BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation 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


    Clean Energy and Conservation Collide in California Coastal Waters

    Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Is Still in Trouble, Two Major Reviews Say

    How a Maryland County Created the Gold Standard for Building Emissions Reduction

    Hawaii Appellate Court Finds Duty to Defend Group Builders Case

    Insured's Jury Verdict Reversed After Improper Trial Tactics

    Apartment Construction Increasing in Colorado while Condo Construction Remains Slow

    The Court of Appeals Holds That Indifference to Safety Satisfies the Standard for a Willful Violation Under WISHA

    Replacement of Defective Gym Construction Exceeds Original Cost

    Kahana Feld LLP Senior Attorney Rachael Marvin and Partner Dominic Donato Obtain Complete Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Labor Law Claims on Summary Judgment

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twenty White and Williams Lawyers

    Public Contract Code Section 1104 Does Not Apply to Claims of Implied Breach of Warranty of Correctness of Plans and Specifications

    Stop Losing Proposal Competitions

    New Jersey Supreme Court Holding Impacts Allocation of Damages in Cases Involving Successive Tortfeasors

    Toll Brothers Climbs After Builder Reports Higher Sales

    Taking Service Network Planning to the Next Level

    Surety Bond Now a Valid Performance Guarantee for NC Developers (guest post)

    Reduce Suicide Risk Among Employees in Remote Work Areas

    What to Do Before OSHA Comes Knocking

    Pensacola Bridge Repair Plan Grows as Inspectors Uncover More Damage

    California Cracking down on Phony Qualifiers

    ACEC Statement on Negotiated Bipartisan Debt Limit Compromise

    Steel Makeover Under Way for Brooklyn's Squibb Footbridge

    How the Election Could Affect the Housing Industry: Steven Cvitanovic Authors Construction Today Article

    New York Office Secures Appellate Win in Labor Law 240(1) Fall in Basement Accident Case

    How to Defend Stucco Allegations

    General Contractor’s Professional Malpractice/Negligence Claim Against Design Professional

    Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship Is Not an "Occurrence"

    Project Completion Determines Mechanics Lien Recording Deadline

    No Coverage for Alleged Misrepresentation Claim

    Time is of the Essence, Even When the Contract Doesn’t Say So

    Watch Your Step – Playing Golf on an Outdoor Course Necessarily Encompasses Risk of Encountering Irregularities in the Ground Surface

    Demanding a Reduction in Retainage

    Microsoft Said to Weigh Multibillion-Dollar Headquarters Revamp

    Thirteen Payne & Fears Attorneys Honored by Best Lawyers

    EEOC Sues Schuff Steel, J.A. Croson in New Racial Harassment Cases

    Settlement Agreement? It Ain’t Over ‘Til it’s . . . Final, in Writing, Fully Executed, and Admissible

    New York Appellate Court Affirms 1966 Insurance Policy Continues to Cover WTC Asbestos Claims

    Schools Remain Top Priority in Carolinas as Cleanup From Storms Continues

    Labor Shortages In Construction

    Construction Firms Complain of Missed Payments on Redevelopment Project

    Port Authority Approves Subsidies for 2 World Trade Project

    Latest Updates On The Coronavirus Pandemic

    Insurer's Quote on Coverage for Theft by Hacker Creates Issue of Fact

    Who Is To Blame For Defective — And Still LEED Certified — Courthouse Square?

    Federal Government May Go to Different Green Building Standard

    Seeking the Urban Lifestyle in the Suburbs

    Flow-Down Clauses Can Drown Your Project

    Bill Introduced to give Colorado Shortest Statute of Repose in U.S.

    Duty to Defend Sorted Between Two Insurers Based Upon Lease and Policies

    Kahana Feld Partner Jeff Miragliotta and Senior Associate Rachael Marvin Obtain Early Dismissal of Commercial Litigation Cases in New York and New Jersey
    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

    Rhode Island Finds Pollution Exclusion Ambiguous, Orders Coverage for Home Heating Oil Leak

    March 06, 2023 —
    The Rhode Island case of Regan Heating and Air Conditioning, Inc. v. Arbella Protection Insurance Company, Inc., et. al.1 provides much-needed guidance regarding ambiguity and the term “pollution.” In Regan, the Rhode Island Supreme Court held that a pollution exclusion contained in the Plaintiff’s “Commercial Package Policy” was ambiguous as to whether home heating oil that escaped into a customer’s basement constituted a “pollutant” under the policy. This case stems from a 2015 incident wherein Regan was in the process of removing an older heating system and installing a new heating system in a customer’s home when that customer discovered 170 gallons of home heating oil in his basement. The customer sued Regan, alleging negligence and demanding remediation for the property damage caused by the oil leak. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kayla S. O'Connor, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. O'Connor may be contacted at KOconnor@sdvlaw.com

    Liquidated Damages: Too High and It’s a Penalty. Too Low and You’re Out of Luck.

    November 21, 2022 —
    Liquidated damages provisions in commercial and residential real estate contracts play a vital role when a transaction goes south, and should be given careful consideration when negotiating a real estate contract. Liquidated damages may be referred to in a variety of ways, such as “earnest money,” a “good-faith deposit,” or a “non-refundable deposit,” but each typically denote a negotiated amount of money that a seller is entitled to retain should a buyer breach a purchase and sale agreement. The purpose of liquidated damages is to provide the parties with certainty when actual damages arising from a breach of contract may be difficult to calculate. Accordingly, liquidated damages provisions alleviate the need for potentially expensive litigation associated with proving damages. While parties are free to negotiate the amount of liquidated damages, the amount must approximate the loss anticipated at the time of contracting, or the loss that actually occurs as a result of a breach. Arizona courts have held that where the amount of liquidated damages is unreasonably large when compared to the anticipated loss or actual loss, the liquidated damages provision is unenforceable as a penalty. A breaching party faced with high liquidated damages will often seek to invalidate the provision as a penalty. If a court agrees, the non-breaching party may still recover damages, but must go through the process of proving such damages. Therefore, when negotiating a real estate contract, consideration should be given as to whether a liquidated damages amount is arbitrarily high when compared to an anticipated loss in the event of a breach. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christian Fernandez, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Fernandez may be contacted at cfernandez@swlaw.com

    Appeals Court Overruled Insured as Additional Insured on Subcontractor’s Commercial General Liability Policy

    April 02, 2014 —
    Scott R. Murphy and Clifford J. Shapiro of Barnes & Thornburg LLP in the publication National Law Review analyzed the findings of the Mississippi case Carl E. Woodward, LLC v. Acceptance Indemnity Insurance: “the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit overruled the district court’s determination that a general contractor was insured as an additional insured on its subcontractor’s commercial general liability (CGL) policy for claims arising out of the allegedly defective work performed by the subcontractor.” “This case underscores the fact that many standard policy forms do not include completed operations coverage for additional insureds,” Murphy and Shapiro declared. “Owners and contractors that desire to have such coverage therefore need to check their contracts to be make sure the contract language requires completed operations coverage for additional insureds, and they also need to obtain and review the actual additional insured endorsement contained in their subcontractors’ insurance policies before work commences to make sure that the required completed operations insurance coverage is provided.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    February 10, 2012 —

    The Hartford Courant reports that Connecticut is trying a very old tactic in a construction defect suit. The law library building at the University of Connecticut suffered from leaks which have now been repaired. The state waited twelve years after was complete to file lawsuit, despite that Connecticut has a six-year statute of limitations on construction defect claims. Connecticut claims that the statute of limitations does apply to the state.

    The state is arguing that a legal principle from the thirteenth century allows it to go along with its suit. As befits a medieval part of common law, the principle is called “nullum tempus occurrit regi,” or “time does not run against the king.” In 1874, the American Law Register said that nullum tempus occurrit reipublicae “has been adopted in every one of the United States” and “is now firmly established law.”

    In the case of Connecticut, Connecticut Solicitor General Gregory D’Auria said that “the statute of limitations does not apply to the state.” He also noted that “the state did not ‘wait’ to file the lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed only after all other options and remedies were exhausted.”

    Connecticut also argued that “nullus tempus occurrit regi” applied in another construction defect case at the York Correctional Institution. The judge in that case ruled in December 2008 to let the case proceed. But in the library case, Judge William T. Cremins ruled in February 2009 that the statute of limitations should apply to the state as well. Both cases have been appealed, with the library case moving more quickly toward the Connecticut Supreme Court.

    Read the full story…

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

    IoT: Take Guessing Out of the Concrete Drying Process

    February 06, 2019 —
    Flooring, tiling, or painting on a concrete surface that is insufficiently dry can end up being a disaster. An experimental project recently used IoT sensors and AI to determine when it is safe to start finishing concrete surfaces. Haste and Imperfect Conditions Lead to Failure To successfully first cure and then dry concrete requires specific conditions. You need to maintain a temperature higher than 10°C and a relative humidity of greater than 80 percent in the concrete. Once the concrete is hardened, you have to make sure that it is dry enough for finishing. Typically, the relative humidity should not exceed 82 percent. Some flooring materials require a humidity of less than 75 percent for successful application. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Federal Government May Go to Different Green Building Standard

    February 12, 2013 —
    The federal government has expressed a commitment to environmentally sound, or “green” building practices, but now the question becomes who decides what constitutes a green building. The U.S. General Services Administration has started a public comment period on what certification program the GSA should recommend. Currently, the GSA uses the LEED standard from the U.S. Green Building Council. Although there are three green building standards, LEED, Green Globes, and the Living Building Challenge, only the first two are being seriously considered, according to a report on TriplePundit.com. The Green Globes program from the Green Building Initiative has its detractors, as some feel that the program fails to be sufficiently environmentally sound. Green Globes was created by a former lumber industry executive, Ward Hubbell, and is more permissive about woods and plastics used in construction. Hubbell defends the program, saying that the certification program is both rigorous and transparent. The U.S. Green Building Council also has its critics, and allegation have been made that LEED costs about twice as much as Green Globes in order to enrich the executives at the U.S. Green Building Council. Further, some claim that LEED certification involves lengthy delays. One architect criticized LEED, indicating that if he has questions he would “have to wait a month for a response.” The U.S. Department of Energy seems to be favoring Green Globes, as their review found it a better choice for meeting government requirements for new buildings. Conversely, the agency preferred LEED for modifying existing buildings. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Courthouse Reporter Series: The Bizarre Case That Required a 117-Year-Old Expert

    December 04, 2023 —
    A recent decision by the Georgia Court of Appeals, Munro v. Georgia Department of Transportation, highlights how overly specific and inflexible rules of evidence can create peculiar results. Munro involved a dispute over the design of a Georgia intersection. No. A23A0404, 2023 WL 4194716 (Ga. Ct. App. June 27, 2023). The plaintiff alleged that the defendant improperly designed the intersection, never corrected that improper design, and failed to properly maintain the intersection. These claims were dismissed for a very odd reason: the plaintiff’s expert witness wasn’t old enough. The case arose from a car accident. A vehicle in which the plaintiff Munro was a passenger collided with a tractor trailer crossing an intersection. Munro sued the Georgia Department of Transportation (DOT) for negligently designing, maintaining, and inspecting the intersection. The DOT filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on the ground of sovereign immunity and a motion to exclude the testimony of the Munros’ expert witness, among other motions. The trial court dismissed the case in full on the sovereign immunity ground and denied the other motions as moot. The Munros appealed. Reprinted courtesy of Todd Heffner, Troutman Pepper and Di'Vennci Lucas, Troutman Pepper Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Heffner may be contacted at todd.heffner@troutman.com

    Hawaii Federal District Court Rejects Bad Faith Claim

    November 30, 2016 —
    The federal district court for the district of Hawaii rejected the insured's argument that the insurer acted in bad faith because the insured had to contribute to a settlement of the underlying case. Hanover Ins. Co. v. Anova Food, LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146114 (D. Haw. Oct. 21, 2016). After a prior round of briefing, the court determined that Hanover had a duty to defend, but rejected Anova's claim for pre-tender fees. 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