BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractor
    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


    The National Building Museum’s A-Mazing Showpiece

    When is a “Willful” Violation Willful (or Not) Under California’s Contractor Enforcement Statutes?

    Public Projects in the Pandemic Pandemonium

    BWB&O ranks as a 2025 Best Law Firm by Best Lawyers®

    90 and 150: Two Numbers You Must Know

    Motion to Dismiss Insureds' Counterclaim on the Basis of Prior Knowledge Denied

    Top 10 Take-Aways: the ABA Forum's 2024 Mid-Winter Meeting

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2017

    9 Positive Housing Statistics by Builder

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Partner John Van Vlear Named to Board Of Groundwater Resources Association Of California

    The Future of High-Rise is Localized and Responsive

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Tightens Requirements for Co-Worker Affidavits in Asbestos Cases

    Rio de Janeiro's Bursting Real-Estate Bubble

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

    Homeowner Who Wins Case Against Swimming Pool Contractor Gets a Splash of Cold Water When it Comes to Attorneys’ Fees

    Hollywood Legend Betty Grable’s Former Home for Sale

    Improper Classification Under Davis Bacon Can Be Costly

    The Private Works: Preliminary Notice | Are You Using the Correct Form?

    Real Protection for Real Estate Assets: Court Ruling Reinforces Importance of D&O Insurance

    FAA Seeks Largest Fine Yet on Drones in Near-Miss Crackdown

    Excess Carrier's Declaratory Judgment Action Stayed While Underlying Case Still Pending

    Arizona Supreme Court Confirms a Prevailing Homeowner Can Recover Fees on Implied Warranty Claims

    Retainage on Pennsylvania Public Contracts

    Drafting the Bond Form, Particularly Performance Bond Form

    Coronavirus Is Starting to Slow the Solar Energy Revolution

    Consumer Protections for California Residential Solar Energy Systems

    Insurer’s Consent Not Needed for Settlement

    New Jersey Appeals Court Ruled Suits Stand Despite HOA Bypassing Bylaw

    Additional Insured Coverage Confirmed

    Colorado House Bill 19-1170: Undefined Levels of Mold or Dampness Can Make a Leased Residential Premises Uninhabitable

    Corps, State Agencies Prep for Flood Risks From California Snowmelt Runoff

    State Farm to Build Multi-Use Complex in Dallas Area

    Contractor Given a Wake-Up Call for Using a "Sham" RMO/RME

    Brookfield Wins Disputed Bid to Manage Manhattan Marina

    Summary Judgment for Insurer Reversed Based on Expert Opinion

    Texas Supreme Court to Review Eight-Corners Duty-to-Defend Rule

    Arguing Cardinal Change is Different than Proving Cardinal Change

    Landlords, Brace Yourselves: New Law Now Limits Your Rental Increases & Terminations

    Home Building Mergers and Acquisitions 2014 Predictions

    Building Supplier Sued for Late and Defective Building Materials

    Funding the Self-Insured Retention (SIR)

    Coverage Established for Property Damage Caused by Added Product

    Ordinary Use of Term In Insurance Policy Prevailed

    Meet Your Future Team Members: AI Agents

    Public Housing Takes Priority in Biden Spending Bill

    Incorporate Sustainability in Building Design to Meet Green Construction Goals

    White House Reverses Trump Administration NEPA Cutbacks

    Colorado Senate Revives Construction Defects Reform Bill

    Flint Water Crisis Prompts Call for More Federal Oversight

    Falling Crime Rates Make Dangerous Neighborhoods Safe for Bidding Wars
    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

    Congratulations to San Diego Partner Johnpaul Salem and Senior Associate Scott Hoy for Obtaining a Complete Defense Verdict!

    November 13, 2023 —
    Partner Johnpaul Salem and Senior Associate Scott Hoy just concluded a 4-week trial defending a local renowned hotel in San Diego. Plaintiff alleged premises liability against BWB&O’s client arguing plaintiff was injured while riding in an elevator due to alleged negligent maintenance and inspection. Plaintiff brought in a “hired gun” elevator expert from Missouri and sought $25 million in damages for two fractured ankles, a compound tibia fracture, and lifelong CRPS/PTDS/anxiety. BWB&O argued any injuries sustained were a direct result of Plaintiff’s actions. After a passionate and powerful closing argument by Mr. Salem, attacking the foundation of Plaintiff’s expert’s opinions and presenting vigilance of the hotel in the safety of its guests, the jury unanimously ruled in BWB&O’s client’s favor. Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Chambers USA 2019 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    June 03, 2019 —
    Chambers USA once again recognized White and Williams as a leading law firm in Pennsylvania for achievements and client service in the area of insurance law. In addition, three lawyers received individual honors - one for her work in insurance, one for his work in commercial litigation and another for his work in banking and finance. White and Williams is acknowledged for its renowned practice offering expert representation to insurers and reinsurers across an impressive range of areas including coverage, bad faith litigation and excess liability. The firm is recognized for its notable strength in transactional and regulatory matters complemented by its adroit handling of complex alternative dispute resolutions. Chambers also acknowledged the firm's broad trial capabilities, including handling data privacy, professional liability and toxic tort coverage claims, and experience in substantial claims arising from bodily injury and wrongful death suits. White and Williams' individual lawyer honorees include Managing Partner Patti Santelle, who is named an Eminent Practitioner in the area of insurance. Patti's considerable experience advising insurers on a broad range of coverage matters, including asbestos, environmental and toxic tort cases, coupled with her proficiency in coverage actions at the state and federal level earn her a well-regarded reputation as an "excellent lawyer." Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys David Marion, Patricia Santelle and Maulin Vidwans Mr. Marion may be contacted at mariond@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Santelle may be contacted at santellep@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Vidwans may be contacted at vidwansm@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Detroit Craftsmen Sift House Rubble in Quest for Treasured Wood

    March 19, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- Detroit’s 70,000 abandoned homes are proving to be a trove for entrepreneurs who recycle century-old lumber, glass and brick into everything from terrariums to $4,500 guitars. “It’s like a treasure hunt,” said Craig Varterian, executive director of Reclaim Detroit, a nonprofit group that’s stripped and sold materials from almost 70 demolished homes. Floorboards and joists of early 20th century maple, walnut, hickory, fir and even chestnut are prized for their density and fine grain. As Detroit ramps up demolitions of vacant dwellings, Mayor Mike Duggan plans a reclamation center in a city-owned building to keep tons of rubble out of landfills and create jobs and merchandise. Recycling would become a centerpiece of the city’s blight-removal effort, which is struggling to maintain funding. Reprinted courtesy of Chris Christoff, Bloomberg and Alexandra Mondalek, Bloomberg Mr. Christoff may be contacted at cchristoff@bloomberg.net Ms. Mondalek may be contacted at amondalek@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Beth Cook Expands Insurance Litigation Team at Payne & Fears

    September 30, 2024 —
    Beth Cook has joined Payne & Fears LLP as Counsel in the firm’s Insurance Litigation Group. With 18 years of legal experience, Beth brings a wealth of knowledge to her practice, focusing on insurance coverage and litigation. “We are excited to welcome Beth to P&F! She brings a great deal of experience to our Insurance Litigation Group as we continue to grow the practice group,” said Sarah Odia, the group’s co-chair. “We look forward to working with Beth and welcome her fresh perspectives.” Get to Know Beth What activities do you enjoy outside of work? Travel, sporting events, movies, craft breweries, and wineries. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Beth A. Cook, Payne & Fears
    Ms. Cook may be contacted at bac@paynefears.com

    “A No-Lose Proposition?”

    October 07, 2024 —
    A Miller Act payment bond surety and its principal general contractor both sued in federal court in New Orleans by a project subcontractor sought to compel arbitration the claims against both contractor and surety based on an indisputably enforceable arbitration clause in the subcontract. This was urged to avoid separate actions against the contractor (arbitration) and its surety (litigation), even though the surety was not a party to the subcontract and, therefore, not a party to the arbitration clause. In the face of the lack of an express agreement to arbitrate, the contractor and contractor argued that “no federal statute or policy prohibits all of Plaintiff’s claims from proceeding to arbitration….” Additionally, those parties urged that the surety should be allowed to affirmatively compel arbitration because the surety “would otherwise have the ability to assert the right to compel arbitration as a defense….” The New Orleans federal district court was unpersuaded:
    “[D]istrict courts within this circuit have recognized that ‘Miller Act claims by a subcontractor for unpaid labor and materials are separate and distinct from those for general breach of contract… [and] arbitration and Miller Act suits, are not, per se, inconsistent with one another.’…[A]bsent express contractual intent to subject Miller Act claims to arbitration, the court [will] not force the parties to arbitrate claims against nonparties to the contract at issue…. [C]laims against a surety, which was a non-signatory to the contract, would not be subject to arbitration without any contractual basis to do so.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Agree First or it May Cost You Later

    May 08, 2023 —
    Business relationships often begin before parties execute a written agreement containing the terms and conditions by which the relationship will be governed. With little more than a Letter of Intent (“LOI”) or Letter of Award (“LOA”) one party is typically pressured to begin investing time and money to start preliminary work on a project. If such LOI or LOA contains nothing more than an agreement to agree later, the performing party should minimize its investment until the later agreement is executed. A recent court decision in New York confirmed the danger to the performing party under “agreement to agree” provisions. In Permasteelia North America Corp. v. JDS Const. Group, LLC, 2022 WL 2954131 (N.Y. Sup. CT. 7/22/22), the plaintiff subcontractor allegedly performed $1.9 million worth of preliminary work under nothing more than a LOA with an agreement to agree provision. Issues arose, and the parties never entered any later written agreement. The general contractor refused to pay the plaintiff anything for its preliminary work. In response, the plaintiff filed suit against the general contractor asserting four counts: foreclosure of its lien, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and account stated. All four counts were based on an alleged oral “handshake deal” for subcontract work for the project. The general contractor’s LOA stated that neither party would be bound “unless and until the parties actually execute a subcontract.” During discovery, the plaintiff admitted that neither party intended to enter into any contract until its potential terms were negotiated, reduced to writing, and signed. Moreover, the plaintiff only offered one set of meeting minutes and a few project agendas to support its alleged “handshake deal.” Once these necessary undisputed facts were confirmed, the defendant moved for summary judgment on all four counts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bill Wilson, Robinson & Cole LLP
    Mr. Wilson may be contacted at wwilson@rc.com

    Columbus, Ohio’s Tallest Building to be Inspected for Construction Defects

    July 16, 2014 —
    Fox 28 news reported that “[t]he state of Ohio is going to spend more than $166,000 to inspect…the 40-year-old Rhodes Tower” in Columbus. "They're going to look at the exterior of the building - [at] sealants between the joints, the condition of the panels, the window systems, how they're draining, how they're operating, and how they're sealed," Ned Thiell, of Ohio Facilities Construction Commission, told ABC 6/FOX 28 news. A study completed last year declared there were “’deficiencies’ on the building’s stone covering” and there were “panels with severe fracture defects” that “will need to be replaced with new stone panels.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is Equipment Installed as Part of Building Renovations a “Product” or “Construction”?

    April 10, 2019 —
    A statute of repose terminates the right to file a claim after a specified time even if the injury has not yet occurred.[1] The construction statute of repose bars claims arising from construction, design, or engineering of any improvement upon real property that has not accrued within six years after substantial completion.[2] But what constitutes an “improvement upon real property” necessitating application of the six-year bar, and when does the bar NOT apply? The Washington Court of Appeals recently addressed these questions in Puente v. Resources Conservation Co., Int’l.[3] There, the personal representative of the estate of Javier Puente sued several parties after Mr. Puente, an employee of a manufacturer, suffered fatal boric acid burns in 2012 while performing maintenance on a pump system installed at the manufacturer’s facility in 2002. The estate alleged claims of negligence and liability under the Washington Product Liability Act (WPLA).[4] The trial court granted summary judgment to defendants, concluding that the installed pump system constituted a statutory “improvement upon real property” and the six-year statute of repose applied. The estate appealed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joshua Lane, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Lane may be contacted at joshua.lane@acslawyers.com