BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete 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


    Jury Trials and Mediation in Philadelphia County: Virtually in Person

    SCOTUS to Weigh Landowners' Damage Claim Against Texas DOT

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Climate Change Lawsuit Barred by “Pollution Exclusion”

    Massachusetts Judge Holds That Insurer Breached Its Duty To Defend Lawsuit After Chemical Spill

    Float-In of MassDOT Span Sails, But Delay Dispute Lingers

    Cincinnati Team Secures Summary Judgment for Paving Company in Trip-and-Fall Case

    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

    Do You Have A Florida’s Deceptive And Unfair Trade Practices Act Claim

    Condo Developers Buy in Washington despite Construction Defect Litigation

    3D Printing Innovations Enhance Building Safety

    Home Repair Firms Sued for Fraud

    How to Lose Your Contractor’s License in 90 Days (or Less): California and Louisiana

    NYT Points to Foreign Minister and Carlos Slim for Collapse of Mexico City Metro

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolute Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    Seventh Circuit Confirms Additional Insured's Coverage for Alleged Construction Defects

    Endorsement Excludes Replacement of Undamaged Property with Matching Materials

    Texas Couple Claim Many Construction Defects in Home

    The Impact of the Russia-Ukraine Conflict on the Insurance Industry, Part One: Coverage, Exposure, and Losses

    Anti-Assignment Provision Unenforceable in Kentucky

    Coverage Under Builder's Risk Policy Properly Excluded for Damage to Existing Structure Only

    Massachusetts Federal Court Rejects Adria Towers, Finds Construction Defects Not an “Occurrence”

    Construction Contractors Must Understand Retainage In 2021

    World-Famous Architects Design $480,000 Gazebos for Your Backyard

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorney Casey Quinn Selected to the 2017 Mountain States Super Lawyers Rising Stars List

    Risk Protection: Force Majeure Agreements Take on Renewed Relevance

    Beyond the Statute: How the Colorado Court Upheld Modified Accrual in Construction Contracts

    Law Firm Fails to Survive Insurer's and Agent's Motions to Dismiss

    Designing the Process to Deliver Zero-Carbon Construction – Computational Design in Practice

    #11 CDJ Topic: Cortez Blu Community Association, Inc. v. K. Hovnanian at Cortez Hill, LLC, et al.

    Business Interruption Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    Certificates of Insurance May Confer Coverage

    The Housing Market Is Softening, But Home Depot and Lowe's Are Crushing It

    Apple to Open Steve Jobs-Inspired Ring-Shaped Campus in April

    General Contractor Intervening to Compel Arbitration Per the Subcontract

    The Construction Lawyer as Counselor

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2023 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    Earthquake Hits Mid-Atlantic Region; No Immediate Damage Reports

    Big Bertha Lawsuits—Hitachi Zosen Weighs In

    Construction Defects and Commercial General Liability in Illinois

    Professional Malpractice Statute of Limitations in Construction Context

    Strategy for Enforcement of Dispute Resolution Rights

    Meritage Acquires Legendary Communities

    California Commission Recommends Switching To Fault-Based Wildfire Liability Standard for Public Utilities

    UK Construction Output Rises Unexpectedly to Strongest Since May

    Non-compliance With Endorsement Means No Indemnity Coverage

    ASCE's Architectural Engineering Institute Announces Winners of 2021 AEI Professional Project Award

    Craig Holden Named Top 100 Lawyer by Los Angeles Business Journal

    Insureds Survive Summary Judgment on Coverage for Hurricane Loss

    Because I Haven’t Mentioned Mediation Lately. . .

    State-Fed Fight Heats Up Over Building Private Nuclear Disposal Sites
    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. Drawing 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

    It Ain’t Over Till it’s Over. Why Project Completion in California Isn’t as Straightforward as You Think

    May 07, 2015 —
    Baseball legend Yogi Berra was famous for his pithy quotes such as “the future ain’t what it used to be,” “half the lies they tell about me aren’t true,” and what is probably his most famous, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” The last, of course, begs the question of when over is over? And, on California construction projects when over is over, or more accurately, when a project is complete, can be as paradoxical as a “yogiism.” Why “Completion” is Important in California In California, project “completion,” is important not only for getting paid, but for knowing the deadlines associated with California’s statutory construction payment remedies. 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

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Causing Property Damage to Insured's Product Only

    October 07, 2016 —
    The Nebraska court found there was no coverage for rebar that did not meet specifications and did not cause property damage to other portions of the construction project. Drake-Williams Steel, Inc. v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 2016 Neb. LEXIS 116 (Neb. Aug. 5, 2016). The general contractor was hired by the city to build an arena. Drake-Williams Steel, Inc. (DWS) was hired to supply rebar for the arena. The rebar was improperly bent when it was fabricated by DWS and did not conform to the terms of the contract. The rebar was incorporated into three components of the arena: the columns, the grade beams, and the pile caps. The pile caps were made of concrete with reinforcing rebar and were installed below ground level on top of the concrete piles that extended to the bedrock. The grade beams were also made of concrete and rebar. The beams formed an oval around the arena and connected different pile caps together and were also installed below ground level. No corrections were made to the grade beams. 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

    Denver Court Rules that Condo Owners Must Follow Arbitration Agreement

    November 07, 2012 —
    Prior to initiating a construction defect lawsuit, the Glass House Residential Association voted to invalidate the arbitration agreement that had been written into its declaration and bylaws by the developer and general contractor. After the association started their construction defect claims, the developer and general contractor argued that the case must go to arbitration, as the arbitration clause contained a provision that it could not be altered without the agreement of the developer and general contractor. The Denver District Court has ruled against that association, determining that the res triction was not in violation of Colorado condominium law. And, as a post from Polsinelli Shughart PC on JDSupra notes, the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act encourages the use of arbitration procedures to settle disputes. The CCIOA does prohibit “certain restrictions on the homeowners association’s ability to amend the condominium declarations,” however, preserving an arbitration agreement is not one of them. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurance Policies Broadly Defining “Suits” May Prompt an Insurer’s Duty to Defend and Indemnify During the Chapter 558 Pre-Suit Notice Process

    May 30, 2018 —
    In Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Company, No. SC16-1420, 2017 WL 6379535 (Fla. Dec. 14, 2017), the Florida Supreme Court addressed whether the notice and repair process set forth in chapter 558, Florida Statutes, constitutes a “suit” within the meaning of a commercial liability policy issued by Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Company (“C&F”) to Altman Contractors, Inc. (“Altman”). The Court found that because the chapter 558 pre-suit process is an “alternative dispute resolution proceeding” as included in the definition of “suit” in the policy by C&F to Altman, C&F had a duty to defend Altman during the chapter 558 process, prior to the filing of a formal lawsuit. Chapter 558, titled “Construction Defects,” sets forth procedural requirements before a claimant may file a construction defect action. It requires a claimant to serve a written notice of claim on the applicable contractor, subcontractor, supplier, and/or design professional prior to filing a construction defect lawsuit. The legislature intended for Chapter 558 to be an alternative dispute resolution mechanism in certain construction defect matters allowing an opportunity to resolve the claim without further legal process. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Garcia, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Mr. Garcia may be contacted at daniel.garcia@grsm.com

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court: Fair Share Act Does Not Preempt Common Law When Apportioning Liability

    March 09, 2020 —
    On February 19, 2020, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a long awaited opinion in the matter of Roverano v. John Crane, Inc., No. 26 EAP 2018, No. 27 EAP 2018 (Pa. 2020). The Court’s opinion is a must-read for anyone involved in asbestos litigation in Pennsylvania. In Roverano, the Court ruled that Pennsylvania’s Fair Share Act (42 Pa.C.S. § 7102) does not preempt Pennsylvania common law favoring per capita apportionment of liability to strict liability defendants. In addition, the Court ruled that bankruptcy trusts, that are either joined as third-party defendants or that have entered into a release with the plaintiff, may be included on the verdict sheet for purposes of liability. In this case, Mr. Roverano sued 30 defendants in strict liability and Defendant Crane filed a joinder complaint against Johns-Manville Personal Injury Trust. The case proceeded to trial against eight defendants in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County. At trial, some of the defendants filed motions in limine seeking a ruling that the Fair Share Act applied to asbestos cases. The trial court denied the motion, concluding that asbestos exposure cannot be quantified, and held that that it would apportion liability on a per capita basis consistent with the Court’s opinion in Baker v. AC&S, 755 A.2d 664 (Pa. 2000). Reprinted courtesy of Mark T. Caloyer, Lewis Brisbois and Joelle Nelson, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Caloyer may be contacted at Mark.Caloyer@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Nelson may be contacted at Joelle.Nelson@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Public Projects in the Pandemic Pandemonium

    September 07, 2020 —
    Despite the ongoing pandemic, states are opening up for business and establishing a new normal. This determination to move forward includes pushing public transportation projects full steam ahead. While this may be good news for certain industries, it may not be for commercial property owners hoping to see a slow down to public projects and avoid a taking of private property. As many grapple with new economic realities, we examine the approaches employed by states in the southeast to manage construction of public projects in this unprecedented time. GEORGIA The Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) is moving forward with all of its previously funded public projects, including the massive I-285 Top-End Project, designated as a “Major Mobility Project” for the Atlanta metro region. Affecting approximately 260 property owners along I-285 and Georgia Highway 400, environmental review of the project continues. GDOT anticipates a contract let date in 2022 and construction start in 2023. Like ocean liners, these projects don’t turn on a dime. Under the 2015 Transportation Funding Act, the budgeted funds cannot be shifted to other needs or projects due to economic shutdown. Once environmental review is complete, GDOT will approve the final design and move toward acquiring right-of-way from affected property owners. Reprinted courtesy of Ashlynn E. Hutton, Michael J. Crook & Christian F. Torgrimson, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    South Carolina Contractors Regain General Liability Coverage

    May 20, 2011 —

    PR Newswire reports that the Carolinas Associated General Contractors (CAGC) have successfully persuaded the South Carolina legislature to pass a bill restoring commercial general liability (CGL) coverage. Governor Nikki Hartley signed the legislation on May 17.

    A South Carolina Supreme Court decision given on January 7, 2011, had ended commercial general liability coverage in the state. Senate Bill 431 addressed this decision, restoring the ability of home builders to obtain CGL coverage.

    PR Newswire quotes South Carolina homebuilder, Allen Amsler: “We have seen a lot of legislation with substantial impact to our business over the years. However, I would place this in the same level of importance with the original tort reform legislation. The effects of the Supreme Court’s ruling could have been catastrophic to our industry in South Carolina had it not been for this bill. Thanks to all those in the House, Senate and the Governor’s office who assisted us.”

    Read the full story…

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

    Proposed Law Protecting Tenants Amended: AB 828 Updated

    June 08, 2020 —
    On May 18, 2020, AB 828 was amended and is currently on its second reading in the Senate Rules Committee. This legislation proposes a temporary moratorium on foreclosures and unlawful detainers while Governor Newsom's COVID-19 emergency order is in effect. In addition to the moratorium, AB 828 also required landlords to reduce rent by 25% under certain circumstances. AB 828 was amended to remove the provision that required landlords to reduce rent by 25% for 12 months. The new provision requires landlords to allow tenant to remain in possession, and requires tenants to start paying rent the month following the end of the emergency order. Tenants must timely pay monthly rent plus 10% of any rent due and owing when the emergency order ended. Under AB 828, a tenant may stipulate to the entry of an order in response to a residential unlawful detainer action filed by the landlord. Upon a hearing, the court determines if the tenant's inability to pay rent is the result of increased expenses or a reduction in income due to COVID-19. The court must also make a determination that there is no material economic hardship for the landlord. Upon making such determinations, the court will issue an order that permits the tenant to remain in possession, and requires tenant to commence rental payments the month following the end of the COVID-19 emergency order. Tenant's payment would include the monthly rent plus 10% of an unpaid rent during the COVID-19 emergency order, but excludes any late charges or other fees or charges. The tenant would be required to make timely payments, and if tenant fails to do so, after a 48 hour notice from landlord, the landlord can file for an immediate writ of possession in favor of the landlord and money judgment for any unpaid balance, court costs and attorneys' fees. Newmeyer Dillion continues to follow COVID-19 and its impact on your business and our communities. Feel free to reach out to us at NDcovid19response@ndlf.com or visit us at www.newmeyerdillion.com/covid-19-multidisciplinary-task-force/. Rhonda Kreger is Senior Counsel on Newmeyer Dillion's transactional team at our Newport Beach office. Her practice focuses on all aspects of commercial real estate law, with a particular emphasis on the representation of residential developers, merchant builders and institutional investors. You can reach Rhonda at rhonda.kreger@ndlf.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of