BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction 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


    More on Fraud, Opinions and Contracts

    Union Handbilling: When, Where, and Why it is Legal

    Reservation of Rights Letter Merely Citing Policy Provisions Inadequate

    Proving Contractor Licensure in California. The Tribe Has Spoken

    Get Your Contracts Lean- Its Better than Dieting

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

    Pulte Home Corp. v. CBR Electric, Inc.

    FEMA Fire Management Assistance Granted for the French Fire

    Climate-Proofing Your Home: Upgrades to Weather a Drought

    Decline in Home Construction Brings Down Homebuilder Stocks

    What ENR.com Construction News Gained the Most Views

    Cybersecurity “Flash” Warning for Construction and Manufacturing Businesses

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

    The Final Frontier Opens Up New Business Opportunities for Private Contractors

    Let it Shine: California Mandates Rooftop Solar for New Residential Construction

    Loss Caused by Theft, Continuous Water Discharge Not Covered

    Colorado’s New Construction Defect Law Takes Effect in September: What You Need to Know

    Let’s Talk About a Statutory First-Party Bad Faith Claim Against an Insurer

    Motion to Dismiss COVID Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    Construction Defect Settlement in Seattle

    Mitsui Fudosan Said to Consider Rebuilding Tilted Apartments

    July 1, 2015 Statutory Changes Affecting Virginia Contractors and Subcontractors

    Ensuing Loss Provision Found Ambiguous

    Where Mechanic’s Liens and Contracts Collide

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

    San Diego’s NFL Stadium Dream Counts on Munis for Chargers’ Home

    PA Supreme Court to Rule on Scope of Judges' Credibility Determinations

    Attention Contractors: U.S. Department of Labor Issues Guidance on Avoiding Discrimination When Using AI in Hiring

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    English v. RKK. . . The Rest of the Story

    Subcontractor Strikes Out in its Claims Against Federal Government

    Construction Executives Should Be Dusting Off Employee Handbooks

    What Happens When Dave Chappelle Buys Up Your Town

    Wave Breaker: How a Living Shoreline Will Protect a Florida Highway and Oyster Bed

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

    Insurers Must Defend Allegations of Faulty Workmanship

    District Court denies Carpenters Union Motion to Dismiss RICO case- What it Means

    Partner Denis Moriarty and Of Counsel William Baumgaertner Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2017

    BHA has a Nice Swing Benefits the Wounded Warrior Project

    Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Inverse Condemnation Action

    Connecticut Federal District Court Follows Majority Rule on Insurance Policy Anti-Assignment Clauses

    Are Mechanic’s Liens the Be All End All of Construction Collections?

    The Fourth Circuit Applies a Consequential Damages Exclusionary Clause and the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Claims by a Subrogating Insurer Seeking to Recover Over $19 Million in Damages

    Montana Theater Threatened by Closure due to Building Safety

    Guidance for Structural Fire Engineering Making Its Debut

    Court Again Defines Extent of Contractor’s Insurance Coverage

    Franchisors Should Consider Signing a Conditional Lease Assignment Rather Than a Franchisee’s Lease

    Court of Appeals Finds Additional Insured Coverage Despite “Care, Custody or Control” Exclusion

    Court Reminds Insurer that the Mere Possibility Of Coverage at the Time of Tender Triggers a Duty to Defend in a Defect Action

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (05/18/22)
    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

    Client Alert: Service Via Tag Jurisdiction Insufficient to Subject Corporation to General Personal Jurisdiction

    August 27, 2014 —
    In Martinez v. Aero Caribbean (No. 3:11-cv-03194-WHA, filed 8/21/2014), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held service of process on a corporation's officer, within the forum state, does not establish general personal jurisdiction over the corporation unless the corporation's contacts with the forum render it essentially at home in the state. Decedent, Lorenzo Corazon Mendoza, was traveling by airplane when the plane crashed, killing everyone aboard. Defendant Avions De Transport Régional (ATR) manufactured the airplane that crashed. Plaintiffs Lorenzo Martinez, Eliezer Martinez, Eliu Mendoza and Gloria Montes (Plaintiffs) filed suit against ATR as heirs of decedent. ATR is a business entity organized under French law with its principal place of business in France. It is not licensed to do business in California, and it has no office or other physical presence there. It has purchased parts from California suppliers, sent representatives to California to promote its business, and advertised in trade publications available in California. It has also sold airplanes to a California corporation. Empire Airlines flies from Santa Barbara to Ontario using ATR planes on a regular basis; however, Empire Airlines purchased the ATR planes secondhand from third parties, and never directly from ATR. At the time of the crash, ATR North America (a wholly owned subsidiary of ATR) had its headquarters in Virginia, and has since relocated to Florida. Reprinted courtesy of R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Kristian B. Moriarty, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com; Mr. Moriarty may be contacted at kmoriarty@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Union THUGS Plead Guilty

    October 15, 2014 —
    Some time ago, I wrote about union THUGS (The Helpful Union Guys) that tormented merit shops to force contractors to use union labor on projects. The THUGS set fire to equipment, beat contractors with baseball bats, and picketed apartment complexes where contractors lived. Recently two of the ten union members plead guilty to arson-related charges, including two counts of maliciously damaging property by means of fire, extortion, and RICO conspiracy charges. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    CDJ’s Year-End Review: The Top 10 CD Topics of 2014

    December 31, 2014 —
    Construction Defect Journal’s year-end review presents the top ten most popular topics featured in the journal in 2014. Some of the topics involved analysis of important construction defect cases, while others covered current events such as proposed state legislation. Most issues were heavily discussed on CDJ as well as in board rooms and during teleconferences. We hope you enjoy the look-back at 2014 interspersed throughout the issue, and we wish you and yours a prosperous 2015! CDJ’s #1 Topic of the Year: Indalex Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, 2013 Pa. Super 311 (Dec. 3, 2013) According to Darrin J. McMullen of Anderson Kill, “[t]he Indalex decision reverses a nearly decade-long trend of Pennsylvania decisions narrowing the scope of insurance coverage for construction and defect-related claims under commercial general liability insurance policies. Equally important, the Indalex ruling dealt a blow to the insurance industry’s continual efforts to win overbroad expansion of the rulings in Kvaerner Metals Div. of Kvaerner U.S., Inc. v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., Millers Capital Ins. Co. v. Gambone Bros. Dev. Co., and Erie Ins. Exchange v. Abbott Furnace Co., which found that claims of faulty workmanship in some circumstances may not constitute coverage-triggering ‘occurrences.’” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Georgia Legislature Passes Additional Procurement Rules

    May 30, 2018 —
    On May 3, 2018, Governor Nathan Deal signed HB 899 into law, officially making it Act 389. Act 389 modifies O.C.G.A. § 13-10-4 and § 36-91-23 relating to public works bidding and contracts of state and local governments, respectively. Both sections are modified in the same bill because they contain the same language. The bill prohibits the disqualification of bidders based upon lack of previous experience with the project’s desired construction delivery method. Before the modifications, the code protected a contractor from disqualification only for lack of previous experience on a job of comparable size. After the modification, the law expands to prohibit disqualification based on lack of previous experience with comparable job size and lack of previous experience with the construction delivery method. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook Jr., Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    Rent Increases During the Coronavirus Emergency Part II: Avoiding Violations Under California’s Anti-Price Gouging Statute

    April 06, 2020 —
    In my earlier article, Profiting From Fear: What You Need to Know About Price Gouging During the Coronavirus Emergency, I discuss price gouging and how the anti-price gouging statute, California Penal Code 396 (“CPC 396”), protects buyers of goods and services deemed vital and necessary for the health, safety and welfare of consumers. Part II of the article provides guidance to landlords on the parameters applicable to acceptable price increases and focuses attention on the application of CPC 396 to rental housing and related issues. California Penal Code 396 As it pertains to housing, defined as “any rental housing with an initial lease term of no longer than one year,” price gouging occurs when a landlord increases the rent of an existing or prospective tenant by more than 10 percent of the previously charged or advertised price following an emergency or disaster declaration for a period of 30 days.2 A residential landlord is only allowed to increase rent in excess of 10 percent if “the increase is directly attributable to additional costs for repairs or additions beyond normal maintenance that were amortized over the rental term that caused the rent to be increased greater than 10 percent or that an increase was contractually agreed to by the tenant prior to the proclamation or declaration” (CPC 396(e).) Further, landlords are prohibited from evicting a tenant and then re-renting the property at a rate that the landlord would have been prohibited from charging the evicted tenant under the statute (CPC 396(f).)3 Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dan Schneider, Newmeyer Dillion
    Mr. Schneider may be contacted at daniel.schneider@ndlf.com

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Too Soon?”

    July 02, 2024 —
    Not at all, said the Louisiana Supreme Court, in a case dealing with the timing of filing of a claim for indemnity. In the case, a Louisiana intermediate appellate court had earlier ruled in very short order on a supervisory writ application (reversing the trial court) that a claim for indemnity (based upon an indemnity clause in a construction contract) was “premature” until a “determination that damages are actually owed and the indemnitee sustains a loss. … At this time, the lawsuit is still pending against [the putative indemnitee], and no determination of liability had been made; thus, there is no obligation for indemnity and defense costs. … Stated differently, indemnity (or reimbursement) is not available at this time because [the indemnitee] has not discharged a liability which [the indemnitor] should have assumed or otherwise suffered any loss or damages. … Accordingly, [the] cause of action for indemnity and defense is not ripe for adjudication.” Bennett v. Demco Energy Servs., LLC, 2023-0581 (La. App. 1 Cir. 09/11/23); 2023 La. App. LEXIS 1449. 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

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions

    January 15, 2019 —
    White and Williams is pleased to announce the election of Siobhan Cole, Matthew Ferrie, Joshua Galante, Rochelle Gumapac, Geoffrey Sasso and Benjamin Staherski to the partnership. The firm has also promoted Brandon Arber, Adam Berardi, Kevin Koscil and Greg Steinberg from associate to counsel. The newly elected partners and promoted counsel represent the wide array of practices that White and Williams offers its clients, including commercial and general litigation, corporate and securities, insurance coverage, product liability, subrogation and tax. These accomplished lawyers have earned this advancement based on their contributions to the firm and their practices. “We are delighted to elect these six lawyers to the partnership and promote four exceptional associates to counsel. The group demonstrates the breadth of services and the deep bench that we offer to our clients at White and Williams," said Patti Santelle, Managing Partner of the firm. “The contributions of this talented group have enhanced the growth and reputation of our firm and reflect our deep commitment to our clients. We look forward to their continued success.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    Update: Amazon Can (Still) Be Liable in Louisiana

    December 31, 2024 —
    On November 25, 2024, in Pickard v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 5:20-cv-01448, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215377, the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (District Court) ruled that Amazon.com, Inc. (Amazon) could be liable for manufacturer-seller liability under the Louisiana Products Liability Act (LPLA) for a defective product sold by a third-party seller through the “Fulfillment by Amazon” program (FBA). The court also dismissed two tort claims against Amazon as follows: (i) Amazon does not qualify as a “seller” for purposes of non-manufacturer seller liability (because passing title is required for that claim); and (ii) there is insufficient evidence to prove the decedent, Archie Pickard (Pickard), relied on Amazon’s safety practices when purchasing the defective product, precluding a claim for negligent undertaking. Background Pickard died from injuries sustained in a house fire allegedly caused by a defective battery charger he purchased on Amazon. Jisell, a Chinese company and a third-party seller, manufactured and sold the charger. Amazon never took title to the charger but stored it in its warehouse and delivered it to Pickard through the FBA. Pickard’s children filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Amazon alleging three claims: (i) manufacturer-seller liability under the LPLA; and tort-based claims of (ii) non-manufacturer seller liability and (iii) negligent undertaking. After Amazon moved for summary judgment on all claims, the District Court certified questions to the Supreme Court of Louisiana (Supreme Court) seeking guidance as there was minimal guidance regarding the application of products claims to online marketplaces. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Ciamaichelo, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Ciamaichelo may be contacted at ciamaichelom@whiteandwilliams.com