BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction defect 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


    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Stop - In the Name of the Law!”

    Bad Faith Jury Verdict Upheld After Insurer's Failure to Settle Within Policy Limits

    You Have Choices (Litigation Versus Mediation)

    Insurance Policies and Indemnity Provisions Are Not the Same

    Construction Costs Must Be Reasonable

    Online Meetings & Privacy in Today’s WFH Environment

    Dave McLain included in the 2023 edition of The Best Lawyers in America

    Discussion of History of Construction Defect Litigation in California

    Builders Arrested after Building Collapses in India

    Business Risk Exclusions (j) 5 and (j) 6 Found Ambiguous

    Hunton Andrews Kurth Associate Cary D. Steklof Selected to Florida Trend’s Legal Elite Up & Comers List for 2019

    How Machine Learning Can Help with Urban Development

    "Multiple Claims" Provisions on Contractor's Professional Liability Policy Creates a Trap for Policyholders

    Defense Victory in Breach of Fiduciary Action

    Court of Appeal Confirms Privette Doctrine as Applied to Passive Conduct of Property Owner

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

    New York Team Secures Appellate Win on Behalf of National Home Improvement Chain

    Not All Design-Build Projects are Created Equal

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

    EPC Contractors Procuring from Foreign Companies need to Reconsider their Contracts

    Sinking Buildings on the Rise?

    Albert Reichmann, Builder of NY, London Finance Hubs, Dies at 93

    Texas Condo Construction Defect Code Amended

    MTA Implements Revised Contractors Debarment Regulations

    NYC Developer Embraces Religion in Search for Condo Sites

    Engineer and CNA Dispute Claim Over Dual 2014 Bridge Failures

    Even Fraud in the Inducement is Tough in Construction

    'You're Talking About Lives': The New Nissan Stadium

    When Cyber Crooks Steal Payments, Think Insurance Makes Up The Loss? Think Again.

    Effective Allocation of Damages for Federal Contract Claims

    Southern California Super Lawyers Recognizes Four Snell & Wilmer Attorneys As Rising Stars

    2022 Construction Outlook: Continuing Growth But at Slower Pace

    Parks and Degradation: The Mess at Yosemite

    Auditor: Prematurely Awarded Contracts Increased Honolulu Rail Cost by $354M

    Defects, Delays and Change Orders

    Building a Strong ESG Program Can Fuel Growth and Reduce Company Risk

    Corporate Transparency Act’s Impact on Real Estate: Reporting Companies, Exemptions and Beneficial Ownership Reporting (webinar)

    2019 Legislative Session

    CA Senate Report States Caltrans ‘Gagged and Banished’ its Critics

    Senator Ray Scott Introduced a Bill to Reduce Colorado’s Statute of Repose for Construction Defect Actions to Four Years

    Report Highlights Trends in Construction Tech, Digitization, and AI

    Construction Workers Face Dangers on the Job

    Court Grants Partial Summary Judgment on Conversion Claim Against Insurer

    Study May Come Too Late for Construction Defect Bill

    Sanctions Award Against Pro Se Plaintiff Upheld

    Construction Defect Claim not Barred by Prior Arbitration

    AAA Revises Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Another (Insurer) Bites The Dust: Virginia District Court Rejects Narrow Reading of Pollution Exclusion

    Update Regarding McMillin Albany LLC v. Super Ct.

    Trumark Homes Hired James Furey as VP of Land Acquisition
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Options When there is a Construction Lien on Your Property

    June 02, 2016 —
    There is a construction lien on my property. What are my best options? I hear this question quite a bit…so here it goes… (1) Do nothing. That’s right – do nothing. If you are not looking to sell your house or refinance in the next year or so, you can do nothing and see whether the lienor files a construction lien foreclosure lawsuit. The lienor has one year from the recording of the lien to file the lawsuit. (2) Record a Notice of Contest of Lien. The Notice of Contest of Lien shortens the lienor’s statue of limitations to foreclose on the lien from one year to 60 days. If the lienor fails to foreclose on the lien within 60 days, the lien is extinguished by operation of law. This is the route I tend to prefer. If the lienor is going to file a lien foreclosure lawsuit, I tend to think it is better forcing the issue on the front end as opposed to waiting a year. But every situation is different. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Feds OK $9B Houston Highway Project After Two-Year Pause

    March 20, 2023 —
    The Federal Highway Administration has agreed to let a $9-billion Texas highway reconstruction project proceed after a two-year pause over concerns linked to the project’s potential impact on communities along the route, including a lawsuit filed by Harris County to halt contracting, pending a new environmental impact review. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Supreme Court Adopts “Vertical Exhaustion” in the Long-Storied Montrose Environmental Coverage Litigation

    June 08, 2020 —
    On April 6, 2020, the California Supreme Court issued a decision that held a policyholder is entitled to access available excess coverage under any excess policy once it has exhausted directly underlying excess policies for the same policy period in Montrose Chemical Corporation v. the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Supreme Court of California, case number S244737. In its unanimous decision adopting this “vertical exhaustion” requirement, the court rejected the “horizontal exhaustion” rule urged by the policyholder’s excess insurers, under which the policyholder would have been able to access an excess policy only after it had exhausted other policies with lower attachment points from every policy period in which the environmental damage resulting in liability occurred. In 1990, Montrose sought coverage under primary policies and multiple layers of excess policies issued for periods from 1961 through 1985 for environmental damage liabilities arising from its production of insecticide in the Los Angeles area between 1947 and 1982. The ongoing dispute currently arises out of Montrose’s Fifth Amended Complaint which was filed in 2015 seeking declarations concerning exhaustion and the manner in which Montrose may allocate its liabilities across the policies. Each of the excess policies at issue contained a requirement of exhaustion of underlying coverage. The various policies described the applicable underlying coverage in four main ways: (1) some policies contained a schedule of underlying insurance listing all of the underlying policies in the same policy period by insurer name, policy number, and dollar amount; (2) some policies referenced a specific dollar amount of underlying insurance in the same policy period and a schedule of underlying insurance on file with the insurer; (3) some policies referenced a specific dollar amount of underlying insurance in the same policy period and identified one or more of the underlying insurers; and (4) some policies referenced a specific dollar amount of underlying insurance that corresponds with the combined limits of the underlying policies in that policy period. The excess policies also provided, in various ways, that “other insurance” must be exhausted before the excess policy can be accessed. Reprinted courtesy of Gregory S. Capps, White and Williams LLP and Michael E. DiFebbo, White and Williams LLP Mr. Capps may be contacted at cappsg@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. DiFebbo may be contacted at difebbom@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    South Carolina Homeowners May Finally Get Class Action for Stucco Defects

    December 04, 2013 —
    Last year, Judge J. Michael Baxley approved a class action lawsuit over stucco problems in Sun City Hilton Head. The lawyers from S.C. State Plastering have already settled with about 140 defendants in that community, and they are trying to prevent the plaintiff’s lawyers from communicating with other residents. In June, a judge dismissed S.C. State Plastering’s request to block this communication, but the company has appealed. The South Carolina Supreme Court has heard the case regarding the notices and has yet to rule. The Chief Justice has recused herself, stating that she has a connection to the case, although she has not elaborated. Many homeowners have waited to repair their homes, hoping to receive compensation. Pulte Homes, the builder of the project, has also repaired some homes. It is not clear if those homeowners are eligible for the class action lawsuit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Boys (and Girls) of Summer: New Residential Solar Energy System Disclosures Take Effect January 1, 2019

    October 02, 2018 —
    As we come to the end of Summer, the California Contractors State License Board advises licensees that it has finalized its Solar Energy System Disclosure Document. The Solar Energy System Disclosure Document, required under Business and Professions Code Section 7169 as amended by Assembly Bill 1070 in 2017, requires that the disclosure language of the document be:
    1. Included in all contracts providing for the installation of a “solar energy system” on a residential building;
    2. Included on the front page or cover page of the contract;
    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

    Subcontractor Exception to Your Work Exclusion Paves the Way for Coverage

    April 03, 2013 —
    In a brief opinion, the Second Circuit vacated the district court's denial of coverage for construction defects. Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. R.I. Pools Inc., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 5680 (2nd Cir. March 21, 2013). The insured, R.I. Pools, employed outside companies to supply concrete and to shoot the concrete into the ground. During the summer of 2006, it obtained its concrete from one subcontractor and used another to shoot the concrete. In 2009, nineteen customers of R.I. Pools from 2006 complained damage to their pools, including cracking, flaking, and deteriorating concrete. Scottsdale sought a declaratory judgment against R.I. Pools that it had no obligations under the policy to defend or indemnify for claims related to cracks in the pools. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Congratulations to Arezoo Jamshidi & Michael Parme Selected to the 2022 San Diego Super Lawyers Rising Stars List

    April 04, 2022 —
    Congratulations to Arezoo Jamshidi and Michael Parme who were selected for the 2022 San Diego Super Lawyers Rising Stars list. The 2022 San Diego Rising Stars list is an honor reserved for lawyers who exhibit excellence in practice. Only 2.5% of attorneys in San Diego receive this distinction. Reprinted courtesy of Arezoo Jamshidi, Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP and Michael C. Parme, Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP Ms. Jamshidi may be contacted at ajamshidi@hbblaw.com Mr. Parme may be contacted at mparme@hbblaw.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Supreme Court Declines to Create Exception to Privette Doctrine for “Known Hazards”

    September 13, 2021 —
    In Gonzalez v. Mathis (Aug. 19, 2021, S247677) __ Cal.5th___, the California Supreme Court reversed an appellate decision holding that a landowner may be liable to an independent contractor, or the contractor’s workers, for injuries resulting from “known hazards,” as running contrary to the Privette doctrine. In Gonzalez, the contractor, who specialized in washing skylights, slipped and fell while accessing the landowner’s particularly hard to reach skylight from a narrow retaining wall that was allegedly covered in loose gravel and slippery. (Slip opn., p. 3.) While the trial court initially granted the landowner summary judgment pursuant to the Privette doctrine, the appellate court reversed and held that the landowner had a responsibility to take reasonable safety precautions where there was a known safety hazard on the landowner’s premises. (Id. at p. 6.) Whether the landowner could have taken various safety precautions also raised disputed issues of material fact precluding summary judgment. (Ibid.) However, the California Supreme Court concluded that no broad, third exception to the Privette doctrine lies; “unless a landowner retains control over any part of the contractor’s work and negligently exercises that retained control in a manner that affirmatively contributes to the injury [citation], it will not be liable to an independent contractor or its workers for an injury resulting from a known hazard on the premises.” (Slip opn., p. 2.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tracy D. Forbath, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Forbath may be contacted at Tracy.Forbath@lewisbrisbois.com