BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window 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


    Shifting Fees and Costs in Nevada Construction Defect Cases

    New York Restaurant and Bar Fire Caused by Electric Defect

    Insolvency of Primary Carrier Does Not Invoke Excess Coverage

    More Details Emerge in Fatal Charlotte, NC, Scaffold Collapse

    Deck Police - The New Mandate for HOA's Takes Safety to the Next Level

    Hunton Insurance Recovery Partner Michael Levine Quoted on Why Courts Must Consider the Science of COVID-19

    California Committee Hosts a Hearing on Deadly Berkeley Balcony Collapse

    Conflict of Interest Accusations may Spark Lawsuit Against City and City Manager

    CLB Recommends Extensive Hawaii Contractor License Changes

    Use of Dispute Review Boards in the Construction Process

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You Left Out a Key Ingredient!”

    Repairs Could Destroy Evidence in Construction Defect Suit

    What is a Subordination Agreement?

    Top 10 Take-Aways from the 2024 Annual Forum Meeting in New Orleans

    Insurer Must Defend Where Possible Continuing Property Damage Occurred

    Fact of Settlement Communications in Underlying Lawsuits is Not Ground for Anti-SLAPP Motion in Subsequent Bad Faith Lawsuit

    The Comcast Project is Not Likely to Be Shut Down Too Long

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Named to Hudson Valley Magazine’s 2022 Top Lawyers List

    While Construction Permits Slowly Rise, Construction Starts and Completions in California Are Stagnant

    Death of Subcontractor’s Unjust Enrichment Claim Against Project Owner

    New Homes in Palo Alto to Be Electric-Car Ready

    Texas “your work” exclusion

    Blackouts Require a New Look at Backup Power

    It Has Started: Supply-Chain, Warehouse and Retail Workers of Essential Businesses Are Filing Suit

    Estoppel Certificate? Estop and Check Your Lease

    New York Governor Expected to Sign Legislation Greatly Expanding Recoverable Damages in Wrongful Death Actions

    Court Rules in Favor of Treasure Island Developers in Environmental Case

    Legal Risks of Green Building

    Supreme Court Opens Door for Challenges to Older Federal Regulations

    Ornate Las Vegas Palace Rented by Michael Jackson for Sale

    Construction Spending Drops in March

    Preparing the Next Generation of Skilled Construction Workers: AGC Workforce Development Plan

    Sixth Circuit Rejects Claim for Reverse Bad Faith

    9th Circuit Plumbs Through the Federal and State False Claims Acts

    Brooklyn Atlantic Yards Yields Dueling Suits on Tower

    Congress Addresses Homebuilding Credit Crunch

    Payne & Fears Recognized by Best Lawyers in 2025 Best Law Firms®

    Colorado Temporarily Requires Employers to Provide Sick Leave While Awaiting COVID-19 Testing

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Dining

    Florida SB 2022-736: Construction Defect Claims

    California Plant Would Convert Wood Waste Into Hydrogen Fuel

    Fort Lauderdale Partner Secures Defense Verdict for Engineering Firm in High-Stakes Negligence Case

    Building the Secondary Market for Reclaimed Building Materials

    Can a Contractor be Liable to Second Buyers of Homes for Construction Defects?

    EEOC Builds on Best Practice Guidance Regarding Harassment Within the Construction Industry

    What to Know Before Building a Guesthouse

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap – Considerations for Optimizing Dispute Resolution Clauses

    What Made the Savannah Harbor Upgrade So Complicated?

    The Great London Property Exodus Is in Reverse as Tenants Return

    Workarounds for Workers' Comp Immunity: How to Obtain Additional Insured Coverage when the Named Insured is Immune from Suit
    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

    Nevada Supreme Court Rejects Class Action Status, Reducing Homes from 1000 to 71

    July 02, 2014 —
    The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that the “Nevada Supreme Court has rejected a request for class action status for claims of damaged stucco from faulty construction by Del Webb Communities involving nearly 1,000 Sun City Summerlin residents,” however, “the court upheld the award of damages to 71 homeowners following a jury trial in Clark County District Court in 2008.” The case began in 2003, and the Las Vegas Review-Journal referred to it as “one of the largest construction-defect cases in Nevada history.” But District Judge Allan Earl denied class action lawsuit in 2006. “Attorneys were seeking $70 million for the homeowners.” In 2008, another court “determined that only 71 homeowners merited compensation totaling $4 million for the stucco issues.” According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, “[h]omeowners alleged that Del Webb failed to install metal screeds that would protect homes from water damage, and as a result, the homes suffered from cracked stucco, mold and weakened walls.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    NYC Supertall Tower Condo Board Sues Over Alleged Construction, Design 'Defects'

    October 04, 2021 —
    The condominium board at a 1,396-ft-tall residential tower on New York City’s Billionaires’ Row has sued the building’s developers, claiming to have identified more than 1,500 construction and design defects in common areas alone. 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

    The Private Works: Preliminary Notice | Are You Using the Correct Form?

    August 20, 2019 —
    The Private Works – Preliminary Notice form which contractors, subcontractors and suppliers had become accustomed to using for many years changed in 2004. Despite this change in law, many in the construction industry have still not started using the correct new form. Changes in the law, championed by the American Subcontractors’ Association, gave a significant new benefit to subcontractors and suppliers by giving the subcontractor or supplier some expectation of actually receiving notice of when a Notice of Completion or a Notice of Cessation has been recorded on many private works projects. The law also changed the language of the California Preliminary Notice that subcontractors and suppliers must use to protect their mechanics’ lien, bond claim and stop payment notice rights. If Owners do not send out the Notice of Completion as required by law they incur a diminishing of the protections afforded to them when they record a Notice of Completion or Notice of Cessation on many private works projects. The revised law requires private project owners to notify all subcontractors and suppliers within 10 days after recording a Notice of Completion or Notice of Cessation that a Notice of Completion or a Notice of Cessation has actually been recorded. In order to receive such notice, the subcontractor or supplier must properly serve the new form of Preliminary Notice. If this properly occurs and the private project owner provides the required notice, then the subcontractor or supplier will have 30 days to record a Mechanics’ Lien. However, if an owner under such circumstances fails to properly notify a subcontractor or supplier within 10 days after recording a Notice of Completion or Notice of Cessation, then the Subcontractor or supplier will have 90 days to record a Mechanics’ Lien. The details of the law can be found in California Civil Code sections 8190, 8414 and 8416. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Esq., Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Colorado SB 15-177 UPDATE: Senate Business, Labor, & Technology Committee Refers Construction Defect Reform Bill to Full Senate

    April 01, 2015 —
    On March 18th, following a lengthy hearing with testimony and questioning for and against Senate Bill 15-177, the Senate Business, Labor & Technology Committee voted 6 to 2 to refer the bill, with new amendments, to the full Senate. While the main points of the bill remain strongly intact (check here for Senate Bill 177’s particulars), bill sponsors Senators Scheffler and Ulibarri offered four amendments, designed to bring additional compromise and clarity to the bill. The committee ultimately adopted these amendments, described below. Amendment 16 removed a prior prohibition in the bill that would have prevented attorneys from assisting in the preparation of the notice required to be provided to all homeowners before the commencement of a construction defect claim. Amendment 19 complemented 16 by providing further clarification regarding the contents and specificities required in said notice, including a disclosure of projected attorneys’ fees, costs, duration, and financial impact of pursuing construction defect claims. Amendment 17 permitted homeowners to approve the pursuit of construction defect claims through written consent. Lastly, Amendment 18 provided clarification regarding the bill’s requirement that mediators and arbitrators be selected and approved through mutual agreement of the parties. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Derek J. Lindenschmidt, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Lindenschmidt may be contacted at lindenschmidt@hhmrlaw.com

    Lightstone Committing $2 Billion to Hotel Projects

    February 26, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- David Lichtenstein, whose real estate company owned Extended Stay Hotels when the chain went bankrupt, is committing $2 billion to developing and investing in lodging properties. Lightstone Group is choosing “top-branded” select-service properties, those with limited amenities, in proven U.S. markets for its projects, Lichtenstein said in an interview. As part of the strategy, Lightstone has teamed up with Marriott International Inc. to build five Moxy hotels in New York -- four in Manhattan and one in Brooklyn. The “micro” lodgings, with high-tech features and smaller-than-average rooms, are geared toward younger travelers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadja Brandt, Bloomberg
    Ms. Brandt may be contacted at nbrandt@bloomberg.net

    Construction Manager’s Win in Michigan after Michigan Supreme Court Finds a Subcontractor’s Unintended Faulty Work is an ‘Occurrence’ Under CGL

    August 03, 2020 —
    On June 29, 2020, the Michigan Supreme Court overturned a longstanding precedent that commercial general liability (“CGL”) insurers have historically relied upon to deny insurance coverage for claims involving pre-1986 CGL policies. See Hawkeye-Security Ins. Co. v. Vector Const. Co., 185 Mich. App. 369, 372, 460 N.W.2d 329, 331 (1990). In its recent ruling, the state Supreme Court unanimously agreed that an Insurance Services Office, Inc. (“ISO”) 1986 standard CGL policy, which is sold to construction contractors across the United States, provides coverage for property damage to a policyholder’s work product that resulted from a subcontractor’s unintended faulty workmanship. Skanska USA Bldg. Inc. v. M.A.P. Mech. Contractors, Inc., No. 159510, 2020 WL 3527909 (Mich. June 29, 2020). In 2008, Skanska USA Building, Inc., the construction manager on a renovation project for Mid-Michigan Medical Center, signed a subcontract with defendant M.A.P. Mechanical Contractors (“MAP”) to install a new heating and cooling (“HVAC”) system. Id. During the renovation, MAP installed some of the expansion joints in the new HVAC system backwards. Id. The defective installation caused approximately $1.4 million in property damage to concrete, steel and the heating system, which Skanska discovered nearly two years after MAP completed the project. Id. After performing the repairs and replacing the damaged property, Skanska sought repayment for the repair costs from MAP and also submitted a claim to Amerisure seeking coverage as an insured under the CGL policy. Id. When Amerisure rejected Skanska’s claim, Skanska sued both parties. Id. Amerisure relied on the holding in Hawkeye and argued that MAP’s defective workmanship was not a covered “occurrence” under the CGL policy, which the policy defined as an accident. Id. at *4. The Michigan Court of Appeals ignored the express language contained in the CGL policy and applied a prior appellate court precedent from Hawkeye, finding that MAP’s faulty work was not an “occurrence” and thus, did not trigger CGL coverage. Id. at *4. The Court of Appeals further reasoned that Skanska was an Amerisure policyholder and that the only property damage was to Skanska’s own work, which was not covered under the CGL policy. Id. at *5. In a landmark decision, the Michigan Supreme Court reversed, holding unanimously that the Court of Appeals incorrectly applied the holding of Hawkeye because it failed to consider the impact of the 1986 revisions to standard CGL insurance policies. Id. at *10. Chief Justice Bridget M. McCormack explained that the Hawkeye decision rested on the 1973 version of the ISO form insurance policy, which specifically excluded certain business risks from coverage such as property damage to a policyholder’s own work. Id. The Supreme Court agreed that while Hawkeye was correctly decided, it did not apply here because the 1986 revised ISO policy includes an exception for property damage caused by a subcontractor’s unintentional faulty work. Id. The Supreme Court said that under the plain reading of the current CGL policy language, an “accident” could include a subcontractor’s unintentional defective work that damaged a policyholder’s work product and thus, may qualify as an “occurrence” covered under the policy. Id. at *9. The Supreme Court defined an “accident” (which was not defined in the Amerisure policy) as “an undefined contingency, a casualty, a happening by chance, something out of the usual course of things, unusual, fortuitous, not anticipated, and not naturally to be expected.” Id. at *5; see Allstate Ins. Co. v. McCarn, 466 Mich. 277, 281, 645 N.W.2d 20, 23 (2002). The Supreme Court noted that there was no evidence suggesting that MAP purposefully installed the expansion joints backwards, nor was there evidence indicating that the parties affected by MAP’s negligence anticipated, foresaw, or expected MAP’s defective installation or property damage. Skanska, 2020 WL 3527909, at *4. Therefore, the Supreme Court concluded that an “occurrence” may have happened, which would trigger coverage under the CGL policy. Id. at *10. Although this landmark decision changes Michigan law, the decision is limited to cases involving the 1986 ISO policy language revisions to CGL insurance policies. Id. The Supreme Court's decision does not overturn Hawkeye, but rather limits Hawkeye’s authority to cases involving the 1973 ISO form. Id. Gabrielle Szlachta-McGinn was a summer associate at Newmeyer Dillion as part of the firm's 2020 summer class. You may learn more about Newmeyer Dillion's construction litigation services and find the group's key contacts at https://www.newmeyerdillion.com/construction-litigation/. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Delaware Strengthens Jurisdictional Defenses for Foreign Corporations Registered to Do Business in Delaware

    April 28, 2016 —
    The days of companies being sued in Delaware based solely upon their compliance with Delaware’s registration statutes appear over. Recently, the Delaware Supreme Court, in Genuine Parts Co. v. Cepec[1], held that Delaware Courts cannot exercise jurisdiction over a foreign corporation registered to do business in Delaware for claims unrelated to its conduct in Delaware. In Delaware, foreign corporations must register to do business and designate a registered agent in Delaware to accept service of process to sell its products or services.[2] Since 1988, Delaware has construed these registration laws as foreign corporations’ express consent to general jurisdiction.[3] Reprinted courtesy of White & Williams LLP attorneys Randall MacTough, Timothy Martin and Christian Singewald Mr. MacTough may be contacted at mactoughr@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Martin may be contacted at martint@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Singewald may be contacted at singewaldc@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Manhattan Site for Supertall Condo Finds New Owner at Auction

    December 15, 2016 —
    A development site slated for an almost 1,000-foot condo tower on Manhattan’s far east side found a new owner through a bankruptcy auction Tuesday, removing a hurdle for construction after about a year of delays. Gamma Real Estate, the lender to the project, won the auction with a credit bid of $86 million and is poised to take control of the site, pending approval from the bankruptcy court, said David Schechtman, a broker with Meridian Investment Sales, which handled the auction with another brokerage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Oshrat Carmiel, Bloomberg
    Mr. Carmiel can be followed on Twitter @OshratCarmiel