BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnesses
    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


    Alleged Defective Water Pump Leads to 900K in Damages

    Insured's Complaint for Breach of Contract and Bad Faith Adequately Pleads Consequential Damages

    Congress to be Discussing Housing

    Choice of Law Provisions in Construction Contracts

    Glendale City Council Approves Tohono O’odham Nation Casino

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa Rolle and Christopher Acosta Win Motion to Dismiss in Bronx County Trip and Fall

    Caltrans Hiring of Inexperienced Chinese Builder for Bay Bridge Expansion Questioned

    Surplus Lines Carriers Cannot Compel Arbitration in Louisiana

    Washington Supreme Court Finds Agent’s Representations in Certificate of Insurance Bind Insurance Company to Additional Insured Coverage

    New Jersey Imposes New Apprenticeship Training Requirements

    Owners and Contractors Beware: Pennsylvania (Significantly) Strengthens Contractor Payment Act

    President Trump’s “Buy American, Hire American” Executive Order and the Construction Industry

    As Some States Use the Clean Water Act to Delay Energy Projects, EPA Issues New CWA 401 Guidance

    Construction Litigation—Battles on Many Fronts

    New Case Alert: Oregon Supreme Court Prohibits Insurer’s Attempt to Relitigate Insured’s Liability

    Court of Appeals Upholds Default Judgment: Serves as Reminder to Respond to Lawsuits in a Timely Manner

    Analysis of the “owned property exclusion” under Panico v. State Farm

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Hundreds of Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Honors Four Partners as ‘Lawyers of the Year’

    CEB’s Mechanics Liens and Related Remedies – 2014 Update

    Puerto Rico Grid Restoration Plagued by Historic Problems, New Challenges

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment Based Upon Vandalism Exclusion

    Florida Accuses Pool Contractor of Violating Laws

    Missouri Legislature Passes Bill to Drastically Change Missouri’s “Consent Judgment” Statute

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

    Georgia Supreme Court Says Construction Defects Can Be an “Occurrence”

    Los Angeles Delays ‘Mansion Tax’ Spending Amid Legal Fight

    Zillow Topping Realogy Shows Web Surge for Housing Market

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

    Vermont Supreme Court Reverses, Finding No Coverage for Collapse

    Texas Condo Construction Defect Code Amended

    Water Backup Payment Satisfies Insurer's Obligation to Cover for Rain Damage

    No Signature, No Problem: Texas Court Holds Contractual Subrogation Waiver Still Enforceable

    Insureds' Experts Insufficient to Survive Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    Pollution Exclusion Does Not Apply To Concrete Settling Dust

    Construction Goes Green in Orange County

    Court Finds That Split in Underground Storage Tank is Not a Covered Collapse

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/31/24) – International Homebuying Shrinks Commercial Real Estate Focus on Sustainability, and U.S. Banks Boost Provisions for Credit Losses

    Quick Note: Can a Party Disclaim Liability in their Contract to Fraud?

    Transition Study a Condo Board’s First Defense against Construction Defects

    After 60 Years, I-95 Is Complete

    The Fourth Circuit Applies a Consequential Damages Exclusionary Clause and the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Claims by a Subrogating Insurer Seeking to Recover Over $19 Million in Damages

    AAA Revises its Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Read the Property Insurance Policy to be Sure You are Complying with Post Loss Obligations

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

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2021 New York – Metro Super Lawyers®

    Is the Manhattan Bank of America Tower a Green Success or Failure?

    Georgia Appellate Court Supports County Claim Against Surety Company’s Failure to Pay

    Intel's $20B Ohio 'Mega-Site' is Latest Development in Chip Makers' Rush to Boost US Production

    Contractor Given a Wake-Up Call for Using a "Sham" RMO/RME

    Construction Defect Reform Dies in Nevada Senate
    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

    Enhanced Geothermal Energy Could Be the Next Zero-Carbon Hero

    June 10, 2024 —
    Hydrogen, solar, wind—and even microwave beams from outer space—are a few of the alternative energies being explored as the world strives to cut the cord on carbon emissions. Recently, advancements in geothermal energy technologies appear poised to significantly expand geothermal’s reach. These new methods, varyingly referred to as enhanced, engineered or advanced geothermal systems (collectively referred to here as EGS), have recently made strides in scalability and grabbed the attention of changemakers. If successful, EGS may play a major role in the clean energy transition. The technique creates no emissions and is virtually limitless (it pulls from heat generated by the Earth’s core), and can provide constant baseload power, making it appealing to green-minded investors. This article calls attention to the progress and variety of EGS projects and proposals that Pillsbury sees as part of the ongoing energy transition. People have long been drawn to geothermal energy, with Paleo-Americans settling at hot springs some 10,000 years ago. In 1892, Boise, Idaho, became the first town to establish a district heating system that piped naturally occurring hot water from underground and into homes. It would take another 70 years for other cities to replicate the feat, but now 17 U.S. districts use such systems, along with dozens more worldwide. Reprinted courtesy of Sidney L. Fowler, Pillsbury, Robert A. James, Pillsbury and Clarence H. Tolliver, Pillsbury Mr. Fowler may be contacted at sidney.fowler@pillsburylaw.com Mr. James may be contacted at rob.james@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Tolliver may be contacted at clarence.tolliver@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Louisiana Couple Claims Hurricane Revealed Construction Defects

    January 22, 2013 —
    A Louisiana couple has sued the company that raised their home, claiming that faults with the work were revealed after Hurricane Isaac hit the home. Crescent City Construction raised the Marcev’s home in 2006. They were satisfied with the work until the 2012 hurricane. The Marcevs claim in their suit that the work is covered by a ten-year warranty. They are suing for a full refund of their payments to Crescent City Construction, as well as architectural fees, damages, interest, and attorney costs. Their claim is that as a result of the work, their home now has structural defects and fails to meet building codes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Building Group Has Successful 2012, Looks to 2013

    February 14, 2013 —
    The North State Building Industry Association has looked back at 2012, and feels that they are “well-positioned to addressed future challenges in 2013 and beyond.” The organization, which represents home builders in Northern California, had several major accomplishments in 2012. The NSBIA has managed to reduce fees that builders must pay. Due to their work with the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District and the Sacramento Area Sewer District over the last several years, a new rate and fee methodology has been adopted, saving builders $3,000 per single family unit in SRCSD fees and $1,000 per acre in SASD fees. Fees were also reduced through agreements with the Folsom Cordova unified and Elk Grove school districts. The city of Rancho Cordova reduced its transportation fee by $3,500 per home. In addition to their advocacy work, the NSBIA has continued its worker training programs. During 2012, 113 people participated in their Journeyman Upgrade classes, an increase of 20 from the prior year. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court Exclaims “Enough!” To Homeowner Who Kept Raising Wrongful Foreclosure Claims

    April 01, 2015 —
    “There are no free houses,” began the decision issued by the Court of Appeal on March 23, 2015 in Boyce v. T.D. Service Company (B255958). Examining three years of litigation in bankruptcy court, unlawful detainer court, and the superior court, and each of their respective appellate courts, the Court of Appeal held that the plaintiff’s wrongful foreclosure claims were barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel. Plaintiff was a borrower who purchased a home subject to a deed of trust. After plaintiff defaulted on the loan, nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings were initiated. To avoid foreclosure, plaintiff engaged in a series of stall tactics, including filing an emergency bankruptcy petition, appealing the bankruptcy court’s decision to grant the trustee relief of stay, refusing to leave the property following the trustee’s sale thereby causing an unlawful detainer action to be filed, and appealing the granting of summary judgment in favor of the defendants in the unlawful detainer action. Once evicted, plaintiff sued all the entities involved in the foreclosure process for wrongful foreclosure, declaratory relief, violation of Unfair Practices Act, and quiet title. When the trial court sustained the defendants’ demurrers on the grounds of res judicata/collateral estoppel, plaintiff naturally appealed. Reprinted courtesy of Krsto Mijanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Annette F. Mijanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Mijanovic may be contacted at kmijanovic@hbblaw.com Ms. Mijanovic may be contacted at amijanovic@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Affordable Housing, Military Contracts and Mars: 3D Printing Construction Potential Builds

    September 05, 2022 —
    The 3D printing construction market is likely on the cusp of a boom. This unique construction method boasts many advantages in comparison to traditional forms of construction. Projects can be completed more quickly and at a fraction of the cost, given fewer laborers are required and the materials used are much cheaper. Though market growth stalled during the COVID-19 pandemic, industry leaders expect 3D printing construction to experience exponential growth in the coming years. While 3D printing technology has risen in popularity and prominence in the past couple of decades, it is only recently that 3D printing companies have begun making strides in the construction industry. Critical to the construction process is the software that is used to create and model the planned structure. A software program turns a building’s blueprint into code that then dictates the movement of a 3D printer on the construction site. After a concrete-like mix is loaded into the printer, the printer begins to build the walls by laying one cylindrical layer of concrete at a time, in accordance with the blueprint. There is no one-size-fits-all approach in 3D printing construction: some companies print the core structure as well as the roof and floor of the structure, while others print only the core and shell and install those portions separately using traditional methods and materials. Reprinted courtesy of Adam J. Weaver, Pillsbury and Lindsey Mitchell, Pillsbury Mr. Weaver may be contacted at adam.weaver@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Wisconsin High Court Rejects Insurer’s Misuse of “Other Insurance” Provision

    March 04, 2019 —
    The Wisconsin Supreme Court held last week in Steadfast Ins. Co. v. Greenwich Ins. Co. that two insurers must contribute proportionally to the defense of an additional insured under their comprehensive liability policies. In 2008, torrential rainstorms battered the Milwaukee area for two days. The downpour overwhelmed the city’s sewer system, causing significant flooding in homes throughout the region. Out of those floods sprang several lawsuits against the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (“MMSD”) for negligent inspection, maintenance, repair, and operation of Milwaukee’s sewage system. MMSD was an additional insured under liability policies covering two other water service providers responsible for the city’s sewer systems. The first policy was issued by Greenwich Insurance Company for United Water Services Milwaukee, LLC, and the second was issued by Steadfast Insurance Company for Veolia Water Milwaukee, LLC. After learning of the lawsuits, MMSD tendered its defense of the sewage suits to both insurers. Steadfast accepted the defense; but Greenwich refused, claiming that its policy was excess to Steadfast’s based on an “other insurance” clause in Greenwich’s policy. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and David Costello, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Costello may be contacted at dcostello@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Do Not Pass Go! Duty to Defend in a Professional Services Agreement (law note)

    April 03, 2019 —
    Recently a client asked me to review a contract for his Firm. The Owner, who had prepared the draft, had inserted a rather stringent “duty to defend” clause. As I told my client, a duty to defend clause is not a good idea for a couple of reasons. First, if you agree to provide a defense, what that means is that you are footing the bill for the Owner if the Owner is sued by another party. Think about that for a minute. You are paying legal fees for someone else’s legal defense. You may or may not be able to direct the litigation or have a say in who is hired. Can you say open check book? Secondly, and more importantly, the duty to defend is almost never insurable. What that means is that your professional liability carrier will not be footing the bill—your Firm will be doing it. This is not a case of adding the Owner as an additional insured, so do not confuse the two. Agreeing to a duty to defend is an extremely burdensome, and potentially costly, mistake. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    Private Project Payment Bonds and Pay if Paid in Virginia

    January 05, 2017 —
    One of the many items of construction law that has always been about as clear as mud has been the interaction between a contractual pay if paid clause and payment bond claims either under the Federal Miller Act or Virginia’s “Little Miller Act.” While properly drafted contractual “pay if paid” clauses are enforceable by their terms in Virginia, what has always been less clear is whether a bonding company can take advantage of such a clause when defending a payment bond claim. As always, these questions are very fact specific both under the Federal Act and the state statute. I wish that this post would answer this question, but alas, it will not. A recent case from the City of Roanoke, Virginia looked at the interaction between a payment bond and a “condition precedent” pay if paid clause as it relates to a private project that is not subject to the Little Miller Act. In the case of IES Commercial, Inc v The Hanover Insurance Company, the Court examined a contractual clause between Thor Construction and IES Commercial in tandem with the bond language between Hanover Insurance Company and Thor as it related to a surprisingly familiar scenario. The general facts are these: IES performed, Thor demanded payment from the owner for the work that IES performed and the owner, for reasons that are left unstated in the opinion, refused to pay. IES sues Hanover pursuant to the payment bond and Hanover moves to dismiss the suit because Thor hadn’t been paid by the owner and therefore Hanover could take advantage of the pay if paid language. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com