BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineers
    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


    Celebrating Dave McLain’s Recognition in the Best Lawyers in America® 2025

    Insurer's Judgment on the Pleadings Based Upon Expected Injury Exclusion Reversed

    Construction Reaches Half-Way Point on San Diego's $2.1 Billion Mid-Coast Trolley

    ASCE Statement on Hurricane Milton and Environmental Threats

    Developer Africa Israel Wins a Round in New York Condominium Battle

    Beam Cracks Cause Closure of San Francisco’s New $2B Transit Center

    Acord Certificates of Liability Insurance: What They Don’t Tell You Can Hurt You

    Nevada Bill Would Bring Changes to Construction Defects

    Call to Conserve Power Raises Questions About Texas Grid Reliability

    No Coverage for Alleged Misrepresentation Claim

    Assessing Defective Design Liability on Federal Design-Build Projects

    Duty to Defend Broadly Applies to Entire Action; Insured Need Not Apportion Defense Costs, Says Maryland Appeals Court

    Is it the End of the Story for Redevelopment in California?

    Did Deutsche Make a Deal with the Wrong Homeowner?

    Restaurant Wants SCOTUS to Dust Off Eleventh Circuit’s “Physical Loss” Ruling

    Are Construction Contract Limitation of Liability Clauses on the Way Out in Virginia?

    Last Call: Tokyo Iconic Okura Hotel Meets the Wrecking Ball

    Common Construction Contract Provisions: No-Damages-for-Delay Clause

    Civil Engineers: Montana's Infrastructure Grade Declines to a 'C-'

    Land Planners Not Held to Professional Standard of Care

    Determining Occurrence for Injury Under Commercial General Liability Policy Without Applying “Trigger Theory”

    Who Would Face Liability For Oroville Dam Management: Brett Moore Authors Law360 Article

    "Your Work" Exclusion Bars Coverage for Contractor's Faulty Workmanship

    Contractor Sues Yelp Reviewer for Defamation

    Colorado Federal Court Confirms Consequetial Property Damage, But Finds No Coverage for Subcontractor

    No Indemnity Coverage Where Insured Suffers No Loss

    Naples, Florida, Is Getting So Expensive That City Workers Can’t Afford It

    Real-Estate Pros Fight NYC Tax on Wealthy Absentee Owners

    New York Appellate Court Expands Policyholders’ Ability to Plead and Seek Consequential Damages

    A Win for Policyholders: Court Finds Flood Exclusion Inapplicable to Plumbing Leaks Caused by Hurricane Rainfall

    The EEOC Is Actively Targeting the Construction Industry

    The G2G Year-End Roundup (2022)

    London’s Best Districts Draw Buyers on Italian Triple Dip

    How the Pandemic Pushed the Construction Industry Five Years Into the Future

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Property Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Alabama Appeals Court Rules Unexpected and Unintended Property Damage is an Occurrence

    Sales of Existing U.S. Homes Decrease on Fewer Investors

    Texas Supreme Court Declines to Waive Sovereign Immunity in Premises Defect Case

    Firm Leadership – New Co-Chairs for the Construction Law Practice Group

    Recent Florida Legislative Changes Shorten Both Statute of Limitation ("SOL") and Statute of Repose ("SOR") for Construction Defect Claims

    Are Modern Buildings Silently Killing Us?

    New Jersey Legislation Would Bar Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause in Homeowners' Policies

    Apartment Building Damaged by Cable Installer’s Cherry Picker

    Chinese Demand Rush for Australia Homes to Stay, Ausin Says

    S&P Near $1 Billion Mortgage Ratings Settlement With U.S.

    School District Settles Over Defective Athletic Field

    Quick Note: Steps to Protect and Avoid the “Misappropriation” of a “Trade Secret”

    How to Make the Construction Dispute Resolution Process More Efficient and Less Expensive

    Dusseldorf Evacuates About 4,000 as World War II Bomb Defused

    Start-up to Streamline Large-Scale Energy Renovation
    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

    Repair of Fractured Girders Complete at Shuttered Salesforce Transit Center

    July 22, 2019 —
    The repair of two fractured girders spanning Fremont Street and the reinforcement of twin girders spanning First Street are complete at the beleaguered Salesforce Transit Center in San Francisco. Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Who Says You Can’t Choose between Liquidated Damages or Actual Damages?

    October 11, 2017 —
    In Colorado, courts enforce liquidated damages provisions if three elements are satisfied: (1) the parties intended to liquidate damages; (2) the amount of liquidated damages was a reasonable estimate of the presumed actual damages caused by a breach; and (3) at the time of contracting, it was difficult to ascertain the amount of actual damages that would result from a breach. But what happens when a contract gives a party a right to choose between liquidated damages or actual damages? This seems troublesome because it allows a party to set the floor for their damages without limitation if actual damages exceed the contractual amount. As a matter of first impression, the Colorado Supreme Court addressed this issue in Ravenstar, LLC v. One Ski Hill Place, LLC, 401 P.3d 552 (Colo. 2017). In Ravenstar, plaintiffs contracted to buy condominiums from a developer. As part of their contracts, plaintiffs deposited earnest money and construction deposits equal to 15% of each unit’s purchase price. Plaintiffs breached their contract by failing to obtain financing and failing to close by the closing date. Each contract’s damages provision provided that if a purchaser defaulted, the developer had the option to retain all or some of the deposits as liquidated damages or, alternatively, to pursue actual damages and apply the deposits to that award. After plaintiffs defaulted, the developer chose to keep plaintiffs’ deposits as liquidated damages. Plaintiffs sued for return of their deposits. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kevin Walton, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Walton may be contacted at kwalton@swlaw.com

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    June 17, 2015 —
    Aside from waiver of lien rights (something that will be illegal in Virginia after July 1, 2015), the most troublesome contractual impediment to payment for a subcontractor or supplier on a project often is the “pay if paid” clause. As a general rule, in Virginia, these clauses where drafted in the proper fashion, are enforceable. As I have said many times, in Virginia freedom of contract almost always wins out. While this is the case, I emphasize that such clauses must be very explicit and specific. Furthermore, and in something that should be obvious, these clauses are generally limited by the Courts of Virginia to only be enforceable and to only forgive the need for payment if the upstream contractor on the construction job has not been paid for the work that the sub claiming non payment has done. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Waiving Workers’ Compensation Immunity for Indemnity: Demystifying a Common and Scary-Looking Contract Term

    October 07, 2016 —
    Parties to a construction contract are often skeptical of terms in bold fonts, capital letters, or underlining, and especially terms requiring separate signatures or initials. A natural assumption is that such terms must be harmful if they require such emphasis. This concern is further heightened when the term involves complex areas of law, or waivers of rights that the party may not fully understand. In such cases, a little knowledge can go a long way. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James R. Lynch, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Mr. Lynch may be contacted at jlynch@ac-lawyers.com

    Utah Becomes First State to Enact the Uniform Commercial Real Estate Receivership Act

    March 29, 2017 —
    On March 25, Utah became the first state to enact the Uniform Commercial Real Estate Receivership Act (“UCRERA”) which was drafted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (the “Conference”) and adopted by the Conference at its annual meeting in July 2015. The Utah Uniform Commercial Real Estate Receivership Act, (the “Utah Act”) mirrors UCRERA and applies to all commercial real property receiverships that are filed in the Utah District Courts on and after May 9, 2017. The Utah Act provides both substantive and procedural guidance in an area of law that historically has been marked by inconsistency and uncertainty. This new law not only will provide judges, lenders and other receivership constituents with much needed instruction about their respective rights and responsibilities in commercial receivership proceedings, but it also is likely to reduce the cost and increase the predictability of these receiverships in Utah. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Leta, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Leta may be contacted at dleta@swlaw.com

    Is a Violation of a COVID-19 Order the Basis For Civil Liability?

    April 20, 2020 —
    Thinking about ignoring your state or local COVID-19 shutdown orders? Think again. Social-distance measures may create a new source of liability for businesses operating during the COVID-19 pandemic. Infection-based litigation is normally limited to businesses operating in the healthcare sector. But, social-distancing measures to stop the spread of infection may expand that litigation to other sectors. State and local governments across the country are taking extraordinary measures to combat the spread of COVID-19, a novel coronavirus that can cause life-threatening respiratory illness. Those measures encourage and even mandate “social distance” between people to limit physical transmission of the virus. Hard-hit states like New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and California have been aggressive in their responses, shuttering businesses, confining people to their homes, and requiring people to stay six feet apart. Common mandates include: quarantines, business and school closures, stay-home orders, curfews, travel restrictions, occupancy limits and physical-distance mandates, among other things. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams attorneys Robert Devine, James Burger and Douglas Weck Mr. Devine may be contacted at deviner@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Burger may be contacted at burgerj@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Weck may be contacted at weckd@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Property Insurance Exclusion for Constant or Repeated Leakage of Water

    March 14, 2018 —
    A property insurance policy, no different than any insurance policy, contains exclusions for events that are NOT covered under the terms of the policy. One such common exclusion in a property insurance policy is an exclusion for damages caused by "constant or repeated seepage or leakage of water…over a period of 14 or more days." The application of this exclusion was discussed in the recent opinion of Hicks v. American Integrity Ins. Co. of Florida, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D446a (Fla. 5th DCA 2018). In this case, while the insured was out of town, the water line to his refrigerator started to leak. When the insured return home over a month later, the supply line was discharging almost a thousand gallons of water per day. The insured submitted a property insurance claim. The property insurer engaged a consultant that opined (likely, correctly) that the water line had been leaking for at least five weeks. Based on the above-mentioned exclusion, i.e., that water had been constantly leaking for over a period of 14 days, the insurer denied coverage. This denial led to the inevitable coverage dispute. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Courts Will Not Rewrite Your Post-Loss Property Insurance Obligations

    June 14, 2021 —
    In the preceding posting, I wrote about making sure you comply with your property insurance policy’s post-loss policy obligations. By failing to comply, you can render your policy ineffective meaning you are forfeiting otherwise valid insurance coverage, which was the situation discussed in the preceding posting. As an insured, you should never want this to occur! In another case, discussed here, the property insurance policy had a preferred contractor endorsement. This means that instead of paying the insured insurance proceeds, the insurer could perform the repairs with its preferred contractor. Typically, the insured will pay a discount on their premium for this preferred contractor endorsement. The insurer elected to move forward with the repairs based on the preferred contractor endorsement but the insured performed the repairs on his own and then sold the house. By doing this, the appellate court held the insured rendered his policy ineffective by breaching his own policy (and failing to allow this post-loss obligation to take place). The explicit terms of the policy allowed the insurer to perform the repairs instead of paying the insured insurance proceeds. The court could NOT rewrite the post-loss obligations in the policy by requiring the insurer to pay insurance proceeds when the insurer, per the preferred contractor endorsement, elected to perform the repairs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com