BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling 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


    US Homes Face Costly Retrofits for Induction Stoves, EV Chargers

    How Concrete Mistakes Added Cost to the Recent Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Project

    Construction Warranties: Have You Seen Me Lately?

    The National Building Museum’s A-Mazing Showpiece

    Colorado HB 13-1090: Concerning Payment of Amounts Due Under a Construction Agreement

    City Wonders Who’s to Blame for Defective Wall

    Kiewit and Two Ex-Managers Face Canada Jobsite Fatality Criminal Trial

    Insured's Testimony On Expectation of Coverage Deemed Harmless

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

    Need and Prejudice: An Eleventh-Hour Trial Continuance Where A Key Witness Is Unexpectedly Unavailable

    Tokyo's Skyline Set to See 45 New Skyscrapers by 2020 Olympics

    Newmeyer & Dillion’s Alan Packer Selected to 2018 Northern California Super Lawyers List

    Mediating Contract Claims and Disputes at the ASBCA

    Using Lien and Bond Claims to Secure Project Payments

    Timber Prices Likely to Keep Rising

    Renovation Contractors: Be Careful How You Disclose Your Projects

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Eliminates Loss from Hurricane

    Breaking the Impasse by Understanding Blame

    Know your Obligations: Colorado’s Statutory Expansions of the Implied Warranty of Habitability Are Now in Effect

    US Civil Rights Tools Are Failing the Most Polluted Black Communities

    Wow! A Mechanic’s Lien Bill That Helps Subcontractors and Suppliers

    New Zealand Using Plywood Banned Elsewhere

    2018 California Construction Law Update

    Two-Part Series on Condominium Construction Defect Issues

    One World Trade Center Tallest Building in US

    COVID-19 Business Closure and Continuity Compliance Resource

    Godfather Charged with Insurance Fraud

    Mitigating the Consequences of Labor Unrest on Construction Projects

    HB 20-1046 - Private Retainage Reform - Postponed Indefinitely

    Deadline Nears for “Green Performance Bond” Implementation

    Continuity and Disaster Recovery Plans for Contractors: Lessons From the Past

    Temporary Obstructions Are a Permanent Problem Under the Americans with Disabilities Act

    Liquidated Damages: A Dangerous Afterthought

    EPC Contractors Procuring from Foreign Companies need to Reconsider their Contracts

    Stacking of Service Interruption and Contingent Business Interruption Coverages Permitted

    Spearin Doctrine as an Affirmative Defense

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorney Alan Packer Selected to the 2017 Northern California Super Lawyers List

    Finding Insurer's Declaratory Relief Action Raises Unsettled Questions of State Law, Case is Dismissed

    New York Appellate Court Applies Broad Duty to Defend to Property Damage Case

    General Contractors Have Expansive Common Law and Statutory Duties To Provide a Safe Workplace

    PFAS: From Happy Mistake to Ubiquity to Toxic Liability (But is there coverage?)

    Wisconsin Court Applies the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Negligence Claims for Purely Economic Losses

    One Colorado Court Allows Negligence Claim by General Contractor Against Subcontractor

    Toll Brothers Report End of Year Results

    Association Insurance Company v. Carbondale Glen Lot E-8, LLC: Federal Court Reaffirms That There Is No Duty to Defend or Indemnify A Builder For Defective Construction Work

    My Top 5 Innovations for Greater Efficiency, Sustainability & Quality

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

    Lane Construction Sues JV Partner Skanska Over Orlando I-4 Project

    The Fourth Circuit Applies a Consequential Damages Exclusionary Clause and the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Claims by a Subrogating Insurer Seeking to Recover Over $19 Million in Damages

    Homebuyers Get Break as Loan Rates Defy Fed Tapering: Mortgages
    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

    Stick to Your Guns on Price and Pricing with Construction Contracts

    December 20, 2021 —
    In recent posts here at Construction Law Musings, I have discussed the need for clarity of contract, trusting your gut, and assuring that your contract has the necessities. All of these bits of advice (along with my usual advice of working with an experienced construction attorney) are true with regard to commercial construction contracts and apply ten fold in a residential construction (read working for a single/family owner on their house). With a residential project, you, as a construction contractor, are likely to be dealing with the difficult combination of an owner with little or no experience relating to how a construction project is supposed to work and an owner that is emotionally invested in the project because it is their home. Because of the above, and the fact that your project is likely the biggest single investment that the owner has made outside of possibly a prior house, the residential owner will likely be looking over your shoulder and may very well attempt to negotiate down some of the costs that they perceive as the project moves forward. In short, the average person 1. does not know how much the project truly costs the contractor, and 2. feels that because they hold the cash, they can and should have some control over the individual costs of the construction thus making those costs, and by extension, their contract, negotiable right up until the end. 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

    Housing Woes Worse in L.A. Than New York, San Francisco

    September 03, 2014 —
    Jeanette Cross took out a payday loan to cover her May rent of $1,600 in South Los Angeles. She skipped car and insurance payments to keep a roof over her head. “I’m further and further behind,” Cross, a 34-year-old single mother of four, said in a telephone interview. “I make a payment on one thing and don’t pay others.” She isn’t alone. Angelenos use a bigger slice of their paychecks on shelter than people in New York, San Francisco or Miami, studies show. Surging property prices in the second-largest U.S. city are driving up costs in once-impoverished areas while pushing lower-income households into converted garages or to distant suburbs, where the tradeoff is hours stuck in traffic each day. Reprinted courtesy of Nadja Brandt, Bloomberg and John Gittelsohn, Bloomberg Ms. Brandt may be contacted at nbrandt@bloomberg.net; Mr. Gittelsohn may be contacted at johngitt@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contract And IP Implications Of Design Professionals Monetizing Non-Fungible Tokens Comprising Digital Construction Designs

    December 26, 2022 —
    There is an emerging market that appears poised to increasingly provide opportunities to monetize architectural and other construction designs through the sale of non-fungible tokens (NFTs). Last year, artist Krista Kim reportedly made the first sale of a digital home design via an NFT marketplace, for over $500,000. With some NFTs selling for millions of dollars, monetizing digital designs is undoubtedly an enticing prospect for architects, engineers, and other design professionals. It is thus critical to understand the application of intellectual property rights to NFTs and to address those rights in contracts involving design professionals. What is an NFT? To understand the market for NFTs it is necessary to first understand blockchain technology. A blockchain is a decentralized system of recording information via a digital ledger of transactions duplicated and distributed across many computers. The manner in which each block of the ledger chain is created—using a cryptographic mathematical algorithm tied into the previous block, a timestamp, and transaction data—prevents it from being changed retroactively without a change to all subsequent blocks and consensus of the decentralized network. An NFT is a ‘token’ secured to a blockchain. It can represent ownership of any item that is non-fungible, i.e., any item that has unique qualities that add value and make the item non-interchangeable. NFTs can take unlimited forms, including, for example, tokens representing unique artwork, music, fashion items, in-game items, essays, collectibles, memorabilia, furniture, and real estate. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Colin C. Holley, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar, & Fitzgerald, LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Mr. Holley may be contacted at cholley@watttieder.com

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Climate Change Lawsuit Barred by “Pollution Exclusion”

    November 05, 2024 —
    On October 7, 2024, the Hawaii Supreme Court answered the question of whether an “accident” includes an insured’s reckless conduct in emitting harmful greenhouse gases (“GHGs”) and whether such emissions are “pollutants” as defined in a general liability policy’s pollution exclusion. In Aloha Petro., Ltd. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pitt., PA, No., 2024 Haw. LEXIS 179 (Oct. 7, 2024), the Hawaii Supreme Court answered in the affirmative as to both certified questions from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii, holding that an insured’s reckless conduct can be an “accident” and that GHGs are “pollutants” under the policies’ pollution exclusions. In the underlying case, the County of Honolulu and the County of Maui (the “Counties”) sued Aloha Petroleum, Ltd. (“Aloha”) and several other fossil fuel companies for climate change-related harms. Namely, the Counties alleged that the fossil fuel industry knew that its products would cause catastrophic climate change, and rather than mitigating their emissions, defendants concealed such knowledge, promoted climate science denial, and increased their production of fossil fuels. Aloha was allegedly on notice that its products caused harmful climate change through its former parent company, Phillips 66, and its current parent company, Sunoco. Given this knowledge, the District Court determined that the Counties allegations constituted reckless conduct by Aloha. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (09/21/22) – 3D Printing, Sustainable Design, and the Housing Market Correction

    October 17, 2022 —
    The first 3D-printed home is under construction, construction contractors could face liability for not securing employee data, the housing market correction continues, and more.
    • Sustainable home design has become key focus of builders and homeowners, helping reduce carbon emissions and other environmental impacts. (Kristi Waterworth, U.S.News)
    • Construction contractors could face legal consequences for failing to manage employee data correctly. (Robyn Griggs Lawrence, Construction Dive)
    • The home price correction continues to spread across the U.S., with an interactive map showcasing local housing markets that have been impacted. (Lance Lambert, Fortune)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Arizona Supreme Court Confirms Eight-Year Limit on Construction Defect Lawsuits

    July 18, 2011 —

    Acting on the case of Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. Partnership, the Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that Arizona’s eight-year statute of repose applies. The case was referred to the court by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which had asked for a clarification of Arizona law. The case focused on three questions:

    1. Does the filing of a motion for class certification in an Arizona court toll the statute of limitations for individuals, who are included within the class, to file individual causes of action involving the same defendants and the same subject matter? 2. If so, does this class-action tolling doctrine apply to statutes of repose, and more specifically, to the statute of repose for construction defects set forth in Arizona Revised Statutes ("A.R.S.") § 12-552? 3. If the doctrine applies to statutes of repose, and specifically § 12-552, may a court weigh the equities of the case in determining whether, and to what extent, an action is tolled?

    The litigation at hand has a lengthy history, starting with a case referred to as “Hoffman” in 2003. The Albano plaintiffs were not able to join in Hoffman, and they filed their own lawsuit in 2006. An additional lawsuit was filed by the Albano plaintiffs in 2007. The courts decided that the Albano plaintiffs’ lawsuit was untimely.

    The Arizona Supreme Court concluded that the statute of repose was the appropriate standard for this case. They noted that “the eight-year statute of repose period began to run on November 6, 1997, the date of the Town of Gilbert’s final inspection. Albano II was filed on November 5, 2007.”

    The court found that the plaintiffs had waited too long for start their suit. As a result, they found it unnecessary to answer the first or third questions. Justice A. John Pelander of the Arizona Supreme Court wrote the opinion, dated June 30, 2011.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Fifth Circuit Decision on Number of Occurrences Underscores Need to Carefully Tailor Your Insurance Program

    December 19, 2018 —
    The Fifth Circuit in Evanston Insurance Co. v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co. recently held that multiple collisions caused by the same insured driver over a span of 10 minutes constitute a single occurrence subject to a $1 million limit in the insured’s primary policy with Mid-Continent. The holding reversed a lower court’s ruling that Mid-Continent is liable for an additional sum the excess insurer, Evanston, paid to resolve all of the claims arising from the collisions. At issue, a fundamental question about causation and coverage under commercial liability insurance. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Daniel Hentschel, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Hentschel may be contacted at dhentschel@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    In Contracts, One Word Makes All the Difference

    July 21, 2018 —
    Here at Musings, I sometimes feel as if I am beating the “contract is king” drum to death. However, each time I start to get this feeling, a new case out of either the Virginia state courts or the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals here in Richmond reminds me that we all, lawyers and contractors alike, need to be reminded of this fact on a regular basis. The terms written into a construction contract (or any other contract for that matter) will control the outcome of any dispute in just about every case. A recent 4th Circuit case takes this to the extreme in pointing out the the choice which of two tiny words can change the entire set of procedural rules and even the courthouse in which your dispute will be decided. In FindWhere Holdings Inc. v. Systems Env. Optimization LLC, the Fourth Circuit looked at a forum selection clause found in a contract between the parties. In this case, the clause stated that any dispute would be litigated in the courts “of the State of Virginia.” When the defendants tried to remove the case from Virginia state court to the Eastern District of Virginia federal courts, the federal court remanded the case, sending it back to the Circuit Court of Loudoun County, Virginia. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com