BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimony
    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


    2024 Construction Law Update

    Specific Source of Water Not Relevant in Construction Defect Claim

    Court Rules that Damage From Squatter’s Fire is Not Excluded as Vandalism or Malicious Mischief

    Steven Cvitanovic Recognized in JD Supra's 2017 Readers' Choice Awards

    Revolutionizing Buildings with Hybrid Energy Systems and Demand Response

    Terminating Notice of Commencement Without Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    Allegations of Actual Property Damage Necessary to Invoke Duty to Defend

    EPA Expands Energy Star, Adds Indoor airPLUS

    The Devil is in the Details: The Texas Construction Trust Fund Pitfalls Residential Remodelers (and General Contractors) Should Avoid

    A Sample Itinerary to get the Most out of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar

    What the FIU Bridge Collapse Says About Peer Review

    Preventing Acts of God: Construction Accidents Caused by Outside Factors

    ASCE Statement on Congress Passage of WRDA 2024

    Is the Event You Are Claiming as Unforeseeable Delay Really Unforeseeable?

    Just Because I May Be An “Expert” Does Not Mean I Am Giving Expert Testimony

    “Over? Did you say ‘over’?”

    Golden Gate Bridge's $76 Million Suicide Nets Near Approval

    Florida Extends Filing Time for Claims Subject to the Statute of Repose

    Public-Private Partnerships: When Will Reality Meet the Promise?

    Subsidence Exclusion Bars Coverage for Damage Caused by Landslide

    COVID-19 Response: California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board Implements Sweeping New Regulations to Prevent COVID-19 in the Workplace

    Supreme Court Rejects “Wholly Groundless” Exception to Question of Arbitrability

    The Washington Supreme Court Rules that a Holder of a Certificate of Insurance Is Entitled to Coverage

    Navigating Construction Contracts in the Energy Sector – Insights from Sheppard Mullin’s Webinar Series

    COVID-19 Vaccine Considerations for Employers in the Construction Industry

    Anchorage Building Codes Credited for Limited Damage After Quakes

    What Sustainable Building Materials Will the Construction Industry Rely on in 2020?

    When is a Residential Subcontractor not Subject to the VCPA? Read to Find Out

    Building Materials Price Increase Clause for Contractors and Subcontractors – Three Options

    Give Way or Yield? The Jurisdiction of Your Contract Does Matter! (Law note)

    Georgia Court Reaffirms Construction Defect Decision

    California’s Prompt Payment Laws: Just Because an Owner Has Changed Course Doesn’t Mean It’s Changed Course on Previous Payments

    Granting Stay, Federal Court Reviews Construction Defect Coverage in Hawaii

    Arbitration Provisions Are Challenging To Circumvent

    The Families First Coronavirus Response Act: What Every Employer Should Know

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Win Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings In Favor of Insurer

    Chambers USA 2022 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    Balancing Risk and Reward: The Complexities of Stadium Construction Projects

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2022 Top Lawyers!

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition of Seattle’s 25-story McGuire Apartments Building

    What to Know Before Building a Guesthouse

    A Court-Side Seat: A Poultry Defense, a Houston Highway and a CERCLA Consent Decree that Won’t Budge

    First Circuit Rejects Insurer’s “Insupportable” Duty-to-Cooperate Defense in Arson Coverage Suit

    Suffolk Construction Drywall Suits Involve Claim for $3 Million in Court Costs

    Partner Jason Taylor and Senior Associate Danielle Kegley Successful in Appeal of Summary Disposition on Priority of Coverage Dispute in the Michigan Court of Appeals

    Cyber Thieves Phish Away a $735K Payment to a Minnesota Contractor

    CSLB Begins Processing Applications for New B-2 License

    Settling with Some, But Not All, of the Defendants in a Construction Defect Case

    Idaho District Court Affirms Its Role as the Gatekeeper of Expert Testimony

    Oracle Sues Procore, Claims Theft of Trade Secrets for ERP Integration
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Drawing from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Fairfield's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act Enacted

    July 14, 2016 —
    On May 11, 2016, President Obama signed the Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) into law, creating a private federal civil cause of action for trade secret misappropriation. This landmark legislation, a product of bipartisan backing and significant support from the business community, will affect businesses and individuals operating in almost every economic sector across the country. The DTSA will potentially be at issue any time an employee with access to confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information moves on to a competitor or launches a startup that competes with the former employer. This will be true so long as the product or service that the trade secret relates to is either used in or intended for use in interstate or foreign commerce. Under present commerce clause jurisprudence, the vast majority of businesses providing products and services in the United States will be affected by this new law. The DTSA will provide, for the first time, a codified federal civil remedy for misappropriation of trade secrets. Although most states have adopted some version of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“UTSA”), there remains significant variation between the states in their application of the UTSA and litigants face significantly different statutory frameworks depending upon which state holds jurisdiction over the dispute. In addition, prior to this new law, litigants were limited to pursuing their claims for misappropriation of trade secrets in state courts, unless federal diversity jurisdiction applied to the dispute. The DTSA changes that dynamic, providing original federal subject matter jurisdiction over trade secret disputes. Reprinted courtesy of Michael B. McClellan, Newmeyer & Dillion and Jason L. Morris, Newmeyer & Dillion Mr. McClellan may be contacted at Michael.mcclellan@ndlf.com Mr. Morris may be contacted at Jason.morris@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insured's Testimony On Expectation of Coverage Deemed Harmless

    August 30, 2017 —
    Affirming the district court, the Third Circuit found that the insured's testimony that she expected her loss to be covered was harmless. Gordon v .Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 13507 (3rd Cir. July 26, 2017). After a storm, portions of the stone facade of the insured's home collapsed. Allstate denied coverage because her policy was limited to "sudden and accident physical loss to the property" caused by a named peril, including windstorm. Allstate contended that the damage to the home was caused by neglect, not the storm. 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

    Contractual Warranty Agreements May Preclude Future Tort Recovery

    January 11, 2022 —
    When a buyer purchases a product that is later discovered to be defective, the court offers a remedy to make the buyer whole. Such remedies can arise either out of a contract, including express and/or implied warranties, or under common law through a tort theory. However, what happens when a buyer has already received the remedy specified in the contractual warranty, only to discover the product manufacturer misrepresented the quality of its product by failing to disclose a defect? Can the buyer subsequently recover for the same product under a tort theory of recovery? The Colorado Court of Appeals analyzed such questions in its December 2021 decision in Dream Finders Homes, LLC v. Weyerhaeuser NR Co., 2021 COA 143. In Dream Finders, the court examines the rights of sophisticated buyers who purchased defective products and received a warranty from the product manufacturer with purchase. The court specifically determines whether such buyers may recover under the tort theory product misrepresentation and failure to disclose when the buyers have already received the remedy specified and the warranty expressly excludes the type of damage the buyer now seeks. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Taylor Ostrowski, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Ostrowski may be contacted at ostrowski@hhmrlaw.com

    California Beach Hotel to Get $185 Million Luxury Rebuild

    September 17, 2014 —
    Rick Caruso, a Los Angeles shopping-mall developer, plans to spend about $185 million to rebuild a Southern California seaside hotel with a troubled past into a luxury getaway. The 170-room Miramar Beach Resort and Bungalows in Montecito, near Santa Barbara, will have such amenities as a beach club, spa, restaurants and two swimming pools, said Caruso, founder of closely held developer Caruso Affiliated. The site’s former hotel, known as Miramar by the Sea, has already been razed. Caruso bought the property in 2007 from H. Ty Warner, the billionaire creator of Beanie Babies plush toys and owner of the Four Seasons Hotel New York. The California hotel, on about 15 acres (6 hectares), had been out of service for more than a decade as past revival efforts were stalled by local opposition to development and the property market’s crash. Former owners include hotelier Ian Schrager. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadja Brandt, Bloomberg
    Ms. Brandt may be contacted at nbrandt@bloomberg.net

    Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Found In South Dakota

    October 11, 2017 —
    The South Dakota Supreme Court found coverage in favor of the general contractor who was sued for alleged faulty workmanship. Owners Ins. Co. v. Tibke Constr., Inc., 2017 S.D. LEXIS 106 (S.D. Aug. 23, 2017). The homeowners hired Tibke Construction Inc. as general contractor to build a new house. Tibke hired Jerry's Excavating Inc. as a subcontractor to prepare the soil and perform excavation work. After the project was completed, the homeowners sued Tibke and Jerry's Excavating for negligent construction and breach of contract. The homeowners alleged that Jerry's Excavating failed to conduct soil-compaction testing before construction. They alleged that the home was built upon highly expansive soils, resulting in damage to the home by "excessive settlement, cracking, structural unsoundness and other damages." The complaint further alleged that damages existed only on portions of the home not worked on by Jerry's Excavating. 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

    Understand the Dispute Resolution Provision You Are Agreeing To

    September 20, 2021 —
    When negotiating a contract, do not overlook the dispute resolution provision. It is one of the more important provisions in your construction contract. This provision will come into play and have ramifications if there is a dispute, which is certainly not uncommon on a construction project. In dispute resolution provisions in subcontracts on federal projects, it is not unusual for that provision to include language that requires the subcontractor to STAY any dispute that concerns actions or inactions of the owner pending the resolution of any dispute between the owner and prime contractor relating to that action or inaction. A provision to this effect should be included for the benefit of the prime contractor. For instance, the provision may say the subcontractor agrees to stay any such claim against the prime contractor or prime contractor’s surety pending the outcome of any pass-through claim (or otherwise) submitted under the Contract Disputes Act. 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

    Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Denied

    June 29, 2020 —
    The court found there was no coverage for the insureds' alleged negligent failure to construct a building. Evanston Ins. Co. v. DCM Contracting, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63977 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 28, 2020). Turning Point Church sued DCM Contracting for faulty workmanship on a construction project. Turning Point sent a demand letter to DCM on August 18, 2017 and filed suit in December. Evanston did not receive notice of Turning Point's claims and the lawsuit until May 15, 2018. Evanston filed suit for a declaratory judgment and moved for summary judgment. The court first considered the late notice. The policy required notice "as soon as practicable" DCM was also required to provide copies of demands, notices, or legal papers to Evanston. Here, DCM did not give notice to Evanston until nine months after receipt of Turning Point's demand. A phone communication with DCM's agent between August 2017 and May 2018 was insufficient. DCM provided no documents, including the summons and complaint, to the agent. DCM waited five months to forward the underlying lawsuit. This was a breach of the policy. 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

    The Impact of the IIJA and Amended Buy American Act on the Construction Industry

    May 23, 2022 —
    Contractors working on federally funded construction projects need to be aware of the new Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and amendments to the Buy American Act (BAA) which have expanded the requirement that contractors use domestic goods and materials on their projects. Failure to consider these requirements could have far-reaching impacts. Overview of Domestic-Procurement Laws and Regulations A number of domestic-preference laws exist today, which generally require that certain goods purchased with federal funds must be produced primarily in the United States. Projects affected include Department of Transportation (DOT)-funded highways, public transportation, airports, aviation, and rail, and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-funded water infrastructure initiatives, among others. Reprinted courtesy of Chad Theriot, Jones Walker (ConsensusDocs) and Stan Millan, Jones Walker (ConsensusDocs) Mr. Theriot may be contacted at ctheriot@joneswalker.com Mr. Millan may be contacted at smillan@joneswalker.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of