BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing 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


    Affirmed: Insureds Bear the Burden of Allocating Covered Versus Uncovered Losses

    ASCE Statement on House Failure to Pass the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    Antitrust Walker Process Claims Not Covered Under Personal Injury Coverage for Malicious Prosecution

    Federal Court Enforces “Limits” and “Most We Will Pay” Clauses in Additional Insured Endorsement

    President Trump’s “Buy American, Hire American” Executive Order and the Construction Industry

    Colorado Passes Compromise Bill on Construction Defects

    Surfside Condo Collapse Investigators Uncover More Pool Deck Deviations

    Cybersecurity “Flash” Warning for Construction and Manufacturing Businesses

    Seattle Expands Bridge Bioswale Projects

    Policy Reformed to Add New Building Owner as Additional Insured

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2023 Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    Default Should Never Be An Option

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Miller Act and “Public Work of the Federal Government”

    Second Circuit Finds Potential Ambiguity in Competing “Anti-Concurrent Cause” Provisions in Hurricane Sandy Property Loss

    Five Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers in America© 2021

    Oregon Court of Appeals Rules That Negligent Construction (Construction Defect) Claims Are Subject to a Two-Year Statute of Limitations

    CGL Coverage for Liquidated Damages and the Contractual Liability Exclusion

    Denial of Coverage For Bodily Injury After Policy Period Does Not Violate Public Policy

    Teaching An Old Dog New Tricks: The Spearin Doctrine and Design-Build Projects

    Hanover, Germany Apple Store Delayed by Construction Defects

    Eleven Payne & Fears Attorneys Honored by Best Lawyers

    Real Estate Developer Convicted in $1.3 Billion Tax Case After Juror Removed

    Extreme Rainfall Is Becoming More Frequent and Deadly

    New Survey Reveals Present-Day Risks of Asbestos Exposure in America - 38% in High-Risk Jobs, 47% Vulnerable through Second-Hand Exposure

    Is Drone Aerial Photography Really Best for Your Construction Projects?

    Fine Art Losses – “Canvas” the Subrogation Landscape

    City Drops Impact Fees to Encourage Commercial Development

    Scientists Are Trying to Make California Forests More Fire Resilient

    Former Sponsor of the Lenox Facing Suit in Supreme Court

    Insurer's Late Notice Defense Fails on Summary Judgment

    Additional Insured Status Survives Summary Judgment Stage

    Challenging Enforceability of Liquidated Damages (In Federal Construction Context)

    Insurance Policy Provides No Coverage For Slab Collapse in Vision One

    Construction Defect Journal Marks First Anniversary

    Maria Latest Threat to Puerto Rico After $1 Billion Irma Hit

    Treasure Island Sues Beach Trail Designer over Concrete Defects

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “A Close Call?”

    Following My Own Advice

    Want More Transit (and Federal Funding)? Build Housing That Supports It

    First Railroad Bridge Between Russia and China Set to Open

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

    Gilbane Project Exec Completes His Mission Against the Odds

    You're Doing Construction in Russia, Now What?

    Measures Landlords and Property Managers Can Take in Response to a Reported COVID-19 Infection

    HOA Foreclosure Excess Sale Proceeds Go to Owner

    California Bullet Train Clears Federal Environmental Approval

    An Era of Legends

    Caveat Emptor (“Buyer Beware!”) Exceptions

    Class Action Certification by Association for “Matters of Common Interest”
    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

    Appraisal May Include Cause of Loss Issues

    March 21, 2022 —
    The federal district court determined that an appraisal can include causation issues when determining the amount of loss. B&D Inv. Grp., LLC v. Mid-Century Ins. Co., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 246853 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 28, 2021). B&D commercial building was damaged by hail. B&D submitted a claim to Mid-Century, but the parties disagreed as to the damage. Mid-Century found there was hail damage to metal vents on the roof and estimated the repair costs to be $4,271.95. Mid-Century found no hail damage to the roof itself. B&D disagreed and insisted that there was additional damage to the property, specifically the roof. B&D requested an appraisal, but Mid-Century denied the request. Mid-Century found that the condition of the roof was due to wear and tear and therefore constituted an excluded cause under the policy. B&D filed suit seeking a declaratory judgment compelling the parties to proceed with an appraisal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Construction is the Fastest Growing Industry in California

    May 20, 2015 —
    We wrote earlier about why construction workers are the happiest employees on Earth, and pointed to one possible factor: That construction, which was one of the hardest hit industries during the 2008 real estate collapse, has since bounced back. This past month, the California Employment Development Department (“EDD”) released data putting some numbers to that hypothesis. And the result: According to the EDD, over the past 12 months, construction was the fastest growing industry in California, adding more than 46,000 jobs within the last year, an increase of 6.9% from 667,000 workers in March 2014 to 713,000 workers in March 2015. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.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

    New York Establishes a Registration Requirement for Contractors and Subcontractors Performing Public Works and Covered Private Projects

    January 17, 2023 —
    By December 30, 2023, contractors and subcontractors bidding on public contracts and performing work on covered private projects in New York must register with the NYS Department of Labor, Bureau of Public Works, pursuant to the newly enacted Labor Law Section 220-i. The DOL has until June 28, 2023 to establish regulations to carry out the new law. There will be an online system where registrations and disclosures are publicly available. The stated purpose of the law is to help enforce New York’s prevailing wage and other worker protection laws. The DOL will create an online system through which contractors and subcontractors will have to answer questions and submit documents about:
    • the business entity and its owners and officers
    • unemployment and workers’ compensation insurance
    • any outstanding wage assessments
    • debarment under New York or federal law, or any other state’s laws
    • final determinations of a violation of any labor laws, employment tax laws, or workplace safety standards (including OSHA)
    • association or signatory to an apprenticeship program
    If the DOL approves the submission, the contractor will receive a registration certificate that remains valid for two years. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher B. Kinzel, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., K. Greer Kuras, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Kinzel may be contacted at ckinzel@pecklaw.com Ms. Kuras may be contacted at gkuras@pecklaw.com Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Louis "Dutch" Schotemeyer Returns to Newmeyer Dillion as Partner in Newport Beach Office

    September 14, 2020 —
    Prominent business and real estate law firm Newmeyer Dillion is pleased to announce that Louis “Dutch” Schotemeyer has rejoined the firm as a partner in the Newport Beach office. Schotemeyer will expand the firm’s Real Estate Litigation, Construction Litigation, Business Litigation and Labor & Employment practices and strengthen the firm’s legal offerings for companies operating without a dedicated in-house legal counsel. “We are thrilled to be welcoming Dutch back to Newmeyer Dillion. He brings a wealth of litigation experience and has served as a trusted advisor to companies facing myriad complex legal disputes,” said the firm’s Managing Partner, Paul Tetzloff. “His experience as in-house counsel will greatly complement Newmeyer Dillion’s business-first mindset when it comes to providing legal counsel to our clients. He is an invaluable asset to the team.” Prior to rejoining Newmeyer Dillion, Schotemeyer was Vice President and Associate General Counsel for William Lyon Homes, Inc. and Vice President and Deputy General Counsel for Taylor Morrison. His experience as a corporate attorney has strengthened his ability to work with in-house counsel and serve as a relationship attorney that assists clients in managing legal needs by building the right team of legal specialists. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Louis "Dutch" Schotemeyer, Newmeyer Dillion
    Mr. Schotemeyer may be contacted at dutch.schotemeyer@ndlf.com

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    August 17, 2011 —

    Coverage was denied under the policy’s condominium exclusion in California Traditions, Inc. v. Claremont Liability Ins. Co.,2011 Cal. App.LEXIS912 (Cal. Ct. App., ordered published July 11, 2011).

    California Traditions was the developer and general contractor for a housing development. California Traditions subcontracted with Ja-Con to perform the rough framing work for 30 residential units. The project had 146 separate residences that were freestanding with no shared walls, roof, halls, or plumbing or electrical lines. To allow a higher density development, the project was developed, marketed and sold as condominiums.

    The purchaser of one of the units filed a complaint against California Traditions alleging property damage from the defective construction. California Traditions cross-complained against Ja-Con.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    “I Didn’t Sign That!” – Applicability of Waivers of Subrogation to Non-Signatory Third Parties

    September 30, 2019 —
    In Gables Construction v. Red Coats, 2019 Md. App. LEXIS 419, Maryland’s Court of Special Appeals considered whether a contractual waiver of subrogation in the prime contract for a construction project barred a third party – a fire watch vendor hired to guard the worksite – from pursuing a contribution claim against the general contractor. The court concluded that the general contractor could not rely on the waiver of subrogation clause to defeat the contribution claim of the vendor, who was not a party to the prime contract. As noted by the court, holding that a waiver of subrogation clause bars the contribution claims of an entity that was not a party to the contract would violate the intent of the Maryland Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act (UCATA). When dealing with claims involving construction projects, there may exist multiple contracts between various parties that contain waivers of subrogation. The enforceability of such waivers can be limited by several factors, including the jurisdiction of the loss, the language of the waiver and the parties to the contract. In Gables Construction, Upper Rock, Inc. (Upper Rock), the owner, contracted with a general contractor, Gables Construction (GCI) (hereinafter referred to as the “prime contract”), to construct an apartment complex. After someone stole a bobcat tractor from the jobsite, Gables Residential Services Incorporated (GRSI), GCI’s parent company, signed a vendor services agreement (VSA) with Red Coats to provide a fire watch and other security services for the project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rahul Gogineni, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Gogineni may be contacted at goginenir@whiteandwilliams.com

    Withholding Payment or Having Your Payment Withheld Due to Disputes on Other Projects: Know Your Rights to Offset

    January 04, 2021 —
    Introduction The right to offset refers to the common sense ability to reduce or eliminate your payment obligations to a party who owes you money on another contract. With offsets, common law largely tracks common sense. The right of offset is recognized by statute and court decisions in many states as well as under federal law and the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. The right to offset can also be established in the contract or subcontract. But like many things that may seem simple, the right to offset can easily become complex. This article provides an overview of the extent and limits of the right to offset varies from state to state and with federal government contracts about the extent and limits of the right of offset. Construction trust fund statutes add another layer of complications. These variations may not be obvious or intuitive, but they have a tremendous impact on your right to get paid or your right to withhold payment. Because of the variations, you must always confirm the law applicable to your contract or subcontract, which may not be where the project or you are located. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher C. Broughton, Jones Walker LLP
    Mr. Broughton may be contacted at cbroughton@joneswalker.com