BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield 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


    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem

    The New York Lien Law - Top Ten Things You Ought to Know

    Regions Where Residential Construction Should Boom in 2014

    Meet BWBO’s 2024 San Diego Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    Waive It Goodbye: Despite Evidence to the Contrary, Delaware Upholds an AIA Waiver of Subrogation Clause

    Dorian’s Wrath: How Event Cancellation Insurance Helps Businesses Recoup Losses from Severe Weather

    Circumstances In Which Design Professional Has Construction Lien Rights

    Repeated Use of Defective Fireplace Triggers Duty to Defend Even if Active Fire Does Not Break Out Until After End of Policy Period

    Hilary Soaks California With Flooding Rain and Snarls Flights

    Sales of New U.S. Homes Fell in February to Five-Month Low

    Florida District Court Finds That “Unrelated” Design Errors Sufficient to Trigger “Related Claims” Provision in Architects & Engineers Policy

    Were Quake Standards Illegally Altered for PG&E Nuclear Power Plant?

    Pollution Created by Business Does Not Deprive Insured of Coverage

    No Coverage for Additional Insured After Completion of Operations

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

    Broker for Homeowners Policy Has No Duty to Advise Insureds on Excess Flood Coverage

    AB5 Construction Exemption – A Checklist to Avoid Application of AB5’s Three-Part Test

    Deadline for Hurricane Ian Disaster Recovery Applications Announced

    It’s All a Matter of [Statutory] Construction: Supreme Court Narrowly Interprets the Good Faith Dispute Exception to Prompt Payment Requirements in United Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron & Steel Co.

    Texas Court Construes Breach of Contract Exclusion Narrowly in Duty-to-Defend Case

    The First UK Hospital Being Built Using AI Technology

    Spearin Doctrine: Alive, Well and Thriving on its 100th Birthday

    U.S. Home Prices Rose More Than Estimated in February

    More Charges Anticipated in Las Vegas HOA Scam

    Kaboom! Illinois Applies the Anti-Subrogation Rule to Require a Landlord’s Subrogating Property Insurer to Defend a Third-Party Complaint Against Tenants

    Genuine Dispute Over Cause of Damage and Insureds’ Demolition Before Inspection Negate Bad Faith and Elder Abuse Claims

    CLB Recommends Extensive Hawaii Contractor License Changes

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Excess Can Sue Primary for Equitable Subrogation

    So a Lawsuit Is on the Horizon…

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

    Construction Lien Waiver Provisions Contractors Should Be Using

    Marlena Ellis Makes The Lawyers of Color Hot List of 2022

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa Rolle and Christopher Acosta Win Summary Judgment in Favor of Property Owner

    The Basics of Subcontractor Defaults – Key Considerations

    Poor Pleading Leads to Loss of Claim for Trespass Due to Relation-Back Doctrine, Statute of Limitations

    Sales Pickup Shows Healing U.S. Real Estate Market

    Engineer Proposes Slashing Scope of Millennium Tower Pile Upgrade

    Primer Debuts on Life-Cycle Assessments of Embodied Carbon in Buildings

    Collaborating or Competing with Construction Tech Startups

    Just When You Thought the Green Building Risk Discussion Was Over. . .

    Drafting a Contractual Arbitration Provision

    Unpunished Racist Taunts: A Pennsylvania Harassment Case With No True 'Winner'

    Just When You Thought General Contractors Were Necessary Parties. . .

    Colorado “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    Pennsylvania Court Extends Construction Defect Protections to Subsequent Buyers

    Florida trigger

    Presidential Memorandum Promotes Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West

    Fifth Circuit -- Damage to Property Beyond Insured’s Product/Work Not Precluded By ‘Your Product/Your Work Exclusion’

    How to Prepare for Potential Construction Disputes Resulting From COVID-19

    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision
    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

    TLSS Partner Burks Smith and Associate Katie Keller Win Summary Judgment on Late Reported Water Seepage Case in South Florida

    November 18, 2019 —
    On July 9, 2019, Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP Partner, Burks A. Smith, III and Associate, Kathryn A. Keller, secured Summary Judgment on behalf of a major homeowners’ insurer in a breach of contract action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. See Lehrfield v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company, 2019 WL2994270 (S.D. Fla. 2019). The underlying claim involved a water loss at the Plaintiffs’ residence allegedly resulting in $91,147.32 worth of damage to their home. The claim was reported eight (8) months after the alleged date of loss, and during the inspection, the adjuster observed rot, decay, mold, and warping wood, prompting the carrier to deny the claim based on the Seepage Endorsement. The Plaintiffs filed a breach of contract action alleging that the insurer breached the Policy by denying the claim. Mr. Smith and Ms. Keller argued that Plaintiffs’ Policy with the insurer imposes a duty on the Plaintiffs to comply with the Duties After Loss conditions of the Policy, including the requirement to provide prompt notice of the loss and show the damaged property. As mentioned above, the Plaintiffs provided notice of the claim eight (8) months late, and performed various repairs prior to notifying the insurer of the claim. After the close of discovery, Mr. Smith and Ms. Keller filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on behalf of the insurer based on the late reporting, and further argued that the Plaintiffs had the burden of proving direct physical loss to property within the first 13 days of the loss, given the recent decision of Hicks v. American Integrity Insurance Company of Florida, 241 So.3d 925 (Fla. 3d DCA 1018). In Florida, when an insured fails to comply with their Duties After Loss, a presumption of prejudice to the insurer arises. Bankers Ins. Co. v. Macias, 475 So. 2d 1216, 1218 (Fla. 1985)). In order to recover, the Plaintiffs bear the burden of overcoming the presumption, and must prove that no prejudice existed. Id. Mr. Smith and Ms. Keller’s comprehensive arguments successfully proved to the Court that the Plaintiffs’ failure to timely report the claim prejudiced the insurer by prohibiting the insurer from being able to independently validate the loss, or distinguish between multiple causes of loss. Mr. Smith and Ms. Keller further argued that Plaintiffs did not meet their burden to prove that the insurer was not prejudiced by the Plaintiffs’ failure to comply with the Duties After Loss provision of the Policy. The Motion cited numerous cases and extensive analysis supporting the insurer’s position. Reprinted courtesy of Burks A. Smith, III, Traub Lieberman and Kathryn Keller, Traub Lieberman Mr. Smith, may be contacted at bsmith@tlsslaw.com Ms. Keller may be contacted at kkeller@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Subcontractor Has No Duty to Defend Under Indemnity Provision

    July 14, 2016 —
    The Hawaii Supreme Court vacated the decision of the Intermediate Court of Appeals [see prior post here] and determined that a subcontractor did not have a duty to defend the developer upon tender under an indemnify provision in the parties' contract. Arthur v. State of Hawaii, 2016 Haw. LEXIS 155 (June 27, 2016). A simplified version of the detailed facts and procedural history follows. The case involved the wrongful death of Mona Arthur. Mona typically gardened on the hillside behind her home. She would cross a concrete drainage ditch and climb over a two-foo-high chain length fence to reach the hillside. Mona was found lying in a concrete ditch with severe head injuries, which ultimately led to her death. Her husband and estate sued for her wrongful death. Claims were asserted for negligence in failing to build a fence higher than two feet, which would have prevented Mona from having access to the garden. Defendants included the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands; Kamehameha Investment Corporation ("KIC"), the developer; Design Partners, Inc., the architect; Coastal Construction Company, the general contractor; and Sato and Associates, the civil engineer. The second amended complaint sought punitive damages against KIC. 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

    Drywall Originator Hopes to Sell in Asia

    October 22, 2013 —
    With all the talk of problems with drywall coming from China, one company wants to send drywall in the other direction. USG introduced its “Adamant Panel Board” (later Sheetrock) in 1917. But while USG has been a leader in the drywall market in North America, only about 20% of its sales are outside North America. USG is partnering with Boral Ltd., an Australian building materials manufacturer. Earlier this year, USG sold manufacturing and distribution of certain products to the German company Knauf Verwaltungsgesellschaft. Knauf has sold drywall in the United States that was manufactured in China and found to exit corrosive fumes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Join: Computer Science Meets Construction

    August 20, 2018 —
    Increasingly, projects need to be optimized to create the most value for their clients and users. With the fragmented nature of project teams, decisions can be lost, communication sporadic, and information disjointed. In addition, the rapid pace of innovation means that it’s difficult – if not impossible – for architects and engineers to be aware of all the latest construction products and materials. It is these problems that inspired the creation of Join. Join is a smart platform that helps project teams collaborate more efficiently and effectively, whether as part of a project optimization process or throughout the entire project lifecycle. The platform connects construction teams, pulls together different types of project information, and integrates manufacturing into construction. 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

    Canadian Developer Faces Charges After Massive Fire on Construction Site

    August 27, 2014 —
    A fire leveled an apartment construction site in Canada last December, which resulted in almost two dozen charges relating to fire safety precautions and lack of cooperation with the Ministry of Labour’s investigation, according to CKWS TV. The Ministry of Labour has recently “laid 22 charges against three individuals and two companies—Jay Patry Enterprises Inc. and Steimach Property Management Inc.” CKWS TV reported that “[c]harges include failing to provide adequate space for workers to evacuate during an emergency, failing to protect the health and safety of workers and failing to inspect every fire extinguisher for defects or deterioration.” Jason Patry, Nathan Patry and Troy Stelmach have been charged with “obstructing and providing false information to a ministry of labour inspector, as well as failing to make the inspection process an easy one.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Gru Was Wrong About the Money: Court Concludes that Lender Owes Contractor “Contractually, Factually and Practically”

    November 07, 2022 —
    This weekend was all about The Rise of Gru. I love Gru so much that when my children ask for money, my best Gru-like voice belts back: “Now, I know there have been some rumors going around that the bank is no longer funding us….In terms of money, we have no money.” And that’s precisely what many lenders say on distressed projects when the owner fails to make final payment and the contractor looks to the bank for funding: “We have no money for you contractor!” In BCD Associates., LLC v. Crown Bank, CA No. N15c-11-062 (Super. Ct. Del, May 2, 2022), the trial court found that when a bank pays a contractor directly, it can create a legally binding relationship subject to the terms of the construction loan agreements with the owner. The project involved a $13m construction loan between the lender and the owner to renovate a hotel. The owner and contractor entered into an AIA Contract for the construction management services. During construction the contractor would submit payment applications to the lender, who would review and approve the invoices for payment. The lender then would pay 90% of the approved payment application and hold back the remaining 10% as retainage. The contractor was supposed to be paid the final retainage upon completion, which it did not receive in accordance with the terms of the AIA Contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Matthew DeVries, Burr & Forman LLP
    Mr. DeVries may be contacted at mdevries@burr.com

    Developer Pre-Conditions in CC&Rs Limiting Ability of HOA to Make Construction Defect Claims, Found Unenforceable

    August 16, 2021 —
    The Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act (Civ. Code §4000, et seq.), also known simply as “Davis-Stirling,” is a statute that applies to condominium, cooperative and planned unit development communities in California. The statute, which governs the formation and management of homeowners associations or HOAs, also governs lawsuits filed by HOAs for construction defects. In the next case, Smart Corners Owner Association v. CJUF Smart Corner LLC, Case No. D076775 (May 20, 2021), the 4th District Court of Appeal addressed the pre-litigation voting requirements of Davis-Stirling and the impact of recent amendments to the Act. The Smart Corners Case In 2004, CJUF Smart Corner LLC contracted with Hensel Phelps Construction Company for the construction of the Smart Corner condominium project, a 19-story mixed-use development with 301 residential units and common areas, in San Diego, California. As part of the development an HOA was formed, the Smart Corner Owner Association. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Construction Defect Leads to Death of Worker

    January 28, 2013 —
    The family of a Florida man has received $2.4 million in damages as a result of his death. Victor Lizarraga was killed when a steel column fell due to the anchor bolts being improperly secured. The general contractor on the project, R. L. Haines, told subcontractors that the epoxy had sufficient time to cure. An OSHA investigation determined that the epoxy was not used properly. Mr. Lizarraga worked for a subcontractor on the project. Mr. Lizarraga and his coworkers were hired to erect steel columns. The epoxy failed, sending a 1,750-pound column down onto Mr. Lizarraga. According to the lawsuit, "due to the sudden and unexpected nature of this incident Mr. Lizarraga had no ability, opportunity or time to get out of the way of the falling column." Other parties in the lawsuit settled with the family. R. L. Haines was the only defendant to go to a jury trial. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of