BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction experts
    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: “I Never Had a Chance”

    Thank You for 18 Straight Years in the Virginia Legal Elite in Construction Law

    Recent Third Circuit OSHA Decision Sounds Alarm for Employers and Their Officers

    Team Temporarily Stabilizes Delaware River Bridge Crack

    CDJ’s #2 Topic of the Year: Ewing Constr. Co., Inc. v. Amerisure Ins. Co., 2014 Tex. LEXIS 39 (Tex. Jan.17, 2014)

    One Colorado Court Allows Negligence Claim by General Contractor Against Subcontractor

    The OFCCP’s November 2019 Updated Technical Assistance Guide: What Every Federal Construction Contractor Should Know

    US Secretary of Labor Withdraws Guidance Regarding Independent Contractors

    New Megablimp to Deliver to Remote Alaskan Construction Sites

    Garlock Five Years Later: Recent Decisions Illustrate Ongoing Obstacles to Asbestos Trust Transparency

    Denver Council Committee Approves Construction Defects Ordinance

    Issue and Claim Preclusion When Forced to Litigate Similar Issues in Different Forums: White River Village, LLP v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland

    Court finds subcontractor responsible for defending claim

    California Court of Appeal Affirms Trial Court’s Denial of anti-SLAPP Motion in Dispute Over Construction of Church Facilities

    Home Buyers will Pay More for Solar

    Federal Magistrate Judge Recommends Rescission of Policies

    Walking the Tightrope of SB 35

    Suit Limitation Provision Upheld

    OSHA Investigating Bridge Accident Resulting in Construction Worker Fatality

    City Sues over Leaking Sewer System

    Former SNC-Lavalin CEO Now Set for Trial in Bribe Case

    Zetlin & De Chiara Ranked in the Top Tier for Construction Law by Legal 500 USA

    Autovol’s Affordable Housing Project with Robotic Automation

    Is it the Dawning of the Age of Strict Products Liability for Contractors in California?

    Non-compliance With Endorsement Means No Indemnity Coverage

    US Court Disputes $1.8B AECOM Damage Award in ‘Remarkable Fraud’ Suit

    SFAA Commends U.S. Senate for Historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill

    Are You Satisfying WISHA Standards?

    A Lack of Sophistication With the Construction Contract Can Play Out In an Ugly Dispute

    Merger to Create Massive Los Angeles Construction Firm

    Arizona Court Cites California Courts to Determine Construction Defect Coverage is Time Barred

    Lewis Brisbois Ranks Among Top 25 Firms on NLJ’s 2021 Women in Law Scorecard

    ASCE Statement On House Passage Of The Precip Act

    The Unpost, Post: Dynamex and the Construction Indianapolis

    Speculative Luxury Homebuilding on the Rise

    Slip and Fall Claim from Standing Water in Parking Garage

    Construction Delays: Which Method Should Be Used to Calculate Delay?

    Best Practices for Installing Networks in New Buildings

    COVID-19 Case Remanded for Failure to Meet Amount in Controversy

    DC Metro Extension’s Precast Supplier Banned from Federal Contracts

    Another Reason to Always Respond (or Hensel Phelps Wins One!)

    As Natural Gas Expands in Gulf, Residents Fear Rising Damage

    Apartment Investors Turn to Suburbs After Crowding Cities

    Amendments to California Insurance Code to Require Enhanced Claims Handling Requirements for Claims Arising Out Of Catastrophic Events

    Another Reminder that Contracts are Powerful in Virginia

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    How Contractors Can Prevent Fraud in Their Workforce

    Manhattan’s Property Boom Pushes Landlords to Sell Early

    Colorado Homes Approved Despite being Too Close Together

    Connecticut Reverses Course for Construction Managers on School Projects
    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

    Amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 – Expert Testimony

    October 30, 2023 —
    In April, the Supreme Court sent a list of proposed amendments to Congress that amend the Federal Rules of Evidence. Absent action by Congress, the rules go into effect December 1, 2023. The proposed amendments affect Rules 106, 615 and, relevant to this article, 702. Rule 702 addresses testimony by an expert witness. The proposed rule reads as follows (new material is underlined; matters omitted are lined through): A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if the proponent demonstrates to the court that it is more likely than not that:
    1. the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;
    2. the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;
    3. the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and
    4. the expert has reliably applied expert’s opinion reflects a reliable application of the principles and methods to the facts of the case.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    Subcontractor Sued for Alleged Defective Work

    June 11, 2014 —
    The Louisiana Record reported that “[a] construction company is suing a subcontractor for alleged defective work on two construction projects” in New Orleans, Louisiana. New Beginnings Enterprises and J. Fernando Arriola are “accused of providing defective labor and materials, failing to properly supervise construction on the properties, failing to obtain inspections required under building codes, failing to construct dwellings in accordance with plans and specifications and failing to perform agreements in a workmanlike manner,” according to the Louisiana Record. Plaintiffs including Bartel Construction LLC seek $209,500 in damages “as additional sums for defective and incomplete work, lost profits, consequential damages and attorney’s fees.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New American Home Construction Nears Completion Despite Obstacles

    January 29, 2014 —
    Construction of the New American Home in Las Vegas, Nevada, to be completed for the 2014 International Builders’ Show, has faced enormous challenges, according to Jennifer Goodman writing for Big Builder. Josh Anderson, owner of Element Building Co., told Goodman “he couldn’t have imagined what lay ahead when he signed on in fall 2012 to the project, which is co-sponsored by BUILDER and the NAHB.” Challenges began during the “design phase” when Anderson “was troubled by the sitting of the house on its lot in the tony Sky Terrace subdivision.” Furthermore, he “balked at the floor plan, which encompassed a traditional design aesthetic and opulent touches.” The project’s architect, Barry Berkus, passed away in late 2012, and his son, Jeffrey Berkus, took over for him. After the plans were “complete and approved by the city,” a labor shortage in Las Vegas made it “particularly difficult to find skilled framers.” The shortage also increased labor costs. Anderson also contended with weather anomalies: “Over the summer, the area set a record for the most consecutive wet days in 30 years. Winds blew sawdust and rain into the open structure, ruining 350 sheets of drywall and slowing down construction,” according to Big Builder. The “mammoth project” is close to completion. Anderson told Big Builder, “I’ve always been a sucker for a challenge.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/17/24) – Housing Inflation to Remain High, Proptech Investment to Fall and Office Vacancy Rates to Reach Peak in 2025

    August 26, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, construction backlog to see positives signs, regional banks to be conservative on buybacks, U.S. metro areas to permit few new housing units, and more!
    • Venture capital investments in proptech and adjacent companies fell 14.3% in the first half of the year. (Leslie Shaver, Multifamily Dive)
    • The expectation of interest rate cuts by the Federal Reserve later this year due to easing inflation and cooling economic growth is a positive sign for construction backlog. (Sebastian Obando, Construction Dive)
    • The U.S. office real estate sector is now in three markets, each with different performance, but the overall office vacancy rate will reach a 21.6% peak in the second half of 2025. (Nish Amarnath, Construction Dive)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Minnesota Addresses How Its Construction Statute of Repose Applies to Condominiums

    April 27, 2020 —
    Courts often struggle with the question of when the statute of repose starts to run for construction projects that involve multiple buildings or phases. In Village Lofts at St. Anthony Falls Ass’n v. Housing Partners III-Lofts, LLC, 937 N.W.2d 430 (Minn. 2020) (Village Lofts), the Supreme Court of Minnesota addressed how Minnesota’s 10-year statute of repose, Minn. Stat. § 541.051, applies to claims arising from the construction of a condominium complex. The court held that the statute of repose begins to run at different times for: a) statutory residential warranty claims brought pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 327A.01 to 327A.08, et. seq.; and b) common law claims arising out of the defective and unsafe condition of the condominium buildings. As stated in Village Lofts, Housing Partners III-Lofts, LLC (Housing Partners) developed the Village Lofts at St. Anthony Falls, a condominium complex consisting of Building A and Building B. Housing Partners retained Kraus-Anderson Construction Company (Kraus-Anderson) as the general contractor for Building A. Kraus-Anderson retained Elness Sweeney Graham Architects, Inc. (ESG), Doody Mechanical, Inc. (Doody) and Kenneth S. Kendle, P.E. (Kendle) to work on Building A. In September 2002, the City of Minneapolis (City) issued a partial certificate of occupancy (CO) for Building A, including the building’s public spaces. On October 4, 2002, Housing Partners filed the declaration creating the Village Lofts at St. Anthony Falls condominium, to be operated by Village Lofts at St. Anthony Association (Village Lofts Association). On October 10, 2002, Housing Partners sold the first unit in Building A and in November of 2003, the City issued a CO for the entire building, excluding two units. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC Recognized Among The Top 50 Construction Law FirmsTM of 2023 by Construction Executive

    June 26, 2023 —
    ACS is proud to announce that it has once again been ranked among The Top 50 Construction Law Firms in the Construction Executive 2023 rankings. Since its first publication in 2003, Construction Executive magazine has served as the leading source for news, market developments, and business issues impacting the construction industry, and its articles are designed to help owners and top managers run a more profitable and productive construction business. Construction Executive established the rankings by asking over 600 hundred U.S. construction law firms to complete a survey. Constructive Executive’s data collection includes: 2022 revenues from the firm’s construction practice, the number of attorneys in the firm’s construction practice, percentage of the firm’s total revenues derived from its construction practice, the number of states in which the firm is licensed to practice, the year in which the construction practice was established, and the number of construction industry clients served during the fiscal year 2022. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC

    Florida Supreme Court Adopts Federal Summary Judgment Standard, Substantially Conforming Florida’s Rule 1.510 to Federal Rule 56

    June 07, 2021 —
    Effective May 1, 2021, the Florida courts will transition to a new summary judgment standard meant to “align Florida’s summary judgment standard with that of the federal courts and of the supermajority of states that have already adopted the federal summary judgment standard.” In re Amends. to Fla. Rule of Civ. Pro. 1.510, 309 So. 3d 192, 192 (Fla. 2020). Consistent with this amendment, Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510 has been amended to adopt the federal summary judgment rule, with exceptions for timing-related issues. The Florida Supreme Court’s most recent opinion on rule 1.510 and the text of new rule 1.510 can be found here. As background, on December 31, 2020, the Florida Supreme Court adopted the federal summary judgment standard by amending Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510(c) to include the following sentence: “The summary judgment standard provided for in this rule shall be construed and applied in accordance with the federal summary judgment standard articulated in Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1976); and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (1986) [(the ‘Celotex trilogy’)].” In re Amends. to Fla. Rule of Civ. Pro. 1.510, 309 So. 3d at 196. The court’s amendment was slated to take effect on May 1, 2021, subject to a public comment period. The court also sought guidance from the Florida Bar’s Civil Procedure Rules Committee. After careful consideration of numerous responses, the court ultimately chose to adopt the substance of the text from federal rule 56. Along with its amendments, the court provides substantial guidance as to how the Florida courts and practitioners should interpret the new rule. A summary of the court’s thorough discussion follows. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Water Damage Sub-Limit Includes Tear-Out Costs

    June 06, 2022 —
    The Florida Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling that the homeowner policy's sub-limit for water damage included tear-out costs. Sec. First Ins. Co. v. Vazquez, 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 1205 (Fla. Ct. App. Feb. 18, 2022). A discharge of water from the cast iron pipes caused damage to the home. The water escaped as a result of the failed cast iron pipes due to wear and tear, deterioration, and corrosion. The insurer acknowledged coverage for the water damage and paid $10,000 under the Limited Water Damage Endorsement (LWD Endorsement). The provision recited that "'[t]he limit of liability for all damage to covered property provided by this endorsement is $10,000 per loss." The insureds' suit argued they were entitled to additional benefits for the cost to tear out and replace a part of the concrete slab - an action necessary to reach the corroded pipes. The parties stipulated that the cost of the tear-out would be $40,000. The parties agreed that the LWD Endorsement provided coverage of both water damage and tear-out costs. They also agreed that the cost to repair and/or replace the corroded pipes was not covered. They disagreed, however, over the proper interpretation of the limitation of liability provision in the LWD Endorsement. The insured argued that the $10,000 limit applied to both water damage and tear-out costs. The insureds argued that the $10,00 limit applied only to water damage to covered property. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com