BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield 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


    Partner Lisa M. Rolle and Associate Vito John Marzano Obtain Dismissal of Third-Party Indemnification Claims

    ASCE Statement On White House "Accelerating Infrastructure Summit"

    A Trio of Environmental Decisions from the Fourth Circuit

    Drones, Googleplexes and Hyperloops

    Risk Management for Condominium Conversions

    Lightstone Committing $2 Billion to Hotel Projects

    RCW 82.32.655 Tax Avoidance Statute/Speculative Building

    White House Seeks $310M To Fix Critical San Diego Wastewater Plant

    United States Supreme Court Limits Class Arbitration

    Court Confirms No Duty to Reimburse for Prophylactic Repairs Prior to Actual Collapse

    Pollution Exclusion Does Not Apply To Concrete Settling Dust

    Finding of No Coverage Overturned Due to Lack of Actual Policy

    Hawaii Court of Appeals Affirms Broker's Liability for Failure to Renew Coverage

    Brazil World Cup Soccer Crisis Deepens With Eighth Worker Death

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    What I Learned at My First NAWIC National Conference

    Federal Lawsuit Accuses MOX Contractors of Fraud

    Bond Principal Necessary on a Mechanic’s Lien Claim

    James R. Lynch Appointed to the Washington State Capital Project Review Committee

    Damron Agreement Questioned in Colorado Casualty Insurance v Safety Control Company, et al.

    Nation’s Top Court Limits EPA's Authority in Clean Air Case

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

    Avoiding 'E-trouble' in Construction Litigation

    Negligence of Property Appraiser

    Mass. Gas Leak Follows NTSB Final Report, Call for Reforms

    CDJ’s #6 Topic of the Year: Does Colorado Need Construction Defect Legislation to Spur Affordable Home Development?

    Veterans Day – Thank You for Your Service

    The Future for Tall Buildings Could Be Greener

    Surplus Lines Carriers Cannot Compel Arbitration in Louisiana

    Hartford Stadium Controversy Still Unresolved

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    #6 CDJ Topic: Construction Defect Legislative Developments

    2017 Colorado Construction Defect Recap: Colorado Legislature and Judiciary Make Favorable Advances for Development Community

    Hunton Insurance Recovery Lawyers Ranked by Chambers as Top Insurance Practitioners

    Suppliers of Inherently Dangerous Raw Materials Remain Excluded from the Protections of the Component Parts Doctrine

    Who's Who Legal Recognizes Two White and Williams Lawyers as Thought/Global Leaders in Insurance and Reinsurance

    New Opportunities for “Small” Construction Contractors as SBA Adjusts Its Size Standards Again Due to Unprecedented Inflation

    Gatluak Ramdiet Named to The National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List

    California insured’s duty to cooperate and insurer’s right to select defense counsel

    Low Interest Rates Encourages Homeowners to become Landlords

    Proposed Law Protecting Tenants Amended: AB 828 Updated

    Withdrawal Liability? Read your CBA

    Insurer Beware: Failure to Defend Ends with Hefty Verdict

    Can an App Renovate a Neighborhood?

    Minnesota Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C" Grade for the Second Time

    “Professional Best Efforts” part 2– Reservation of Rights for Engineers who agree to “best” efforts? (law note)

    Glendale City Council Approves Tohono O’odham Nation Casino

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

    Court Holds That Self-Insured Retentions Exhaust Vertically And Awards Insured Mandatory Prejudgment Interest in Stringfellow Site Coverage Dispute

    Explore Legal Immigration Options for Construction Companies
    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

    Rio Olympics Work Was a Mess and Then Something Curious Happened

    April 06, 2016 —
    In early 2014, a senior Olympic Committee official returned from a trip to Rio de Janeiro and declared Brazil’s preparations for the Summer Games to be the worst he’d ever seen. In the two years since, a crippling recession set in, dozens of construction executives were ensnared in a nationwide corruption scandal and the president has been pushed to the brink of impeachment. And the preparations? They’re basically fine now, actually. In what is emerging as a rare bright spot in a country buffeted by crisis on all sides, the organizing committee is saying that more than 95 percent of the venues are complete some four months ahead of the opening ceremony and, what’s more, data shows spending has largely remained under control. Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg reporters Jonathan Levin, Tariq Pania and David Biller Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Value of Photographic Evidence in Construction Litigation

    April 26, 2021 —
    If a picture is worth a thousand words, can it be worth a thousand dollars? Ten thousand? Maybe, if it provides key evidence in a construction dispute. Litigating a construction case involves each side telling their story. Details and visual context make a story compelling. Evidence and corroboration make a story persuasive. Photographs can help on both of these fronts. The Value of Photographic Evidence in Construction Litigation Consider the following examples:
    • A dispute relates to the timeliness of particular work. An employee has a memory of a load of materials arriving to the site later than it should have, but the records are incomplete or ambiguous about when it actually occurred. If the employee also took a photo of the materials, on the day they arrived, they could match up the date of the photo to their memory and build a clear timeline.
    • A dispute relates to the presence or absence of obstructions in drilled shafts. There are no available photographs or videos of the work due to site restrictions. Presentation of this type of case may be severely limited by not being able to show photos depicting the size, shape and type of material removed from the shafts, and by the lack of video depicting the work.
    Reprinted courtesy of Marie Mueller, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Ms. Mueller may be contacted at mmueller@verrill-law.com

    1 De Haro: A Case Study on Successful Cross-Laminated Timber Design and Construction in San Francisco

    November 06, 2023 —
    At the intersection of San Francisco’s SOMA, Potrero Hill and Showplace Square districts, a first-of-its-kind building offers an example of the potential widespread success of mass timber construction in the United States. 1 De Haro, a 134,000-square-foot, 4-story office and light industrial project built by Bay Area developer SKS Partners is not only the first cross-laminated timber (CLT) building in the San Francisco, it is also the first multistory mass timber building of its type to be fully executed in California and the first CLT project in the United States to be delivered via railways. We recently sat down with Yvonne Fisher and Lee Ishida of SKS to discuss the unique design process, marketing success and overall industry buzz surrounding one of their latest projects. Reprinted courtesy of Cait Horner, Pillsbury, Adam J. Weaver, Pillsbury and Allan C. Van Vliet, Pillsbury Ms. Horner may be contacted at cait.horner@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Weaver may be contacted at adam.weaver@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Van Vliet may be contacted at allan.vanvliet@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ahlers & Cressman Presents a Brief History of Liens

    August 20, 2014 —
    Brad Westmoreland on Ahlers & Cressman PLLC’s blog, presented the history of liens in the U.S., going back to 1789. In fact, the lien was created in response to the need of swift and extensive construction in Washington D.C. “Although it had an abundance of land at the time, America was short on labor and capital,” Westmoreland wrote. “Knowing the state of things, builders were hesitant to provide labor and materials without guarantees that owners would be able to pay.” According to the Ahlers & Cressman PLLC blog, Thomas Jefferson solved the issue by urging “the Legislature of Maryland to pass a law giving builders ‘a lien upon newly created values of [their] labors.’ The new law would provide builders with the assurance that contracts would not result in a total loss should the owners fail to pay.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Defect Disputes: Know Your Measure of Damages!!!!!

    January 21, 2025 —
    Remember this: know your measure of damages in a construction defect dispute. If you don’t, as shown below, the outcome can be unforgiving. The measure of damages is one of your most important elements of proof. You are filing suit for damages; thus, knowing what you can reasonably recovery is paramount. In a recent dispute, Bandklayder Development, LLC v. Sabga, 50 Fla.L.Weekly D91e (Fla. 3d DCA 2025), a residential developer sold a single-family house while it was under construction in an as-is purchase agreement. Post-closing, the purchasers claimed defects and served a Florida Statutes Chapter 558 notice of construction defects letter. The purchaser subsequently initiated a construction defect lawsuit. During the nonjury trial, the purchaser’s expert testified that the purchasers suffered damages approximating $323,000 calculated as of January 19, 2022 (which was the date of the expert’s report). The expert further testified that the cost to finish the incomplete/defective work increased by 35% at the date of the May 2023 trial. However, the expert never testified as to the amount of damages as of the date of the contractual breach, which at the latest, would have been in April 2018 when the notice of construction defects letter was sent (or, at its earliest, June 2017 when closing occurred). At trial, the judge entered judgment for the purchasers in the amount of about $425,0000. This was reversed on appeal with judgment to be entered in favor of the developer. Why? Because the purchasers employed the wrong measure of damages and the only thing that prevented them from introducing the right measure of damages was within their control. Harsh outcome for not applying the correct measure of damages! 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

    City of Aspen v. Burlingame Ranch II Condominium Owners Association: Clarifying the Application of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act

    June 17, 2024 —
    On June 17, 2024, the Colorado Supreme Court delivered a significant opinion in the case of City of Aspen v. Burlingame Ranch II Condominium Owners Association (Case No. 22SC293). This decision provides crucial guidance on the interplay between the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act (“CGIA”) and the economic loss rule in the context of construction defect claims. Background of the Case The case arose from a construction defect dispute between the City of Aspen, which served as the developer and declarant for the affordable housing condominiums at issue, and the Burlingame Ranch II Condominium Owners Association, the HOA created by Aspen to manage the association after the period of declarant control. The Association alleged that Aspen breached various warranties related to the construction of affordable housing units, leading to structural deficiencies. Aspen argued that the CGIA barred these claims because they could lie in tort. The Lower Court’s Decision The district court initially agreed with Aspen, holding that the Association’s claims sounded in tort and were therefore barred by the CGIA. The court relied on the principle that governmental immunity protects public entities from liability for claims that ‘lie in tort or could lie in tort,’ as established by the CGIA. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Ninth Circuit Affirms Duty to Defend CERCLA Section 104 (e) Letter

    October 10, 2013 —
    The Ninth Circuit held there is a duty to defend not only a PRP letter issued by the EPA, but also a section 104 (e) letter. Anderson Brothers, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 18156 (9th Cir. Aug. 30, 2013). The insured received two letters from the EPA notifying it of potential liability under CERCLA for environmental contamination of the Portland Harbor Superfund Site. The first letter was received in January 2008, and stated that the EPA sought the insured's cooperation in its investigation of the release of hazardous substances at the site. The letter enclosed an extensive, 82-question "Information Request" seeking information about the insured's current and former activities at the site. The letter informed the insured that its voluntary cooperation was sought, but compliance with the Information Request was required by law and failure to respond could result in an enforcement action and civil penalties of $32,500 per day. The insured tendered the 104 (e) letter to St. Paul and requested a defense and indemnity pursuant to the CGL policy. St. Paul declined to provide a defense because the letter did not constitute a "suit," which was required by the policy to trigger the duty to defend. The second letter from the EPA, received in November 2009, was entitled "General Notice Letter for the Portland Superfund Site" and notified the insured that it was a "potentially responsible party ("PRP"). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Colorado Construction Defect Action Reform: HB 17-1279 Approved by Colorado Legislature; Governor’s Approval Imminent

    June 05, 2017 —
    Colorado developers frequently cite Colorado’s Construction Defect Action Reform Act (CDARA) as an obstacle to building new condominiums in the state. Developers contend that the law makes it too easy for condo boards to sue developers for workmanship issues, however trivial. As a result, Colorado has seen significant growth in the development of rental apartments, while development of new, for-sale, multi-unit housing, has declined in the state. In 10 years, new condo development in Colorado dropped from 20 percent to just 3 percent of total new-housing starts. Recognizing this issue, Governor Hickenlooper and the Colorado Legislature have taken an interest in reforming CDARA by, among other things, making it more difficult for condo boards and associations to sue construction professionals. Well on its way to becoming law, HB 17-1279 does exactly that. After the enactment of HB 17-1279, the executive boards of homeowners’ associations (HOA) in common interest communities will have to satisfy three broad elements before bringing suit against a construction professional on behalf of the community’s individual unit owners. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Erik G. Nielsen, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Nielsen may be contacted at egnielsen@swlaw.com