BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut ada design 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


    Wall Street Journal Analyzes the Housing Market Direction

    Hybrid Contracts for The Sale of Goods and Services and the Predominant Factor Test

    New York Appellate Division: Second Department Contradicts First Department, Denying Insurer's Recoupment of Defense Costs for Uncovered Claims

    Why Are Developers Still Pouring Billions Into Waterlogged Miami?

    Seattle Expands Bridge Bioswale Projects

    Class Action Certification by Association for “Matters of Common Interest”

    Understanding Lien Waivers

    Federal Subcontractor Who Failed to Follow FAR Regulations Finds That “Fair” and “Just” are Not Synonymous

    Ohio Does Not Permit Retroactive Application of Statute of Repose

    Washington State Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision on Spearin Doctrine

    A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

    Scary Movie: Theatre Developer Axed By Court of Appeal In Prevailing Wage Determination Challenge

    As Climate Changes, 'Underwater Mortgage' May Take on New Meaning

    Seabold Construction Ties Demise to Dispute with Real Estate Developer

    Philadelphia Court Rejects Expert Methodology for Detecting Asbestos

    Genuine Dispute Summary Judgment Reversed for Abuse of Discretion and Trial of Fact Questions About Expert Opinions

    Plaintiffs’ Claims in Barry v. Weyerhaeuser Company are Likely to Proceed after Initial Hurdle

    Texas Supreme Court Rules That Subsequent Purchaser of Home Is Bound by Original Homeowner’s Arbitration Agreement With Builder

    New York Instructs Property Carriers to Advise Insureds on Business Interruption Coverage

    Insured's Testimony On Expectation of Coverage Deemed Harmless

    Examination of the Product Does Not Stop a Pennsylvania Court From Applying the Malfunction Theory

    Court Rules on a Long List of Motions in Illinois National Insurance Co v Nordic PCL

    CC&Rs Not the Place for Arbitration Agreement, Court Rules

    In Florida, Exculpatory Clauses Do Not Need Express Language Referring to the Exculpated Party's Negligence

    Constructive Change Directives / Directed Changes

    Landlords Beware: Subordination Agreements

    Earth Movement Exclusion Bars Coverage

    The Basics of Subcontractor Defaults – Key Considerations

    Contract Change #8: Direct Communications between Owners and Contractors (law note)

    San Francisco Museum Nears $610 Million Fundraising Goal

    SFAA Commends U.S. House for Passage of Historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill

    Ex-Construction Firm That Bought a $75m Michelangelo to Delist

    Home insurance perks for green-friendly design (guest post)

    ConsensusDOCS Updates its Forms

    Professional Liability Client Alert: Law Firms Should Consider Hiring Outside Counsel Before Suing Clients For Unpaid Fees

    4 Breakthrough Panama Canal Engineering Innovations

    Architectural Firm, Fired by School District, Launches Lawsuit

    Remembering Joseph H. Foster

    Parties to an Agreement to Arbitrate May be Compelled to Arbitrate with Non-Parties

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

    Traub Lieberman Chair Emeritus Awarded the 2022 Vince Donohue Award by the International Association of Claim Professionals

    ASCE Statement on National Dam Safety Awareness Day - May 31

    Fourth Circuit Clarifies What Qualifies As “Labor” Under The Miller Act

    California Mechanics’ Lien Case Treads Both Old and New Ground

    New York Court Holds Radioactive Materials Exclusion Precludes E&O Coverage for Negligent Phase I Report

    Court Calls Lease-Leaseback Project What it is: A Design-Bid-Build Project

    California Ranks As Leading State for Green Building in 2022

    Windows and Lawsuits Fly at W Hotel

    Chattanooga Bridge Collapse Likely Resulted From Impact

    Mortgagors Seek Coverage Under Mortgagee's Policy
    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

    A Court-Side Seat: Flint Failures, Missed Deadlines, Toad Work and a Game of Chicken

    October 05, 2020 —
    The last few weeks have yielded a number of interesting developments in the Federal courts. FEDERAL COURTS OF APPEAL In re Flint Water Cases Several local and State of Michigan officials, including the former governor, requested dismissal from the civil litigation seeking damages for the massive failure of Flint, Michigan’s public drinking water system. On August 5, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit agreed that the plaintiffs, residents of Flint, have successfully pled a case that the conduct of the defendants so “shocked the conscience” that a claim for a violation of their substantive due process rights was appropriately alleged. The defendants, including the former governor, argued that they were entitled to a qualified immunity defense. The court rejected this argument on the basis of the earlier decisions made by the court in this matter. Judge Sutton concurred because he was bound by this precedent, but remarked that the evidence for the governor’s culpability was very thin; he was not intimately connected to the extraordinary error in judgment. The majority was very upset with this concurrence as indicted by their own opinion. 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

    VinFast Breaks Ground in North Carolina on its Promised $4B EV Plant

    August 28, 2023 —
    Charlotte Observer North Carolina officials and top VinFast executives met Friday morning in Chatham County to officially start construction on the carmaker’s first manufacturing facility outside its native Vietnam. By 2028, VinFast has committed to employ 7,500 people at the site, about 30 miles southwest of Raleigh . In terms of projected job creation, it is the largest state-backed economic project in North Carolina history. Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    “Genuine” Issue of “Material” Fact and Summary Judgments

    December 18, 2022 —
    This is short article on summary judgments. A motion for summary judgment, as you may already know, is a procedural vehicle to try to dispose of issues or claims in a lawsuit, either partially or fully. The objective is that the moving party claims that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that they are entitled to a judgment (partially or finally) as a matter of law. See Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510. In May of 2021, Florida adopted the federal summary judgment standard which theoretically means trial courts should grant more summary judgments, not less, based on the more rigorous standard. There have been many articles that discuss Florida’s new summary judgment standard including how the standard used to be versus how it is supposed to be now that it is modeled after the federal standard. That isn’t the point of this posting. (Here is an article published in the Florida Bar Journal that provides a primer on summary judgments in case you are interested.) The point of this posting is to understand the words “genuine” and “material” as underlined above when moving for or defending against a summary judgment. These words have important meaning in the context of motions for summary judgment. In other words, what is a genuine issue of material fact? This is a question that should not be overlooked because these are the facts you want to focus on and frame your arguments on when moving for or defending against a summary judgment. Notably, these are also the facts you want to introduce and emphasize at trial. 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

    Texas Supreme Court to Review Eight-Corners Duty-to-Defend Rule

    April 05, 2021 —
    The Texas Supreme Court has accepted certified questions from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to clarify Texas’ eight-corners rule for determining the existence of a duty to defend. In Bitco Gen. Ins. Corp. v. Monroe Guar. Ins. Co., No. 19-51012, 2021 WL 955155 (5th Cir. Mar. 12, 2021), certified question accepted (Mar. 19, 2021), the Fifth Circuit asked the Texas Supreme Court to provide guidance on Texas insurance law. In Bitco, the insured was sued for negligently drilling an irrigation well. The insured allegedly got a drilling bit stuck in a bore hole, refused to fix the issue, and eventually abandoned the well. The policy did not cover continuing property damage known to the insured before the policy incepted. The policy period ran from Oct. 6, 2015 to Oct. 6, 2016, and the parties stipulated the drill bit became stuck in November 2014. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jared De Jong, Payne & Fears
    Mr. De Jong may be contacted at jdj@paynefears.com

    Henderson Engineers Tests AI for Building Systems Design with Torch.AI

    September 26, 2022 —
    Torch.AI is testing a new artificial intelligence application with Henderson Engineers, a national building systems design firm, to unlock the creative and problem solving potential of the firm’s more than 1,000 employees. Henderson Engineers is a building systems design and engineering firm that works on projects across the business, community, health, retail, and venue sectors. Their projects include many high-profile projects, such as SoFi Stadium, host site for the 2022 Super Bowl. They know how the industry relies on highly complex information contained in equally complex unstructured data: drawings, images, PDFs, handwriting, raw text. Earlier this year, Henderson began testing new artificial intelligence from Torch.AI that could learn to read complex construction and engineering documents and diagrams. “When Kevin Lewis, Henderson’s CEO, and I got together to first discuss the partnership, I could tell they were already thinking way ahead of everyone else,” says Brian Weaver, Chairman and CEO of Torch.AI. “As an engineering firm they are meticulous, thoughtful, strategic. We quickly saw the potential impact these new AI systems could have for their amazingly talented teams and are excited to continue growing our relationship.” 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

    Landmark Contractor Licensing Case Limits Disgorgement Remedy in California

    November 09, 2020 —
    Contractors performing work in California are required to be licensed by the California State License Board (“CSLB”). Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §7065. Except for sole proprietors, contractors are typically licensed through “qualifiers,” i.e., officers or employees who take a licensing exam and meet other requirements to become licensed on behalf of the contractor’s company. Contractors who perform work in California without being properly licensed are subject to a world of hurt, including civil and criminal penalties (see, e.g., Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 7028, 7028.6, 7028.7, 7117, and Cal. Labor Code §§ 1020-1022), and the inability to maintain a lawsuit to recover compensation for their work. Cal. Bus & Prof. Code § 7031(a); Hydra Tech Systems Ltd. v. Oasis Water Park, 52 Cal.3rd 988 (1991). But arguably the worst ramification of not being property licensed is that established in Business & Professions Code Section 7031(b), which provides that any person who uses the services of an unlicensed contractor may bring an action for the return of all compensation paid for the performance of the work, commonly known as “disgorgement.” This remedy is particularly harsh (often described as “draconian”) because it makes no allowance for the fact that an unlicensed contractor will likely have already paid out the bulk of its compensation to its subcontractors, suppliers and vendors, but nevertheless can be ordered to disgorge all compensation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Candace Matson, Sheppard Mullin
    Ms. Matson may be contacted at cmatson@sheppardmullin.com

    Arizona Supreme Court Leaves Limits on Construction Defects Unclear

    August 27, 2013 —
    The Arizona Supreme Court has determined that “non-contracting parties may bring negligence claims for construction defects because such claims are not barred by the economic loss doctrine,” as Richard Erikson writes in a Snell & Wilmer Legal Alert. In the case of Sullivan v. Pulte Home, Pulte had built the home in 2000. The original buyer sold it to the Sullivans in 2003. The Sullivans discovered construction defects in a retaining wall in 2009. The lost their original lawsuit, but the appeals court found that if the Sullivans filed within two years of finding the damage, they could sue. The case then progressed to the Arizona Supreme Court. Erikson points out that in an amicus brief, a number of parties in the Arizona homebuilding industry argued that “the appellate court’s ruling was commercially irreconcilable with expectations of builders, homeowners, homebuyers, engineers and architects in the construction industry.” Nevertheless, the Sullivans prevailed at court. Erikson asks what the actual limit on construction defects must be, given that the court found for plaintiffs who discovered construction defects nine years after the home was built. “How many years after the builder finishes a home does it have to plan on defending defect claims—10, 20, 30 years?” He proposes that the Arizona legislature needs to clarify the specific limits. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Couple Claims Poor Installation of Home Caused Defects

    December 30, 2013 —
    Robert and Tracy Samosky of Spanishburg, West Virginia have filed a lawsuit claiming that the improper delivery of their modular home caused defects and damages, preventing them from actually using their home. The couple purchased a modular home from J&M Quality Construction for a home designed and built by Mod-U-Kraf Homes. They are suing the two firms for $50,000 in damages, reports the West Virginia Record. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of