BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut construction defect 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


    Times Square Alteration Opened Up a Can of Worms

    Don’t Ignore a Notice of Contest of Lien

    Beware of Personal-Liability Clauses – Even When Signing in Your Representative Capacity

    Production of Pre-Denial Claim File Compelled

    The Best Laid Plans: Contingency in a Construction Contract

    Construction Defect Claims are on the Rise Due to Pandemic-Related Issues

    Bill to Include Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Introduced in New Jersey

    Florida Supreme Court Adopts Federal Summary Judgment Standard, Substantially Conforming Florida’s Rule 1.510 to Federal Rule 56

    Run Spot...Run!

    Funding the Self-Insured Retention (SIR)

    California Supreme Court Holds that Design Immunity Does Not Protect a Public Entity for Failure to Warn of Dangerous Conditions

    It’s Time to Start Planning for Implementation of OSHA’s Silica Rule

    Wait! Don’t Sign Yet: Reviewing Contract Protections During the COVID Pandemic

    On to Year Thirteen for Blog

    Three White and Williams Lawyers Named Top Lawyers by Delaware Today

    U.K. Construction Unexpectedly Strengthens for a Second Month

    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    Allegations Versus “True Facts”: Which Govern the Duty to Defend? Bonus! A Georgia Court Clears Up What the Meaning of “Is” Is

    New York Court Rules on Architect's Duty Under Contract and Tort Principles

    Contractors May be Entitled to Both Prompt Payment Act Relief and Prejudgment Interest for a Cumulative 24%!

    Staten Island Villa Was Home to Nabisco 'Nilla' Wafer Inventor

    Energy Efficiency Ratings Aren’t Actually Predicting Energy Efficiency

    Chinese Billionaire Developer Convicted in UN Bribery Case

    Delaware Settlements with Minors and the Uniform Transfer to Minor Act

    California Supreme Court Finds that When it Comes to Intentional Interference Claims, Public Works Projects are Just Different, Special Even

    Builders Arrested after Building Collapses in India

    Forcible Entry and Detainer Actions: Courts May Not Consider Tenant’s Hardship

    Department Of Labor Recovers $724K In Back Wages, Damages For 255 Workers After Phoenix Contractor Denied Overtime Pay, Falsified Records

    That Boilerplate Language May Just Land You in Hot Water

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

    Newmeyer Dillion Secures Victory For Crown Castle In Years-Long Litigation With City Council Of Piedmont Over Small Cell Wireless Telecommunications Sites

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Reimbursement of Defense Costs Paid by Other Insurers

    Construction Job Opening Rise in October

    Insured's Claim for Water Damage Dismissed with Leave to Amend

    Huh? Action on Construction Lien “Relates Back” Despite Notice of Contest of Lien

    Six-Month Prison Term for Role in HOA Scam

    House of Digital Twins

    Mexico Settles With Contractors for Canceled Airport Terminal

    Court Affirms Summary Adjudication of Bad Faith Claim Where Expert Opinions Raised a Genuine Dispute

    Union Handbilling: When, Where, and Why it is Legal

    Naughty or Nice. Contractor Receives Two Lumps of Coal in Administrative Dispute

    Carwash Prosecutors Seek $1.6 Billion From Brazil Builders

    Crisis Averted! Pennsylvania Supreme Court Joins Other Courts in Finding that Covid-19 Presents No Physical Loss or Damage for Businesses

    Construction Defect Claim not Barred by Prior Arbitration

    Transplants Send Nashville Home Market Upwards

    County Officials Refute Resident’s Statement that Defect Repairs Improper

    Defense Owed to Insured Subcontractor, but not to Additional Insured

    Seven Former North San Diego County Landfills are Leaking Contaminants

    Economy in U.S. Picked Up on Consumer Spending, Construction

    Litigation Counsel of America Honors Partner Victor Anderson with Peter Perlman Award
    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

    Flint Water Suits Against Engineers Will Go to Trial, Judge Says

    March 14, 2022 —
    A federal judge in Michigan declined on Feb. 7 to accept the contention of engineer Lockwood, Andrews and Newnam Inc. that claims against it for professional negligence in its advisory role to Flint, Mich. ahead of the city's drinking water crisis should not go to trial. The civil case, set for trial on Feb. 15, was brought on behalf of four children who say they suffered neurocognitive harm from exposure to lead in the water supply. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado Senate Revives Construction Defects Reform Bill

    January 04, 2018 —
    Originally Published by CDJ on March 1, 2017 A re-booted construction defects reform bill recently passed its first Senate committee, according to the Denver Business Journal. Next, Senate Bill 156, sponsored by Sen. Owen Hill, R-Colorado Springs, heads to the Senate floor for debate. SB 156 “would require that condominium owners alleging construction defects take their disputes to arbitration or mediation if requested by builders,” the Denver Business Journal reported. “It also would require that homeowners be informed of the consequences of filing legal actions over purported disputes and that a majority of all owners in a condominium complex vote to proceed with legal action, rather than just a majority of homeowners association board members.” However, it is almost identical to the failed measures that were introduced in 2014 and 2015. Homeowners association group members and owners of defective condominiums argued against the measure, stating “that the effort would not improve the quality of building in the state, but simply would block aggrieved Coloradans from taking their complaints before a jury of their peers.” Proponent of the bill, Tom Clark, CEO of Metro Denver Economic Development Corp., said “that Denver’s housing costs have risen since the first bill was introduced in 2013 to the sixth-most-expensive in the country – and are tops for any metro area not on a coast.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Res Judicata Bars Insured from Challenging Insurer's Use of Schedule to Deduct Depreciation from the Loss

    June 10, 2024 —
    The insured was barred by res judicata from filing a second lawsuit challenging the insurer's method of establishing the amount of the loss. Burke v. GeoVera Spec. Ins. Co., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 9186 (5th Cir, April 16, 2024). On August 29, 2021, Hurricane Ida caused wind damage to the Burkes' home. They filed a claim with their insurer, GeoVera Specialty, and received payment. In calculating the payment, GeoVera Specialty adjusted the damage claim pursuant to its Roof System Payment Schedule, which lists the criteria used in reducing roof damage claims based on depreciation. Based on that schedule, GeoVera Specialty reduced the roof damage component of the Burkes' claim by forty-eight percent. In March 2022, the Burkes filed suit alleging that GeoVera Specialty undervalued their claim. On September 8, 2022, the parties filed a joint motion to dismiss the lawsuit after reaching a settlement, which the district court granted. 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

    Risk-Shifting Tactics for Construction Contracts

    February 24, 2020 —
    Anyone who has worked in the construction industry is familiar with the financial risks involved. With thin margins, cash flow issues and the litany of potential claims and damages that can arise, contractors need to be able to manage that risk properly. There is the right way of going about it, and there's a wrong way. Unfortunately, the wrong way (which involves using leverage and shifting risk to other parties) is the more prevalent approach. There are different contractual tactics employed by owners and general contractors alike to shift financial risk to other parties. Why is construction so financially risky? There are a few different reasons there is so much risk involved. First and foremost, the construction payment chain itself is inherently risky. Owners and lenders release project funds and trust that the money will reach everyone on the job. But that can’t happen unless each link in the payment chain passes payment to the next. That's a lot of trust for an industry that's not particularly known for it. Another reason is how construction projects begin. Upfront payment is rare in this industry. This leads to floating the initial costs, extending credit and potentially borrowing money to do so. And those who typically bear this burden, lower-tier subs and suppliers, are the least equipped for that level of risk. Reprinted courtesy of Nate Budde, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Budde may be contacted at nate@levelset.com

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    August 17, 2011 —

    Jim Haugey, the Chief Economist for Reed Construction Data noted that new residential construction spending fell 0.2% in June and a slightly larger drop of 0.5% in residential remodeling. While economic growth is still low, Haugey states that homebuilders have “record low inventories.” He forecasts a shrinkage of 1.5% in 2011, followed by about 20% growth in 2012.

    Read the full story…

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

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    March 23, 2011 —

    The New York Court of Appeals considered the impact of competing “other insurance” provisions located in both a CGL policy and a D&O policy. See Fieldston Property Owners Assoc., Inc. v. Hermitage Ins. Co., Inv., 2011 N.Y. LEXIS 254 (N.Y. Feb. 24, 2011).

    In the underlying case, Fieldston’s officers were charged with making false statements and fraudulent claims with respect to a customer's right to access its property from adjacent streets. Suit was eventually filed against Fieldston and its officers, alleging several causes of action including injurious falsehood. Damages were sought.

    Fieldston’s CGL policy was issued by Hermitage. The “other insurance” provision stated, “If other valid and collectible insurance is available to the insured for a loss we cover . . . our obligations are limited,” but also stated it would share with all other insurance as a primary policy.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    Home Construction Thriving in Lubbock

    December 30, 2013 —
    The 2013 numbers for home construction aren’t ready yet, but the January through November numbers for Lubbock, Texas show a 42% increase over the number of construction permits issued for single-family homes in the first 11 months of 2012. The number look even better compared to 2011’s totals, according to KFYO. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is the Issuance of a City Use Permit Referable? Not When It Is an Administrative Act

    January 10, 2018 —
    Arizona’s Constitution gives electors in cities, towns, and counties the ability to refer legislation that was enacted by their local elected officials to the ballot for popular vote. Ariz. Const. art. IV, Pt. 1 § 1(8). But only legislative acts are referable; administrative acts are not. In general, a legislative act makes new law and creates policy, is permanent in nature, and is generally applied. On the other hand, an administrative act is one that executes and implements a law already in place. Wennerstrom v. City of Mesa, 169 Ariz. 485, 489-90, 821 P.2d 146, 150-51 (1991). For more than fifty years, Arizona courts have been clear: zoning and rezoning ordinances are legislative acts and therefore referable to popular vote. City of Phoenix v. Fehlner, 90 Ariz. 13, 17, 363 P.2d 607, 609 (1961) (holding that “what constitutes an appropriate zone is primarily for the legislature”); Fritz v. City of Kingman, 191 Ariz 432, 432, 957 P.2d 337, 337 (1998) (noting “we reaffirm our view that zoning decisions are legislative matters subject to referendum”); Pioneer Trust Co. of Arizona v. Pima Cty., 168 Ariz. 61, 64–65, 811 P.2d 22, 25–26 (1991) (holding “that, in Arizona, zoning decisions are legislative acts subject to referendum” and that even a “conditional approval of . . . rezoning was a legislative act”); Cottonwood Dev. v. Foothills Area Coal. of Tucson, Inc., 134 Ariz. 46, 653 P.2d 694 (1982) (analyzing whether zoning referendum complied with statutory requirements); Wait v. City of Scottsdale, 127 Ariz. 107, 108, 618 P.2d 601, 602 (1980) (noting “that the enactment and amendment of zoning ordinances constitute legislative action”); City of Phoenix v. Oglesby, 112 Ariz. 64, 65, 537 P.2d 934, 935 (1975) (“The matter of zoning is appropriately one for the legislative branch of government.”); Queen Creek Land & Cattle Corp. v. Yavapai Cty. Bd. of Sup’rs, 108 Ariz. 449, 452, 501 P.2d 391, 394 (1972) (denying an attempt to enjoin referendum on county’s zoning decision). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Adam E. Lang, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Lang may be contacted at alang@swlaw.com