BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut construction claims 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


    Ex-Ironworkers Local President Sentenced to Prison Term for Extortion

    Defects, Delays and Change Orders

    Torrey Pines Court Receives Funding for Renovation

    Supplement to New California Construction Laws for 2019

    Expert Can be Questioned on a Construction Standard, Even if Not Relied Upon

    Keep Your Construction Claims Alive in Crazy Economic Times

    Georgia Amends Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Lease-Leaseback Battle Continues as First District Court of Appeals Sides with Contractor and School District

    Circuit Court Lacks Appellate Jurisdiction Over Order Compelling Appraisal

    California MCLE Seminar at BHA Sacramento July 11th

    The Argument for Solar Power

    New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ Bill

    Home Buyers Lose as U.S. Bond Rally Skips Mortgage Rates

    Colorado Statutes of Limitations and Repose, A First Step in Construction Defect Litigation

    Lennar Profit Tops Estimates as Home Prices Increase

    There’s Still No Amazon for Housing, But Fintech’s Working on It

    Colorado Homes Approved Despite being Too Close Together

    The Brexit Effect on the Construction Industry

    First-Time Buyers Shut Out of Expanding U.S. Home Supply

    The Construction Industry Lost Jobs (No Surprise) but it Gained Some Too (Surprise)

    Revel Closing Shows Gambling Is No Sure Thing for Renewal

    Back Posting with Thoughts on Lien Waivers

    Is Construction in Arizona Back to Normal?

    Supreme Court of Washington State Upholds SFAA Position on Spearin Doctrine

    Fort Lauderdale Partner Secures Defense Verdict for Engineering Firm in High-Stakes Negligence Case

    Some Coastal Cities Are Sinking Even Faster Than Seas Are Rising

    CCPA Class Action Lawsuits Are Coming. Are You Ready?

    Arkansas: Avoiding the "Made Whole" Doctrine Through Dépeçage

    Housing Gains Not Leading to Hiring

    2022 Project of the Year: Linking Los Angeles

    Second Circuit Affirms Win for General Contractor on No Damages for Delay Provision

    Fine Art Losses – “Canvas” the Subrogation Landscape

    California Supreme Court Shifts Gears on “Reverse CEQA”

    Ahlers Distinguished As Top Super Lawyer In Washington And Nine Firm Members Recognized As Super Lawyers Or Rising Stars

    The Economic Loss Rule and the Disclosure of Latent Defects: In re the Estate of Carol S. Gattis

    Ensuing Loss Provision Found Ambiguous

    Carbon Monoxide Injuries Caused by One Occurrence

    Sometimes It’s Okay to Destroy Evidence

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Will Not Address Trigger for DEP Environmental Cleanup Action at This Time

    Boys (and Girls) of Summer: New Residential Solar Energy System Disclosures Take Effect January 1, 2019

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Sub-Contractor

    State Farm Too Quick To Deny Coverage, Court Rules

    Recycled Water and New Construction. New Standards Being Considered

    Apartment Construction Ominously Nears 25-Year High

    Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship Is Not an "Occurrence"

    A Behind-the-Scenes Look at Substitution Hearings Under California’s Listing Law

    Denial of Coverage for Bulge in Wall Upheld

    U.S. Government Bans Use of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements between Nursing Homes and Residents, Effective November 28, 2016

    New Illinois Supreme Court Trigger Rule for CGL Personal Injury “Offenses” Could Have Costly Consequences for Policyholders

    NTSB Sheds Light on Fatal Baltimore Work Zone Crash
    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

    Order for Appraisal Affirmed After Insureds Comply with Post-Loss Obligations

    April 15, 2015 —
    The Florida Court of Appeal affirmed an order compelling an appraisal because the insureds complied with their post-loss obligations under the policy. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co. v. Cardelles, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 2559 (Fla. Ct. App. Feb. 25, 2015). The insureds suffered damage to their home after Hurricane Katrina on August 25, 2005, and again after Hurricane Wilma on October 24, 2005. After each hurricane, State Farm was notified. With the assistance of their public adjuster, the insureds submitted sworn proofs of loss for damages caused by each hurricane. After the deductible, State Farm paid $19,000 for the Hurricane Katrina claim and $13,000 for the Hurricane Wilma claim. The insureds repaired their roof and made minor repairs to their home with the State Farm payment, but claimed the payment was insufficient to fully repair the damage from the two hurricanes. Four years later, the insureds hired a second public adjuster, who submitted a supplemental claim to State Farm for $127,000 in damages. State Farm requested documents and an updated sworn proof of loss. The insureds did not submit any additional documents because they had not made any additional repairs without further payment from State Farm. The insureds did, however, allow State Farm to make a further inspection of the damages. 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

    Nevada Insureds Can Rely on Extrinsic Facts to Show that An Insurer Owes a Duty to Defend

    November 15, 2021 —
    On Oct. 28, 2021, the Nevada Supreme Court in Zurich American Insurance Company v.. Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company, 137 Nev. Adv. Op. 66, held that an insured can rely on extrinsic facts to show that an insurer has a duty to defend the insured, as long as the facts were available to the insurer at the time the insured tendered the claim. The court also held that an insured has the burden of proving that an exception to an exclusion in an insurance policy applies to create a duty to defend. In Zurich, Ironshore refused to defend to its insured against multiple property damage claims arising out of construction defects, claiming that its policies’ continuing and progressive damage exclusions barred coverage. The underlying lawsuits made no specific allegations describing when or how the property damage occurred. Ironshore claimed that the property damage had occurred due to faulty work that predated the commencement of its policies. Two different federal trial courts came to conflicting conclusions in the underlying cases. One held that Ironshore had a duty to defend because Ironshore failed to show that an exception to the exclusion did not apply. The second granted summary judgment in favor of Ironshore holding that the insured failed to meet its burden of proving that an exception to the exclusion applied. Reprinted courtesy of Sarah J. Odia, Payne & Fears and Scott S. Thomas, Payne & Fears Ms. Odia may be contacted at sjo@paynefears.com Mr. Thomas may be contacted at sst@paynefears.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 45 White and Williams Lawyers

    September 25, 2023 —
    Thirty-two White and Williams lawyers were recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® 2024. Inclusion in Best Lawyers® is based entirely on peer-review. The methodology is designed to capture, as accurately as possible, the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical area and legal practice area. Best Lawyers® employs a sophisticated, conscientious, rational, and transparent survey process designed to elicit meaningful and substantive evaluations of quality legal services. In addition, thirteen lawyers were recognized as Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America. This recognition is given to attorneys who are earlier in their careers for outstanding professional excellence in private practice in the United States. The firm is also pleased to announce Best Lawyers® has recognized Christopher P. Leise as a 2024 "Lawyer of the Year" for Litigation – Insurance in Cherry Hill, NJ. Chris works with regional and national brokerage firms defending professional liability claims and handling disputes with insurance companies throughout the mid-Atlantic region, as well as with commercial insurance carriers defending allegations of bad faith. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    Texas City Pulls Plug on Fossil Fuels With Shift to Solar

    March 19, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- A city in the heart of the oil state of Texas is set to become one of the first communities in the U.S. to wean its residents off fossil fuels. The municipal utility in Georgetown, with about 50,000 residents, will get all of its power from renewable resources when SunEdison Inc. completes 150 megawatts of solar farms in West Texas next year. The change was announced Wednesday. It will be the first city to completely embrace clean power in the state, which is the biggest U.S. producer and user of natural gas. More will follow as municipalities seek to insulate themselves from unpredictable prices for fossil fuels, said Paul Gaynor, SunEdison’s executive vice president of North America. Burlington, Vermont, made a similar move with its purchase of a hydroelectric plant last year. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Martin, Bloomberg
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin11@bloomberg.net

    DC Wins Largest-Ever Civil Penalty in US Housing Discrimination Suit

    November 15, 2022 —
    Three real estate companies operating in Washington, DC, will pay record-breaking penalties in a suit brought by the city for illegally discriminating against tenants who use Section 8 vouchers and other forms of housing assistance. The attorney general for the District of Columbia, Karl Racine, announced on Thursday a settlement for $10 million. While fair housing cases involving lenders have resulted in larger compensation payouts, $10 million is the largest civil penalty ever levied in a housing discrimination case. In 2020, the city sued several entities — DARO Management Services, DARO Realty and New York-based parent company Infinity Real Estate, as well as several executives — over housing practices in the District. DARO Management operates and rents some 1,200 residential units in more than a dozen apartment buildings spread across Wards 1, 2 and 3, which include DC’s more affluent areas. (DARO Realty owns the properties, DARO Management operates them, and Infinity owns both affiliates.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kriston Capps, Bloomberg

    How BIM Helps Make Buildings Safer

    July 01, 2019 —
    There are many uses for building information models that are yet to be discovered. One Finnish team collaborated with a city and fire & rescue authority to explore how BIM would help make buildings safer. “Imagine a fire inspector in a building with an AR headset. He can retrieve data from the building’s digital model and hence get an x-ray view of the pipes and cables behind the lowered ceiling.” That’s a scenario that Timo Lehtoviita pictured when we discussed the experimentation project which he led at Saimia, Saimaa University of Applied Sciences. Saimia, the city of Lappeenranta and their real estate company LATO, and the Rescue Department of South Karelia partnered in 2018 to explore the possibilities of using BIM to make buildings safer. The project, titled “Enhancing building safety using information models,” formed part of the national KIRA-digi built environment digitalization program. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    What The U.S. Can Learn from China to Bring Its Buildings to New Heights

    November 15, 2022 —
    “China’s history is marked by thousands of years of world-changing innovations: from the compass and gunpowder to acupuncture and the printing press. No one should be surprised that China has re-emerged as an economic superpower.” —Gary Locke Westerners have often criticized China’s ‘creative’ interpretation of the concept of intellectual property, but even its harshest critics recognize the Asian superpower’s ability to build large-scale infrastructure projects at a breakneck pace. America does not want to emulate the absolute government control that has allowed China to build futuristic bridges and airports in record time. However, there are still some things we can learn from our biggest global competitor. The White House itself has invoked China’s grand achievements in its quest to secure more infrastructure funding from Congress. The administration believes that the only way to compete with China is to spend at least $2 trillion on upgrading bridges and mass transit, modernizing neighborhoods and airports, and making broadband access universal. The skylines of China’s largest metropolises are nothing short of mesmerizing. Its grand airports and auditoriums amaze tourists and locals alike. Explore any important Chinese city on Google maps, and you will find a level of modernization in infrastructure that far surpasses American cities of similar size. Scholars have coined the phrase “China envy” to refer to the effects of this phenomenon. According to urban planning historian Thomas J. Campanella, China is doing the kind of things America used to do: amazing the world with grand structures that push engineering and architecture forward. The question is, if China has emulated us, can we now emulate China? China Envy There are some basic differences between the two nations which make emulation difficult. On the one hand, China has leapfrogged from rudimentary infrastructure to suborbital spaceships and bullet trains. America is at a different stage and moves at a different pace. Chinese leaders don’t need approval from the opposition in Congress; they have total control. If the Chinese administration wants to build a bridge, they just go ahead and do it. Democracy is a bit more complicated, but we naturally welcome the complexities, considering how stifling the political atmosphere is under communist rule. Another difference some analysts have pointed out is that the current Chinese President and his predecessor both studied engineering, so they were naturally keen on innovation in their field. Meanwhile, U.S. presidents have seldom had such backgrounds. The American public has more often elected lawyers to rule over our nation. China envy is understandable. Our competitor is home to 49 of the planet’s 100 tallest skyscrapers. It also boasts a million bridges. While the U.S. spends 2.4 percent of GDP on infrastructure, China spends 8 percent. This was an important selling point for the White House’s ambitious infrastructure plan. Located in a mountainous region with over 1,500 rivers, China has built bridges of fantastic proportions to keep urban centers and important agricultural areas connected. The Pingtang Bridge in Guizhou province links two sides of a canyon that are 7,000 feet apart. The spectacular, 7-mile-long Hutong Yangtze River Bridge efficiently provides railway and highway access to Shanghai from Jiangsu province. As climate change forces us to reevaluate Americans’ preference for private cars and the neglect of our railway systems, the inferior car ownership that was once a disadvantage for China is now an advantage. By 2025, high-speed trains will service 98 percent of Chinese cities. Subways are common in many of them. Today, the country boasts a high-speed rail network totaling more than 23,500 miles, or eight times the distance between New York and LA. Chinese workers travel on bullet trains at 215 miles per hour, much faster than their American counterparts. The gap between China and the U.S. when it comes to infrastructure is one of astronomic proportions. A few years ago, Bill Gates announced that China had used as much cement in three years as the U.S. in 100 years. China currently produces 14 times more steel than the U.S. and about 2.2 gigatons of cement per year, roughly half of the 4.5 gigatons our country used in the 20th century. In China, city planners have not focused on short-term return on investment, but on broader societal benefits. For example, World Bank officials were not enamored with the idea of creating a subway in Shanghai; the region’s geology made the project far too complex. The World Bank suggested buses would be a better solution for the city’s transit, but Chinese officials didn’t listen and went ahead. Thirty years later, the Shanghai subway has become an example of efficiency, transporting more than 10 million people every day. It is as if China followed a different logic, one that often pays off. According to Mr. Campanella, “We need a bit of China to be stirred into our game. . . We’re over privileging the immediately affected residents. What we don’t do is give requisite weight to the larger society.” China’s modernization has, however, not been without cost. Accelerated construction creates pollution, and not all the country’s massive structures are green or energy efficient. President Xi’s country is conscious about pollution, and it has poured significant resources into green infrastructure projects like wind and solar farms. There is a boldness in China’s infrastructure planning, a pioneering spirit that we would do well to imitate. What American jurisdiction would spend billions on a new state-of-the-art airport only 50 miles away from a recently modernized one? China has done it in Beijing. In a way, it seems that China is seeing beyond the here and now, planning for tomorrow, and this is something we can learn from our competitors. Marc Gravely is the founder and lead attorney at Gravely PC and author of Reframing America’s Infrastructure: A Ruins to Renaissance Playbook. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Indemnity and Defense Construction Law Changes for 2013

    April 03, 2013 —

    Death of “Type 1” Indemnity in California Construction

    For many years the prevalence of the “Type 1” indemnity clause has been the subject of fierce debate within the construction industry.  Subcontractors have complained that they are saddled with indemnity obligations that require them to indemnify contractors from construction-related claims for which these subcontractors are truly not responsible.  In defense, contractors have argued that they must be entitled to the freedom to set contractual terms to best protect themselves and they point out that subcontractors are certainly free to negotiate better terms or turn down work.

    After many years of debate and small legislative inroads in prohibiting Type 1 indemnity in residential projects and where it concerns the “sole negligence”, “willful misconduct” or the “design defects” of others, the California legislature has finally spoken broadly and definitively on the issue of Type 1 indemnity clauses in construction contracts.  Under new Civil Code section 2782, beginning with contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2013, broad “Type 1” indemnity clauses shall be void and unenforceable in the context of both private and public construction projects in California.  Civil Code section 2782 now makes it clear that subcontractors can no longer be required to indemnify against another’s active negligence in connection with construction contracts, whether public or private.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Esq.
    William L. Porter, Esq. can be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com