BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural 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


    Contract And IP Implications Of Design Professionals Monetizing Non-Fungible Tokens Comprising Digital Construction Designs

    New California Employment Laws Affect the Construction Industry for 2019

    Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Harmon Towers

    Philadelphia Revises Realty Transfer Tax Treatment of Acquired Real Estate Companies

    Court Bars Licensed Contractor From Seeking Compensation for Work Performed by Unlicensed Sub

    BLOK, a Wired UK Hottest 100 Housing Market Startup, Gets Funding from a Renowned Group of Investors

    Are Housing Prices Poised to Fall in Denver?

    Justin Clark Joins Newmeyer & Dillion’s Walnut Creek Branch as its Newest Associate

    Statute of Frauds Applies to Sale of Real Property

    Old Case Teaches New Tricks

    Blindly Relying on Public Adjuster or Loss Consultant’s False Estimate Can Play Out Badly

    Erector Tops Out 850-Foot-Tall Rainier Square Tower in Only 10 Months

    Montana Theater Threatened by Closure due to Building Safety

    N.J. Voters Approve $116 Million in School Construction

    Design-Assist Collaboration/Follow-up Post

    Jason Poore Receives 2018 Joseph H. Foster Young Lawyer Award

    Deducting 2018 Real Property Taxes Prepaid in 2017 Comes with Caveats

    More Musings From the Mediation Trenches

    Don’t Believe Everything You Hear: Liability of Asbestos Pipe Manufacturer Upheld Despite Exculpatory Testimony of Plaintiff

    Client Alert: Michigan Insurance Company Not Subject to Personal Jurisdiction in California for Losses Suffered in Arkansas

    Commencing of the Statute of Repose for Construction Defects

    Under Colorado House Bill 17-1279, HOA Boards Now Must Get Members’ Informed Consent Before Bringing A Construction Defect Action

    Texas Supreme Court Rules That Subsequent Purchaser of Home Is Bound by Original Homeowner’s Arbitration Agreement With Builder

    2022 Construction Outlook: Continuing Growth But at Slower Pace

    Manhattan Gets First Crowdfunded Condos

    No Repeal Process for Rejected Superstorm Sandy Grant Applications

    Default Should Never Be An Option

    Home Prices Beat Estimates With 0.8% Gain in November

    Former Owner Not Liable for Defects Discovered After Sale

    Do Not Pass Go! Duty to Defend in a Professional Services Agreement (law note)

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

    Senate Bill 15-091 Passes Out of the Senate State, Veterans & Military Affairs Committee

    Trial Date Discussed for Las Vegas HOA Takeover Case

    Another Way a Mechanic’s Lien Protects You

    Falling Tree Causing Three Injuries/Deaths Is One Occurrence

    Construction in Indian Country – What You Need To Know About Sovereign Immunity

    “Bound by the Bond”

    PFAS: From Happy Mistake to Ubiquity to Toxic Liability (But is there coverage?)

    D.R. Horton Earnings Rise as Sales and Order Volume Increase

    AB5 Construction Exemption - A Checklist to Avoid Application of AB5's Three-Part Test

    The Show Must Go On: Shuttered Venues Operators Grant Provides Lifeline for Live Music and Theater Venues

    Alleged Damage to Personal Property Does Not Revive Coverage for Construction Defects

    ASHRAE Seeks Comments by May 26 on Draft of Pathogen Mitigation Standard

    The Law of Patent v Latent Defects

    Allegations Versus “True Facts”: Which Govern the Duty to Defend? Bonus! A Georgia Court Clears Up What the Meaning of “Is” Is

    Confidence Among U.S. Homebuilders Declines to Eight-Month Low

    Insurer’s Consent Not Needed for Settlement

    Uniwest Rides Again (or, Are Architects Subject to Va. Code Section 11-4.1?)

    Advice to Georgia Homeowners with Construction Defects

    Understanding Liability Insurer’s Two Duties: To Defend and to Indemnify
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Best Lawyers®

    September 18, 2023 —
    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai has been recognized by Best Lawyers® in its 30th edition of The Best Lawyers in America® in the area of Construction Law for 2024. This is the the first year Garret has been recognized by Best Lawyers®. Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Form Contracts are Great, but. . .

    November 12, 2019 —
    Recently I was discussing the ConsensusDOCs with a colleague and friend and had a revelation. These forms are used often (though somewhat less than their AIA counterparts and less than they should be used). Quick disclaimer: I have been a part of a couple of drafting committees for ConsensusDOCs and am friends with Brian Perlberg, general counsel to the drafting effort. Some of the reason that these forms are so widely used is that they can be applied in a general way to almost any situation. Both sets of forms have documents for small and large jobs. Both have forms for Contractor/Owner and Contractor/Subcontractor. In short, a form document exists for about any scenario. I am writing now to let you know that while forms are great, they are just that. . . forms. Like with any set of forms, they need to be “tweaked” for your particular project. In my opinion they both have great clauses in them, and both have some flexibility built in (ConsensusDOCS more at the moment than the AIA forms). At the very least, construction professionals need to use this flexibility to conform the documents to their particular situation and do so within the documents themselves and not with addenda that “strike” or “modify” particular clauses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Can I Be Required to Mediate, Arbitrate or Litigate a California Construction Dispute in Some Other State?

    September 19, 2022 —
    It is not uncommon in the construction industry for an out-of-state general contractor to include a provision in a subcontract requiring a California subcontractor to resolve disputes outside the state of California, even though the work is to be performed within California. Fortunately, most California subcontractors are immune from this tactic. California law generally prohibits clauses requiring subcontractors to travel outside California to resolve construction disputes. California Code of Civil Procedure Section 410.42, [CCP 410.42 Link] renders “void and unenforceable,” any provision in a contract that “purports to require any dispute to be litigated, arbitrated, or otherwise determined outside this state,” so long as the contract is “between the contractor and a subcontractor with principal offices in the state, for the construction of a public or private work of improvement in this state.” Similarly, this law voids any similar contractual term that might prevent the California subcontractor from commencing an action, obtaining a judgment, or resolving its dispute in the courts of California. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    South Carolina Supreme Court Finds that Consequential Damage Arise From "Occurrence"

    October 10, 2013 —
    The South Carolina Supreme Court held that continuing damage that was part of a continuum of property damage constituted an "occurrence." Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Rhodes, 2013 S.C. LEXIS 248 (Sept. 25, 2013). Rhodes hired Eadon to design, fabricate, and erect three outdoor advertising signs on Rhodes' property bordering an interstate highway. After the signs were erected, one fell across the highway, blocking both lanes of southbound traffic. The state Department of Transportation ordered Rhodes to remove the remaining two signs and revoked Rhodes' permit to maintain signs on the property. Rhodes sued Eaton. Eaton's insurer, Auto-Owners, filed a declaratory judgment action to determine whether there was coverage under the CGL policy. The trial court found the sign falling on the interstate constituted an "occurrence" that resulted in damages beyond the defective work to property other than the defective work itself. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Wisconsin Court Applies the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Negligence Claims for Purely Economic Losses

    August 17, 2020 —
    In Mech. Inc. v. Venture Elec. Contrs., Inc., No. 2018AP2380, 2020 Wisc. App. LEXIS 170, the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, District Two, considered whether a party may bring a negligence claim for purely economic damages. In upholding the lower court, the appellate court found that a party is barred by the Economic Loss Doctrine from bringing a negligence claim for purely economic damages. Both parties involved in this action were subcontractors on a building project at the Great Lakes Research Facility for the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. As a result of Venture Electrical Contractors, Inc. (Venture) not paying for requested work, Mechanical, Inc. (Mechanical) sued Venture for $11,961.31. Venture, in turn, countersued in negligence for $1.1 million for costs incurred due to delays and untimely performance. Mechanical sought dismissal of the negligence claim based upon the Economic Loss Doctrine. Finding that the Economic Loss Doctrine applies to purely economic losses, the trial court dismissed Venture’s negligence claim. Venture appealed to the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin. 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

    Triple Points to the English Court of Appeal for Clarifying the Law on LDs

    July 01, 2019 —
    Can an employer recover liquidated damages (LDs) from a contractor if the contract terminates before the contractor completes the work? Surprisingly, heretofore, English law provided no clear answer to this seemingly straightforward question, and inconsistent case law over the past century has left a trail of confusion. Given the widespread use of English law in international construction contracts, this uncertainty had gone on far too long. The good news is that drafters of construction contracts throughout the world can now have a well-deserved good night’s sleep courtesy of the English Court of Appeal’s March 2019 decision in Triple Point Technology, Inc. v PTT Public Company Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 230. The Triple Point case concerned the delayed supply by Triple Point (the “Contractor”) of a new software system to employer PTT. The contract provided for payments upon achievement of milestones, however order forms incorporated into the contract set out the calendar dates on which fixed amounts were payable by PTT, resulting in an apparently contradictory requirements on when payment was due. Triple Point achieved completion (149 days late) of a portion of the work milestones, and were paid for that work. Triple Point then sought payment for the work which was not yet completed, relying on the calendar dates in the order forms rather than achievement of milestone payments. Things got progressively worse as PTT refused payment, Triple Point suspended the work for PTT’s failure to pay, PTT terminated the contract and then appointed a new contractor to complete the work. Reprinted courtesy of Vincent C. Zabielski, Pillsbury and Julia Kalinina Belcher, Pillsbury Mr. Zabielski may be contacted at vincent.zabielski@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Belcher may be contacted at julia.belcher@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Nafta Could Settle Canada-U.S. Lumber War, Resolute CEO Says

    February 02, 2017 —
    A renegotiation of Nafta could be used to settle a lumber dispute that’s been simmering between Canada and the U.S. for decades and threatens to make housing unaffordable for thousands of Americans, according to the world’s largest newsprint maker. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jen Skerritt, Bloomberg
    Ms. Skerritt may be followed on Twitter @jenskerritt

    Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal Secured by Lewis Brisbois in Coverage Dispute Involving San Francisco 49ers’ Levi Stadium

    May 31, 2021 —
    Fort Lauderdale Partner and Vice Chair of Lewis Brisbois’ Insurance Coverage & Bad Faith Litigation Practices Kristen D. Perkins and Los Angeles Partner Jordon E. Harriman had their district court victory confirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit when it affirmed the lower court’s ruling that Lewis Brisbois’ client, an excess insurer, had no duty to defend or indemnify a construction joint venture in a lawsuit filed by San Francisco 49ers fans. Underlying Case and Lewis Brisbois’ Successful Motion to Dismiss In the underlying matter, 49ers fans filed a proposed class action against the team, alleging that the team’s home venue, Levi Stadium, violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and the state's Unruh Civil Rights Act because it contained physical barriers that hindered access for disabled people. The 49ers subsequently filed a third-party complaint against the construction joint venture that built the stadium, contending that the joint venture’s negligence caused the inaccessibility, and that if the team was held liable for the fans' claims, the joint venture should be obligated to indemnify the team under the terms of the stadium contract. Reprinted courtesy of Kristen Perkins, Lewis Brisbois and Jordon Harriman, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Perkins may be contacted at Kristen.Perkins@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Harriman may be contacted at Jordon.Harriman@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of