BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut fenestration 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


    City Sues over Leaking Sewer System

    Contractors and Owners Will Have an Easier Time Identifying Regulated Wetlands Following Recent U.S. Supreme Court Opinion

    Wage Theft Investigations and Citations in the Construction Industry

    U.K. Construction Unexpectedly Strengthens for a Second Month

    Proposition 65: OEHHA to Consider Adding and Delisting Certain Chemicals of Concern

    Court Says KBR Construction Costs in Iraq were Unreasonable

    Florida Continues Enacting Tort Reforms, This Time Shortening the Statute of Repose

    California’s One-Action Rule May Apply to Federal Lenders

    Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Faulty Work By Subcontractor Constitutes "Occurrence"

    When a Construction Lender Steps into the Shoes of the Developer, the Door is Open for Claims by the General Contractor

    Let’s Talk About a Statutory First-Party Bad Faith Claim Against an Insurer

    Last Parcel of Rancho del Oro Masterplan Purchased by Cornerstone Communties

    AB 1701 Has Passed – Developers and General Contractors Are Now Required to Double Pay for Labor Due to Their Subcontractors’ Failure to Pay

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 7: How to Successfully Prepare, Submit and Negotiate the Claim

    Quick Note: Submitting Civil Remedy Notice

    Claims Litigated Under Government Claims Act Must “Fairly Reflect” Factual Claims Made in Underlying Government Claim

    Lewis Brisbois Launches New Practice Focusing on Supply Chain Issues

    Witt Named to 2017 Super Lawyers

    Pandemic Magnifies Financial Risk in Construction: What Executives Can Do to Speed up Customer Payments

    There's No Place Like Home

    New York Establishes a Registration Requirement for Contractors and Subcontractors Performing Public Works and Covered Private Projects

    Exculpatory Provisions in Business Contracts

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    Georgia Amends Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Illinois Supreme Court Announces Time Standards for Closing Out Cases

    Application of Frye Test to Determine Admissibility of Expert

    Bad News for Buyers: U.S. Mortgage Rates Hit Highest Since 2014

    IRMI Expert Commentary: Managing Insurance Coverage from Multiple Insurers

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2023 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    Not to Miss at This Year’s Archtober Festival

    Details Matter: The Importance of Strictly Following Public Bid Statutes

    Client Alert: California’s Unfair Competition Law (B&P §17200) Preempted by Federal Workplace Safety Law

    Construction Lien Does Not Include Late Fees Separate From Interest

    City Potentially Liable for Cost Overrun on Not-to-Exceed Public Works Contract

    Appraisal Process Analyzed

    When Licensing Lapses: How One Contractor Lost a $1 Million Dispute

    Insurers in New Jersey Secure a Victory on Water Damage Claims, But How Big a Victory Likely Remains to be Seen

    No One to Go After for Construction Defects at Animal Shelter

    Florida’s Supreme Court Resolves Conflicting Appellate Court Decisions on Concurrent Causation

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment to Dispose of Hail Damage Claim Fails

    The G2G Year in Review: 2021

    Deadline Nears for “Green Performance Bond” Implementation

    South Carolina Supreme Court Finds that Consequential Damage Arise From "Occurrence"

    Surfside Condo Collapse Investigators Uncover More Pool Deck Deviations

    Musk Backs Off Plan for Tunnel in Tony Los Angelenos' Backyard

    Eleventh Circuit’s Noteworthy Discussion on Bad Faith Insurance Claims

    New Jersey’s Governor Puts Construction Firms on Formal Notice of His Focus on Misclassification of Workers as Independent Contractors

    Revised Federal Rule Regarding Class-Wide Settlements

    California Supreme Court Finds that When it Comes to Intentional Interference Claims, Public Works Projects are Just Different, Special Even

    Blog: Congress Strikes a Blow to President Obama’s “Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces” Executive Order 13673
    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. Drawing 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

    Chinese Drywall Manufacturer Claims Product Was Not for American Market

    October 22, 2013 —
    Taishan Gypsum Co. Ltd. Claimed in a hearing at the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that when they sold about $8.5 million of contaminated drywall to Venture Supply Inc. of Virginia, that they had no awareness that the drywall would be sold in the United States. Joe Cyr, an attorney for Taisan told the court that “Venture Supply never said it was going to distribute the goods in Virginia.” One of the judges on the three-judge panel, Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod, was skeptical of Taishan’s claim, asking, “it was packed and labeled for the Virginia market, isn’t that correct?” When asked by a judge if Taishan was trying to avoid accountability, Cyr said that Tiashan “has not said that it doesn’t want to be accountable for its drywall.” Taishan holds the position that claims against it should be arbitrated in the People’s Republic of China. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado Court of Appeals’ Ruling Highlights Dangers of Excessive Public Works Claims

    August 26, 2024 —
    In the case of Ralph L. Wadsworth Construction Company, LLC v. Regional Rail Partners (2024 COA 78), the Colorado Court of Appeals reviewed a complex contract dispute related to the design and construction of a transit rail line. The project, commissioned by the Regional Transportation District (“RTD”), involved a collaboration between Regional Rail Partners and Ralph L. Wadsworth Construction Company (“Wadsworth”) to build the North Metro Rail Line between Denver Union Station and Thornton. Key Facts:
    1. Contracts and Payments: Regional Rail Partners contracted with Wadsworth to perform specific construction tasks with a total contract value of $60,210,783. By the time of the trial, Regional Rail had paid almost $58 million of this amount.
    2. Disputes and Delays: The project faced numerous delays and disputes, leading to Wadsworth claiming significant financial damages attributed to these disruptions. In April 2018, Wadsworth’s expert estimated that Regional Rail owed them $12,408,496.60.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Remote Depositions in the Post-Covid-19 World

    September 06, 2021 —
    Despite the easing of COVID-19 restrictions in California, many of the changes imposed on the legal industry by the pandemic will likely remain in effect for the foreseeable future. One major change for litigators has been conducting depositions remotely. This change takes an already intricate task and makes it further complex by adding a new dimension of factors to consider. It is imperative that litigators understand these factors to avoid giving their opposition an undue advantage and to maximize the utility of depositions. While we may disagree as to whether remote depositions are a welcome change, the fact of the matter is that lawyers must adapt to them and provide adequate legal representation. This article explores some of the challenges and opportunities presented by remote depositions.
    1. The Deponent
    2. The deponent is the single most important element of any deposition and handing it properly becomes even more delicate in remote settings. I recently took a deposition where the plaintiff met their attorney for the first time at their deposition. The result was not spectacular. The plaintiff was ill-prepared, and the case eventually settled for far less than what it might have if it had been better prepared.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Islam M. Ahmad, Wilke Fleury, LLP
    Mr. Ahmad may be contacted at iahmad@wilkefleury.com

    Vermont Supreme Court Finds COVID-19 May Damage Property

    November 07, 2022 —
    As reported on this blog, policyholders have long been of the view that the presence of substances like COVID-19 and its causative virus SARS-CoV-2, which render property dangerous or unfit for normal business operations, should be sufficient to trigger coverage under commercial all-risk insurance, as has been the case for more than 60 years. However, many courts, federal courts in particular, despite decades of pro-policyholder precedent, have embraced the view that “viruses harm people, not [property].” Thirty-one months after the start of the pandemic, the first state high court has gone in a different direction, according greater weight to pro-policyholder precedent. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Defect Litigation in Nevada Called "Out of Control"

    February 04, 2013 —
    KXNT Las Vegas's Trevor Smith reports that Las Vegas alone has more than 500 pending construction defect cases. The issue of construction defects in Nevada will be taken up by the Nevada Legislature. Smith spoke with Mike Dillon, the executive director of the Builders Association of Northern Nevada. BANN is supporting legislation that Dillon says will "protect homeowners and secondly it's going to put people back to work." Dillon noted that "construction is the second largest industry in the state." Dillon attributed some of the construction defect litigation to the state's building codes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contract Should Have Clear and Definite Terms to Avoid a Patent Ambiguity

    December 11, 2023 —
    If you need more of a reason to have contracts with clear and definite terms, this case is it. This case exemplifies what can happen if the contract, not only does not have clear and definite terms, but contains a patent ambiguity. The contract will be deemed unenforceable which will make one of the contracting parties very unhappy! In Bowein v. Sherman, 48 Fla.L.Weekly D2208a (Fla. 6th DCA 2023), the buyer and seller entered into a real estate transaction. The transaction was for $2 Million. The purchase-and-sale agreement included the address and legal description of a parcel to be sold. However, there was a section in the agreement called “Other Terms and Conditions” which identified that the offer was actually for four properties that were being sold by the seller. When it came to closing time, the seller refused to close because the seller disputed that the $2 Million purchase price was for all four of his properties. The buyer sued the seller for specific performance to force the sale which the trial court agreed in favor of the buyer. However, the appellate court did not. First, the appellate court held that “[t]he equitable remedy of specific performance may be granted only where the parties have actually entered into a definite and certain agreement.” Bowein, supra (quotation and citation omitted). 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

    White and Williams LLP Secures Affirmation of Denial to Change Trial Settings Based on Plaintiffs’ Failure to Meet the Texas Causation Standard for Asbestos Cases

    July 06, 2020 —
    The Delaware Supreme Court, in a rare split opinion, affirmed the trial court’s denial of Plaintiffs’ Request to Change Trial Settings in favor of all defendants, including a major automotive manufacturer represented by White and Williams LLP, in a mesothelioma case with a young decedent who had an alleged economic loss claim exceeding $9,000,000, in Shaw v. American Friction, Inc. et al., No. 86, 2019. This decision operates to dismiss all of Plaintiffs’ claims based on their failure to meet Delaware’s strict expert deadlines and establish a prima facie case under Texas law. Plaintiffs’ Complaint invoked the application of Texas substantive law and alleged that multiple manufacturers were negligent and strictly liable for failing to warn the decedent of the alleged dangers posed by the use of asbestos-containing products. Plaintiffs’ alleged asbestos exposures from defendants’ products caused Mr. Shaw’s disease and subsequent death. In 2007, Texas instituted its now well-known causation requirement, which requires the “dose” of asbestos exposure from each defendant’s products to be quantified by an expert. Borg-Warner Corp. v. Flores, 232 S.W.3d 765, 773 (Tex. 2007). Prior to decedent’s death, Plaintiffs’ counsel deposed decedent and his father for product identification purposes. During the depositions, Plaintiffs’ counsel failed to obtain the necessary factual information from his clients for an expert to be able to opine as to alleged exposure doses from any defendant’s product. Despite lacking the requisite information for a prima facie case under Texas law, Plaintiffs sought and were given placement in an expedited trial setting, which had strict, defined deadlines. Reprinted courtesy of Christian Singewald, White and Williams LLP and Rochelle Gumapac, White and Williams LLP Mr. Singewald may be contacted at singewaldc@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Gumapac may be contacted at gumapacr@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Bill Proposes First-Ever Federal Workforce Housing Tax Credit for Middle-Class Housing

    March 04, 2024 —
    Legislation was recently introduced to the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives proposing the creation of the first-ever Workforce Housing Tax Credit (WHTC) for middle-income housing developments. Similar to the existing Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC), the WHTC would provide additional federal income tax credits to housing development projects for tenants making between 60% and 100% of Area Median Income (AMI). The allocation of WHTC would be based on a competitive bid process and awarded to developments over a 15-year credit period (as opposed to a 10-year credit period for LIHTC). Developments receiving allocations of WHTC will be subject to affordability requirements during the 15-year credit period and subsequent extended use period of at least 15 years. Reprinted courtesy of Emily K. Bias, Pillsbury and Brittany Griffith, Pillsbury Ms. Bias may be contacted at emily.bias@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Griffith may be contacted at brittany.griffith@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of