BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractor
    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


    Disappointment on an Olympian Scale After Rio 2016 Summer Games

    A Vision and Strategy for the Adoption of Open International Standards

    Construction Picks Up Post-COVID and So Do Claims (and A Construction Lawyer Can Help)

    Tick Tock: Don’t Let the Statute of Repose or Limitations Time Periods Run on Your Construction Claims

    California Supreme Court Hands Victory to Private Property Owners Over Public Use

    Home Builder Doesn’t See Long Impact from Hurricane

    Hunton Insurance Group Advises Policyholders on Issues That Arise With Wildfire Claims and Coverage – A Seven-Part Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series

    State Farm Too Quick To Deny Coverage, Court Rules

    Homeowner’s Claims Defeated Because “Gravamen” of Complaint was Fraud, not Breach of Contract

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Eliminates Loss from Hurricane

    Is an Initial Decision Maker, Project Neutral, or Dispute Resolution Board Right for You?

    Commencing of the Statute of Repose for Construction Defects

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Reaffirms Validity of Statutory Employer Defense

    Connecticut Supreme Court to Review Several Issues in Asbestos Coverage Case

    Loose Bolts Led to Sagging Roof in Construction Defect Claim

    Mixed Reality for Construction: Applicability and Reality

    Contractor Allegedly Stole Construction Materials

    Florida County Suspends Impact Fees to Spur Development

    Firm Claims Construction Defects in Hawaiian Homes

    Lead Paint: The EPA’s Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule

    Mountain States Super Lawyers 2019 Recognizes 21 Nevada Snell & Wilmer Attorneys

    The Future Has Arrived: New Technologies in Construction

    Walking the Tightrope of SB 35

    White and Williams LLP Acquires 6 Attorney Firm

    Georgia Court Clarifies Landlord Liability for Construction Defects

    Construction Defect Fund Approved for Bankrupt Las Vegas Builder

    Gordon & Rees Ranked #4 of Top 50 Construction Law Firms in the Nation by Construction Executive Magazine

    Understanding Insurance Disputes in Construction Defect Litigation: A Review of Acuity v. Kinsale

    Kiewit Hired as EPC for Fire-Damaged Freeport Gas Terminal Fix

    New York State Trial Court Addresses “Trigger of Coverage” for Asbestos Claims and Other Coverage Issues

    Construction Law Breaking News: California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Beacon Residential Community Association

    California Court of Appeal Makes Short Work Trial Court Order Preventing Party From Supplementing Experts

    Preserving Lien Rights on Private Projects in Washington: Three Common Mistakes to Avoid

    Courts Take Another Swipe at the Implied Warranty of the Plans and Specifications

    Court’s Ruling on SB800 “Surprising to Some”

    Miller Act Claim for Unsigned Change Orders

    Changes to the Federal Rules – 2024

    California Supreme Court Holds that Requirement of Prejudice for Late Notice Defense is a Fundamental Public Policy of the State for Choice of Law Analysis

    Garlock Five Years Later: Recent Decisions Illustrate Ongoing Obstacles to Asbestos Trust Transparency

    Environmental Justice Legislation Update

    Insurers' Motion to Knock Out Bad Faith, Negligent Misrepresentation Claims in Construction Defect Case Denied

    Flushing Away Liability: What the Aqua Engineering Case Means for Contractors and Subcontractors

    Insurer’s Discovery Requests Ruled to be Overbroad in Construction Defect Suit

    Construction Law Alert: Builder’s Alternative Pre-litigation Procedures Upheld Over Strong Opposition

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Denies Bad Faith Claim in HO Policy Dispute

    MSJ Granted Equates to a Huge Victory for BWB&O & City of Murrieta Fire Department!

    Expansion of Statutes of Limitations and Repose in K-12 and Municipal Construction Contracts

    Work to Solve the Mental Health Crisis in Construction

    2014 WCC Panel: Working Smarter with Technology

    BWB&O Partner Jack Briscoe and Associate Anoushe Marandjian Win Summary Judgment Motion on Behalf of Homeowner Client!
    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

    Ninth Circuit Construes Known Loss Provision

    August 19, 2015 —
    The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's award of summary judgment to the insurer after analyzing the known loss provision in the insured subcontractor's policy. Kaady v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10754 (9th Cir. June 25, 2015). The insured was awarded a subcontract to install manufactured stone at the residential project. The stone was affixed to the wall sheathing. The insured also wrapped deck posts with manufactured stone and installed masonry caps on the toe of the stone that was wrapped around the deck posts. After construction was completed, the insured was called back to the project to inspect cracks in the manufactured stone and masonry caps he installed. The insured told the general contractor that the cracks were likely due to settling. Three months after inspecting the cracks, the insured purchased a CGL policy from Mid-Continent. 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

    Utilities’ Extreme Plan to Stop Wildfires: Shut Off the Power

    October 28, 2024 —
    A growing number of utilities are resorting to an extreme measure to prevent their equipment from sparking catastrophic wildfires: turning off the power. Electric companies serving about 24 million homes and businesses across the fire-prone US West now have plans to preemptively cut electricity during dangerous fire conditions, according to an analysis of data compiled by researchers at Stanford University. The proactive blackouts, however, run counter to the power companies’ main mission — which is to keep the lights on. And that’s angering customers and officials. Lawsuits — and the billions of dollars of damage claims that come with them — are an increasing concern among utilities, said Michael Wara, who leads the Climate and Energy Policy Program at Stanford University. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mark Chediak, Bloomberg

    Ninth Circuit Rules Supreme Court’s Two-Part Test of Implied Certification under the False Claims Act Mandatory

    May 13, 2019 —
    For those contractors in the government arena, read on. The False Claims Act (“FCA”) was enacted to deter knowingly fraudulent actions by contractors which resulted in a loss of property to the Government. Intent to defraud with resulting financial hardship was required. Contrary to popular misconception, the statute was not designed to punish all false submissions to the Government simply because those submissions, or claims, are later found to be false. The statute’s inclusion of the requisite element of knowledge is consistent with this notion:
    1. A defendant must submit a claim for payment to the Government;
    2. the claim must be false or fraudulent;
    3. the defendant must have known the claim was fraudulent when it was submitted (also known as scienter); and
    4. the claim must have caused the Government to pay out money.
    See 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a). Despite these explicit elements (in addition to common law elements of fraud), over the last two decades, contractors have seen ever-expanding theories of FCA recovery presented by qui tam plaintiffs and the Government. For example, under the FCA, the false “claim” evolved over time: the claim no longer needs to be an express false claim (i.e. the truthfulness of the claim is a direct condition of payment); the claim can be “implied” misrepresentation or “half-truth”. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Meredith Thielbahr, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Ms. Thielbahr may be contacted at mthielbahr@grsm.com

    Cleveland Condo Board Says Construction Defects Caused Leaks

    March 01, 2012 —

    A Cleveland condo association has sued the developer of their building, claiming that construction defects resulted in water intrusion. The K&D Group, which still owns forty units in the 160-unit building, claim that it’s a maintenance issue that they’d like to see fixed, but it’s their responsibility as the developer. Doug Price, CEO of K&D calls it a “frivolous lawsuit.” He blames a “hostile board” and told The Plain Dealer “there’s simple maintenance that they refuse to do.”

    An outside company evaluated Stonebridge Towers. According to the condo board’s lawyer, Laura Hauser, the building design and construction are to blame for the water intrusion. Hauser said that the board’s “goal through this litigation is to find a resolution for the association, the building and the owners.”

    David Kaman, a Cleveland attorney not involved in the lawsuit, told the Plain Dealer that construction litigation in the Cleveland area had fallen off from 2007, but he sees it on the rise, which he attributes to cost-cutting on recently finished projects. “If an owner moves in and two years later the wallpaper needs to be replaced because the wall is leaking, that’s a construction defect.”

    Read the full story…

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

    Maryland Legislation Prohibits Condominium Developers from Shortening Statute of Limitations to Defeat Unit Owner Construction Defect Claims

    May 16, 2018 —
    New Maryland legislation prevents developers from shortening the time period within which condominium associations and their unit owner members can assert claims for hidden construction defects in newly constructed condominium communities. The legislation known as HB 77 and SB 258 passed both houses of the Maryland General Assembly and was signed into law by Governor Lawrence J. Hogan on April 24, 2018 (see photo above). Nicholas D. Cowie, Esq. is the author of the legislation, which will be codified as Section 11-134.1 of the Maryland Condominium Act, effective October 1, 2018. This article discusses how this new legislation ends the practice by which some condominium developers attempted to use condominium documents to shorten the normal statute of limitations in order to prevent condominium associations and their unit owner members from having a fair opportunity to assert their warranty and other legal claims for latent construction defects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas D. Cowie, Esq., Cowie & Mott
    Mr. Cowie may be contacted at ndc@cowiemott.com

    Quick Note: Remember to Timely Foreclose Lien Against Lien Transfer Bond

    July 09, 2019 —
    When a construction lien is transferred to a lien transfer bond pursuant to Florida Statute s. 713.24, instead of foreclosing the lien against the real property, you are foreclosing the lien against the lien transfer bond. This is not a bad deal and, oftentimes, is probably ideal. Remember, however, just because a construction lien was transferred to a lien transfer bond (pre-lawsuit) does not mean you get more time to file your lien foreclosure lawsuit. A lawsuit must still be filed within one year (short of that period being specifically shortened under operation of the law). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Philadelphia Voters to Consider Best Value Bid Procurment

    May 10, 2017 —
    My friend and colleague, Chris McCabe, recently published an opinion piece on Philly.com concerning the May 16 ballot question that asks Philadelphia voters to approve a change in the way Philadelphia awards public contracts. Currently, Philadelphia, like all municipalities in Pennsylvania, uses an objective lowest responsible bidder standard in the award of public contracts. Under this approach, public contracts must be awarded to a bidder that responds to all of the criteria of the request for bids and offers the lowest price. Under this traditional approach the award of public contracts is completely transparent. The May 16 ballot initiative seeks to change this. If approved, Philadelphia could award public contracts using a host of subjective factors. What those factors would be are unknown because the policies are not yet written. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    Coverage Found For Cleanup of Superfund Site Despite Pollution Exclusion

    March 05, 2015 —
    The court determined that the pollution exclusion did not bar defense or indemnity for the insured's obligation to clean up a superfund site. Decker Mfg. Corp. v. The Travelers Indem. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12169 (W.D. Mich. Feb. 3, 2015). From 1966 to 1981, Decker disposed of its waste materials at the township landfill. The landfill was closed in 1981. Decker was insured under a CGL policy for a four year period from January 1, 1973, through January 1, 1977. After the landfill was closed, the EPA began an investigation which eventually led to a Unilateral Administrative Order in 1995 in which Decker was ordered to remove drums, construct a landfill cap, and monitor groundwater. Decker notified Travelers of the EPA's order on November 14, 1995. Travelers responded that it had no duty to defend or indemnify Decker. 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