BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management 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


    Deterioration of Bridge Infrastructure Is Increasing Insurance Needs

    Understanding Liability Insurer’s Two Duties: To Defend and to Indemnify

    Georgia Supreme Court Limits Damages Under Georgia Computer Systems Protection Act

    Fire Raging North of Los Angeles Is Getting Fuel From Dry Winds

    Graham & Who May Trigger The Need To Protest

    Not a Waiver for All: Maryland Declines to Apply Subrogation Waiver to Subcontractors

    Damp Weather Not Good for Wood

    A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules

    Foreign Entry into the United States Construction, Infrastructure and PPP Markets

    Construction Jobs Expected to Rise in Post-Hurricane Rebuilding

    Subrogation Waiver Unconscionable in Residential Fuel Delivery Contract

    Los Angeles Wildfires to Impact Profitability of US Property Insurers, Says GlobalData

    Report: Construction Firms Could Better Protect Workers From Noise Hazards

    Seller Cannot Compel Arbitration for Its Role in Construction Defect Case<

    No Prejudicial Error in Refusing to Give Jury Instruction on Predominant Cause

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Court Holds That One-Year SOL Applies to Disgorgement Claims Under B&P Section 7031

    Caltrans Reviewing Airspace Program in Aftermath of I-10 Fire

    California to Require Disclosure of Construction Defect Claims

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Motion for Remand

    Texas Jury Awards $5.3 Million to Company Defamed by Union: Could it work in Pennsylvania?

    TRI Pointe Merges with Weyerhaeuser’s Real Estate Company

    Implementation of CA Building Energy Efficiency Standards Delayed

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

    Thirteen Payne & Fears Attorneys Honored by Best Lawyers

    Europe’s Satellites Could Help Catch the Next Climate Disaster

    Toxic Drywall Not Covered Under Homeowner’s Policy

    Ohio: Are Construction Defects Covered in Insurance Policies?

    Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion to Reject Claim for Construction Defects Upheld

    Lease-Leaseback Fight Continues

    Case Dispositive Motion for Summary Judgment Granted for BWB&O’s Client in Wrongful Death Case!

    Flood Policy Does Not Cover Debris Removal from Property

    Charles Eppolito Appointed Vice-Chair of the PBA Judicial Evaluation Commission and Receives Prestigious “President’s Award”

    Construction Down in Twin Cities Area

    It’s Time to Include PFAS in Every Property Related Release

    Las Vegas’ McCarran Tower Construction Issues Delays Opening

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

    Unlocking the Potential of AI and Chat GBT in Construction Management

    Chinese Hunt for Trophy Properties Boosts NYC, London Prices

    No Collapse Coverage Where Policy's Collapse Provisions Deleted

    Coping with Labor & Install Issues in Green Building

    Sales of New Homes in U.S. Increased 5.4% in July to 507,000

    Florida Insurance Legislation Alert - Part I

    Why Biden’s Infrastructure Plan Is a Green Jobs Plan

    Human Eye Resolution Virtual Reality for AEC

    California’s Labor Enforcement Task Force Continues to Set Fire to the Underground Economy

    Three's a Trend: Second, Fourth and Ninth Circuits Uphold Broad "Related Claims" Language

    Nevada Insureds Can Rely on Extrinsic Facts to Show that An Insurer Owes a Duty to Defend

    Recent Bribery and Anti-Corruption Enforcement Trends in Global Construction Industry

    The Golden State Commits to Going Green – Why Contractors Will be in High Demand to Build the State’s Infrastructure
    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

    Be Careful with Continuous Breach and Statute of Limitations

    January 21, 2019 —
    If you are a construction attorney like me (or anyone that takes cases to court), you deal with statutes of limitation on a daily basis. These statutes seem pretty simple. A party has “X” amount of time in which to file its lawsuit after accural of the cause of action. In a breach of contract suit, the accrual is the date of breach. Easy, right? Wrong, at least in some circumstances. Take for example, the case of Fluor Fed. Sols., LLC v. PAE Applied Techs., LLC out of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals. In this unpublished opinion the Court looked at “continuous breach” versus “series of separate breaches.” The basic facts are that in 2000 Flour entered into a contract with PAE whereby PAE requested and claims to have received consent from Flour to a 2.3% administrative cost cap on Flour’s work on an Air Force contract. Flour claimed that it did not agree to this cap. In 2002, Flour begain billing PAE for its costs plus the 2.3% administrative markup and billed in this fashion for the first full year. However, in subsequent years and for the next 11 years, Flour billed PAE at a higher markup rate than the 2.3%. PAE disputed the increased markup and paid Flour at the 2.3% rate. Flour periodically protested but made no move to court until it filed suit in March of 2016. After a bench trial, the district court found that Flour had agreed to the cap and found for PAE. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Mold Due to Construction Defects May Temporarily Close Fire Station

    October 25, 2013 —
    Fire Station 5 in Chino, California is about to undergo mold remediation. Ruben Martinez, the city’s Public Works Director, expects the station to be closed during remediation. “We’d like to get the firemen out of there so there isn’t any potential infection or worker’s compensation issues,” he said. However, Fire Department Captain Steve Harrison did not think the station needed to be closed. “We are adamant the station stays staffed while the remediation work is completed.” The mold came about due to problems the station has had with roof leaks since its opening in 1999. The current set of repairs will cost between $12,000 and $25,000, and the city is discussing matters with its insurer to determine who will pay for the repairs. It’ won’t be the original contractor, as the building is past the 10-year limit for construction defect claims. Even if a claim were possible, the contractor who built the building is bankrupt. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules

    April 29, 2024 —
    San Diego, Calif. (April 10, 2024) - California legislators have changed the rules of discovery in civil cases through the passage of amendments to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2016.090 and 2023.050, effective January 1, 2024. Section 2016.090 creates a new set of rules for civil litigators in cases filed on or after January 1, 2024, which permits any party to the litigation to demand initial disclosures be provided within 60-days. Such a demand can be made any time after a party has filed a responsive pleading, including a demurrer or motion to strike. Notably, this rule requires production of all information relevant to any causes of action that are pled at the time of the demand, meaning the parties may be required to disclose information related to claims that are being challenged on demurrer or a motion to strike, such as claims for punitive damages. This statute is only implicated when one of the parties to the action makes a demand and may be modified by stipulation of the parties. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Denied

    June 29, 2020 —
    The court found there was no coverage for the insureds' alleged negligent failure to construct a building. Evanston Ins. Co. v. DCM Contracting, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63977 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 28, 2020). Turning Point Church sued DCM Contracting for faulty workmanship on a construction project. Turning Point sent a demand letter to DCM on August 18, 2017 and filed suit in December. Evanston did not receive notice of Turning Point's claims and the lawsuit until May 15, 2018. Evanston filed suit for a declaratory judgment and moved for summary judgment. The court first considered the late notice. The policy required notice "as soon as practicable" DCM was also required to provide copies of demands, notices, or legal papers to Evanston. Here, DCM did not give notice to Evanston until nine months after receipt of Turning Point's demand. A phone communication with DCM's agent between August 2017 and May 2018 was insufficient. DCM provided no documents, including the summons and complaint, to the agent. DCM waited five months to forward the underlying lawsuit. This was a breach of the policy. 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

    Carroll Brock of Larchmont Homes Dies at Age 88

    November 05, 2014 —
    Homebuilder Carroll Brock, "whose family-owned company built thousands of Larchmont Homes in the Sacramento region, died Oct. 31 of natural causes in his sleep, his son Steve said," according to the obituary in the Sacramento Bee. "Under Mr. Brock, who was named Sacramento general manager in 1967, Larchmont Homes built nearly 15,000 houses in more than 30 subdivisions of modest ranch-style homes aimed mostly at first-time buyers." Mr. Brock served on the board of the National Association of Home Builders, was past president of the North State Building Industry Association, and had been appointed to the California state Board Standards Commission. Furthermore, he was inducted into the California Building Industry Association Hall of Fame in 1991. Mr. Brock served the community through his work in the Sacramento Area Commerce and Trade Commission as well as the Sacramento Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce. He volunteered his time to the Salvation Army as well as offering construction assistance and expertise to the Fair Oaks Presbyterian Church. “My dad was a humble leader,” his son told the Sacramento Bee. “As successful as he was at building homes, he felt just as strongly about serving others.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    LA’s $1.2 Billion Graffiti Towers Put on Sale After Bankruptcy

    June 04, 2024 —
    For sale: Steel skeletons of three towers in downtown Los Angeles, erected by a Chinese developer that spent $1.2 billion before running into financial troubles. The site, called Oceanwide Plaza, became famous this year when graffiti artists covered the 49-floor-tall structures. Now, the property is going on the market, with lenders and other creditors needing about $400 million to recoup their money. The brokerage Colliers and advisory firm Hilco Real Estate have been hired to market and handle a sale of the property, subject to bankruptcy court approval, according to a statement. “We are determined to run a disciplined and orderly process to identify the right developer to finish the project in time for the 2028 Summer Olympics,” said Mark Tarczynski, an executive vice president at Colliers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Gittelsohn, Bloomberg

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “D’Oh!”

    August 12, 2024 —
    The U.S. DOL found itself on June 24 on the wrong end of a preliminary injunction concerning recent changes to the Davis-Bacon Act. The lawsuit, initiated in Texas federal court by the Associated General Contractors of America and other concerned citizens, sought a preliminary injunction barring implementation and enforcement of “specified portions of § 5.2 and § 5.5(e) of the DOL’s ‘Updating the Davis-Bacon and Related Acts Regulations’” – the “Final Rule,” published August 23, 2023. After determining the appropriateness of the “standing” of the plaintiffs based upon the plaintiffs being “adversely affected” by the Final Rule, the federal court preliminarily enjoined enforcement of the Final Rule. In noting its disagreement with the Final Rule, the court stated:
    “… the Final Rule amends the DBA [the Davis-Bacon Act] by imposing a stealth selfimplementing DBA requirement in the contract by an operation-of-law provision that contradicts the express statutory language of the Act [the court bristling at the idea that contracts might exclude with impunity the otherwise mandated DBA clauses]. Further, the Final Rule amends the Act to extend the DBA to apply to workers who are not mechanics and laborers, and to extend the scope of the work covered by DBA to include work is not performed ‘directly on the site of the work.’
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Consumer Protection Act Whacks Seattle Roofing Contractor

    July 21, 2011 —

    It’s been over 1 year since we last visited the CertainTeed Corp. v. Seattle Roof Brokers lawsuit. After my original post, the contractor, James Garcia, appeared at Builders Counsel in a comment to defend himself. It appears that 1 year later, the court decided to side with CertainTeed and award them significant attorneys’ fees. Ready for the whole story? Its a pricey one.

    Back in July 2010, good friend Mike Atkins (Seattle Trademark Attorney) authored a post about a Seattle roofing contractor who had been sued for false advertising on his website. The lawsuit was raised by CertainTeed, a roofing material producer, whose products were the target of a Seattle contractor’s ire. Seattle Roof Brokers, owned by James Garcia, published content on its website, remarking that CertainTeed products have a history of “premature failure” and that they “will fail?.resale inspection after 15-20 years.”

    CertainTeed filed its action to obtain an injunction and damages under the Consumer Protection Act.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

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