BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expert
    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


    Statute of Limitations Upheld in Construction Defect Case

    Traub Lieberman Partners Ryan Jones and Scot Samis Obtain Affirmation of Final Summary Judgment

    New York Building Boom Spurs Corruption Probe After Death

    US Supreme Court Backs Panama Canal Owner in Dispute with Builders

    New Orleans Is Auctioning Off Vacant Lots Online

    U.S. Tornadoes, Hail Cost Insurers $1 Billion in June

    Force Majeure and COVID-19 in Construction Contracts – What You Need to Know

    New Index Tracking Mortgages for New Homes

    Terminating the Notice of Commencement (with a Notice of Termination)

    Engineer Proposes Slashing Scope of Millennium Tower Pile Upgrade

    Court Holds That Insurance Producer Cannot Be Liable for Denial of COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim

    Dust Obscures Eleventh Circuit’s Ruling on “Direct Physical Loss”

    A Loud Boom, But No Serious Injuries in World Trade Center Accident

    Contractual Setoff and Application When Performance Bond Buys Out of its Exposure

    SFAA and Coalition of Partners Encourage Lawmakers to Require Essential Surety Bonding Protections on All Federally-Financed Projects Receiving WIFIA Funds

    Connecticut Supreme Court Again Asked to Determine the Meaning of Collapse

    Professor Stempel's Excpert Testimony for Insurer Excluded

    Jury Awards 20 Million Verdict Against Bishop Abbey Homes

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

    Hawaii Supreme Court Tackles "Other Insurance" Issues

    Don’t Put All Your Eggs in the Silent-Cyber Basket

    New York Restrictions on Flow Through Provision in Subcontracts

    Illinois Supreme Court Limits Reach of Implied Warranty Claims Against Contractors

    Water Intrusion Judged Not Related to Construction

    How a Maryland County Created the Gold Standard for Building Emissions Reduction

    A Few Green Building Notes

    Case Alert Update: SDV Case Tabbed as One of New York’s Top Three Cases to Watch

    Top 10 Insurance Cases of 2024

    San Francisco Half-Built Apartment Complex Destroyed by Fire

    A Game of Texas Hold’em: How Texas Stopped Wage Increases for Salaried Exempt Employees Nationwide

    Colorado Supreme Court Decision Could Tarnish Appraisal Process for Policyholders

    Mediation Fails In Federal Lawsuit Seeking Damages From Sureties for Alleged Contract Fraud

    The Requirement to State a “Sum Certain” No Longer a Jurisdictional Bar to Government Contract Claims

    Corrective Action Protest Grounds for GSA Schedule Federal Construction Contractors

    2018 Spending Plan Boosts Funding for Affordable Housing

    Determining Occurrence for Injury Under Commercial General Liability Policy Without Applying “Trigger Theory”

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    A Landlord’s Guide to the Center for Disease Control’s Eviction Moratorium

    Nevada Bill Would Bring Changes to Construction Defects

    Ambiguity in Insurance Policy will be Interpreted in Favor of Insurance Coverage

    2022 Project of the Year: Linking Los Angeles

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (01/18/23) – Construction Inventory, 3D Printing, and Metaverse Replicas

    New Highway for Olympics Cuts off Village near Sochi, Russia

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case Cannot Be Overturned While Facts Are Still in Contention in Related Cases

    White and Williams Celebrates 125th Anniversary

    Location, Location, Location—Even in Construction Liens

    Ninth Circuit Clears the Way for Review of Oregon District Court’s Rulings in Controversial Climate Change Case

    WSHB Ranked 4th Most Diverse Law Firm in U.S.

    Louis "Dutch" Schotemeyer Returns to Newmeyer Dillion as Partner in Newport Beach Office
    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

    One Insurer's Settlement with Insured Does Not Bar Contribution Claim by Other Insurers

    October 30, 2013 —
    The New Jersey Supreme Court held that one insurer could seek contribution from another insurer who settled with and secured a release from the insured. Potomac Ins. Co. v. Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Ass'n Ins. Co., 2013 N.J. LEXIS 847 (N.J. Sept. 16, 2013) The township of Evesham retained Roland Aristone, Inc. to be its general contractor for construction of a new middle school. After completion of the school, the roof leaked. Evesham sued Aristone for the construction defects. Aristone tendered to its various CGL carriers. Two insurers, Selective Way Insurance Company and OneBeacon Insurance Company, defended. Two others, Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Insurance Company (PMA) and Royal Insurance Company, denied coverage. Aristone sued PMA and Royal, and ultimately settled with PMA for $150,000 in exchange for Aristone's release from all claims, including claims for defense fees and costs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Vinci Will Build $580M Calgary Project To Avoid Epic Flood Repeat

    June 20, 2022 —
    Vinci Construction has begun work on a giant flood control project in Alberta designed to prevent a repeat of one of the most devastating natural disasters in Canadian history. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Van Voorhis, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Defective Panels Threatening Profit at China Solar Farms: Energy

    January 21, 2015 —
    Flaws found in some Chinese solar panels can drastically eat into their efficiency, reducing how much power the panels will produce as the country races to meet aggressive goals to hold the line on fossil fuel emissions. The defects, found in products set to be used only in China, are in a coating that suppresses reflections on glass, allowing the panels to capture more light. About 23 percent of samples taken from dozens of Chinese companies failed to meet requirements, according to regulators in China. For samples from Jiangsu, the eastern province where much of the glass is made, the rate was as high as 40 percent. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg News

    Recent Supreme Court Decision Could Have Substantial Impact on Builders

    January 23, 2023 —
    On October 27, 2022, the Washington State Supreme Court issued a decision which could have a substantial impact on the enforceability of contract clauses that require litigation to be commenced within a stated period of time from project completion. In Tadych v. Noble Ridge Construction, Inc.,the Supreme Court held that the contractual one-year statute of limitations for bringing claims against the contractor was substantively unconscionable and reversed the Court of Appeals. In Tadych, plaintiff owners (the Tadychs) contracted with defendant contractor (Noble Ridge Construction, Inc., or NRC) for the construction of a custom home in 2012. The contract included a one-year claim limitations clause that required claims to be raised within a one year period from project completion and that any claims not raised during the one-year period would be waived. In December 2013, as the project neared completion, the Tadychs met with NRC to identify any outstanding project issues. The Tadychs noted several, including rainwater pools at the landing at the bottom of the stairs and several nicks and cracks on the stucco exterior walls. The Tadychs moved into the home on April 8, 2014, and the City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development conducted its final site inspection on April 15 and approved the residence for occupancy on April 23. In January or February of 2015, the Tadychs began to notice a shift in their home. In February of 2015, the Tadychs engaged the Construction Dispute Resolution (CDR) to review NRC’s work. CDR raised concerns about the adequacy of the home’s construction and prepared a written report in March 2015 indicating several deviations from the architectural plans and building codes. The Tadychs sent this report to NRC, who assured the Tadychs that NRC’s work followed all requirements and rejected any claims that there were deviations from the plans. The Tadychs continued to notice issues with the home through October 2016. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cassidy Ingram, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight
    Ms. Ingram may be contacted at cassidy.ingram@acslawyers.com

    A Downside of Associational Standing - HOA's Claims Against Subcontractors Barred by Statute of Limitations

    March 28, 2012 —

    In multi-family construction defect litigation in Colorado, homeowners associations rely on associational standing to pursue claims affecting more than two units and to bring claims covering an entire development. This practice broadens an association’s case beyond what individual, aggrieved owners would otherwise bring on their own against a developer or builder-vendor. However, reliance on associational standing to combine homeowners’ defect claims into a single lawsuit has its drawbacks to homeowners.

    A recent order in the case Villa Mirage Condominium Owners’ Association, Inc., v. Stetson 162, LLC, et al., in El Paso County District Court, presents an example. There, the HOA unsuccessfully sought a determination from the court that its claims against subcontractors were not barred by the statute of limitations. To do so, the HOAs attempted to apply the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (“CCIOA”), which governs the creation and operation of HOAs, and a statute intended to apply to persons under a legal disability.

    Under CCIOA, during the period of “declarant control” the developer may appoint members to the association’s executive board until sufficient homeowners have moved into the development and taken seats on the board.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Bret Cogdill of Higgins, Hopkins, McClain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. Cogdill can be contacted at cogdill@hhmrlaw.com.

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

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Fires up a Case-By-Case Analysis for Landlord-Tenant, Implied Co-Insured Questions

    February 03, 2020 —
    In Joella v. Cole, 2019 PA Super. 313, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania recently considered whether a tenant, alleged by the landlord’s property insurance carrier to have carelessly caused a fire, was an implied co-insured on the landlord’s policy. The court found that the tenant was an implied co-insured because the lease stated that the landlord would procure insurance for the building, which created a reasonable expectation that the tenant would be a co-insured under the policy. Since the tenant was an implied co-insured on the policy, the insurance carrier could not maintain a subrogation action against the tenant. This case confirms that Pennsylvania follows a case-by-case approach when determining whether a tenant was an implied co-insured on a landlord’s insurance policy. The Joella case stems from a fire at an apartment building in Northampton County, Pennsylvania. The landlord’s property insurance carrier paid the landlord $180,000 to repair the damages resulting from the fire. In March 2018, the insurer brought a subrogation action against Annie Cole, a tenant in the building, alleging that Ms. Cole’s negligent use of an extension cord caused the fire. Ms. Cole raised the affirmative defense that she was an implied co-insured on the landlord’s insurance policy. The subrogating insurer filed a partial motion for summary judgment seeking to dismiss Ms. Cole’s defense. In response, Ms. Cole filed a cross motion for partial judgment, arguing that because the lease specified that the landlord would maintain fire insurance for the building, there was a reasonable expectation that she would be a co-insured on that policy. The trial court found in favor of Ms. Cole, holding that the landlord’s insurer could not maintain a subrogation action against her because she was an implied co-insured of the landlord’s insurance policy under the terms of the lease. The landlord’s insurer filed an appeal with the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Floating Crane on Job in NYC's East River Has a Storied Past of Cold War Intrigue

    January 04, 2018 —
    Originally Published by CDJ on March 22, 2017 The complex maneuver of lifting heavy prefabricated modules out of New York City's East River to build a university laboratory took careful planning and the work of one particular floating crane with a complicated past. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, ENR
    Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com

    Proposed Changes to Federal Lease Accounting Standards

    January 19, 2017 —
    The Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) has proposed amendments to federal lease accounting standards found within Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standard (SFFAS) 5, ‘Accounting of Liabilities of the Federal Government,’ and SFFAS 6, ‘Accounting for Property, Plant, and Equipment,’ promulgated by FASAB. The proposals would require entities leasing property to the federal government, such as private landlords, to recognize a lease receivable and deferred revenue at the beginning of the lease term (except on intragovernmental or short-term leases). The proposals are slated to take eff ect in reporting periods following September 30, 2018. PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE DUE JANUARY 6, 2017. The federal government is one of the largest tenants in the country. The General Services Administration (GSA) alone leases space to house over 600,000 government workers. GSA has over 8,000 leases throughout the U.S. Reprinted courtesy of Susan Elliott, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Lori A. Lange, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Ms. Elliott may be contacted at selliott@pecklaw.com Ms. Lange may be contacted at llange@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of