BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction claims 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


    Florida Court Puts the Claim of Landlord’s Insurer In The No-Fly Zone

    Managing Narrative, Capturing Context, and Building Together: Talking VR and AEC with David Weir-McCall

    New Member Added to Seattle Law Firm Williams Kastner

    Potential Extension of the Statutes of Limitation and Repose for Colorado Construction Defect Claims

    Flood Sublimits Do Not Apply to Loss Caused by Named Windstorm

    If You Don’t Like the PPP Now, Wait a Few Minutes…Major Changes to PPP Loan Program as Congress Passes Payroll Protection Program Flexibility Act

    No Coverage for Defects in Subcontrator's Own Work

    Harmon Towers Case to Last into 2014

    The Year 2010 In Review: Design And Construction Defects Litigation

    Insurer Ordered to Participate in Appraisal

    The “Ugly” Property Next Door is Ruining My Property Value

    White and Williams Recognizes Women’s History Month: Remembering Virginia Barton Wallace

    U.S. Housing Starts Top Forecast on Single-Family Homes

    What ‘The Curse’ Gets Wrong About Passive House Architecture

    Neighbors Fight to Halt Construction after Asbestos found on Property

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Business Interruption Claim Denied

    Note on First-Party and Third-Party Spoliation of Evidence Claims

    Intellectual Property And Employment Law Best Practices: Are You Covering Your Bases In Protecting Construction-Related Trade Secrets?

    Connecting Construction Project Information: Open Technology Databases Improve Project Communication, Collaboration and Visibility

    Exploring Architects’ Perspectives on AI: A Survey of Fears and Hopes

    Construction Firms Complain of Missed Payments on Redevelopment Project

    Kahana Feld Welcomes Six Attorneys to the Firm in Q4 of 2023

    New Report Reveals Heavy Civil Construction Less Impacted by COVID-19 Than Commercial Construction

    When Can Customers Sue for Delays?

    Justice Dept., EPA Ramp Up Environmental Justice Enforcement

    Judicial Panel Denies Nationwide Consolidation of COVID-19 Business Interruption Cases

    Defeating the Ten-Year Statute of Repose For Latent Construction Defects

    Lawsuit Decries Environmental Assessment for Buffalo, NY, Expressway Cap Project

    Hammer & Hand’s Top Ten Predictions for US High Performance Building in 2014

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2022 “Atlanta 500” List

    Mediation is (Almost) Always Worth a Shot

    The Peak of Hurricane Season Is Here: How to Manage Risks Before They Manage You

    How AI Can Become a Design Adviser

    No Coverage for Restoring Aesthetic Uniformity

    Breath of Fresh Air

    How Drones are Speeding Up Construction

    Mortgage Applications in U.S. Jump 11.6% as Refinancing Surges

    Balfour Taps Qinetiq’s Quinn as new CEO to Revamp Builder

    Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co.

    Virtual Mediation – How Do I Make It Work for Me?

    No Coverage for Roof Collapse During Hurricane

    Are COVID-19 Claims Covered by Builders Risk Insurance Policies?

    24/7 Wall Street Reported on Eight Housing Markets at All-Time Highs

    Lease-Leaseback Battle Continues as First District Court of Appeals Sides with Contractor and School District

    Former UN General Assembly President Charged in Bribe Scheme

    Failing to Release A Mechanics Lien Can Destroy Your Construction Business

    OSHA Set to Tag More Firms as Severe Violators Under New Criteria

    Legislative Update on Bills of Note (Updated Post-Adjournment)

    A Compilation of Quirky Insurance Claims

    Home Prices Expected to Increase All Over the U.S.
    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. Leveraging 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

    Defective Stairways can be considered a Patent Construction Defect in California

    September 24, 2014 —
    Stairs are not safe! At least the Court of Appeal in the Second Appellate District of California doesn’t think so. A rail station in Los Angeles was completed by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“MTA”) in 1993. The rail station was part of the development of the Southern California Rapid Transit District Metro Rail Project. In 2011, the plaintiff fell on a stairway at the station. In August 2012, Plaintiff sued the MTA for dangerous condition of public property, statutory liability, and negligence. Among other defects, plaintiff alleged the banister of the stairwell was “too low” and the stairwell “too small” given the number, age, and volume of people habitually entering and exiting the rail station. In addition, plaintiff alleged that MTA “failed to provide adequate safeguards against the known dangerous condition by, among other acts and omissions, failing to properly design, construct, supervise, inspect and repair the Premises causing the same to be unsafe and defective for its intended purposes.” MTA, in turn, cross-complained against Hampton- the entity that provided design and construction services at the station. Hampton demurred to the first amended cross-complaint, asserting a four year statute of limitations defense pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 337.1, claiming the alleged deficiencies were patent defects. On September 11, 2013, the trial court overruled the demurrer finding that the defect was not patent. Hampton appealed. The appellate court overruled the trial court’s ruling and in fact, granted Hampton’s writ of mandate and even directed the trial court to sustain the demurrer without leave to amend! (Delon Hampton & Associates v. Sup. Ct. (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority) (Cal. App. Second Dist., Div. 3; June 23, 2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 250, [173 Cal.Rptr.3d 407].) The appellate court found that the purpose of section 337.1 is to “provide a final point of termination, to proctect some groups from extended liability.” A “patent deficiency” has been defined as a deficiency which is apparent by reasonable inspection. See Tomko Woll Group Architects, Inc. v. Superior Court (1996) 46 Cal.App.4th 1326, 1336. The court found a patent defect can be discovery by the kind of inspection made in the exercise of ordinary care and prudence, whereas a latent defect is hidden and would not be discovered by a reasonably careful inspection. See Preston v. Goldman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 108, 123. The test to determine whether a construction defect is patent is an objective test that asks “whether the average consumer, during the course of a reasonable inspection, would discover the defect…” See Creekbridge Townhome Owners Assn., Inc. v. C. Scott Whitten, Inc. (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 251, 256. Mr. Kaufman may be contacted at wkaufman@lockhartpark.com, and you may visit the firm's website at www.lockhartpark.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William M. Kaufman, Lockhart Park LP

    Construction Contract Language and Insurance Coverage Must Be Consistent

    July 30, 2015 —
    How often do you review both the additional insured language in the contract and the insurance policy provided by a subcontractor? My guess is, unless the project has gone off the rails, NEVER. Well, perhaps you should to make absolutely sure the extent of the subcontractor’s insurance obligations and whether those obligations are being fulfilled. This point was recently addressed in a recent DRI article analyzing the Deepwater Horizon/BP lawsuit. My partner, Anne Marie O’Brien, also blogged on this a few months ago. As you will recall, Transocean’s Deepwater Horizon oil-drilling rig exploded, killing 11 workers, and polluted the Gulf of Mexico. BP demanded that Transocean’s insurer pay for the loss. Transocean’s insurer said no, and the litigation ensued, in state court, federal court, and the Texas Supreme Court. It was quite an odyssey of litigation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    Can a Contractor be Liable to Second Buyers of Homes for Construction Defects?

    November 05, 2014 —
    Whether a contractor will be liable to a second purchaser, even though the contractor never contracted with the second purchaser, varies state to state. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in Conway v. The Cutler Group, is the latest court to rule that a subsequent purchaser lacks privity and cannot pursue an action against the builder. In that case, the Conways purchased a home from the original owner. After living in the home for about two years, the Conways discovered water leaking around the windows. The Conways sued the builder, alleging breach of the implied warranty of habitability. The builder defended the claim, asserting that it had not contracted with the Conways and thus had not provided any warranties to the Conways. The trial court agreed and dismissed the claim. The first level of appellate court reversed the trial court, holding that the warranty of habitability was intended to level the playing field between the builder and purchaser of a home and it should be extended to subsequent purchasers. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court disagreed and refused to extend any warranties to subsequent purchasers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    Pinterest Nixes Big San Francisco Lease Deal in Covid Scaleback

    September 21, 2020 —
    Pinterest Inc. canceled a large office lease at a building to be constructed near its San Francisco headquarters, marking one of the most significant moves yet by a big tech company to scale back real estate plans in the city amid the Covid-19 pandemic. “As we analyze how our workplace will change in a post-Covid world, we are specifically rethinking where future employees could be based,” Todd Morgenfeld, Pinterest’s chief financial officer and head of business operations, said in a statement Friday. The social-sharing service is paying an $89.5 million termination fee to terminate its lease for 490,000 square feet (45,500 square meters) of space. It will keep its existing offices in the city. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sophie Alexander, Bloomberg

    Why Construction Law- An Update

    May 07, 2015 —
    Back in 2009, only a year or so after my first post here at Musings, I posted on why I’m in the field of construction law. Well, a lot has happened in the over 5 years since then, not the least of which is my move to solo practice in July of 2010 and the later certification as a mediator. As I sit here, I look back at the passage of time and the events between my last thoughts on this subject and now and wonder if my thoughts have changed? Frankly, not much has changed as far as my attitude toward the practice of construction law. Despite my kids occasionally rolling their eyes when I talk about a case of interest to me and their sometimes moniker for me as a “dirt lawyer,” I continue to find the representation of the construction professionals that I call clients and friends to be fulfilling and worthwhile. Even in the face of criticisms that we lawyers cause more problems that we solve, I firmly believe that I and other good construction lawyers can and do help avoid and anticipate more problems than I cause. As one of the few solo construction attorneys here in the Richmond area, if anything, I am more involved in the construction community. Between my continued and even increased involvement with the AGC of Virginia and my more recent appointment to the board of the Virginia State Bar‘s Construction Law and Public Contracts Section, I have gained even more insight into the workings of the legal and business landscapes of construction. With each new piece of information gained by such involvement, I see another side to the business of construction that I may not have thought of. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Construction Law Musings
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Federal Court Strikes Down 'Persuader' Rule

    November 23, 2016 —
    In a victory for construction industry groups, a federal court has permanently blocked a U.S. Dept. of Labor rule requiring attorneys and other outside groups to disclose publicly that they provide advice to employers on how to comply with federal labor laws. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pam Hunter McFarland, Engineering News-Record
    Ms. McFarland may be contacted at mcfarlandp@enr.com

    Massachusetts High Court to Decide if Insurers Can Recoup Defense Costs

    February 07, 2018 —
    The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) is set to hear argument on February 6 in a case that will decide whether insurers can recoup defense costs if it is later determined that they owed no duty to defend an underlying claim. At issue in Holyoke Mut. Ins. Co. v. Vibram USA, Inc., No SJC-12401, is Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig O'Neill, White and Williams, LLP
    Mr. O'Neill may be contacted at oneillc@whiteandwilliams.com

    Vietnam Expands Arrests in Coffee Region Property Probe

    February 19, 2024 —
    Vietnam authorities detained the Communist Party chief of coffee-producing province Lam Dong as they expand an investigation into alleged bribery tied to a tourist and residential project, the public security ministry said in a website statement. Party chief Tran Duc Quan was arrested for allegedly abusing his power and position, according to the statement. Quan allegedly violated the law while giving instructions to the Dai Ninh property project in the province, causing severe consequences, it said. A Lam Dong Provincial Party Committee representative declined to provide a comment about the arrest. A representative for Quan was not available. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mai Ngoc Chau, Bloomberg