BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code 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


    Precedent-Setting ‘Green’ Apartments in Kansas City

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

    2016 California Construction Law Upate

    Evergrande’s Condemned Towers on China’s Hawaii Show Threat

    Statute of Limitations Bars Lender’s Subsequent Action to Quiet Title Against Junior Lienholder Mistakenly Omitted from Initial Judicial Foreclosure Action

    Coverage Denied for Faulty Blasting and Improper Fill

    White and Williams LLP Acquires 6 Attorney Firm

    Edgewater Plans to Sue Over Pollution During Veterans Field Rehab

    UPDATE - McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court

    Anatomy of an Indemnity Provision

    Coyness is Nice. Just Not When Seeking a Default Judgment

    New York State Legislature Passes Legislation Expanding Wrongful Death Litigation

    New Jersey Appellate Decision Reminds Bid Protestors to Take Caution When Determining Where to File an Action

    A Changing Climate for State Policy-Making Regarding Climate Change

    Waiving Workers’ Compensation Immunity for Indemnity: Demystifying a Common and Scary-Looking Contract Term

    Mitigating Mold Exposure in Manufacturing and Multifamily Buildings

    Navigating Complex Preliminary Notice Requirements

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: TOM NOCAR

    New Homes in Palo Alto to Be Electric-Car Ready

    Recording a Lis Pendens Is Crucial

    Colorado Court of Appeals Confirms Senior Living Communities as “Residential Properties” for Purposes of the Homeowner Protection Act

    A Tort, By Any Other Name, is Just a Tort: Massachusetts Court Bars Contract Claims That Sound in Negligence

    Idaho Supreme Court Address Water Exclusion in Commercial Property Exclusion

    Does the UCC Apply to the Contract for the Sale of Goods and Services

    Caveat Emptor (“Buyer Beware!”) Exceptions

    Ninth Circuit: Speculative Injuries Do Not Confer Article III Standing

    The U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Rules on Greystone

    Top 10 Insurance Cases of 2023

    Proposition 65: OEHHA to Consider Adding and Delisting Certain Chemicals of Concern

    You Are Your Brother’s Keeper. Direct Contractors in California Now Responsible for Wage Obligations of Subcontractors

    Jarred Reed Named to the National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List for Second Consecutive Year

    The Year 2010 In Review: Design And Construction Defects Litigation

    Fifth Circuit Confirms: Insurer Must Defend Despite Your Work/Your Product Exclusion

    Insurers Get “Floored” by Court of Appeals Regarding the Presumptive Measure of Damages in Consent Judgments

    10 Year Anniversary – Congratulations Greg Podolak

    Texas Construction Firm Officials Sentenced in Contract-Fraud Case

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Endorsements in CGL Insurance Policies: A Word of Caution

    Unfair Risk Allocation on Design-Build Projects

    New Case Law Update: Mountain Valleys, Chevron Deference and a Long-Awaited Resolution on the Sacketts’ Small Lot

    Will The New U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Deal Calm Industry Jitters?

    Insurer Must Defend Claims of Alleged Willful Coal Removal

    I.M. Pei, Architect Who Designed Louvre Pyramid, Dies at 102

    Contractor Gets Benched After Failing to Pay Jury Fees

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (8/14/24) – Commercial Real Estate AI, Hotel Pipeline Growth, and Housing Market Improvements

    St. Petersburg Florida’s Tallest Condo Tower Allegedly Riddled with Construction Defects

    Rise in Single-Family Construction Anticipated in Michigan

    Rhode Island Closes One Bridge and May Have Burned Others with Ensuing Lawsuit

    Arizona Court of Appeals Decision in $8.475 Million Construction Defect Class Action Suit

    Justin Bieber’s Unpaid Construction Bill Stalls House Sale

    Examining Best Practices for Fire Protection of Critical Systems in Buildings
    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

    10 Haight Lawyers Recognized in Best Lawyers in America© 2023 and The Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch 2023

    August 22, 2022 —
    Four Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys were selected for Best Lawyers in America© 2023. Congratulations to:
    • Bruce Cleeland – Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    • Peter Dubrawski – Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    • Denis Moriarty – Insurance law
    • Ted Penny – Workers’ Compensation Law – Claimants
    Six Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys were selected for Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch 2023. Congratulations to:
    • Courtney Arbucci – Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants; Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    • Frances Brower – Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    • Kyle DiNicola – Transportation Law
    • Arezoo Jamshidi – Appellate Practice; Transportation Law
    • Kristian Moriarty – Transportation Law
    • Bethsaida Obra-White – Construction Law; Insurance Law; Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

    Arizona Court of Appeals Rules Issues Were Not Covered in Construction Defect Suit

    December 09, 2011 —

    The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled in the case of Peters v. Marque Homes. In this case, Walter Peters provided the land and funding for Marque Homes to build a luxury residence in Glendale, Arizona. By the terms of the “Joint Venture Agreement,” Peters provided the land and funding, while Marque would not charge Peters for overhead, profits, or supervision fees. The agreement specified that profits would be divided equally.

    Two years later, Marque sued Peters claiming he had breached his obligations by refusing several offers for the home. Peters replied that Marque had “failed to complete the home so it is habitable to prospective purchasers.” Peters stated he had “retained an expert inspector who had identified numerous defects.” The court appointed a Special Commissioner to list the home for sale. Peters purchased the home with two stipulations ordered by the court. At this point, the earlier case was dismissed with prejudice.

    Peters then sued Marque “asserting express and implied warranty claims arising out of alleged construction defects in the home.” Marque claimed that Peters’s claims were “precluded by the prior joint venture dispute.” The court granted Marque’s motion.

    The appeals court reversed the lower court’s decision, determining that Peters’s claims were not precluded by the agreement. Although there had been a prior case between the two parties, warranty issues did not form a part of that case. “Peters never raised these allegations nor presented this evidence in support of any warranty claim.”

    The court also noted that the “parties never agreed to preclude future warranty claims.” Marque and Peters “agreed in the stipulated sale order that ‘the sale of the property to a third party shall be “as is” with a 10-year structural warranty.’” The court noted that the agreement said nothing about one of the parties buying the house.

    The appeals court left open a claim by Marque that there are no implied or express warranties available to Peters. They asked the Superior Court to address this.

    Read the court’s decision…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hawaii Federal District Court Remands Coverage Dispute

    June 15, 2020 —
    Accepting the insured's amended complaint, the federal district court of Hawaii remanded the coverage action to state court. Hale v. Lloyd's, London, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9061 (D. Haw. Jan. 17, 2020). Hale purchased a policy for his home in Hilo, Hawaii, from Defendant Pyramid Insurance Centre. The policy was memorialized by a Lloyd's Certificate issued by Defendant Lloyd's. On September 19, 2017, Hale entered Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. Included in the bankruptcy proceeding was Hale's home and a secured home mortgage loan now owned by Defendant Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC. The Bankruptcy Court issued a discharge order on January 18, 2018. On May 9, 2018, Hale's home was destroyed, being covered with lava from the Kilauea volcano eruption. Hale filed a claim with Lloyd's based upon the loss of his home. The claim was denied. Subsequently, however, Lloyd's issued a check for the full amount of the policy. Both Hale and Specialized Loan were listed as payees on the check. 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

    Insurers' Motion to Determine Lack of Occurrence Fails

    August 19, 2024 —
    The federal district court, interpreting Massachusetts law, found there were genuine issues of fact as to whether the insured's mixing of biodiesel with home heating fuel was an occurrence. United States Fire Ins. Co. v. Peterson's Oil Serv., Inc., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106980 (D. Mass. June 17, 2024). Homeowners sued Peterson's Oil Service, alleging that Peterson sold them fuel for home heating which contained more that 5% biodiesel. The homeowners further alleged that fuel containing more than 5% biodiesel did not meet industry standards and caued damage to their home heating equipment. Peterson allegedly did not fully disclose the presence of biodiesel in their fuel, despite knowing the risk posed by high-biodiesel blended fuel. The insurers, United States Fire Insurance Company and The North River Insurance Company, defended Peterson under a reservation of rights. United States Fire issued priomary policies with limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 as a general aggregate limit. An endorsement titled "Limited Coverage - Failure to Supply" limited the amount covered for "property damage arising out of the failure of any insured to adequately supply gas, oil, water, electricty or steam" to $250,000. North River issued umbrella policies with additional coverage in the amount of $15,000,000 per occurrnce and in the aggregate if property damage was caused by an occurrence. The umbrella policies also contained a "Failure to Supply Exclusion" which excluded coverage for "property damage arising out of the failure of an insured to adequately supply gas, oil, water, electricty or steam." 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

    Kentucky Court Upholds Arbitration Award, Denies Appeal

    June 15, 2011 —

    The Kentucky Court of Appeals has ruled in Lake Cumberland Community Action Agency v. CMW, Inc. affirming the arbitration award. CMW, Inc. was responsible for the construction of a facility to be used for pre-school students and the housing of Alzheimer patients and senior citizens. An agreement was made that any disputes would be heard by an arbitrator selected by the construction industry.

    The plaintiff alleged that there were design and construction defects in the building trusses, violation of the Kentucky Building Code, and problems with the HVAC system. The arbitrator awarded $106,000 to the plaintiff which then sought to vacate the award. The circuit court upheld the arbitrator’s decision.

    The Court of Appeals found that there was no basis for rejecting the arbitrator’s decision, noting “there is nothing to show that there was any fraud or bias on the part of the arbitrator.” The appeals court, with all three judges concurring, upheld the arbitration award.

    Read the court’s decision

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    August 17, 2011 —

    Coverage was denied under the policy’s condominium exclusion in California Traditions, Inc. v. Claremont Liability Ins. Co.,2011 Cal. App.LEXIS912 (Cal. Ct. App., ordered published July 11, 2011).

    California Traditions was the developer and general contractor for a housing development. California Traditions subcontracted with Ja-Con to perform the rough framing work for 30 residential units. The project had 146 separate residences that were freestanding with no shared walls, roof, halls, or plumbing or electrical lines. To allow a higher density development, the project was developed, marketed and sold as condominiums.

    The purchaser of one of the units filed a complaint against California Traditions alleging property damage from the defective construction. California Traditions cross-complained against Ja-Con.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Toll Plans to Boost New York Sales With Pricing, Incentives

    December 10, 2015 —
    Toll Brothers Inc. plans to use competitive pricing and offer buyers incentives to speed up sales at some of its New York City condominium projects. “There are certain units in certain locations within a building that are hot, and then there are other units that may be in a dark, cold corner that you have to incentivize a bit more,” Chief Executive Officer Douglas Yearley said on the company’s earnings conference call Tuesday. While Toll “will not fire-sale it to move” units, “we will price to the market.” Incentives would be offered for certain units at Pierhouse at Brooklyn Bridge Park and 400 Park Ave. South and 1110 Park Ave. in Manhattan, Yearley said. While the supply in New York City has grown most for condos selling for more than $7.5 million, most of Toll’s units are less expensive, he said. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Prashant Gopal, Bloomberg

    Modern Tools Are Key to Future-Proofing the Construction Industry

    September 19, 2022 —
    The U.S. construction industry is facing a tech revolution that’s upending the roles of skilled workers. Many traditional contractors are struggling to embrace the new technologies customers increasingly demand, while the industry struggles to attract young professionals. According to the latest American Community Survey data, the median age of a construction worker is 41. This is particularly concerning given the confluence of two trends: the construction industry is facing a critical workforce shortage that’s only expected to intensify, and the workforce is aging—NCCER is predicting around 40% are expected to retire by 2031. Industry leaders must prioritize using the latest industry solutions and innovations to modernize construction work, transform the construction industry and appeal to the next generation of contractors. Throughout COVID-19, the construction sector experienced a higher number of workers quitting jobs as opposed to being laid off, indicating the older workforce likely took the opportunity to retire early, along with more than three million other Americans who did the same. Currently, industry leaders are not doing enough to communicate opportunities to help shift the career perception of electrical contractors from simply being “blue collar” and un-exciting. A 2019 National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) found only 3% of people ages 18 to 25 were interested in pursuing a construction career, with most respondents noting the desire for a less physically demanding job. Reprinted courtesy of Guillaume Le Gouic, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of