BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope 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


    Maria Latest Threat to Puerto Rico After $1 Billion Irma Hit

    Two Injured in Walkway Collapse of Detroit Apartment Complex

    Gillotti v. Stewart (2017) 2017 WL 1488711 Rejects Liberty Mutual, Holding Once Again that the Right to Repair Act is the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    Superior Court Of Pennsylvania Holds Curb Construction Falls Within The Scope Of CASPA

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- The Claim

    BHA Expands Construction Experts Group

    Documentation Important for Defending Construction Defect Claims

    Mediation Confidentiality Bars Malpractice Claim but for How Long?

    Coverage for Construction Defects Barred by Business Risk Exclusions

    For Whom Additional Insured Coverage Applies in New York

    Miami Building Boom Spreads Into Downtown’s Tent City

    What ‘The Curse’ Gets Wrong About Passive House Architecture

    EPA Announces that January 2017 Revised RMP Rules are Now Effective

    Dozens Missing in LA as High Winds Threaten to Spark More Fires

    No Coverage for Additional Insured After Completion of Operations

    Interior Designer Licensure

    Material Prices Climb…And Climb…Are You Considering A Material Escalation Provision?

    Risk Spotter Searches Internal Data Lakes For Loaded Words

    Hawaii Federal District Court Compels Appraisal

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Jason Moberly Caruso As Its Newest Partner

    Firm Offers Tips on Construction Defects in Colorado

    Think Twice Before Hedging A Position Or Defense On A Speculative Event Or Occurrence

    Gibbs Giden is Pleased to Announce Four New Partners and Two New Associates

    Denial of Motion to Dissolve Lis Pendens Does Not Automatically Create Basis for Certiorari Relief

    BLOK, a Wired UK Hottest 100 Housing Market Startup, Gets Funding from a Renowned Group of Investors

    General Release of Contractor Upheld Despite Knowledge of Construction Defects

    Lessons Learned from Implementing Infrastructure BIM in Helsinki

    Supreme Court Rejects “Wholly Groundless” Exception to Question of Arbitrability

    California Condo Architects Not Liable for Construction Defects?

    SCOTUS Opens Up Federal Courts to Land Owners

    Maybe California Actually Does Have Enough Water

    Contractors and Force Majeure: Contractual Protection from Hurricanes and Severe Weather

    Personal Thoughts on Construction Mediation

    Environmental Justice Legislation Update

    The Ever-Growing Thicket Of California Civil Code Section 2782

    How California’s Construction Industry has dealt with the New Indemnity Law

    Insurer Rejecting Construction Defect Claim Must Share in Defense Costs

    Firm Claims Construction Defects in Hawaiian Homes

    Arizona Court of Appeals Upholds Judgment on behalf of Homeowners against Del Webb Communities for Homes Riddled with Construction Defects

    The Simple Reason Millennials Aren't Moving Out Of Their Parents' Homes: They're Crushed By Debt

    North Carolina Appeals Court Threatens Long-Term Express Warranties

    Minnesota Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C" Grade for the Second Time

    Common Law Indemnification - A Primer

    Be Wary of Construction Defects when Joining a Community Association

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2021 “Atlanta 500” List

    Traub Lieberman Partners Ryan Jones and Scot Samis Obtain Affirmation of Final Summary Judgment

    New Jersey Court Upholds Registration Requirement for Joint Ventures Bidding on Public Works Contracts

    Municipalities Owe a Duty to Pedestrians Regardless of Whether a Sidewalk Presents an “Open and Obvious” Hazardous Condition. (WA)

    Withdrawal of an Admission in California May Shift Costs—Including Attorneys’ Fees—Incurred in Connection with the Withdrawal

    ASCE Releases New Report on Benefits and Burdens of Infrastructure Investment in Disadvantaged Communities
    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

    Where Breach of Contract and Tortious Interference Collide

    January 11, 2022 —
    Claims for breach of contract are numerous in the construction law world. Without these claims we construction attorneys would have a hard time keeping the doors open. A 2021 case examined a different sort of claim that could arise (though, “spoiler alert” did not in this case) during the course of a construction project. That type of claim is one for tortious interference with business expectancy. In Clark Nexsen, Inc. et. al v. Rebkee, the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia gave a great explanation of the law of this type of claim in analyzing the following basic facts: In 2018, Clark Nexsen, Inc. (“Clark”) and MEB General Contractors, Inc. (“MEB”) responded to Henrico County’s (“Henrico”) Request for Proposals (“RFP”) for the design and construction of a sport and convocation center (the “Project”). Henrico initially shortlisted Clark and MEB as a “design-build” team for the Project, but later restarted the search, issuing a second RFP. Clark and MEB submitted a second “design-build” proposal, but Henrico selected Rebkee Co. (“Rebkee”) for certain development aspects of the Project. MEB also submitted proposals to Rebkee, and Rebkee selected MEB as the design-builder for the Project. MEB, at Rebkee’s request, solicited proposals from three design firms and ultimately selected Clark as its design partner. From December 2019 to May 2020, Clark and MEB served as the design-build team to assist Rebkee in developing the Project. In connection therewith, Clark developed proprietary designs, technical drawings, and, with MEB, several cost estimates. In February 2020, MEB submitted a $294,334.50 Pay Application to Rebkee for engineering, design, and Project development work. Rebkee never paid MEB. Henrico paid MEB $50,000.00 as partial payment for MEB’s and Clark’s work. MEB then learned that Rebkee was using Clark’s drawings to solicit design and construction proposals from other companies. On July 23, 2020, Rebkee told MEB that Henrico directed it to cancel the design-build arrangement with MEB and Clark and pursue a different planning method. MEB and Clark sued and Rebkee for, among other claims, tortious interference with a business expectancy. Rebkee moved to dismiss the tortious interference claim. 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

    How to Build Climate Change-Resilient Infrastructure

    July 20, 2020 —
    Ohio University has released a guide titled, An Engineer’s Guide to Building Climate Change-Resilient Infrastructure. It was created for engineers, environmentalists, climate change communities, and construction organizations who are looking to share information about the importance of building cities that are able to fight growing climate threats. Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Are “Green” Building Designations and Certifications Truly Necessary?

    January 28, 2019 —
    As anyone who reads this construction blog on a regular basis knows, I believe that the move to newer sustainable building practices (while bringing about a new or different set of potential risks) is both necessary and laudable. Because of this fact, you may be asking why the headline for today’s post. After all, I am a LEED AP and assisted in the drafting of the LEED/Green Building addendum to the ConsensusDOCS so I must be pro LEED (or any other) certification of buildings. To the extent that such certification encourages best practices and more sustainable building stock, I am pro certification. However, certification is not a necessary carrot to bring builders around to such practices. As a recent article in EcoHome Magazine (thanks to Todd Hawkins at BuilderFish for alerting me to the article) points out, companies are already moving toward these practices with or without certification and it’s added layer of expense. Economic, air quality, and moral (“its the right thing to do”) factors are pushing executives to such practices. According to EcoHome Magazine, while LEED retains the lions share of green certifications, more and more companies are either using internal standards or trying out other certification programs, including Energy Star. 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

    Repair of Part May Necessitate Replacement of Whole

    February 10, 2012 —

    Judge Gleuda E. Edmonds, a magistrate judge in the United States District Court of Arizona issued a ruling in Guadiana v. State Farm on January 25, 2012. Judge Edmonds recommended a partial summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

    Ms. Guandiana’s home had water damage due to pluming leaks in September 2004. She was informed that polybutylene pluming in her house could not be repaired in parts “it must be completely replaced.” She had had the plumbing replaced. State Farm denied her claim, arguing that “the tear-out provision did not cover the cost of accessing and replacing those pipes that were not leaking.”

    In September 2007, State Farm filed a motion to dismiss. The court rejected this motion, stating that “If Guadiana can establish as a matter of fact that the system that caused the covered loss included all the pipes in her house and it was necessary to replace all the pipes to repair that system, State Farm is obligated to pay the tear-out costs necessary to replace all the pipes, even those not leaking.”

    In March 2009, State Farm filed for summary judgment, which the court granted. State Farm argued that “the tear-out provision only applied to ‘repair’ and not ‘replace’ the system that caused the covered leak.” As for the rest of the piping, State Farm argued that “the policy does not cover defective materials.”

    In December 2011, Ms. Guadiana filed for summary judgment, asking the court to determine that “the policy ‘covers tear-out costs necessary to adequately repair the plumbing system, even if an adequate repair requires replacing all or part of the system.”

    In her ruling, Judge Edmonds noted that Ms. Guadiana’s claim is that “the water damage is a covered loss and she is entitled to tear-out costs necessary to repair the pluming system that caused that covered loss.” She rejected State Farm’s claim that it was not obligated to replace presumably defective pipes. Further, she rejected State Farm’s argument that they were only responsible for the leaking portion, noting “Guadiana intends to prove at trial that this is an unusual case where repair of her plumbing system requires replacement of all the PB plumbing.”

    Judge Edmonds concluded by directing the District Court to interpret the tear out issue as “the tear-out provision in State Farm’s policy requires State Farm to pay all tear-out costs necessary to repair the plumbing system (that caused the covered loss) even if repair of the system requires accessing more than the leaking portion of the system.”

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Red Tape Is Holding Up a Greener Future

    March 13, 2023 —
    Seven months on, Democrats are still celebrating the Inflation Reduction Act, even though a crucial determinant of its success — permitting reform for energy projects — remains undone. Recent data shows just how imperative it is for them to stop dragging their feet. What’s now called the IRA had little to do with inflation. It was a climate bill, and a big one: It provided $370 billion to improve energy efficiency, reduce emissions and smooth the path to a clean-power economy. It came on top of a 70% surge in private investment since 2017. But the biggest impediment to the US energy transition isn’t financing: It’s building. A decade ago, between 25% and 30% of proposed wind and solar projects moved from the drawing boards to completion. But as new projects and new funding have soared, utilities have been unable to keep up, leading to an immense backlog. A recent report by BloombergNEF found that over just six years, global clean-energy investment has gone from half the level of fossil-fuel investment to near parity, an extraordinary leap that reflects the market’s appetite for clean power. Yet America’s dysfunctional regulation is preventing many needed projects from even breaking ground. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Editors, Bloomberg

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Los Angeles Tier 1 “Best Law Firm” and Tier 2 for Orange County by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2023

    November 21, 2022 —
    Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP is listed in the U.S. News – Best Lawyers® (2023 Edition) “Best Law Firms” list with metro rankings in the following areas: Los Angeles
    • Metropolitan Tier 1
      • Insurance Law
      • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    Orange County
    • Metropolitan Tier 2
      • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel

    Indemnity Payment to Insured Satisfies SIR

    March 11, 2014 —
    In response to certified questions from the Eleventh Circuit, the Florida Supreme Court found that a contractual indemnity payment to the insured satisfied the policy's SIR requirement. Intervest Constr. of Jax v. Gen. Fid. Ins. Co., 2014 Fl. LEXIS 568 (Fla. Feb. 6, 2014). ICI Homes, Inc. a general contractor, hired Custom Cutting, Inc. to provide trim work, including installation of attic stairs in a residence ICI was building. Under the contract, Custom Cutting agreed to indemnify ICI for any damages resulting from Custom Cutting's negligence. The owner of the residence fell while using the attic stairs installed by Custom Cutting, injurying herself. The owner sued ICI, who sought indemnification from Custom Cutting. ICI's policy with General Fidelity had a $1 million SIR. The policy also had a transfer of rights clause granting the insurer some subrogation rights. The case was mediated. The parties agreed to a settlement of $1.6 million. Custom Cutting's insurer proposed paying $1 million to ICI to settle the indemnification claim. ICI, in turn, would pay that $1 million to the residence owner. A dispute arose over wither ICI or General Fidelity was responsible for paying the remaining $600,000. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Defects, Delays and Change Orders

    November 01, 2021 —
    As every construction professional is aware, unexpected events and problems are guaranteed on every large project. Defects, delays and change orders are sure to arise, and depending on how they are dealt with and addressed at the time, they can either have minimal effects on the overall project or they can have drastic, long-term and often costly effects, including but not limited to thousands of dollars in legal fees, increases in insurance premiums and/or years of litigation down the road. There are many reasons why so many large construction projects end up in some type of litigation. Delay claims, construction contract disputes and construction defect lawsuits are so prevalent in certain parts of the country that certain judges designate specific time blocks in their courtrooms for construction cases only—just to deal with the large portions of their case dockets dealing with construction issues at the same time. Reprinted courtesy of Jacob A. Epstein, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Epstein may be contacted at jepstein@haber.law