BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction forensic 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


    Measure of Damages in Negligent Procurement of Surety Bonds / Insurance

    Proximity Trace Used to Monitor, Maintain Social Distancing on $1.9-Billion KCI Airport Project

    SIG Earnings Advance 21% as U.K. Construction Strengthens

    Insured's Lack of Knowledge of Tenant's Growing Marijuana Means Coverage Afforded for Fire Loss

    A “Flood” of Uncertainty; Massachusetts SJC Finds Policy Term Ambiguous

    Insurance Company Prevails in “Chinese Drywall” Case

    Ambiguity in Pennsylvania’s Statute of Repose Finally Cleared up by Superior Court

    Contractor Haunted by “Demonized” Flooring

    May Heat Wave Deaths Prompt New Cooling Rules in Chicago

    Am I Still Covered Under the Title Insurance Policy?

    Insurer Waives Objection to Appraiser's Partiality by Waiting Until Appraisal Issued

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2023 Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    Addressing Safety on the Construction Site

    Policy's Limitation Period for Seeking Replacement Costs Not Enforced Where Unreasonable

    Lasso Needed to Complete Vegas Hotel Implosion

    Vacant Property and the Right of Redemption in Pennsylvania

    Boston’s Tunnel Project Plagued by Water

    SB800 Not the Only Remedy for Construction Defects

    Verdict In Favor Of Insured Homeowner Reversed For Improper Jury Instructions

    Indemnity Provision Prevails Over "Other Insurance" Clause

    Ex-Ironworkers Local President Sentenced to Prison Term for Extortion

    Dispute Waged Over Design of San Francisco Subway Job

    Is Equipment Installed as Part of Building Renovations a “Product” or “Construction”?

    Alaska District Court Sets Aside Rulings Under New Administration’s EO 13795

    Do Engineers Owe a Duty to Third Parties?

    Hennigh Law Corporation Wins Award Against Viracon, Inc In Defective Gray PIB Case

    Colorado Requires Builders to Accommodate High-Efficiency Devices in New Homes

    The Future of Construction Tech Is Decision Tech

    Virginia Chinese Drywall “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and number of “occurrences”

    Texas Federal Court Finds Total Pollution Exclusion Does Not Foreclose a Duty to Defend Waterway Degradation Lawsuit

    Summary Judgment for Insurer Reversed Based on Expert Opinion

    A DC Office Building Offers a Lesson in Glass and Sculpture

    OSHA Issues Final Rule on Electronic Submission of Injury and Illness Data

    Reaffirming the Importance of Appeal Deadlines Under the Contract Disputes Act

    Florida Decides Against Adopting Daubert

    Manhattan Vacancies Rise in Epicenter Shift: Real Estate

    California Enacts New Claims Resolution Process for Public Works Projects

    Construction Client Advisory: The Power of the Bonded Stop Notice Extends to Expended Construction Funds

    “To Indemnify, or Not to Indemnify, that is the Question: California Court of Appeal Addresses Active Negligence in Indemnity Provisions”

    Hong Kong Buyers Queue for New Homes After Prices Plunge

    Nine ACS Lawyers Recognized by Best Lawyers®

    Building Recovery Comes to Las Vegas, Provides Relief

    Float-In of MassDOT Span Sails, But Delay Dispute Lingers

    Obama Asks for $302 Billion to Fix Bridges and Potholes

    Erector Tops Out 850-Foot-Tall Rainier Square Tower in Only 10 Months

    Blackstone Suffers Court Setback in Irish Real Estate Drama

    Evolving Climate Patterns and Extreme Weather Demand New Building Methods

    Federal Judge Vacates CDC Eviction Moratorium Nationwide

    Location, Location, Location—Even in Construction Liens

    Litigation Roundup: “You Can’t Make Me Pay!”
    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

    Endorsement Excludes Replacement of Undamaged Property with Matching Materials

    August 20, 2019 —
    The court approved the insurer's endorsement which stated the insured would not pay for undamaged property in order to match damaged property. Noonan v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 15545 (May 24, 2019). After hail and wind damaged part of the roof in the insureds' home, American Family inspected the roof and determined that it had suffered $12,000 in damage. The insureds disputed this amount and demanded an appraisal to provide a binding estimate of the amount of loss. American Family asked the appraisers to divide their estimate into two categories - one for replacing damaged shingles and another for replacing undamaged shingles that would not match those needed to replace the damaged ones. The appraisers did not do so. They instead found that replacing the entire roof would cost $141,000 and noted there was a matching issue because alternative products did not match the current shingles on the roof. Of the $141,000 needed to replace the entire roof, American Family estimated that $87,232.98 was due to the costs of matching. The insureds sued. The district court remanded the case to the appraisers to clarify the award by differentiating the costs attributable to the actual roof damage from those attributable to shingle matching. The appraisers clarified the award and reported that actual damages were $66,619, meaning that $74,381 was attributable to matching. American Family then paid the actual damages, less the deductible, but refused to pay the rest. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Crumbling Roadways Add Costs to Economy, White House Says

    July 16, 2014 —
    More than two-thirds of U.S. roadways are in need of repair and the poor condition of the nation’s transportation network results in billions in extra costs, according to a White House report. The report was released today in conjunction with President Barack Obama’s campaign to pressure Congress for a deal to replenish the Highway Trust Fund. The fund, supplied by fuel taxes, is heading toward insolvency as early as next month, jeopardizing jobs and projects during the peak construction season. Crumbling roads and bridges cut into economic growth, by increasing transportation costs and delaying shipments, according to the report. “A well-performing transportation network keeps jobs in America, allows businesses to expand, and lowers prices on household goods to American families,” said a 27-page report by the Council of Economic Advisers and National Economic Council. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Roger Runningen, Bloomberg
    Mr. Runningen may be contacted at rrunningen@bloomberg.net

    Mendocino Hospital Nearing Completion

    December 04, 2013 —
    The Frank R. Howard Memorial Hospital is well underway on its plans to move to a larger facility. The new building in Willits, California, will be more than twice the size of the old building at 74,000 square feet. Construction has reached the halfway point after just over three months of construction. Despite that, plans are to put the facility into use in January 2015. The general contractor for the project is HBE Corporation. Rick Bockmann, HBE’s chief executive officer, said that the hospital was “on schedule and on budget.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    EPA Can't Evade Enviro Firm's $2.7M Cleanup Site Pay Claim, US Court Says

    January 25, 2021 —
    A Richmond, Va., federal appeals court has restored an environmental consultant's legal fight for $2.7 million in federal funds to cover work at a Superfund cleanup site it managed, rejecting a lower court’s dismissal of its claim over a technicality. Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Houses Can Still Make Cents: Illinois’ Implied Warranty of Habitability

    March 01, 2011 —

    In a report published earlier this week Marisa L. Saber writes about the implied warranty of habitability in the context of construction defect litigation. The piece speaks of the difficulties in alleging tort theories against builders and vendors in light of Illinois’ expansion of the economic loss doctrine, and how the implied warranty of habitability may provide another avenue for recovery.

    Read Full Story...

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

    Personal Guarantor Cannot Escape a Personal Guarantee By…

    June 02, 2016 —
    In a prior article, I discussed the point that a personal guarantor cannot escape a contractual requirement of a personal guarantee merely by executing the guarantee as a corporate officer. The recent decision Frieri v. Capital Investment Services, Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D1189a (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) illustrates this point. In this case, a company hired an individual to help grow that company’s business. The contract required the individual to invest $6 Million into a trust in consideration of the company’s president transferring substantial shares of the company into the trust. The objective was that the trust would own the controlling shares of the company. The money was transferred. However, the shares were never placed in the trust and the trust never received controlling interest in the company. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Ninth Circuit Resolves Federal-State Court Split Regarding Whether 'Latent' Defects Discovered After Duration of Warranty Period are Actionable under California's Lemon Law Statute

    December 17, 2015 —
    In Daniel v. Ford Motor Company (filed 12/02/15), the Ninth Circuit resolved a federal and state court split on the issue of whether consumers can sustain a breach of implied warranty claim under California’s Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (aka the “lemon law” statute) for “latent” defects discovered after the warranty period has expired. Answering this question in the affirmative, the Ninth Circuit followed the holding in the California state appellate decision of Mexia v. Rinker Boat Co. 95 Cal.Rptr.3d 285 (2009), which definitively determined there is nothing in California’s lemon law that requires a consumer to discover a latent defect during the duration of the warranty. The underlying class action lawsuit was brought in federal district court by purchasers of Ford Focus vehicles. The plaintiffs alleged Ford was aware of, but failed to disclose, a rear suspension defect in the Focus that resulted in premature tire wear which can cause decreased vehicle control, catastrophic tire failure and drifting on wet or snowy roads. The plaintiffs alleged a number of claims including violations of California’s Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and Magnuson Moss Warranty Act. Ford successfully moved for summary judgment on all claims prompting an appeal. Reprinted courtesy of Laura C. Williams, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Williams may be contacted at lwilliams@hbblaw.com Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Commission Recommends Switching To Fault-Based Wildfire Liability Standard for Public Utilities

    June 25, 2019 —
    A state-appointed panel advised last week that California should change the standard for determining whether utilities are liable for wildfires. Under the current system, California’s Public Utilities Code § 2106 provides a private right of action by any person or entity that has suffered loss, damages, or injury caused by prohibited or unlawful acts of a public utility. Relying on this statute, property owners have asserted wildfire-related claims directly against allegedly culpable electric utility companies. Public utilities in California also face inverse condemnation claims arising out of wildfires. Under inverse condemnation, where private property is taken for public use and later damaged by the state or its agency, the state or agency is strictly liable to the property owner. In an effort to reduce the financial impact on public utilities resulting from wildfires—as exemplified by Pacific Gas and Electric Co.’s recent filing for Chapter 11 protection in January—the California Commission on Catastrophic Wildfire Cost and Recovery recommended changing the current laws to reflect a fault-based standard. According to the panel, this change would reduce the risk of bankruptcy and decrease the cost of capital. The commission also recommended establishing a wildfire victims’ fund and setting up an electric utility wildfire board to handle the prevention and mitigation of utility-related wildfires. Reprinted courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth attorneys Lawrence J. Bracken II, Sergio F. Oehninger, Paul T. Moura and Alexander D. Russo Mr. Bracken may be contacted at lbracken@HuntonAK.com Mr. Oehninger may be contacted at soehninger@HuntonAK.com Mr. Paul may be contacted at pmoura@HuntonAK.com Mr. Alexander may be contacted at arusso@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of