BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating 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


    School District Client Advisory: Civility is not an Option, It is a Duty

    Denver’s Mayor Addresses Housing and Modifying Construction Defect Law

    How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6 Billion Embarrassment

    Elizabeth Lofts Condo Owners Settle with Plumbing Supplier

    Congress Relaxes Several PPP Loan Requirements

    Appraisers’ Failure to Perform Assessment of Property’s Existence or Damage is Reversible Error

    The National Labor Relations Board Joint Employer Standard is Vacated by the Eastern District of Texas

    Connecticut Court Finds Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Enforceable

    ENR 2024 Water Report: Managers Look to Potable Water Reuse

    The Johnstown Dam Failure, as Seen in the Pages of ENR in 1889

    NYC-N.J. Gateway Rail-Tunnel Work May Start in 2023

    Report to Congress Calls for Framework to Cut Post-Quake Recovery Time

    California Contractor License Bonds to Increase in 2016

    Notice and Claims Provisions In Contracts Matter…A Lot

    An Obligation to Provide Notice and an Opportunity to Cure May not End after Termination, and Why an Early Offer of Settlement Should Be Considered on Public Works Contracts

    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    California Rejects Judgments By Confession Pursuant to Civil Code Section 1132

    Don’t Let Construction Problems Become Construction Disputes (guest post)

    Patti Santelle Honored by Rutgers School of Law with Arthur E. Armitage Sr. Distinguished Alumni Award

    New Jersey Supreme Court Ruled Condo Association Can’t Reset Clock on Construction Defect Claim

    Buffalo-Area Roof Collapses Threaten Lives, Businesses After Historic Snowfall

    #5 CDJ Topic: David Belasco v. Gary Loren Wells et al. (2015) B254525

    Beverly Hills Voters Reject Plan for Enclave's Tallest Building

    San Francisco Office Secures Defense Verdict in Legal Malpractice Action

    First Circuit Finds No Coverage For Subcontracted Faulty Work

    New York State Legislature Passes Legislation Expanding Wrongful Death Litigation

    The Construction Project is Late—Allocation of Delay

    Modular Homes Test Energy Efficiency Standards

    Construction Warranties: Have You Seen Me Lately?

    THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT HAS RULED THAT THE RIGHT TO REPAIR ACT (SB800) IS THE EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR CONSTRUCTION DEFECT CLAIMS NOT INVOLVING PERSONAL INJURIES WHETHER OR NOT THE UNDERLYING DEFECTS GAVE RISE TO ANY PROPERTY DAMAGE in McMillin Albany LL

    The Fifth Circuit, Applying Texas Law, Strikes Down Auto Exclusion

    Claims for Bad Faith and Punitive Damages Survive Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    ASCE Releases First-of-its-Kind Sustainable Infrastructure Standard

    UPDATE: Texas Federal Court Permanently Enjoins U.S. Department of Labor “Persuader Rule” Requiring Law Firms and Other Consultants to Disclose Work Performed for Employers on Union Organization Efforts

    Testing Your Nail Knowledge

    Wyoming Supreme Court Picks a Side After Reviewing the Sutton Rule

    Fifth Circuit Holds Insurer Owes Duty to Defend Latent Condition Claim That Caused Fire Damage to Property Years After Construction Work

    EEOC Sues Whiting-Turner Over Black Worker Treatment at Tennessee Google Project

    WSDOT Seeks Retraction of Waiver Excluding Non-Minority Woman-Owned Businesses from Participation Goals

    U.K. Construction Resumes Growth Amid Resurgent Housing Activity

    Tall Mass Timber Buildings Now Possible Under 2021 IBC Code Changes

    Drafting a Contractual Arbitration Provision

    The Drought Is Sinking California

    Fifth Circuit -- Damage to Property Beyond Insured’s Product/Work Not Precluded By ‘Your Product/Your Work Exclusion’

    Drowning of Two Boys Constitutes One Occurrence

    Hunton Insurance Practice Receives Top (Tier 1) National Ranking by US News & World Report

    U.S. Building Permits Soared to Their Highest Level in Nearly Eight Years

    New York Court of Appeals Takes Narrow View of Labor Law Provisions in Recent Cases

    No Coverage for Negligent Misrepresentation without Allegations of “Bodily Injury” or “Property Damage”

    Ceiling Collapse Attributed to Construction Defect
    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. Leveraging 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

    Home Building Likely to Stick to Slow Pace

    November 13, 2013 —
    The National Association of Realtors is predicting that home builders will continue to be cautious in the number of homes they build, leading to a continued shortage and higher prices for those that are built. “The inventory shortage will not go away,” said Lawrence Yun, the chief economist for the National Association of Realtors. According to Mr. Yun, the inventory is the lowest it has been in 13 years. As a result of many factors, including rising home prices and rising interest rates, the group is predicting that new home sales will remain flat next year, offering little incentive to builders. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York Team Secures Appellate Win on Behalf of National Home Improvement Chain

    September 26, 2022 —
    New York, N.Y. (August 12, 2022) - New York Appellate Partner Nicholas P. Hurzeler, with New York Partners John J. Doody and David M. Pollack, obtained a significant appellate victory on behalf of a national home improvement chain when a New York Appellate Division panel for the Second Department reduced a jury verdict by more than half. In this matter, which was covered by Law360, the plaintiff was a customer at one of the chain's stores when he was involved in a confrontation with a man and his wife as they exited the store. The chain's loss prevention official told police that the plaintiff had assaulted the female customer. As a result of the incident, the plaintiff was arrested, spent the night in jail, and was arraigned at the same courthouse where he worked as a staff attorney while wearing only an undershirt and jogging shorts. He also had to disclose his arrest on his judgeship nomination application. The charges against him were ultimately dropped after the chain's loss prevention official told prosecutors that surveillance video showed that the female customer’s assault claims were false. The plaintiff subsequently sued the home improvement chain and its loss prevention official for allegedly causing his false arrest and interfering with his career goal of securing a New York state court judgeship. At the close of the trial in this case, the jury determined that the defendant was liable for battery and false imprisonment, and awarded the plaintiff $1.8 million for pain and suffering. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Gillotti v. Stewart (2017) 2017 WL 1488711 Rejects Liberty Mutual, Holding Once Again that the Right to Repair Act is the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    November 21, 2017 —
    Originally published by CDJ on June 5, 2017 Background In Gillotti v. Stewart (April 26, 2017) 2017 WL 1488711, which was ordered to be published on May 18, 2017, the defendant grading subcontractor added soil over tree roots to level the driveway on the plaintiff homeowner’s sloped lot. The homeowner sued the grading subcontractor under the California Right to Repair Act (Civil Code §§ 895, et seq.) claiming that the subcontractor’s work damaged the trees. After the jury found the subcontractor was not negligent, the trial court entered judgment in favor of the subcontractor. The homeowner appealed, arguing that the trial court improperly construed the Right to Repair Act as barring a common law negligence theory against the subcontractor and erred in failing to follow Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 98. The Third District Court of Appeal disagreed and affirmed the trial court’s judgment in favor of the subcontractor. Impact This is the second time the Third District Court of Appeal has held that Liberty Mutual (discussed below) was wrongly decided and held that the Right to Repair Act is the exclusive remedy for construction defect claims. The decision follows its holding in Elliott Homes, Inc. v. Superior Court (Hicks) (2016) 6 Cal.App.5th 333, in which the Court of Appeal held that the Right to Repair Act’s pre-litigation procedures apply when homeowners plead construction defect claims based on common law causes of action, as opposed to violations of the building standards set forth in the Right to Repair Act. Elliott is currently on hold at the California Supreme Court, pending the decision in McMillin Albany, LLC v. Superior Court (2015) 239 Cal.App.4th 1132, wherein Liberty Mutual was rejected for the first time by the Fifth District. CGDRB continues to follow developments regarding the much anticipated McMillin decision closely, as well as all related matters. Reprinted courtesy of Richard H. Glucksman, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger and Chelsea L. Zwart, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger Mr. Glucksman may be contacted at rglucksman@cgdrblaw.com Ms. Zwart may be contacted at czwart@cgdrblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Property Tax Exemption, Misapplied, in Texas

    June 18, 2019 —
    In an important ruling for Texas businesses, the Texas Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that the TCEQ misapplied the Texas property tax’s exemption for specified pollution control equipment. Since 1993, the Texas Constitution has included a provision which authorizes the Texas Legislature to exempt from ad valorem taxation “all or part of real and personal property used … wholly or partly … for the control or reduction of air, water or land pollution.” This provision is implemented by Section 11.31 of the Texas Tax Code, which is administered by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. (See the rules at Title 30, Chapter 17 of the Texas Administrative Code.) If the Executive Director of the TCEQ determines that the equipment is used wholly or partly for pollution control, he issues a “positive use determination”; in the event it does not, the Executive Director issues a “negative use determination and rejects the application for the exemption. In 2007, Section 11.31 was amended at 11.31 (k) to list several items of equipment that are presumed to be pollution-control equipment, including “heat recovery steam generators” or HRSGs. This equipment is used by powerplants to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions that are the product of generation of electricity. Several applications were submitted to the TCEQ by the Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, seeking a tax exemption for its HRSG units. In July 2012, the TCEQ denied these applications, with the flat declaration that HRSGs are not pollution-control equipment—“they are used solely for production.” The Brazos Cooperative sued the Commission, and on May 3, 2019, in the case of Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. v. TCEQ, the Texas Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion reversing the Commission, and the lower court (the Eight Court of Appeals, sitting in El Paso) that affirmed the Commission’s action. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    CSLB Reminds California Public Works Contractors to Renew Their Public Works Registration

    October 02, 2015 —
    A friendly reminder from the Contractors State License Board . . . CSLB Urges Public Works Contractors to Renew Dept. of Industrial Relations Registration before October 1 to Avoid Hefty Penalty SACRAMENTO — A mandatory renewal deadline is approaching for licensees who work on public works projects. Contractors whose registration with the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) expired June 30, 2015, and have ongoing public works projects or plan to bid on new ones, must pay the $300 renewal fee before October 1, 2015, or face an additional $2,000 late penalty after that date. As a result of Senate Bill (SB) 854, all contractors have been required since April 1, 2015, to register with DIR to be awarded a public works contract, even if the project did not go out to bid. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Pollution Created by Business Does Not Deprive Insured of Coverage

    November 26, 2014 —
    The federal district court determined that coverage was properly denied under the pollution exclusion of the policies. Headwaters Resources, Inc. v. Illinois Union Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20060 (10th Cir. Oct. 20, 2014). Over 400 residents of Chesapeake, Virginia, filed two lawsuits against the insured, Headwaters, alleged property damage and bodily injury due to pollution generated in connection with the development of a golf course. The complaints alleged that between 2002 and 2007, the defendants used 1.5 million tons of toxic fly ash during construction of a golf course. The insured allegedly transported the fly ash to an open pit adjacent to residential neighborhoods. The chemicals from the fly ash leached into the ground water, damaging the private wells. The fly ash pit also released airborne contaminants that produced a strong smell of ammonia. As a result of the alleged contamination, the property values of plaintiffs' homes depreciated and members of the community faced increased risk of serious bodily injuries caused by exposure to the fly ash. 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

    Asbestos Confirmed After New York City Steam Pipe Blast

    July 21, 2018 —
    Asbestos has been found at the site where an underground steam pipe exploded early Thursday morning near the Flatiron building in midtown Manhattan. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eydie Cubarrubia, ENR
    Ms. Cubarrubia may be contacted at cubarrubiae@enr.com

    Appellate Court of Maryland Construes Notice Conditions of A312 Performance Bond in Favor of Surety

    January 02, 2024 —
    The Appellate Court of Maryland issued a reported opinion in a case construing an American Institute of Architects (“AIA”) A312 performance bond. In Wildewood Operating Company, LLC v. WRV Holdings, LLC, et al. 2023 Md. App. LEXIS 720 (Oct. 30, 2023), the Appellate Court of Maryland held that a performance bond surety was discharged from liability where the owner/obligee failed to give the surety notice of the contractor’s default termination until after a third party had completed the work. The project concerned the construction of an assisted living facility in St. Mary’s County, Maryland. The owner, Wildewood Operating Company, LLC, entered into an A312-2010 performance bond with Clark Turner Construction, LLC, as contractor, and First Indemnity of America Insurance Company, as surety. When Clark Turner failed to complete certain stormwater management work adjacent to the site, Wildewood, Clark Turner, and other parties entered into a Work Agreement to address completion of the work. The surety was not a party to the Work Agreement. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joel P. Williams, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Williams may be contacted at williamsj@whiteandwilliams.com