BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut fenestration 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


    Beth Cook Expands Insurance Litigation Team at Payne & Fears

    The U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Rules on Greystone

    Mitigating FCRA Risk Through Insurance

    Colorado Supreme Court Grants the Petition for Writ of Certiorari in Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/28/25) – FTC Suing Greystar, DOJ Investigating Top Residential Landlords and Trump Facing Housing Conundrum

    Is Settling a Bond Claim in the Face of a Seemingly Clear Statute of Limitations Defense Bad Faith?

    L.A. Makes $4.5 Billion Bet on Olympics After Boston Backs Out

    Buffalo-Area Roof Collapses Threaten Lives, Businesses After Historic Snowfall

    What Counts as Adequate Opportunity to Cure?

    CA Homeowners Challenging Alternate Pre-Litigation Procedures

    The BUILDCHAIN Project Enhances Data Exchange and Transparency in the EU Construction Industry

    2019 Promotions - New Partners at Haight

    Possible Real Estate and Use and Occupancy Tax Relief for Philadelphia Commercial and Industrial Property Owners

    Don MacGregor of Bert L. Howe & Associates Awarded Silver Star Award at WCC Construction Defect Seminar

    A Changing Climate for State Policy-Making Regarding Climate Change

    Town Concerned Over Sinkhole at Condo Complex

    Privette: The “Affirmative Contribution” Exception, How Far Does It Go?

    Standard of Care

    Preliminary Notice Is More Important Than Ever During COVID-19

    Vancouver’s George Massey Tunnel Replacement May Now be a Tunnel Instead of a Bridge

    Big Bertha Lawsuits—Hitachi Zosen Weighs In

    Obama Asks for $302 Billion to Fix Bridges and Potholes

    Update – Property Owner’s Defense Goes up in Smoke in Careless Smoking Case

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

    Leaky Wells Spur Call for Stricter Rules on Gas Drilling

    Coverage for Injury to Insured’s Employee Not Covered

    Drones Used Despite Uncertain Legal Consequences

    Contractor Prevailing Against Subcontractor On Common Law Indemnity Claim

    New York Appeals Court Rekindles the Spark

    WSHB Ranked 4th Most Diverse Law Firm in U.S.

    When “Substantially Similar” Means “Fundamentally Identical”: Delaware Court Enforces Related Claim Provision to Deny D&O Coverage for Securities Class Action

    Fannie Overseer Moves to Rescue Housing With Lower Risk to Lenders

    Lewis Brisbois Promotes 35 to Partnership

    I’m Sorry Ms. Jackson, I [Sovereign Immunity] am For Real

    Wells Fargo Shuns Peers’ Settlement in U.S in Mortgage

    Hotel Owner Makes Construction Defect Claim

    Professional Liability Alert: Joint Client Can't Claim Privilege For Communications With Attorney Sued By Another Joint Client

    The Air in There: Offices, and Issues, That Seem to Make Us Stupid

    California Supreme Court Declines to Create Exception to Privette Doctrine for “Known Hazards”

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (08/15/23) – Manufacturing Soars with CHIPS Act, New Threats to U.S. Infrastructure and AI Innovation for One Company

    Aging-in-Place Features Becoming Essential for Many Home Buyers

    Study Finds Mansion Tax Reduced Sales in New York and New Jersey

    Selected Environmental Actions Posted on the Fall 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulator Actions

    Construction-Industry Clients Need Well-Reasoned and Clear Policies on Recording Zoom and Teams Meetings

    Equipment Costs? It’s a Steal!

    Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP Expands into Georgia

    Colorado Mayors Should Not Sacrifice Homeowners to Lure Condo Developers

    Be Careful How You Terminate: Terminating for Convenience May Limit Your Future Rights

    Insurer’s “Failure to Cooperate” Defense

    Congratulations to Wilke Fleury’s 2024 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!!
    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

    Renters Who Bought Cannot Sue for Construction Defects

    October 08, 2013 —
    A Wisconsin couple that leased then bought a home cannot sue the couple that built the home for construction defects. The court rejected the claims made by Niksa and Kelly Ivancevic that the sellers, Ronald and Debra Reagan, had breached contract or that the contract represented a mutual mistake. The Ivancevics initially leased the home, with an agreement that said the house would be “delivered in clean condition and good repair, free of mold and toxic substances, suitable for habitation in compliance with all laws.” Before the purchase, no defects were found. After the purchase, the Ivancevics had problems with the air conditioning, leading to water leaks on the second floor. The court found that the actual sales contract did not guarantee a defect-free residence. Therefore the Ivancevic’s claim of a mutual mistake, in which “both parties of a contact are unaware of the existence of a past or present fact material to their agreement” did not apply, since the presence of construction defects was not “material to their agreement.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Blueprint for Change: How the Construction Industry Should Respond to the FTC’s Ban on Noncompetes

    May 13, 2024 —
    In a groundbreaking move aimed at fostering fair competition and empowering workers, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a final rule last week to ban noncompete agreements nationwide. This ruling may carry profound implications for the construction industry, prompting construction businesses to reassess their practices and ensure compliance while maintaining competitiveness. Let’s explore how construction companies, large and small, can navigate this regulatory shift effectively. Noncompete clauses have long been a staple in employment contracts within the construction sector, often used to protect proprietary information and retain skilled talent. However, the FTC’s ban on noncompetes demands a reevaluation of these practices. Employers must recognize the potential consequences of noncompliance, including legal repercussions and reputational damage, and take proactive steps to adapt to the new regulatory landscape. Communications with Employees The FTC rule requires employers to provide a form notice of non-enforcement to all present and former employees subject to an unexpired noncompete provisions. However, given the immediate legal challenges to the FTC’s rule and the fact that the 120-day compliance window has not yet begun, there is no reason to take immediate action or begin notifying employees. Instead, business owners should wait for at least 60 days before taking concrete action in response to the rule to see if any court temporarily enjoins the effectiveness of the rule. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Matthew DeVries, Burr & Forman LLP
    Mr. DeVries may be contacted at mdevries@burr.com

    Construction Case Alert: Appellate Court Confirms Engineer’s Duty to Defend Developer Arises Upon Tender of Indemnity Claim

    January 27, 2010 —

    In the recent case of UDC-Universal Development, L.P. v. CH2M Hill, 2010 Cal.App.LEXIS 47 (filed January 15, 2010), the Sixth District Court of Appeal provided a stunning illustration of the far-reaching effects of the California Supreme Court’s holding in Crawford v. Weather Shield Manufacturing Inc. (2008) 44 Cal.4th 541. In Crawford, the Court held the duty to defend under an indemnity agreement arose upon the mere tender of defense of a claim covered by the indemnity.

    In the UDC case, CH2M Hill provided engineering and environmental planning services to developer UDC on a project that ultimately wound up in a construction defect lawsuit by the homeowners association ( HOA ). UDC tendered its defense to CH2M Hill, the tender was rejected, and UDC filed a cross-complaint for negligence, breach of contract and indemnity against CH2M Hill and others. After the HOA’s construction defect claims were settled, UDC proceeded to trial against CH2M Hill. The jury found in favor of CH2M Hill on the claims for negligence and breach of contract. At the request of the parties prior to trial, the trial court ruled on the application of the indemnity agreement in light of Crawford and, in so doing, found that the defense obligation arose upon the tender and that CH2M Hill breached that duty despite the jury finding in favor of CH2M Hill.

    The Court of Appeal affirmed, noting that the defense obligation arose as soon as the defense was tendered and did not depend on the outcome of the litigation, and that the HOA’s general description of the defects along with an allegation that Doe engineers were negligent triggered the duty to defend.

    Although this case did not expand the crushing impact of Crawford’s holding, it is

    Read the full story...

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

    The Conscious Builder – Interview with Casey Grey

    February 16, 2017 —
    In this podcast interview, Casey Grey talks about Conscious Building, passive houses, and and how we can make our homes healthier. About Casey Grey Casey Grey is the founder and CEO of The Conscious Builder Inc., an Ontario company. Casey is one of those very few people who knew what he wanted from a very young age. Although his goals have changed over the years, they have always revolved around building homes. From Lego, to tree houses to custom homes, he is constantly looking for ways to build better homes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aarni@aepartners.fi

    Settlement Conference May Not Be the End in Construction Defect Case

    February 21, 2013 —
    The builder has been sentenced to jail for theft. The building has been condemned over construction defects. And the settlement conference probably won’t bring an end to the case. The building in question is a condominium complex, located at 770 Sandy Street in Norristown, Pennsylvania. Bruce Fazio took out a $2.5 million construction loan to build it. And when it was done, there were inspections over construction defects, the building was condemned, and then the court ordered repair work. The city of Norristown has sued Fazio to recover the more than $1.5 million it took to repair the building and allow at least some condominium owners to move back in. The suit alleges that Norristown officials failed to properly inspect the construction work, and that inspectors were not properly certified. Further, it is alleged that secretaries and clerks signed off on inspection reports and certificates of occupancy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Ranks As Leading State for Green Building in 2022

    February 01, 2023 —
    Washington, D.C. (Jan. 17, 2023) – The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) today released its annual ranking of U.S. states leading the way on green building, and California made the top ten at number four. USGBC's ranking is based on LEED-certified gross square footage per capita over the past year. The LEED rating system is the world's most widely used green building program and was created by USGBC as a leadership standard defining best practices for healthy, high-performing green buildings. "It was a strong year for LEED certifications across the U.S. as companies and governments embrace LEED as a tool for meeting ESG goals and organizational commitments to climate action, occupant wellbeing and resource efficiency," said Peter Templeton, USGBC president and CEO. "In California and beyond, LEED buildings are environmentally friendly, cutting their emissions and waste, and use less energy and water. At the same time, they also help reduce operational and maintenance costs, contributing to the bottom line." In 2022, California had 386 LEED-certified projects, totaling over 96.4 million square feet or 2.44 square feet per capita. Office buildings, residential apartment buildings, government buildings and schools were among those that were LEED-certified last year. The states ranking ahead of California were Massachusetts (3.76 LEED-certified square feet per resident), Illinois (3.47 square feet per capita), and New York (3.17 square feet per capita). Additional information on the 2022 rankings, along with a listing of notable projects, can be found here. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    November 18, 2011 —

    Vertex Pharmaceuticals is poised to become the holder of Boston’s biggest commercial lease, paying $72.5 million for 1.1 million square feet on Boston’s waterfront. Vertex’s new buildings are still under construction, but the plans have spurred other development in the Fan Pier area, according to the New York Times. The Times quotes Mary A. Burke, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston that the Vertex project gives “a big push” to the “momentum for economic growth.”

    The Fallon Company is building Vertex’s new laboratory and office space. They are separately planning to build a high-rise with 150 luxury condominium units. According to Joseph Fallon, the chief executive and president of the Fallon Company, there is already a waiting list of 50 buyers for the condominiums.

    Across the street from the Vertex site, a group including Morgan Stanley and Boston Global Investors is planning a 23-block mixed use project that would include 1.2 million square feet of retail space. Additionally, the New England Development and the Hanover Group is building a 356-unit apartment building at the adjacent Pier 4.

    Read the full story…

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

    Guarantor’s Liability on Partially Secured Debts – The Impacts of Pay Down Provisions in Serpanok Construction Inc. v. Point Ruston, LLC et al.

    October 24, 2021 —
    In Serpanok Construction, Inc. v. Point Ruston, LLC, Division Two of the Washington Court of Appeals decided an issue of first impression in Washington—whether a guarantor of a partially secured debt remains liable until the last dollar of the entire debt is paid off. After examining cases from other jurisdictions, the court held that that a guarantor is liable until the underlying debt is paid in full unless the agreement contains an express pay down provision. A pay down provision sets forth the guarantor’s right to reduce its obligation to the extent of any payment toward the debt, and it establishes that the guaranty applies only until an amount equivalent to the guaranteed amount is paid off. The Serpanok decision addressed several other issues, but the published portion of this part-published case focused on whether an entity involved in a real estate development, Point Ruston LLC, was discharged from its guaranty obligation following a foreclosure sale where the proceeds did not cover the entire debt owed to a subcontractor. Point Ruston LLC, Point Ruston Phase II LLC (“Phase II”), and Century Condominiums (“Century”) were affiliated entities (collectively “Point Ruston parties”) that constructed retail and residential structures on a site in Point Ruston. Serpanok Construction Inc. (“Serpanok”) entered into subcontract agreements with Phase II and Century to perform concrete and steel work on a parking garage and movie theater for the project. Point Ruston LLC was not a party to either subcontract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Margarita Kutsin, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight
    Ms. Kutsin may be contacted at margarita.kutsin@acslawyers.com