way for CLT in Tall Buildings and Spark Flammability Debate

    May 13, 2019 —
    Although nothing new, the debate over which is better as a building material—wood or concrete—intensified in December following the preliminary approval of new codes for cross-laminated timber and mass timber in tall structures. The discussion among industry professionals has been less about CLT’s structural capabilities and more about its perceived flammability, with either side offering decidedly different perspectives. Comparatively new to the United States, CLT and mass timber products are constructed of several layers of pressed lumber board stacked in alternating directions. In December, the International Code Council released the unofficial voting results on several code change proposals, including passage of the entire package of 14 tall mass timber codes. The proposals were presented by the ICC’s Ad Hoc Committee on Tall Wood Buildings, comprised mostly of engineers, architects, building and fire code officials, fire service, materials and testing lab representatives. Reprinted courtesy of Sam Barnes, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ninth Circuit Finds Policy’s Definition of “Policy Period” Fatal to Insurer’s “Related Claims” Argument

    April 10, 2019 —
    Professional liability policies often include some form of a “related claims” or “related acts” provision stating that if more than one claim results from a single wrongful act, or a series of related wrongful acts, such claims will be treated as a single claim and deemed first made during the policy period in which the earliest claim was made. These provisions can have significant implications on the applicable policy and policy limits, retroactive date issues, and whether such claims were first made and reported during a particular policy period. Recently, the Ninth Circuit issued a stern reminder of how the particular policy language can effect, and in this case thwart, the intended scope of the carrier’s “related claims” provision. In Attorneys Ins. Mut. Risk Retention Grp., Inc. v. Liberty Surplus Ins. Corp., 2019 WL 643442 (9th Cir. Feb. 15, 2019), the Ninth Circuit construed a “related claims” provision included in two consecutive lawyers professional liability policies. During both the 2009–2010 and 2010–2011 insurance policy periods, attorney J. Wayne Allen (“Allen”) was insured through his employer by Liberty Surplus Insurance Corporation’s (“Liberty”) professional liability insurance. Third parties filed suit against Allen during the 2009–2010 policy period in a probate case, and a second, related civil suit during the 2010–2011 policy period. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason M. Taylor, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com

    Meet BWBO’s 2024 San Diego Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    April 29, 2024 —
    BWB&O is proud to announce San Diego Partner Johnpaul Salem, and Associates Christina Matian and Angelo Perillo have been selected in the 2024 San Diego Super Lawyers list as Rising Stars for their work in Civil and Personal Injury Litigation. To read Super Lawyers’ digital publication, please click here. SELECTED AS RISING STARS Johnpaul Salem: 2023-2024 Christina Matian: 2024 Angelo Perillo: 2024 Super Lawyers is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The objective of Super Lawyers’ patented multiphase selection process is to create a credible, comprehensive, and diverse listing of outstanding attorneys that can be used as a resource for attorneys and consumers searching for legal counsel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Arizona Supreme Court Confirms Eight-Year Limit on Construction Defect Lawsuits

    July 18, 2011 —

    Acting on the case of Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. Partnership, the Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that Arizona’s eight-year statute of repose applies. The case was referred to the court by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which had asked for a clarification of Arizona law. The case focused on three questions:

    1. Does the filing of a motion for class certification in an Arizona court toll the statute of limitations for individuals, who are included within the class, to file individual causes of action involving the same defendants and the same subject matter? 2. If so, does this class-action tolling doctrine apply to statutes of repose, and more specifically, to the statute of repose for construction defects set forth in Arizona Revised Statutes ("A.R.S.") § 12-552? 3. If the doctrine applies to statutes of repose, and specifically § 12-552, may a court weigh the equities of the case in determining whether, and to what extent, an action is tolled?

    The litigation at hand has a lengthy history, starting with a case referred to as “Hoffman” in 2003. The Albano plaintiffs were not able to join in Hoffman, and they filed their own lawsuit in 2006. An additional lawsuit was filed by the Albano plaintiffs in 2007. The courts decided that the Albano plaintiffs’ lawsuit was untimely.

    The Arizona Supreme Court concluded that the statute of repose was the appropriate standard for this case. They noted that “the eight-year statute of repose period began to run on November 6, 1997, the date of the Town of Gilbert’s final inspection. Albano II was filed on November 5, 2007.”

    The court found that the plaintiffs had waited too long for start their suit. As a result, they found it unnecessary to answer the first or third questions. Justice A. John Pelander of the Arizona Supreme Court wrote the opinion, dated June 30, 2011.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Rescission of Policy for Misrepresentation in Application Reversed

    August 17, 2017 —
    The California Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's issuance of summary judgment to the insurer, finding that the insured did not make misrepresentations when applying for a policy to cover rental property. Duarte v. Pacific Spec. Ins. Co., 13 Cal. App. 5th 45 (2017). Duarte rented his house to Jennifer Pleasants. Duarte gave her a 45-day notice to quit in February 2012, but she did not leave. Two months later, Duarte applied for landlord-tenant coverage with Pacific. The application was submitted electronically and Pacific issued a policy to Durate the same day. In June 2012, Pleasants filed a lawsuit against Duarte, alleging ten causes of action arising from habitability defects which began in 2009. The suit claimed Pleasants had notified Duarte about the defects, she had suffered emotional distress and physical injury, and over paid rent, and had out-of-pocket expenses. 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

    Lakewood First City in Colorado to Pass Ordinance Limiting State Construction Defect Law

    October 15, 2014 —
    The Denver Post reported that the Lakewood City Council passed an ordinance “designed to soften the effects of Colorado's controversial construction-defects law.” Specifically, the ordinance “gives developers and builders a ‘right to repair’ defects before facing litigation and would require condominium association boards to get consent from a majority of homeowners — rather than just the majority of the board — before filing suit.” Not all residents are in favor of the ordinance. "It protects builders and big business at the expense of homeowners," Chad Otto, former president of the Grant Ranch homeowners association, told the crowd, as quoted by the Denver Post. "Does Lakewood want to be known as the mecca of poorly built condos?" Proponents of the measure, including Lakewood Mayor Bob Murphy, claim that “Colorado's defects law…has forced up insurance premiums on new condo projects to the point where they are no longer feasible to build.” Furthermore, according to the Denver Post, “Condos represented only 4.6 percent of total new home starts in metro Denver in the second quarter of 2014, versus more than 26 percent in 2008, according to Metrostudy.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ohio Does Not Permit Retroactive Application of Statute of Repose

    October 08, 2014 —
    Don Gregory of Kegler Brown Hill + Ritter (published in Association of Corporate Counsel) reported that while Ohio currently has a statute of repose, the Supreme Court of Ohio recently ruled in a case where the development was built in 1990 but the defects weren’t discovered until 2003 that the statute of repose did not apply since “Ohio had no enforceable statute of repose in 2003 (it had been declared unconstitutional).” Gregory stated that “[t]his case means that some construction defect claims, by condo associations or others, may survive even though construction was completed more than a decade ago.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of