BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling 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


    Record Home Sales in Sydney Add to Bubble Fear

    CDJ’s #8 Topic of the Year: California’s Board of Equalization Tower

    Crowdfunding Comes to Manhattan’s World Trade Center

    Be Careful with Good Faith Payments

    Canada Housing Surprises Again With July Starts Increase

    California Court of Appeal Vacates $30M Non-Economic Damages Award Due to Failure to Properly Apportion Liability and Attorney Misconduct During Closing Argument

    Economic Loss Doctrine Bars Negligence Claim Against Building Company Owner, Individually

    Lack of Workers Holding Back Building

    With Historic Removal of Four Dams, Klamath River Flows Again Unhindered

    Fifth Circuit Holds Insurer Owes Duty to Defend Latent Condition Claim That Caused Fire Damage to Property Years After Construction Work

    TOP TAKE-AWAY SERIES: The 2023 Fall Meeting in Washington, D.C.

    FEMA, Congress Eye Pre-Disaster Funding, Projects

    Prevailing Payment Bond Surety Entitled to Statutory Attorneys’ Fees Even if Defended by Principal

    NYC Luxury-Condo Buyers Await New Towers as Sales Slow

    Congratulations to Wilke Fleury’s 2023 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!!

    California Imposes New Disabled Access Obligations on Commercial Property Owners

    Hirer Not Liable Under Privette Doctrine Where Hirer Had Knowledge of Condition, but not that Condition Posed a Concealed Hazard

    Vietnam Expands Arrests in Coffee Region Property Probe

    Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

    Following California Law, Federal Court Adopts Horizontal Allocation For Asbestos Coverage

    Caution to GCs! An Exception to Privette Can Leave You Open to Liability

    Home-Rentals Wall Street Made Say Grow or Go: Real Estate

    Heavy Rains Cause Flooding, Mudslides in Japan

    Paycheck Protection Program Forgiveness Requirements Adjusted

    Not Remotely Law as Usual: Don’t Settle for Delays – Settle at Remote Mediation

    SCOTUS to Weigh Landowners' Damage Claim Against Texas DOT

    Walkability Increases Real Estate Values

    Blindly Relying on Public Adjuster or Loss Consultant’s False Estimate Can Play Out Badly

    Denver Passed the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “A Less Than Valiant Effort”

    John Paulson’s $1 Billion Caribbean Empire Faces Betrayal

    Lien Attaches To Landlord’s Interest When Landlord Is Party To Tenant Improvement Construction Contract

    Home Construction Thriving in Lubbock

    Plans Go High Tech

    Did New York Zero Tolerance Campaign Improve Jobsite Safety?

    Obama Asks for $302 Billion to Fix Bridges and Potholes

    Home Construction Slows in Las Vegas

    Florida Self-Insured Retention Satisfaction and Made Whole Doctrine

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

    Alleged Serious Defects at Hanford Nuclear Waste Treatment Plant

    OSHA Investigating Bridge Accident Resulting in Construction Worker Fatality

    Your Construction Contract

    Texas Considers a Quartet of Construction Bills

    When is a “Notice of Completion” on a California Private Works Construction Project Valid? Why Does It Matter for My Collection Rights?

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Will Not Address Trigger for DEP Environmental Cleanup Action at This Time

    ASCE Statement On House Passage Of The Precip Act

    ABC, Via Construction Industry Safety Coalition, Comments on Silica Rule

    Insurer Must Cover Portions of Arbitration Award

    Third Circuit Court of Appeals Concludes “Soup to Nuts” Policy Does Not Include Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    Summary Judgment in Favor of General Contractor Under Privette Doctrine Overturned: Lessons Learned
    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

    Policing Those Subcontractors: It Might Take Extra Effort To Be An Additional Insured

    June 14, 2011 —

    I just came across a case that I think truly paints the insurance dilemma for contractors. Thanks to this recent Illinois case, I don’t have to make up any factual scenarios—so kudos to Attorney Robert Boylan for posting it.

    In reading over my RSS feeds this weekend, I noticed a great writeup on long-time blogger Josh Glazov’s Construction Law Today. Attorney Robert Boylan’s post describes a recent Illinois case where a general contractor was denied its additional insured status on a second-tier subcontractor’s insurance. The reason for the denial: the general contractor failed to procure an agreement in writing with the second-tier subcontractor, requiring it to be listed as an additional insured.

    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

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    August 07, 2023 —
    BWB&O is excited to announce Las Vegas Partners Devin Gifford and Madeline Arcellana have been selected in the 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyers list as Rising Stars for their work in Civil Litigation. To read Super Lawyers’ digital publication, please click here. SELECTED AS RISING STARS Devin Gifford: 2023 Madeline Arcellana: 2023 Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    CAPSA Changes Now in Effect

    November 14, 2018 —
    Back in June, I posted about changes coming to the Pennsylvania Contractor and Subcontractor Payment Act (CAPSA), 73 P.S. Section 501, et. seq. The Act applies to virtually all private construction projects in Pennsylvania. As of last week (Oct. 10), those changes are effective. While there is some argument to the contrary, these changes are NOT retroactive and apply to all projects going forward from that date. To recap, here are some of the important changes you need to be aware of:
    1. Contractual waivers. Parties cannot waive the applicability of the act through contract. Therefore, any clause in a contract purporting to waive the Payment Act’s applicability is void.
    2. Suspension of work. Unpaid contractors and subcontractors have always enjoyed a common law right to suspend performance until payment was made. Now, they also have a statutory right to do so. Section 5 of the Payment Act ads a subpart (e) which states that an unpaid contractor or subcontractor can suspend performance without penalty if it is not paid.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    Certificates of Merit: Is Your Texas Certificate Sufficient?

    January 22, 2024 —
    In Eric L. Davis Eng’g, Inc. v. Hegemeyer, No. 14-22-00657-CV, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 8899, the Court of Appeals of Texas (Court of Appeals) considered whether the plaintiffs’ certificate of merit, in support of their professional malpractice claim against the defendant engineers, adequately set forth the experience and qualifications of the expert who submitted the certificate. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss, alleging that the certificate of merit was inadequate because it failed to establish that the expert practiced in the same specific areas as the defendants in relation to the work at issue. The lower court denied the defendants’ motion. The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s decision, finding that there was sufficient information for the lower court to have reasonably found that the plaintiffs’ expert practiced in the same area as the defendants. In Hegemeyer, the plaintiffs sued Eric L. Davis Engineering, Inc. (Davis) and Kenneth L. Douglass (Douglass), alleging improper design of their home’s foundation. The plaintiffs retained Davis to design and engineer the home and Douglass prepared the plans for the home. The plans called for the installation of post-tension cables in the home’s foundation. The plaintiffs alleged that the foundation design was improper and brought professional malpractice claims against Davis and Douglass. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    California Courts Call a “Time Out” During COVID-19 –New Emergency Court Rules on Civil Litigation

    May 04, 2020 —
    “We are at this point truly with no guidance in history, law, or precedent. To say that there is no playbook is a gross understatement of the situation.” -Chief Justice and Chair of the California Judicial Council, Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye Seeking to sustain essential court services while balancing weighty considerations, including litigants’ due process rights, access to justice, and stringent health and safety orders, the California Judicial Council has adopted Emergency Rules in response to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). While many of the Emergency Rules focus on criminal and juvenile dependency matters, this update highlights the Emergency Rules immediately impacting civil litigation in California state courts. The following Emergency Rules remain in effect until 90 days after the Governor lifts the state of emergency or the rule is amended or repealed by the Judicial Council: Tolling of Statutes of Limitation in Civil Actions Effective April 6, 2020, the statutes of limitation (the time period in which to bring a claim) for all civil causes of action is tolled until such time as the rule is no longer in effect. The impact of this rule is that it provides plaintiffs with more time to bring claims and extends the time period that defendants may face legal action for alleged violations of the law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tara C. Dudum, Newmeyer Dillion
    Ms. Dudum may be contacted at tara.dudum@ndlf.com

    The CA Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review of McMillin Albany LLC v. Super Ct. 2015 F069370 (Cal.App.5 Dist.) As to Whether the Right to Repair Act (SB800) is the Exclusive Remedy for All Defect Claims Arising Out of New Residential Construction

    December 02, 2015 —
    As anticipated in a prior CGDRB 2015 Bulletin that discussed the Fifth Appellate District Court’s noteworthy opinion in McMillin Albany LLC v. Super Ct. 2015 F069370 (Cal.App.5 Dist), the California Supreme Court has granted the petition for review of the McMillin Albany decision. The Supreme Court will attempt to resolve the conflict of authority presented by the Fourth Appellate District Court’s opinion in Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 98 and the Fifth Appellate District Court’s rejection of the Liberty Mutual holding in McMillin Albany. In Liberty Mutual, the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that compliance with SB800’s pre-litigation procedures prior to initiating litigation is only required for defect claims [violations of SB 800’s building standards] that have not yet resulted in actual property damage. Where damage has occurred, a homeowner may initiate litigation under common law causes of action without first complying with the pre-litigation procedures set forth in SB 800. Two years later, the Fifth District Court of Appeal, in McMillin Albany, held that the California Legislature intended that all construction defect claims arising out new residential construction are subject to the standards and requirements of the Right to Repair Act [SB800], including specifically, the requirement that the claimant provide the builder with notice and an opportunity to repair prior to filing a lawsuit. According to the Court, SB 800 is the exclusive remedy for all defect claims arising out of new residential construction sold on or after January 1, 2003. The holdings in Liberty Mutual and McMillin Albany present a conflict of authority that the California Supreme Court has appropriately deemed worthy of review. The parties will now be permitted to file briefs on the merits and amicus briefs will certainly be submitted by the defense and plaintiff bars. Our firm will be closely monitoring this case, the outcome of which will significantly impact pre-litigation construction defect claims going forward. We will provide updates as to further activities and the Supreme Court’s decision. Reprinted courtesy of Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger attorneys Richard H. Glucksman, Glenn T. Barger, Jon A. Turigliatto and David A. Napper Mr. Glucksman may be contacted at rglucksman@cgdrblaw.com Mr. Barger may be contacted at gbarger@cgdrblaw.com Mr. Turigliatto may be contacted at jturigliatto@cgdrblaw.com Mr. Napper may be contacted at dnapper@cgdrblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    February 08, 2021 —
    One of Florida’s most troubled construction projects is now in court, with one partner in a design-build joint venture pitted against another. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Judy, Engineering News-Record Mr. Judy may be contacted at judys@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Owner Can’t Pursue Statutory Show Cause Complaint to Cancel Lien… Fair Outcome?

    June 10, 2024 —
    If there is a payment dispute with a construction lienor — could be a contractor, a subcontractor, or supplier – it is possible, and more than likely, a construction lien may get recorded against real property. This scenario is not uncommon as the lien is the mechanism for the lienor to collateralize their claimed nonpayment. Now, in reality, it does not take much money to record a lien. A lienor should utilize a lawyer to prepare their liens, but maybe they prepare liens in-house. Regardless, the recording of the lien is a nominal cost and the clerk that dockets and records the lien does NOT analyze the merits of the lien. That is not what the clerk is there to do; nor do you really want them the delve into the factual merits. Well, what if a lien is facially invalid, meaning that the lien, on its face, includes information that demonstrates it is NOT properly perfected. Or what if the lienor failed to properly preserve or perfect its lien rights before recording the lien. This happens! Naturally, an owner of the real property wants the lien removed from the property. The owner does not want the encumbrance. The owner could transfer the lien to a lien transfer bond under Florida’s Lien Law, but that is easier said than done. And this does not discharge the lien; it just removes the lien from the property to the security of the bond. 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