BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestration
    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


    Chinese Drywall Manufacturer Claims Product Was Not for American Market

    Nonresidential Construction Employment Expands in August, Says ABC

    Before and After the Storm: Know Your Insurance Rights, Coverages and Obligations

    Mitsubishi Estate to Rebuild Apartments After Defects Found

    Carbon Monoxide Injuries Caused by One Occurrence

    Connecticut Supreme Court Rules Matching of Materials Decided by Appraisers

    Constructive Suspension (Suspension Outside of an Express Order)

    The Construction Industry's Health Kick

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    EEOC Issues Anti-Harassment Guidance To Construction-Industry Employers

    Trump Order Waives Project Environment Rules to Push COVID-19 Recovery

    U.S. Codes for Deck Attachment

    The Three L’s of Real Estate Have New, Urgent Meaning

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Excess Can Sue Primary for Equitable Subrogation

    Insurer Must Pay for Matching Siding of Insured's Buildings

    No Coverage Under Exclusions For Wind and Water Damage

    Why Ethiopia’s $5 Billion Dam Has Riled Its Neighbors

    Asbestos Confirmed After New York City Steam Pipe Blast

    Elizabeth Lofts Condo Owners Settle with Plumbing Supplier

    Preliminary Notices: Common Avoidable But Fatal Mistakes

    District Court Allows DBE False Claims Act Case to Proceed

    Zell Says Homeownership Rate to Fall as Marriages Delayed

    Baltimore Project Pushes To Meet Federal Deadline

    Big Changes and Trends in the Real Estate Industry

    Court Finds That Split in Underground Storage Tank is Not a Covered Collapse

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Indemnity Coverage For Damage Caused by Named Insured

    No Coverage Where Cracks in Basement Walls Do Not Amount to Sudden Collapse

    From the Ashes: Reconstructing After the Maui Wildfire

    Uniformity in Florida’s Construction Bond Laws Brings About Fairness for the Industry

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (9/4/24) – DOJ Sues RealPage, Housing Sales Increase and U.S. Can’t Build Homes Fast Enough

    Circumstances In Which Design Professional Has Construction Lien Rights

    TARP Funds Demolish Homes in Detroit to Lift Prices: Mortgages

    What You Don’t Know About Construction Law Can Hurt Your Engineering Firm (Law Note)

    California Supreme Court Endorses City Authority to Adopt Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

    Harborside Condo Construction Defect Settlement Moves Forward

    Homeowner Survives Motion to Dismiss Depreciation Claims

    Philadelphia Proposed Best Value Procurement Bill

    Parol Evidence can be Used to Defeat Fraudulent Lien

    Hawaii Federal District Court Again Rejects Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    When “Substantially Similar” Means “Fundamentally Identical”: Delaware Court Enforces Related Claim Provision to Deny D&O Coverage for Securities Class Action

    Impairing Your Insurer’s Subrogation Rights

    Jury Convicts Ciminelli, State Official in Bid-Rig Case

    CDC Issues Moratorium on Residential Evictions Through 2020

    Relief Bill's Highway Funds Could Help Construction Projects

    South Carolina Law Clarifies Statue of Repose

    The Case For Designers Shouldering More Legal Responsibility

    The Word “Estimate” in a Contract Matters as to a Completion Date

    The Dangers of an Unlicensed Contractor from Every Angle

    Extreme Heat, Smoke Should Get US Disaster Label, Groups Say

    AB 3018: Amendments to the Skilled and Trained Workforce Requirements on California Public Projects
    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. Drawing 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

    South Carolina Couple Must Arbitrate Construction Defect Claim

    June 28, 2013 —
    The South Carolina Court of Appeals has rejected a claim by Sun City property owners that they were not bound by the arbitration clause in their purchase agreement. Roger and Mary Jo Carlson brought the claim against Del Webb Communities and Pulte Homes. About 140 homeowners are alleging problems in the community. According to the court, the Carlsons will have to go through arbitration with the companies over the alleged stucco defects to their home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Case Alert: Appellate Court Confirms Engineer’s Duty to Defend Developer Arises Upon Tender of Indemnity Claim

    January 27, 2010 —

    In the recent case of UDC-Universal Development, L.P. v. CH2M Hill, 2010 Cal.App.LEXIS 47 (filed January 15, 2010), the Sixth District Court of Appeal provided a stunning illustration of the far-reaching effects of the California Supreme Court’s holding in Crawford v. Weather Shield Manufacturing Inc. (2008) 44 Cal.4th 541. In Crawford, the Court held the duty to defend under an indemnity agreement arose upon the mere tender of defense of a claim covered by the indemnity.

    In the UDC case, CH2M Hill provided engineering and environmental planning services to developer UDC on a project that ultimately wound up in a construction defect lawsuit by the homeowners association ( HOA ). UDC tendered its defense to CH2M Hill, the tender was rejected, and UDC filed a cross-complaint for negligence, breach of contract and indemnity against CH2M Hill and others. After the HOA’s construction defect claims were settled, UDC proceeded to trial against CH2M Hill. The jury found in favor of CH2M Hill on the claims for negligence and breach of contract. At the request of the parties prior to trial, the trial court ruled on the application of the indemnity agreement in light of Crawford and, in so doing, found that the defense obligation arose upon the tender and that CH2M Hill breached that duty despite the jury finding in favor of CH2M Hill.

    The Court of Appeal affirmed, noting that the defense obligation arose as soon as the defense was tendered and did not depend on the outcome of the litigation, and that the HOA’s general description of the defects along with an allegation that Doe engineers were negligent triggered the duty to defend.

    Although this case did not expand the crushing impact of Crawford’s holding, it is

    Read the full story...

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

    Manhattan Home Prices Top Pre-Crisis Record on Luxury Deals

    January 06, 2016 —
    Manhattan home prices surged to a record in the fourth quarter, propelled by closings of luxury deals in new developments that were agreed to years ago, when construction was just starting on many of the buildings. The median price of all completed co-op and condominium purchases in the borough jumped 17 percent from a year earlier to $1.15 million, the highest in 27 years of record-keeping, according to a report Tuesday by appraiser Miller Samuel Inc. and brokerage Douglas Elliman Real Estate. That tops the previous peak of $1.03 million, set in the second quarter of 2008, before the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. triggered a plunge in property prices and a near standstill in sales. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Oshrat Carmiel, Bloomberg

    Homebuilder Immunity Act Dies in Committee. What's Next?

    May 07, 2015 —
    For the third straight year, the Colorado legislature has rejected efforts by the homebuilders’ lobby to provide virtual immunity for construction defects and property damage. Late Monday night, the House committee on State, Military, and Veterans Affairs voted down Senate Bill 15-177 on straight party lines. All six Democrats on the committee voted against the bill, while all five Republicans voted for it. Similar bills had died in the Senate in 2013 and 2014. In theory, SB177 would have boosted multifamily construction by shielding builders from liability for negligent work. Unlike the 2013 bill, this version never expressly stated that it was providing homebuilders with immunity, but it would have made it nearly impossible for community associations to take action against a builder who refused to honor a warranty. And even if the homeowners managed to overcome the procedural obstacles, the bill would have forced their claims into costly, private arbitration. Proponents hoped that, by eliminating responsibility for negligent work and property damage, they could entice homebuilders to construct more cheap condominiums. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jesse Howard Witt, Acerbic Witt
    Mr. Witt welcomes comments at www.wittlawfirm.net

    Amazon Feels the Heat From Hoverboard Fire Claims

    January 20, 2020 —
    In State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 3:18CV166-M-P, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 189053 (Oct. 31, 2019), the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi considered a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by defendant Amazon.com, Inc. (Amazon). Amazon argued that, because it was a “service provider” who cannot be held liable under Mississippi’s Product Liability Act (MPLA), Miss. Code § 11.1.63, the negligence and negligent failure to warn claims filed against it by plaintiff State Farm Fire & Casualty Company (State Farm) failed as a matter of law. The court, looking beyond the MPLA, held that State Farm’s complaint stated a claim against Amazon. In State Farm, Taylor and Laurel Boone (the Boones), State Farm’s subrogors, purchased two hoverboards from third parties in transactions facilitated by Amazon. They purchased the first hoverboard on October 31, 2015 and the second on November 10, 2015. The Boones started using the hoverboards on or about December 25, 2015. On March 16, 2016, the hoverboards caught fire and the fire spread to destroy the Boones’ home. As alleged in the amended complaint, the hoverboards were “manufactured by unknown manufacturers from China.” State Farm, as the Boones’ subrogee, filed suit asserting negligence and negligent failure to warn claims against Amazon. Amazon filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, arguing that State Farm’s claims against it were governed by the MPLA and, as a service provider, it was not liable under the MPLA. In response, State Farm argued that Amazon was liable because it acted as a “marketplace” and that, rather than MPLA claims, Amazon is subject to common law negligence and failure to warn claims. The District Court agreed with State Farm. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    PFAS and the Challenge of Cleaning Up “Forever”

    July 31, 2023 —
    From a stream of legal challenges, to ever-expanding regulations on things like cosmetics and drinking water, PFAS are the “forever chemicals” keeping companies and consumers on high alert. While industries scramble to remove the synthetic compounds from products, scientists are researching new techniques for scrubbing PFAS from the environment. There is money to be had for those who can find a more streamlined method of purging the substances—the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has an $800 million contract on the table for the handling, destruction and replacement of PFAS-laden fire-fighting foam—leaving technology companies racing to create solutions. The three main PFAS cleaning techniques currently relied upon can be very effective but are also costly and may leave questionable byproducts in their wake. The established approaches include:
    • Granular Activated Carbon. As one of the most studied treatments for PFAS removal, granular activated carbon is often used in water treatment plants. Large beds of carbon essentially soak up the unwanted chemicals. After the Sweeney Water Plant in North Carolina, whose water source is downstream from a fluorochemical-producing Chemours plant, was found to be contaminated with PFAS, the plant invested around $46 million into upgraded activated carbon systems. Once installed, these systems cost roughly $2.9 million to operate yearly, as the carbon needs to be replaced each time it reaches capacity. Though pricey, the plant says that the process now clears close to 100% of PFAS.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of PFAS Team, Pillsbury

    Green Construction Claims: More of the Same

    May 10, 2021 —
    For this week’s Guest Post Friday, Musings welcomes back Timothy R. Hughes, Esq., LEED AP. Tim (@timrhughes on Twitter) is a Shareholder in the Arlington, Virginia firm of Bean, Kinney & Korman, P.C. In his practice as a business, corporate, and construction law attorney, Tim was the Chair of the Construction Law and Public Contracts Section of the Virginia State Bar. He was recognized by Virginia Lawyer’s Weekly as a 2010 “Leader in the Law” and a member of the Legal Elite for Construction Law for 2010 by Virginia Business Magazine. A regular speaker and writer, Tim is the lead editor of his firm blog, Virginia Real Estate, Land Use and Construction Law. Green construction liability risk has received a lot of discussion over time. My take is that sustainable design and construction projects present the same type of risk profile as other construction projects, with the caveat that there may be “a little more”. A little more risk. A little more lack of predictability. A little more process overlay. Thus, green construction claims really are just “more of the same”. I have watched and participated in the discussion. With regards to the Chesapeake Bay Foundation building, the reality is that any project can face challenges of product specification and performance, green or not. We can see plenty of examples where products have created tremendous risk and liability to the construction industry, the avalanche of EIFS litigation and Chinese drywall standing as just two of the most recent examples. A product failed, but that is nothing truly new. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Mega-Consulate Ties U.S. to Convicted Billionaire in Nigeria

    May 30, 2022 —
    On March 31, billionaire Gilbert Chagoury stood atop the plot of land he’d dredged from the sea around Lagos, beaming in the sweltering heat alongside U.S. Consul-General to Nigeria Claire Pierangelo, as they broke ground for America’s largest consulate in the world. As a cool spring rain fell on Washington that day, Republican Congressman Jeff Fortenberry, of Nebraska, resigned from the House of Representatives after a conviction announced a week earlier. His crime: lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation about illegal campaign contributions he’d received from Chagoury. The pageantry in Lagos obscured the uncomfortable fact that by placing its $537 million consulate on Chagoury’s Eko Atlantic development, the U.S. government was becoming the anchor tenant for a project run by a man who was once convicted of laundering money for a Nigerian dictator and who’s admitted to making illegal campaign contributions in the U.S. Ethics groups and Nigeria experts aren’t pleased with the choice. Reprinted courtesy of Neil Munshi, Bloomberg and William Clowes, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of