BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window 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


    “Families First Coronavirus Response Act”: Emergency Paid Leave for Construction Employers with Fewer Than 500 Employees

    WSHB Expands into the Southeast

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Allegations of Collapse Rejected

    As Single-Family Homes Get Larger, Lots Get Smaller

    Insurance Company’s Reservation of Rights Letter Negates its Interest in the Litigation

    Washington Court Tunnels Deeper Into the Discovery Rule

    Viewpoint: A New Approach to Job Site Safety Reaps Benefits

    Hunton’s Geoffrey Fehling Confirmed to DC Bar Foundation’s Young Lawyers Network Leadership Council

    GSA Releases Updated Standards to Accelerate Federal Buildings Toward Zero Emissions

    When is Forum Selection in a Construction Contract Enforceable?

    Watchdog Opens Cartel Probe Into Eight British Homebuilders

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Denies Bad Faith Claim in HO Policy Dispute

    Newmeyer & Dillion Gets Top-Tier Practice Area Rankings on U.S. News – Best Lawyers List

    Hiring Subcontractors with Workers Compensation Insurance

    Pine River’s Two Harbors Now Targets Non-Prime Mortgages

    Courts Favor Arbitration in Two Recent Construction Dispute Cases

    What Buyers Want in a Green Home—and What They Don’t

    Additional Insured Prevails on Summary Judgment For Duty to Defend, Indemnify

    Additional Dismissals of COVID Business Interruption, Civil Authority Claims

    California Ballot Initiative Seeks to Repeal Infrastructure Funding Bill

    Personal Thoughts on Construction Mediation

    Combating Climate Change by Reducing Embodied Energy in the Built Environment

    Kumagai Drops Most in 4 Months on Building Defect: Tokyo Mover

    Predicting the Future of Texas’s Grid Is a Texas-Sized Challenge

    If a Defect Occurs During Construction, Is It an "Occurrence?"

    Seyfarth Shaw’s Construction Group Receives Top Tier Recognition from Legal 500

    Court Rules that Damage From Squatter’s Fire is Not Excluded as Vandalism or Malicious Mischief

    Court Affirms Duty to Defend Additional Insured Contractor

    Zombie Foreclosures Plaguing Various Cities in the U.S.

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    Injury to Employees Endorsement Eliminates Coverage for Insured Employer

    Administration Launches 'Buy Clean' Construction Materials Push

    Court of Appeal Holds Only “Named Insureds” May Sue for Bad Faith Under California FAIR Plan Policy

    Some Construction Contract Basics- Necessities and Pitfalls

    Changes to the Federal Rules – 2024

    When Is Mandatory Arbitration Not Mandatory?

    Canadian Developer Faces Charges After Massive Fire on Construction Site

    A Guide to Evaluating Snow & Ice Cases

    Gordie Howe Bridge Project Team Looks for a Third Period Comeback

    Defective Panels Threatening Profit at China Solar Farms: Energy

    Can a Home Builder Disclaim Implied Warranties of Workmanship and Habitability?

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2024 New York – Metro Super Lawyers®

    How to Drop a New Building on Top of an Old One

    Hanover, Germany Apple Store Delayed by Construction Defects

    Even Toilets Aren’t Safe as Hackers Target Home Devices

    Another Colorado Construction Defect Reform Bill Dies

    Court Finds Matching of Damaged Materials is Required by Policy

    Construction Defect Reform Bill Passes Colorado Senate

    Godfather Charged with Insurance Fraud

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increase at Slower Pace
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Miorelli Doctrine’s Sovereign Immunity in Public Construction Contracts — Not the Be-All and End-All

    March 21, 2022 —
    In the Florida commercial contract public arena, there is a sovereign immunity doctrine known as the Miorelli doctrine after 1997 Florida Supreme Court decision, County of Brevard v. Miorelli Eng’g, Inc., 703 So.2d 1049 (Fla. 1997). This doctrine would apply to construction contracts between a contractor and a public body. Through the years, the Miorelli doctrine stands for the proposition in commercial transactions with a Florida public body “that the doctrine of sovereign immunity precludes recovery of the cost of extra work where claims for that extra work are ‘totally outside’ the terms of the contract.” Monroe County v. Ashbritt, Inc., 47 Fla.L.Weekly D594a (Fla. 3d DCA 2022). See also Asbritt, n.2 quoting Posen Construction v. Lee County, 921 F.Supp.2d 1350, 1356 (M.D.Fla. 2013) (“A claim for damages predicated on work ‘totally outside the terms of the contract‘ is barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity, whereas damages caused by extra work done at the state’s behest and in furtherance of the contractual covenants (express or implied) are potentially recoverable.”) 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

    Tejon Ranch Co. Announces Settlement of Litigation Related to the Tejon Ranch Conservation and Land Use Agreement

    December 05, 2022 —
    TEJON RANCH, Calif., Nov. 30, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Tejon Ranch Co. is pleased to announce the resolution of a legal dispute involving the Tejon Ranch Conservancy and the signatories to the 2008 Tejon Ranch Conservation and Land Use Agreement (Agreement), namely, Audubon California, Endangered Habitats League, Natural Resources Defense Council, Planning and Conservation League, and the Sierra Club. The dispute stemmed from the signatories' participation in the Antelope Valley Regional Conservation Strategy (AVRCIS), which was subsequently used by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) to oppose Tejon Ranch Co.'s Centennial development. The 2008 Tejon Ranch Conservation and Land Use Agreement has been widely hailed as a historic conservation achievement in preserving one of California's great natural and working landscapes. Tejon Ranch Co.'s agreement to conserve 90 percent of its landholdings pursuant to the Agreement is a monumental contribution to conservation in California. Tejon Ranch Co. continues to be a leader in balancing the stewardship of the ranch as a natural treasure for California and achieving economic opportunities for its shareholders. The Company demonstrated that leadership with the actions it took to enforce the terms of the Agreement, which led to this legal dispute. As part of a settlement agreement, the Conservancy and the signatories dismissed with prejudice the lawsuit they filed. They also acknowledge that the AVRCIS does not contain the "best available scientific data" regarding Tejon Ranch Co.'s landholdings, and further, that they will not use, or support the use of, the AVRCIS or any other similar endeavors, to challenge Tejon Ranch Co.'s development projects and/or any Ranch uses consistent with the Agreement. In turn, Tejon Ranch Co. released from escrow 50% of the advance payments it withheld under the terms of the Agreement. The remaining funds will be released over a three-year period as matching funds to monies raised by the Conservancy as well as others who participate in Conservancy capital raising programs, after which the remaining funds with be released to the Conservancy to further its mission. These funds are the final fulfilment of Tejon Ranch Co.'s full funding obligations under the Agreement, totaling $11,760,000 over the past 14 years, again demonstrating Tejon Ranch Co.'s commitment to fulfilling the implementation of the 2008 Tejon Ranch Conservation and Land Use Agreement. All parties are glad to put this dispute behind them and move forward in a cooperative manner to achieve the goals envisioned in the historic 2008 Agreement. About Tejon Ranch Co. Tejon Ranch Co. (NYSE: TRC) is a diversified real estate development and agribusiness company, whose principal asset is its 270,000-acre land holding located approximately 60 miles north of Los Angeles and 30 miles south of Bakersfield. More information about Tejon Ranch Co. can be found on the Company's website at www.tejonranch.com. Forward Looking Statements This press release contains forward-looking statements, including without limitation statements regarding commitments of the parties under the settlement agreement and the achievement of certain goals related to Tejon Ranch Co.'s landholdings. These forward-looking statements are not a guarantee of future results, performance, or achievements, are subject to assumptions and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that could cause the actual results, performance, or achievements to differ materially from those implied by such forward-looking statements. These risks, uncertainties and important factors include, but are not limited to, the ability and willingness of the parties to the Settlement Agreement to take the actions (or refrain from taking the actions) specified in the Settlement Agreement, and the risks described in the section entitled "Risk Factors" in our annual and quarterly reports filed with the SEC. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/1/24) – IMF’s Data on Housing, REITs Versus Private Real Estate, and Suburban Versus Urban Office Property Market

    May 28, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, apartment sales fall for seventh straight quarter, raising real estate capital proves challenging, aspiring homeowners face strong obstacles, and more!
    • Rent increases have softened across the U.S. over the last year, and the combination of high home prices, elevated mortgage rates and low housing inventory creates strong obstacles for aspiring homeowners. (Alex Gailey, Bankrate)
    • The housing market is showing innovative efforts to combat the inventory crisis with initiatives including repurposing commercial properties into residential units. (Angel Smith, Yahoo)
    • Apartment sales fell for the seventh straight quarter in Q1, dropping 25% year over year to $20.6 billion. (Leslie Shaver, Multifamily Dive)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Illinois Court of Appeals Addresses What It Means to “Reside” in Property for Purposes of Coverage

    July 16, 2023 —
    In Dardar v. Farmers Auto. Ins. Ass'n, 2023 IL App ( 5th ) 220357-U, the Illinois Fifth District Court of Appeals addressed an insured’s suit against her property insurer after the carrier denied coverage for a fire loss. The property in question was inherited by the Plaintiff from her brother and was in the process of being renovated at the time of the fire loss. After the fire, the Plaintiff’s homeowners carrier denied the claim on the grounds that the Plaintiff was not occupying the property at the time of the fire and was therefore not covered under the terms of the policy. It was undisputed that the Plaintiffs never lived in or physically occupied the home. Correspondingly, the carrier denied the claim on the basis that the policy only covered the Plaintiff’s "residence premises," which was defined as: (1) the one-family dwelling where you reside; (2) the two, three, or four-family dwelling where you reside in at least one of the units; or (3) that part of any other building in which you reside. The carrier determined that the Plaintiff did not “reside” at the property and therefore were not covered under the policy terms. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James M. Eastham, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Eastham may be contacted at jeastham@tlsslaw.com

    How the California and Maui Wildfires Will Affect Future Construction Projects

    October 30, 2023 —
    Just like any kind of fire, wildfires are caused by the presence of fuel and a spark. In the case of the 2017 fires in the wine country of California, along with the state's 2018 Camp Fire, the fuel was dry leaf litter, branches and downed trees. And the spark, in some cases, resulted from electric utility lines and, in other cases, due to contractor’s work. More recently, this summer's Maui fires have taken hundreds of lives—deceased and missing—and burned more than 2,500 acres. Lahaina’s historic sites cannot be replaced, and estimates of the rebuild costs are near $5 billion. In Hawaii, the fuel was the same as in California: dried forest debris. It is alleged that the spark was from a powerline downed by extreme winds from Hurricane Dora. While sparks were present, it is the increased volume of fuel that has been the true source of the disastrous recent wildfires. The increased presence of fuel is the result of recent changes in forestry-management practices, coupled with accelerated climatic shifts in recent years toward hotter, drier weather from 2011 to 2020 in California and 2022 to 2023 in Maui, increasing both frequency and severity. Reprinted courtesy of Susan Doering, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    How the Parking Garage Conquered the City

    January 09, 2023 —
    Uncertainty overcame owners of several Manhattan parking garages in September. A plan to implement congestion pricing — charging drivers to enter a zone south of 60th Street — could lead to more transit usage by commuters, and thus the closure of some parking garages, The City reported. Parking options have already been on the wane in the largest US city: The NYC Department of Consumer Affairs and Worker Protection counted more than 2,200 licenses for garages and lots in 2015, a number that fell to 1,899 by 2021.  For most urban residents, if not outer-borough drivers, that decline is reason to cheer. The parking garage — a big, concrete-gray box for cars — is a notorious bane of urban vitality. City after city, desperate to lure suburbanites downtown to work or shop, bulldozed prime real estate to build these structures in the postwar era, turning central business districts into vehicle-storage voids that sapped streets of pedestrian energy and hollowed out neighborhoods. Building codes that mandated a certain number of parking spaces have kept new garages coming: In suburbs, exurbs and towns across the US, you will find these facilities, squatting beside shopping centers and stadiums, airports and office parks, planned communities and amusement parks.  Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Andrew Zaleski, Bloomberg

    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

    Deescalating Hyper Escalation

    July 05, 2023 —
    Recent years have seen the construction industry get hit by a perfect storm of rising costs, workforce shortages, delivery delays, supply-chain issues, inflation, interest-rate hikes and materials price escalation. The cost of construction has become more expensive, leaving all parties to grapple with the sufficiency of their risk-management strategies and the ramifications of contracts that are ill-equipped to deal with unprecedented cost increases. Of particular concern to industry participants are the volatile price fluctuations that construction materials have undergone and how to appropriately mitigate the risks they present. Although owners, general contractors and subcontractors may seek to mitigate future risks, many who are party to an existing contract all too often must scramble to divine how to absorb significantly more financial risk than they expected pre-pandemic. Contracts that were bid and entered into prior to the pandemic may have seen, in some instances, double- and triple-digit percent increases in prices due to hyper escalation, with little recourse to address such situations. While parties to private contracts are free to mitigate their risk through contract negotiations, parties to federal or state public procurements are somewhat more constrained. Reprinted courtesy of Paul F. Williamson, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of