BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco 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


    Lawyer Claims HOA Scam Mastermind Bribed Politicians

    Hovnanian Reports “A Year of Solid Profitability”

    No Damage for Delay? No Problem: Exceptions to the Enforceability of No Damage for Delay Clauses

    New York City Construction: Boom Times Again?

    D.R. Horton Profit Beats Estimates as Home Sales Jumped

    Mondaq’s 2023 Construction Comparative Guide

    Wharf Holdings to Sell Entire Sino-Ocean Stake for $284 Million

    Insurer Entitled to Reimbursement of Defense Costs Under Unjust Enrichment Theory

    Sacramento’s Commercial Construction Market Heats Up

    Asbestos Confirmed After New York City Steam Pipe Blast

    Cuba: Construction Boom Potential for U.S. Construction Companies and Equipment Manufacturers?

    Companies Move to Houston Area and Spur Home Building

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

    Florida Court Gives Parties Assigned a Subrogation Claim a Math Lesson

    Kiewit Selected for Rebuild of Collapsed Baltimore Bridge

    Chinese Billionaire Sues Local Governments Over Project Payment

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    Governor Signs Permit Extension Bill Extending Permit Deadlines to One Year

    More Reminders that the Specific Contract Terms Matter

    Auburn Woods Homeowners Association v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    Suing A Payment Bond Surety in Different Venue Than Set Forth in The Subcontract

    Colorado Springs may be Next Colorado City to Add Construction Defects Ordinance

    Nevada State Senator Says HOA Scandal Shows Need for Construction Defect Reform

    Six Reasons to Use Regular UAV Surveys on Every Construction Project

    Nevada’s Home Building Industry can Breathe Easier: No Action on SB250 Leaves Current Attorney’s Fees Provision Intact

    Being the Bearer of Bad News (Sounding the Alarm on Construction Issues Early and Often) (Law Note)

    Meet Some Key Players in 2020 Environmental Litigation

    Hawaiian Electric Finalizes $2 Billion Maui Fire Settlement

    Colorado Court of Appeals Finds Damages to Non-Defective Property Arising From Defective Construction Covered Under Commercial General Liability Policy

    Beginning of the 2020 Colorado Legislative Session: Here We Go Again

    Meet Daniel Hall, Assistant Professor at TU Delft

    You Are Your Brother’s Keeper. Direct Contractors in California Now Responsible for Wage Obligations of Subcontractors

    Empowering Success: The Advantages of Female Attorneys in Construction Defect Law

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Museums

    Case Remanded for Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    The Credibility of Your Expert (Including Your Delay Expert) Matters in Construction Disputes

    ‘Revamp the Camps’ Cabins Displayed at the CA State Fair

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Eliminates Loss from Hurricane

    Federal Court Predicts Coverage In Nevada for Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    BHA at the 10th Annual Construction Law Institute, Orlando

    Quick Note: Don’t Forget To Serve The Contractor Final Payment Affidavit

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Risk Management and Contracting after Hurricane Irma: Suggestions to Avoid a Second Disaster

    Forensic Team Finds Fault with Concrete Slabs in Oroville Dam Failure

    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Hold the Pickles, Hold the Lettuce?”

    North Dakota Supreme Court Clarifies Breadth of Contractual Liability Coverage

    #9 CDJ Topic: Vallagio at Inverness Residential Condominium Association, Inc. v. Metropolitan Homes, Inc., et al.

    NYC Rail Tunnel Cost Jumps and Construction Start Pushed Back

    Harmon Tower Construction Defects Update: Who’s To Blame?
    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

    Quick Note: Steps to Protect and Avoid the “Misappropriation” of a “Trade Secret”

    November 23, 2020 —
    Florida’s Uniform Trade Secret Act (included in Florida Statute s. 688.001 en seq.) defines the terms “trade secret” and “misappropriation.” These definitions (found here) are important in that just because 1) we deem something a trade secret does not, in of itself, make it so, and 2) we deem someone to have misappropriated a trade secret does not, in of itself, make it so. If a party deems something to be a trade secret they should identify the document or paper as “confidential trade secret” as the first-step in preserving the confidentiality of that information. The party should also consider entering into an agreement with the party that may receive that information to maximize the protection of such confidential trade secret information during the parties’ agreement. 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

    What is a Subordination Agreement?

    May 06, 2019 —
    Put simply, a subordination agreement is a legal agreement which establishes one debt as ranking behind another debt in the priority for collecting repayment from a debtor. It is an arrangement that alters the lien position. Without a subordination clause, loans take chronological priority which means that a deed of trust recorded first will be considered senior to all deeds of trusts recorded after. As such, the oldest loan becomes the primary loan, with first call on any proceeds from a sale of a property. However, a subordination agreement acknowledges that one party’s claim or interest is inferior to that of another party in the event that the borrowing entity liquidates its assets. Further, shareholders are subordinate to all creditors. The junior debt is referred to as a “subordinated debt”, and the debt which has a higher claim to any assets is the senior debt. Often, the borrower does not have enough funds to pay all debts, and lower priority debts may receive little or no repayment. For example, if a business has $400,000 in senior debt, $100,000 in subordinated debt, and a total asset value of $420,000, upon liquidation of the company, only the senior debtholder will be paid in full. The remaining $20,000 will be distributed among the subordinated debtholders. Subordinated debts are, therefore, riskier and lenders will require a higher interest rate as compensation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Court Finds No Coverage for Workplace “Prank” With Nail Gun

    April 04, 2022 —
    In the recent case of Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Burby, 2022 NY Slip Op 22070, ¶ 1 (Sup. Ct.) Justice Richard M. Platkin of the Supreme Court of Albany County, New York examined a homeowners insurance policy and determined that a duty to defend was triggered in a case seeking recovery for injuries sustained when the insured, Burby allegedly discharged a nail gun in the bathroom of a work facility at which both Burby and the underlying plaintiff worked. Burby pled guilty to assault in the third degree for recklessly causing physical injury. MetLife, Burby’s carrier, disclaimed coverage based on lack of an occurrence, the business activities exclusion and the intentional loss exclusion, which bars coverage for injuries expected or intended by the insured or injuries that are the result of the insured’s intentional and criminal acts or omissions. Justice Platkin initially reviewed the intentional loss exclusion and lack of an occurrence and found that, from a duty to defend perspective, neither provided a dispositive coverage defense. However, the court found that the broadly worded business activities exclusion, which was not the subject of MetLife’s motion and instead was the subject of a cross motion by Burby, applied to bar coverage. In doing so, the court searched the record and granted summary judgment on the issue, despite MetLife not moving for relief under the exclusion. With respect to the expected or intended prong of the intentional loss exclusion, the court found that, even if Burby did intend to pull the trigger of the nail gun, it was not pled in the underlying complaint that the harm that resulted to the plaintiff was expected or intended. As such, the court concluded that MetLife did not prove that there was no possible factual or legal basis upon which it could be found that Burby did not reasonably expect or intend to cause injury to the plaintiff. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com

    UConn’s Law-School Library Construction Case Settled for Millions

    June 11, 2014 —
    A group of builders recently settled with the state of Connecticut for $12.1 million in a case “over flaws in the construction of UConn's law-school library” reported Hartford Business. The State of Connecticut v. Lombardo Bros. Mason Contractors, Inc., et al. had been scheduled to start trial in 2015. According to Hartford Business, “The settlement ends six years of litigation over defects in construction of the library, which was completed in 1996 and renamed in 2010 in honor of the late Gov. Meskill.” An investigation into the construction of the library began after “[l]eaks, instability in the library’s granite façade, and other structural and safety problems became evident.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Subrogation Waiver Unconscionable in Residential Fuel Delivery Contract

    April 29, 2024 —
    In a matter of first impression, the Superior Court of Connecticut (Superior Court), in American Commerce Ins., Co. v. Eastern Fuel Corp., No. CV-206109168-S, 2024 Conn. Super. LEXIS 380, held that a waiver of subrogation provision in a consumer fuel service/delivery contract violated public policy. The Superior Court overruled the motion for summary judgment filed by Eastern Fuel Corporation (Eastern) and determined that the clause was impermissible as the contract was entered into by two parties with unequal bargaining power. American Commerce Insurance Company (American) provided property insurance to Arlene and James Hillas (the Insureds) for their home in Woodbridge, Connecticut. The Insureds hired Eastern to service their heating system on or around October 25, 2018. The service work at the property included inspecting the oil filters and flushing the fuel lines. On November 1, 2018, when the Insureds turned the heating system on for the first time that season, the two oil tanks on the property were allegedly full. After a series of deliveries, claims that the oil levels were lower than expected, discovering oil staining on the floor and Eastern’s replacement of the oil lines, Eastern delivered another 429 gallons. However, after the delivery, additional leaks were discovered relating to the oil line replacements. Ultimately, the Insureds submitted a claim to American and American paid in excess of $59,000 for the damage incurred. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryan A. Bennett, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Bennett may be contacted at bennettr@whiteandwilliams.com

    Manufacturer of Asbestos-Free Product May Still Be Liable for Asbestos Related Injuries

    July 30, 2015 —
    In Sherman v. Hennessy Industries, Inc. (No. B252566, filed June 18, 2015), the Court of Appeal, Second District, reversed a trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of a manufacturer of a brake grinding machine. The Court cited an exception to the general rule that manufacturers may not be held liable, under a strict products liability theory, where the plaintiff’s injuries arise from other products that are used in conjunction with the defendant’s product. Plaintiff and appellant, Michael Sherman, was an automobile mechanic from 1962 to 1977. Mr. Sherman alleged that during this period he used an arcing machine, which abraded brake linings by means of sand paper moving at high speeds. Sherman alleged the machine released asbestos dust, which he then brought home, exposing his wife Debra Sherman to asbestos. Ms. Sherman developed mesothelioma and passed away from exposure to the asbestos dust carried home by her husband. Reprinted courtesy of Kristian B. Moriarty, R. Bryan Martin and Lee Marshall of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Moriarty may be contacted at kmoriarty@hbblaw.com Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com Mr. Marshall may be contacted at lmarshall@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Tier 1 and Tier 2 “Best Law Firm” by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2025

    November 11, 2024 —
    Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP is listed in the U.S. News – Best Lawyers® (2025 Edition) “Best Law Firms” list with metro rankings in the following areas: Los Angeles
    • Metropolitan Tier 1
      • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    • Metropolitan Tier 2
      • Insurance Law
    Orange County
    • Metropolitan Tier 1
      • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

    A New Study: Unexpected Overtime is Predictable and Controllable

    January 31, 2022 —
    A new study by Dodge Construction Network and Versatile, a construction technology pioneer using artificial intelligence (AI) and the internet of things (IoT) to optimize construction processes, found that unexpected overtime is predictable and controllable through regular job site activity measurement. According to the study, overtime is predictable at an 88% confidence level, if proper measurement is utilized. Overtime is a persistent feature of construction sites, however, it is often unplanned and unpredictable. Despite the cost of overtime, its impact on skilled workers, and its implications for safety and other key factors on a project site, it is often applied to address immediate concerns rather than planned to maximize its effects. This recent study shows that in order to best understand overtime and its impact, data and measurement of jobsite activities are key. “Unique insights derived from advanced data and analytics tools will empower construction crews to build better,” said Meirav Oren, co-founder and CEO of Versatile. “Overtime can be a very effective tool on the jobsite. Through the power of data, general contractors gain the ability to minimize unnecessary overtime while maximizing its strategic benefits.” 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