BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineers
    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


    Federal Court Denies Summary Judgment in Leaky Condo Conversion

    Nine Gibbs Giden Partners Listed in Southern California Super Lawyers 2022

    Contractor Not Liable for Flooding House

    On Rehearing, Fifth Circuit Finds Contractual-Liability Exclusion Does Not Apply

    New York Condominium Association Files Construction Defect Suit

    Serving the 558 Notice of Construction Defect Letter in Light of the Statute of Repose

    "Damage to Your Product" Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Party Loses Additional Insured Argument by Improper Pleading

    Building Stagnant in Las Cruces Region

    California Restricts Principles of “General” Personal Jurisdiction

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increased 4.3% in November

    Appraisal Panel Can Determine Causation of Loss under Ohio Law

    Your Work Exclusion Applies to Damage to Tradesman's Property, Not Damage to Other Property

    Waiver of Subrogation and Lack of Contractual Privity Bars Commercial Tenants’ Claims

    Re-Thinking the One-Sided Contract: Considerations for a More Balanced Approach to Contracting

    More Broad-Based Expansion for Construction Industry Expected in 2015

    New Jersey/New York “Occurrence”

    Chapman Glucksman Press Release

    Justin Clark Joins Newmeyer & Dillion’s Walnut Creek Branch as its Newest Associate

    What to do about California’s Defect-Ridden Board of Equalization Building

    BHA Sponsors 28th Annual Construction Law Conference in San Antonio, TX

    Alexus Williams Receives Missouri Lawyers Media 2021 Women’s Justice Pro Bono Award

    Quick Note: Lis Pendens Bond When Lis Pendens Not Founded On Recorded Instrument Or Statute

    This Times Square Makeover Is Not a Tourist Attraction

    U.S. Steel Invoking Carnegie’s Legacy in Revival Strategy

    Don’t Spoil Me: Oklahoma District Court Rules Against Spoliation Sanctions

    North Carolina Should Protect Undocumented Witnesses to Charlotte Scaffolding Deaths, Unions Say

    And the Cyber-Beat Goes On. Yet Another Cyber Regulatory Focus for Insurers

    Substantial Completion Explained: What Contractors & Owners Should Know

    Coverage for Collapse Ordered on Summary Judgment

    In Texas, a General Contractor May be Liable in Tort to a Third-Party Lessee for Property Damage Caused by a Subcontractor’s Work

    More Regulations for Federal Contractors

    Self-Storage Magnates Cash In on the Surge in Real Estate

    Fourth Circuit Questions EPA 2020 Clean Water Act 401 Certification Rule Tolling Prohibition

    Construction Defects Checklist

    Surviving the Construction Law Backlog: Nontraditional Approaches to Resolution

    2018 Super Bowl US. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis

    Damages to Property That is Not the Insured's Work Product Are Covered

    Who's Who Legal Recognizes Two White and Williams Lawyers as Thought/Global Leaders in Insurance and Reinsurance

    Online Meetings & Privacy in Today’s WFH Environment

    Jury Awards Aluminum Company 35 Million in Time Element Losses

    State Supreme Court Cases Highlight Importance of Wording in Earth Movement Exclusions

    Decades of WCC Seminar at the Disneyland Resort

    Surety Trends to Keep an Eye on in the Construction Industry

    Sochi Construction Unlikely to be Completed by End of Olympic Games

    ABC Announces Disaster Relief Efforts and Resources Following Hurricane Milton

    California Contractor License Bonds to Increase in 2016

    California Commission Recommends Switching To Fault-Based Wildfire Liability Standard for Public Utilities

    South Carolina Legislature Redefining Occurrences to Include Construction Defects in CGL Policies

    Indictments Issued in Las Vegas HOA Scam
    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

    Travelers v. Larimer County and the Concept of Covered Cause of Loss

    May 10, 2013 —
    Travelers Indemnity Company (“Travelers”) recently won a decision against Larimer County regarding a claim for damage caused to the roofs of several buildings at the County Fairgrounds. Travelers Indemnity Company v. Board of County Commissioners for Larimer County, Slip Copy, 2013 WL 238865, p. 1 (10th Cir. 2013). Larimer County alleged, in district court, that snowstorms and the weight of the snow build-up caused damage to the roof structures. Id. After the district court found for Travelers on a motion for summary judgment, Larimer County appealed the ruling, claiming that Traveler’s was obligated under the insurance policy to pay for repair costs to portions of the roofing structure. Id. The underlying claim for repairs originates with several snowstorms that caused damage to several buildings on the County Fairgrounds. The damage claimed was widespread to the roof structures, evidenced by rolling and buckling purlins (horizontal beams running along the length of the roof, resting upon the principal rafters at right angles and supporting the ordinary rafters). Travelers denied the claim based on its own investigation which concluded the damage was caused by design and construction defects, and therefore excluded from coverage under the insurance policy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brady Iandiorio
    Mr. Iandiorio can be contacted at iandiorio@hhmrlaw.com

    Fundamental Fairness Trumps Contract Language

    September 24, 2014 —
    The Texas Supreme Court recently ruled that a “no-damages-for-delay” clause would not be enforced where the delay was caused by the owner. The court’s ruling flies squarely in the face of the contract language that attempted to insulate the owner from any delay claims, even those it caused. In the case of Zachary Construction v. Port of Houston underlying contract, proposed by the Port of Houston, was heavy handed, to say the least. The contract provided: “[Contractor] shall receive no financial compensation for delay or hindrance to the Work. In no event shall the Port Authority be liable to [Contractor] … for any damages arising out of or associated with any delay or hindrance to the Work, regardless of the source of the delay or hindrance, including events of Force Majeure, AND EVEN IF SUCH DELAY OR HINDRANCE RESULTS FROM, ARISES OUT OF OR IS DUE IN WHOLE OR IN PART, TO THE NEGLIGENCE, BREACH OF CONTRACT OR OTHER FAULT OF THE PORT AUTHORITY. [Contractor’s] sole remedy in any such case shall be an extension of time.” Wow, that’s some one-sided language. If the contract was enforced, the contractor could not get any damages for delay, even those damages caused by the active interference of the Port of Houston. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    New Highway for Olympics Cuts off Village near Sochi, Russia

    February 07, 2014 —
    A new highway costing $635 million was built in Sochi, Russia to support this month’s Winter Olympic Games—but the “shining” highway has cut off residents of the Village of Akhtyr, according to The Spokesman-Review. The online publication reports that while the Olympics will showcase the “luxury malls, sleek stadiums and high-speed train links, thousands of ordinary people in the Sochi area put up with squalor and environmental waste: villagers living next to an illegal dump filled with Olympic construction waste, families whose homes are sinking into the earth, city dwellers suffering chronic power cuts despite promises to improve electricity.” One of the Sochi residents told KPAX News that what was once a “15-minute walk to get the bus to work has become a two-hour, cross-country trek. Military guards block their way to the rickety footbridge they used to use.” Furthermore, KPAX News claimed, “Heavy construction and traffic have chewed up the road through town and turned it into a dust bowl.” Read the full story at The Spokesman-Review... Read the full story at KPAX News... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Overview of New Mexico Construction Law

    June 25, 2019 —
    We’ve seen an uptick in out-of-state companies working on construction projects in New Mexico. The following is an overview of some of the nuances of New Mexico construction law about which companies may want to be aware. Construction Contract Issues Limitation of Liability Clauses are usually Enforceable, but Anti-Indemnity Clauses Are Not New Mexico courts have enforced limitation of liability clauses included in construction contracts. See Fort Knox Self Storage, Inc. v. W. Techs., Inc., 140 N.M. 233, 237 (N.M. Ct. App 2006). New Mexico law recognizes the difference between contracts that insulate a party from any and all liability and those that simply limit liability. Fort Knox Self Storage, Inc., 140 N.M. 233 at 237. An exculpatory clause immunizes a party from liability, whereas a limitation of liability clause merely curtails liability. Id. A limitation of liability clause has been held not to violate New Mexico public policy because the party “still bears substantial responsibility for its actions.” Id.; see also Cowan v. D'Angelico, 2010 WL 11493789, *6 (D. N.M. Apr. 26, 2010). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Walker F. Crowson, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Crowson may be contacted at wcrowson@swlaw.com

    Luxury Home Sales are on the Rise

    February 04, 2014 —
    The New York Times reports that the sale of luxury homes is on the rise: “Yet despite the bursting of the housing bubble, the ensuing recession and the slow recovery, buyers have not abandoned luxury homes. It turns out that they just took a break. In July 2013, sales of homes costing more than $1 million were up 46.6 percent from the previous July.” “The housing market is being driven by the move-up buyer, the luxury buyer,” Brad Hunter, chief economist and director of consulting at Metrostudy told the New York Times. “And those who have strong incomes, secure jobs, their stock portfolio is doing well — they are able to buy whatever they want. And what they are buying is larger houses.” Toll Brothers design director, Tim Gehman, said that “the homes that sell best today are those with the biggest kitchens and most expansive master suites — much as they were before the recession,” according to the New York Times. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    If I Released My California Mechanics Lien, Can I File a New Mechanics Lien on the Same Project? Will the New Mechanics Lien be Enforceable?

    December 29, 2020 —
    If I Released My California Mechanics Lien, Can I File a New Mechanics Lien on the Same Project? Will the New Mechanics Lien be Enforceable? In general, the answer to the above questions is “Yes”, but only if you meet the following requirements:
    1. You must only release the mechanics lien itself, but not the “right” to a mechanics lien: There is an important distinction to be made between releasing a mechanics lien and releasing the right to a mechanics lien. Whether you do one or the other will depend on the specific language used in your release. In the case of Santa Clara Land Title Co. v. Nowack and Associates, Inc. (1991) 226 Cal. App.3d, 1558 a “release of mechanics lien” document was recorded TO THE County Recorder’s office which included a statement that the mechanics lien was “fully satisfied, released and discharged”. Based on this language, the court concluded that the mechanics lien claimant had waived its “right” to a further mechanics lien on the same property for the work in question. The court concluded that since the release stated that the claim was “fully satisfied” the right to mechanics lien on the project had forever been waived. The Nowak case can be distinguished from the case of Koudmani v. Ogle Enterprises, Inc., (1996) 47 Cal.App.4th 1650, where the release of mechanics lien only stated that the mechanics lien was “otherwise released and discharged” and not that it was “satisfied”. Based on the distinction drawn from the two cases, a simple mechanics lien release that only releases the mechanics lien itself, but not the “right” to a mechanics lien should be used. At the following link you will find a proper form to achieve this purpose: https://www.porterlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/03PRI-Mechanics-Lien-Release.pdf
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Duty to Defend Broadly Applies to Entire Action; Insured Need Not Apportion Defense Costs, Says Maryland Appeals Court

    January 27, 2020 —
    In a recent decision, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals reiterated that the duty to defend broadly requires a liability insurer to defend an entire lawsuit against its insured, even where only some of the allegations are potentially covered. The court further held that the insured has no obligation to apportion defense costs among multiple implicated policies. The decision, Selective Way Insurance Company v. Nationwide Property and Casualty Insurance Company, et al., can be found here. The coverage litigation arose out of a construction defect case against a general contractor. The general contractor tendered the action to its insurer, Nationwide, which, in turn, filed a declaratory judgment action against the various insurers of construction project subcontractors that had named the general contractor as an additional insured. Ultimately, the court granted a summary judgment motion declaring that all of the subcontractors’ insurers had a duty to defend the general contractor “because the allegations in the underlying lawsuit raised claims that potentially arose from the [s]ubcontractors’ work at the [construction site].” All of the subcontractors’ insurers settled with Nationwide except for one, Selective Way; and the parties proceeded to a jury trial on various issues. The jury found for Nationwide on all issues. Selective Way appealed. Selective Way argued on appeal that even if some of the allegations were covered under its policy, it had no obligation to defend the general contractor because its insureds, the subcontractors, could not have been responsible for all of the losses given the nature of their work. Further, Selective Way contended that if it was responsible for defending the general contractor, it was not responsible for the entire defense, and the general contractor was responsible for apportioning the costs among the various subcontractors. The panel disagreed on both points. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Kevin V. Small, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Small may be contacted at ksmall@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Extreme Rainfall Is Becoming More Frequent and Deadly

    November 11, 2024 —
    Torrential rains that triggered floods and landslides have killed hundreds of people and displaced millions across parts of Africa, Europe, Asia and the US in recent months. The unprecedented deluges overwhelmed even communities accustomed to extreme weather and showed the limitations of the early-warning systems and emergency protocols established in many countries to avoid major loss of life. Climate scientists have warned that an accelerated water cycle is locked into the world’s climate system due to past and projected greenhouse gas emissions, and is now irreversible. The communities that tend to pay the highest price are often in poorer countries, where environments can be more fragile and governance more patchy, and there are fewer resources to bounce back after a disaster. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lou Del Bello, Bloomberg