BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim 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


    Eleventh Circuit Set to Hear Challenge to Florida Law Barring Foreign Citizens From Buying Real Property

    HVAC System Collapses Over Pool at Gaylord Rockies Resort Colorado

    Construction Law Alert: A Specialty License May Not Be Required If Work Covered By Another License

    Good News on Prices for Some Construction Materials

    Judge Nixes SC's $100M Claim Over MOX Construction Delays

    Construction Industry Outlook: Building a Better Tomorrow

    What’s the Best Way to “Use” a Construction Attorney?

    Quick Note: Discretion in Determining Prevailing Party for Purposes of Attorney’s Fees

    When Is Mandatory Arbitration Not Mandatory?

    Weed Property Owner Gets Smoked Under Insurance Policy

    World Cup May Pull Out of Brazil because of Construction Delays

    Supreme Court of Wisconsin Applies Pro Rata Allocation Based on Policy Limits to Co-Insurance Dispute

    Privileged Communications With a Testifying Client/Expert

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (6/4/24) – New CRE Litmus Tests, Tech Integration in Real Estate and a Jump in Investor Home Purchases

    Recovery Crews Swing Into Action as Hurricane Michael Departs

    Appraisal May Include Cause of Loss Issues

    2024 Construction Law Update

    Appraisal Goes Forward Even Though Insurer Has Yet to Determine Coverage on Additional Claims

    Federal Court Predicts Coverage In Utah for Damage Caused By Faulty Workmanship

    The Show Must Go On: Shuttered Venues Operators Grant Provides Lifeline for Live Music and Theater Venues

    New York Nonprofit Starts Anti-Scaffold Law Video Series

    Subcontractors Found Liable to Reimburse Insurer Defense Costs in Equitable Subrogation Action

    Happy New Year from CDJ

    New York’s Second Department Holds That Carrier Must Pay Judgment Obtained by Plaintiff as Carrier Did Not Meet Burden to Prove Willful Non-Cooperation

    South Carolina Legislature Redefining Occurrences to Include Construction Defects in CGL Policies

    Brooklyn Atlantic Yards Yields Dueling Suits on Tower

    Colorado Mayors Should Not Sacrifice Homeowners to Lure Condo Developers

    Texas Shortens Cut-Off Date for Suits Against Homebuilders Who Provide a 6-Year Written Warranty

    Preparing For and Avoiding Residential Construction Disputes: For Homeowners and Contractors

    Bay Area Firm Offers Construction Consulting to Remodels

    False Implied Certifications in Making Payment Requests: What We Can Learn from Lance Armstrong

    City Development with Interactive 3D Models

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Los Angeles Office on Another Successful MSJ!

    Homeowner’s Claims Defeated Because “Gravamen” of Complaint was Fraud, not Breach of Contract

    Insurance Coverage Litigation Section to Present at Hawaii State Bar Convention

    Las Vegas Partner Sarah Odia Named a 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyer Rising Star

    Plan Ahead for the Inevitable Murphy’s Law Related Accident

    NCCER Celebrates Construction Education Programs and Products in 2024

    Women Make Their Mark on Construction Leadership

    Heavy Rains Cause Flooding, Mudslides in Japan

    County Elects Not to Sue Over Construction Defect Claims

    Insurer Must Defend Faulty Workmanship Claims

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (01/18/23) – Construction Inventory, 3D Printing, and Metaverse Replicas

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

    Contractors: Consult Your Insurance Broker Regarding Your CGL Policy

    City Council Authorizes Settlement of Basement Flooding Cases

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: The Duty to Defend

    Timely and Properly Assert Affirmative Defenses and Understand Statutory Conditions Precedent

    WSHB Secures Victory in Construction Defect Case: Contractor Wins Bench Trial

    New Jersey Courts Sign "Death Knell" for 1979 Weedo Decision
    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

    Receiving a $0 Verdict and Still Being Deemed the Prevailing Party for Purposes of Attorney’s Fees

    May 24, 2018 —
    Low and behold, a party can be the prevailing party for purposes of attorney’s fees even if that party is awarded $0. That’s right, even if the party is awarded a big fat zero, they can still be the prevailing party for purposes of being entitled to attorney’s fees. This is because a party is the prevailing party if they prevail on the significant issues in the case. A party can prevail on the significant issues even if that party is awarded $0. Whoa! For example, in Coconut Key Homeowner’s Association, Inc. v. Gonzalez, 43 Fla.L.Weekly D1045a (Fla. 4th DCA 2018), a homeowner sued her homeowner’s association claiming the association breached its governing documents. There was a basis for fees under Florida’s homeowner’s association law (and there likely was a basis under the governing documents). At trial, the jury held that the association breached its governing documents, but awarded the homeowner nothing ($0). The trial court also issued injunctive relief in favor of the homeowner. The homeowner claimed she should be deemed the prevailing party for purposes of attorney’s fees; however, this was denied by the trial court based on the $0 verdict and no fees were awarded to the homeowner. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Recent Federal Court Decision Favors Class Action Defendants

    October 26, 2020 —
    The commercial construction contracting and subcontracting industry in general is unique under the law for industry professionals, as they’re typically limited to wage and hour litigation under provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The majority of FLSA cases seek class action status or collective classification, while other FLSA litigation is initiated by individuals seeking damages. For the former, past and current employees can opt into class action litigation and seek collective damages against a construction company. The looming financial burden of class action or collective litigation against construction companies consume time, money and resources to the extent it’s often advisable for Defendants to negotiate an unfair settlement. Yet, thanks to a recent federal court decision on March 27, 2020, the legal maneuvering behind unreasonable Plaintiff demands may soon be counter-balanced by the class action Defendants’ right to due process review. A recent legal opinion in a recent FLSA case has potentially wide-ranging implications for Defendant employers mired in future class action litigation. Moreover, as the FLSA applies to all employers, this decision potentially applies to all ownership groups representing the commercial construction industry, extending to partners, contractors and subcontractors. Reprinted courtesy of Amber Karns & Dan Pipitone, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Pipitone may be contacted at dpipitone@munsch.com Ms. Karns may be contacted at akarns@munsch.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Bond, No Recovery: WA Contractors Must Comply With WA Statutory Requirements Or Risk Being Barred From Recovery If Their Client Refuses To Pay

    September 18, 2018 —
    The risk that a contractor’s client may refuse to pay the full contract balance is a day-to-day reality for every contractor. That risk – and the stress it causes in the mind of any contractor – is tempered by the knowledge that Washington statutes provide contractors with ready access to the courts to file a lawsuit and be fully compensated for the work performed. But a recent case provides a grim reminder that the same statutes that giveth court access can also taketh away. Washington’s Contractor Registration Act (“WCRA”)[1] requires every contractor engaging or offering to engage in services in Washington to register with the Department of Labor and Industries (”L&I”). In order to sue to collect compensation for work or to enforce a contract, a contractor must prove that he/she “was a duly registered contractor and held a current and valid certificate of registration at the time he or she contracted for the performance of such work or entered into such contract.”[2] In order to conclude that a contractor has substantially comply with these requirements, a court must find that: (1) The department has on file the information required by RCW 18.27.030; (2) the contractor has at all times had in force a current bond or other security as required by RCW 18.27.040; and (3) the contractor has at all times had in force current insurance as required by RCW 18.27.050.[3] Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joshua Lane, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Lane may be contacted at joshua.lane@acslawyers.com

    Consequential Damage Claims for Insurer's Bad Faith Dismissed

    April 22, 2019 —
    Partial dismissal of the insured's complaint seeking consequential damages for the insurer's bad faith was granted by the court. Bryant v. General Cas. Co., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15369 (N.D. N.Y. Jan. 30, 2019). Bryant purchased from General Casualty Company of Wisconsin (GCCW) a commercial property and casualty policy to cover the insured premises. While the building was rented to a tenant who operated a restaurant, it sustained a collapse. GCCW refused to cover the loss. Bryant sued. In addition to the cost of repairing and replacing the damage to the property, Bryant alleged he was out the value of rental revenue from his tenant, which was forced to close the restaurant and relocated as a result of the unrepaired damage. 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

    From the Ashes: Reconstructing After the Maui Wildfire

    November 27, 2023 —
    On Tuesday, Aug. 8, a wildfire on the Hawaiian island of Maui ravaged the town of Lahaina, killing nearly 100 people and stranding thousands of survivors, many of whom remain displaced today. The loss of life makes this the deadliest American wildfire on record, while the material cost in property damage has been estimated at upwards of $5 billion. The response to the disaster has involved firefighters and other emergency personnel—and also engineering and construction professionals. One of them is Tam Kim, director of operations for West Maui Construction Inc., a civil contractor on the island. Originally from Oregon, Kim fell in love with Hawaii when he visited on a surfing vacation; eventually he took his technology background and helped found a startup company on Maui in 2008. Eight years later, the startup relocated to Oahu, but Kim stayed on Maui to forge a different path, one that would lead him somewhere he never imagined. Reprinted courtesy of Grace Calengor, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Mediation Fails In Federal Lawsuit Seeking Damages From Sureties for Alleged Contract Fraud

    August 17, 2020 —
    After mediation failed, a federal whistle blower lawsuit over alleged fraud against two contractors, which also targets sureties and a surety bond producer, is moving forward. The parties have asked a U.S. district court judge in Washington, D.C. to rule on outstanding motions in preparation for a possible trial. Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    In Massachusetts, the Statute of Repose Applies to Consumer Protection Claims Against Building Contractors

    January 28, 2019 —
    In Bridgwood v. A.J. Wood Construction, Inc., 105 N.E.3d 224 (Mass. 2018), the Supreme Court of Massachusetts determined that the statute of repose barred the plaintiff’s consumer protection claims commenced more than six years after the occurrence of the event that gave rise to the claims. In Bridgwood, the homeowner filed suit against the contractors who had performed renovations 15 years earlier. The homeowner asserted that concealed faulty electrical work caused a fire 11 years after the work was completed. The complaint alleged that the contractors, by violating Mass. Gen. Laws. Chapter 142A §17(10), committed an unfair and deceptive act pursuant to Mass. Gen. Laws Chapter 93A. Section 17(10) prohibits contractors from violating building laws and specifically states that a violation of Section 17(10) constitutes an unfair and deceptive act as defined by Chapter 93A. Chapter 93A is regarded as one of the most stringent consumer protection statutory schemes in the nation, and allows litigants to seek remedies such as treble damages and attorney fees. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shannon M. Warren, White and Williams
    Ms. Warren may be contacted at warrens@whiteandwilliams.com

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud

    November 18, 2011 —

    A Pennsylvania contractor in prison for fraud has been convicted with insurance fraud. The York Daily Record reports that Steven D. Gebhart was already in jail for fraud for about $350,000 for work he either failed to finish or even start or by using substandard materials and practices when he was convicted of insurance fraud. Gebbert’s offices were destroyed in a fire that was later determined to be arson. He was not charged with this, but instead for overestimating his losses to the insurance company. Sentencing for the fraud charge will be on December 21.

    Read the full story…

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