BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing 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


    NY Appellate Court Holds Common Interest Privilege Applies to Parties to a Merger

    Gordie Howe Bridge Project Team Looks for a Third Period Comeback

    Is The Enforceability Of A No-Damage-For-Delay Provision Inappropriate For Summary Judgment

    ASCE Statement on EPA Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan

    Safety Data: Noon Presents the Hour of Greatest Danger

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Super Lawyers

    Eleventh Circuit Reverses Attorneys’ Fee Award to Performance Bond Sureties in Dispute with Contractor arising from Claim against Subcontractor Performance Bond

    Late Filing Contractor Barred from Involving Subcontractors in Construction Defect Claim

    Construction Defect Bill Removed from Committee Calendar

    Kahana Feld Partner Noelle Natoli Named President of Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles

    Long-Planned Miami Mega Mixed-Use Development Nears Initial Debut

    School District Settles Over Defective Athletic Field

    Will The New U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Deal Calm Industry Jitters?

    New Tariffs Could Shorten Construction Expansion Cycle

    Construction Problems May Delay Bay Bridge

    Ordinary Use of Term In Insurance Policy Prevailed

    Indemnity: What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You!

    U.S. Homebuilder Confidence Rises Most in Almost a Year

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

    Texas Court Requires Insurer to Defend GC Despite Breach of Contract Exclusion

    Facts about Chinese Drywall in Construction

    Rihanna Gained an Edge in Construction Defect Case

    Constructive Suspension (Suspension Outside of an Express Order)

    Super Lawyers Selects Haight’s Melvin Marcia for Its 2023 Northern California Rising Stars List

    Understanding Indiana’s New Home Construction Warranty Act

    Home Building Mergers and Acquisitions 2014 Predictions

    Contractors: Revisit your Force Majeure Provisions to Account for Hurricanes

    No Collapse Coverage Where Policy's Collapse Provisions Deleted

    Heathrow Tempts Runway Opponents With $1,200 Christmas Sweetener

    Condo Developers Buy in Washington despite Construction Defect Litigation

    Panthers Withdraw City, County Deal Over Abandoned Facility

    Julie Firestone & Francois Ecclesiaste Recognized as 2023 MSBA North Star Lawyers

    Be Careful When Walking Off of a Construction Project

    Ohio subcontractor work exception to the “your work” exclusion

    Eleventh Circuit Finds Professional Services Exclusion Applies to Construction Management Activities

    Insurance Company Prevails in “Chinese Drywall” Case

    Three Steps to a Safer Jobsite

    Over 70 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 4th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    Performance Bonds: Follow the Letter of the Bond and Keep The Surety Informed

    Digitalizing Cross-Laminated Timber Construction

    New Jersey Federal Court Examines And Applies The “j.(5)” Ongoing Operations Exclusion

    Connecticut Supreme Court Further Refines Meaning of "Collapse"

    Pile Test Likely for Settling Millennium Tower

    Contractor Sentenced to 7 Years for “Hail Damage” Fraud

    A Discussion on Home Affordability

    City Covered From Lawsuits Filed After Hurricane-Damaged Dwellings Demolished

    Los Angeles Considering Census of Seismically Unstable Buildings

    South Adams County Water and Sanitation District Takes Proactive Step to Treat PFAS, Safeguard Water Supplies

    Residential Construction Rise Expected to Continue

    Why Employees Are Taking Ownership of Their Architecture Firms
    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

    Responding to Ransomware Learning from Colonial Pipeline

    June 07, 2021 —
    Recently, ransomware has taken to the forefront in national news. The most prevalent ransomware attack, the one perpetrated against Colonial Pipeline by the now-defunct "Dark Side" hackers, has served to remind businesses about the risks of ransomware. What happened to Colonial Pipeline? What should businesses do to learn from Colonial Pipeline's response? What should a business avoid? What happened to Colonial Pipeline? Colonial Pipeline, a Georgia based operator of fuel pipelines, had its billing software compromised by Dark Side's ransomware attack.1 Following this, Colonial Pipeline took proactive measures to (1) shut down their systems; (2) evaluate the issue; and (3) safely brought systems back on line after ensuring that they were not compromised. Following this, Colonial Pipeline did eventually pay the 4.4 million dollar ransom demand from Dark Side. What it got in return was a decryption key, as promised, which ended up being slower than Colonial Pipeline's own backups.2 The ultimate result of this event being an initial cost of $4.4 million, in addition to lost profits, additional security costs, reputational costs, and litigation costs as consumers had filed a class-action lawsuit to hold Colonial Pipeline accountable for their perceived lapse in security.3 Further, the fall-out from Colonial Pipeline had prompted additional cybersecurity efforts and changes by the Biden administration, including proposed regulations requiring pipeline companies to inform the Department of Homeland Security of cybersecurity incidents within 12 hours, in addition to keeping a cybersecurity coordinator on staff at all times, and reviews of current security measures. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of J. Kyle Janecek, Newmeyer Dillion
    Mr. Janecek may be contacted at kyle.janecek@ndlf.com

    Property Owner Entitled to Rely on Zoning Administrator Advice

    May 16, 2018 —
    In the recent case of In Re Langlois/Novicki Variance Denial, 175 A.3d 1222, 2017 VT 76 (2017), the Vermont court addressed the question of whether a property owner could enforce – by equitable estoppel principles – a representation by a town zoning administrator that no permit or variance was needed for the property owner’s proposed construction. In that case, a landowner wanted to add a pergola to an existing concrete patio on his land. During a social visit at the property, the property owner asked the town zoning administrator if he needed a permit. The town zoning administrator told the property owner that no permit was needed. The property owner thereafter showed the zoning administrator a sketch of the planned construction, and again asked if a permit was required. The town zoning administrator looked at the sketch and repeated his prior advice that no permit was needed. The property owner then spent $33,000 to build the pergola. After incurring the expense, the property owner was advised that the structure violated zoning regulations. The property owner requested a variance, which the zoning board denied. The Court held that the town was estopped from requiring removal of the pergola. 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

    U.S. Homeownership Rate Falls to Lowest Since Early 1995

    October 29, 2014 —
    The homeownership rate in the U.S. fell to the lowest in more than 19 years as the market shifted toward renting and tight credit blocked some potential buyers. The share of Americans who own their homes was 64.4 percent in the third quarter, down from 64.7 percent in the previous three months, the Census Bureau said in a report today. The rate was at the lowest level since the first quarter of 1995. Entry-level buyers have been held back by stringent mortgage standards and slow wage growth. The share of first-time buyers was 29 percent in September for the third straight month, compared with about 40 percent historically, according to the National Association of Realtors said. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Prashant Gopal, Bloomberg
    Mr. Gopal may be contacted at pgopal2@bloomberg.net

    Iowa Court Holds Defective Work Performed by Insured's Subcontractor Constitutes an "Occurrence"

    July 28, 2016 —
    The Iowa Supreme Court held that property damage caused by a subcontractor's defective work was an "occurrence." Nat'l Sur. Corp. v. Westlake Invs., LLC, 2016 Iowa LEXIS 71 (Iowa June 10, 2016). In 2002, the insureds, the developers and general contractor, began construction on an apartment complex. While the complex was still under construction, it was purchased by Westlake Investments, LLC. During construction, numerous problems surfaced, including visible water penetration issues in several buildings. In February 2008, Westlake sued the insureds, seeking to recover lost profits, repair costs, and other damages under tort and contract theories. Arch Insurance Group defended under the primary policy. A settlement was eventually reached whereby a consent judgment for $15,600,000 was entered against the insureds and in favor of Westlake. Arch contributed its policy limits of $1,000,000 to the settlement. Other third party defendants contributed $1,737,500, leaving $12,762,500 of the judgment unsatisfied. The insureds assigned rights under their excess policy with National Surety Corporation (NSC) to Westlake. NSC's policy was a following-form policy. 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

    ARUP, Rethinking Green Infrastructure

    April 08, 2014 —
    ARUP claims to have rethought green infrastructure, according to their website. Their Cities Alive project “shows how the creation of a linked ‘city ecosystem’ that encompasses parks and open spaces; urban trees, streets, squares; woodland and waterways can help create healthier, safer and more prosperous cities.” “[G]reen is the new gold,” Garrett Marai said on his California Construction Law blog post that discussed the Cities Alive project. “As well as LEED bronze, silver and platinum.” ARUP is “an independent firm of designers, planners, engineers, consultants and technical specialists.” Read the full story, ARUP Cities Alive... Read the full story, CA Construction Law Blog... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Two Recent Cases Address Copyright Protection for Architectural Works

    January 16, 2024 —
    Recent decisions by the Seventh Circuit and the Eight Circuit have addressed the scope of protection afforded to architectural works under copyright law. The Seventh Circuit case of Design Basics, LLC v. Signature Constr., Inc., 994 F.3d 879 (7th Cir. 2021), took a somewhat narrow view of the copyright protection afforded to the design of an “affordable, multipurpose, suburban, single-family home.” In Designworks Homes, Inc. v. Columbia House of Brokers Realty, Inc., 9 F.4th 803 (8th Cir. 2021), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 2888, 213 L. Ed. 2d 1103 (2022) the Eight Circuit held that the publication of floor plans of a house in a real estate listing was not protected from claims of copyright infringement. Design Basics, LLC v. Signature Constr., Inc., involved a plaintiff that the court described as holding registered copyrights in thousands of floor plans for suburban, single-family homes that are basic schematic designs, largely conceptual in nature, and depict layouts for one- and two-story single-family homes that include the typical rooms: a kitchen, a dining area, a great room, a few bedrooms, bathrooms, a laundry area, a garage, stairs, assorted closets, etc. The court described the plaintiff as a “copyright troll” and noted that litigation proceeds had become the principal revenue stream for the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued a contractor and related businesses contending hat the defendants had infringed plaintiff’s copyrighted floor plans. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stu Richeson, Phelps
    Mr. Richeson may be contacted at stuart.richeson@phelps.com

    Underpowered AC Not a Construction Defect

    November 07, 2012 —
    After buying a home in Louisiana, Mike Gines determined that the home’s air conditioning unit was insufficient to maintain an appropriate temperature. He contacted the home builder, D.R. Horton, Inc., which worked with the air conditioning installer, Reliant Heating & Air Conditioning, in order to repair the system. When the problems persisted, Gines filed a class action petition against Horton and Reliant in state court. Horton and Reliant moved the case to the federal courts, whereupon Gines asserted the defendants were in violation of the Louisiana New Home Warranty Act (NHWA). Horton stated that the claim under the NHWA was invalid, because Gines had not alleged actual physical damage to his home. The district court granted Horton’s motion to dismiss. Gines sought a reversal from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and sought to have two questions of state law addressed by the Louisiana Supreme Court. The district court ruled that the NHWA was the “sole remedy under Louisiana law for a purchaser of a new home with construction defects. Gines argued that court erred in this, but also conceded that this was the conclusion of the Louisiana Supreme Court. Further, Gines argued that a provision in the NHWA that allows the inclusion of construction defects that do not cause damage was satisfied by paragraph 6 of the contract. The court noted that Gines did not attach a copy of the contract to either the original or amended complaint, and so the court does not need to address these claims. However, the court cautioned that if a copy had been included, they still would have rejected the claim, as “the cited language does not indicate a waiver of the physical damage requirement.” They also note that “paragraph 13 of the contract shows that Gines was aware to the absence of any such waiver in the contract.” The court concludes that “the moral of this story is that in order to avoid the harsh result that has obtained here, the buyer of a newly constructed home in Louisiana should seek to obtain in the contract of sale an express waiver of the actual damage requirement of the NHWA.” The appeals court affirmed the decision of the circuit court and denied the application to certify questions to the Louisiana Supreme Court. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Gru Was Wrong About the Money: Court Concludes that Lender Owes Contractor “Contractually, Factually and Practically”

    November 07, 2022 —
    This weekend was all about The Rise of Gru. I love Gru so much that when my children ask for money, my best Gru-like voice belts back: “Now, I know there have been some rumors going around that the bank is no longer funding us….In terms of money, we have no money.” And that’s precisely what many lenders say on distressed projects when the owner fails to make final payment and the contractor looks to the bank for funding: “We have no money for you contractor!” In BCD Associates., LLC v. Crown Bank, CA No. N15c-11-062 (Super. Ct. Del, May 2, 2022), the trial court found that when a bank pays a contractor directly, it can create a legally binding relationship subject to the terms of the construction loan agreements with the owner. The project involved a $13m construction loan between the lender and the owner to renovate a hotel. The owner and contractor entered into an AIA Contract for the construction management services. During construction the contractor would submit payment applications to the lender, who would review and approve the invoices for payment. The lender then would pay 90% of the approved payment application and hold back the remaining 10% as retainage. The contractor was supposed to be paid the final retainage upon completion, which it did not receive in accordance with the terms of the AIA Contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Matthew DeVries, Burr & Forman LLP
    Mr. DeVries may be contacted at mdevries@burr.com