BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut architect 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


    Is Your Business Insured for the Coronavirus?

    Woman Files Suit for Property Damages

    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem

    Nine Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Recognized as Southern California Super Lawyers

    There is No Claims File Privilege in Florida, Despite What Insurers Want You to Think

    Partner Jason Taylor and Senior Associate Danielle Kegley Successful in Appeal of Summary Disposition on Priority of Coverage Dispute in the Michigan Court of Appeals

    Experts Weigh In on Bilingual Best Practices for Jobsites

    The Road to Rio 2016: Zika, Super Bacteria, and Construction Delays. Sounds Like Everything is Going as Planned

    Albert Reichmann, Builder of NY, London Finance Hubs, Dies at 93

    Jersey Shore Town Trying Not to Lose the Man vs. Nature Fight on its Eroded Beaches

    Firm Leadership – New Co-Chairs for the Construction Law Practice Group

    Landlords Beware: Subordination Agreements

    OSHA Issues COVID-19 Guidance for Construction Industry

    Mediating Contract Claims and Disputes at the ASBCA

    Delaware “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6)

    Deductibles Limited to Number of Suits Filed Against Insured, Not Number of Actual Plaintiffs

    Homeowner Loses Suit against Architect and Contractor of Resold Home

    Seven Coats Rose Attorneys Named to Texas Rising Stars List

    Maryland Legislation Prohibits Condominium Developers from Shortening Statute of Limitations to Defeat Unit Owner Construction Defect Claims

    Nashville Stadium Bond Deal Tests Future of Spectator Sports

    Deadlines Count for Construction Defects in Florida

    NLRB Hits Unions with One-Two Punch the Week Before Labor Day

    Neighbor Allowed to Remove Tree Roots on Her Property That Supported Adjoining Landowners’ Two Large Trees With Legal Immunity

    When an Intentional Act Results in Injury or Damage, it is not an Accident within the Meaning of an Insurance Policy Even When the Insured did not Intend to Cause the Injury or Damage

    Meet Orange County Bar Associations 2024 Leaders

    Construction Defect Claim Not Timely Filed

    Colorado homebuilders target low-income buyers with bogus "affordable housing" bill

    AAA Revises its Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Denver Council Committee Approves Construction Defects Ordinance

    Want a Fair Chance at a Government Contract? Think Again

    No Duty to Defend Under Pollution Policy

    How Long does a Florida Condo Association Have to File a Construction Defect Claim?

    Power of Workers Compensation Immunity on Construction Project

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2022 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    The Ghosts of Baha Mar: How a $3.5 Billion Paradise Went Bust

    The Argument for Solar Power

    Dispute Resolution in Your Construction Contract

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (09/06/23) – Nonprofit Helping Marginalized Groups, Life Sciences Taking over Office Space, and Housing Affordability Hits New Low

    Washington Supreme Court Finds Agent’s Representations in Certificate of Insurance Bind Insurance Company to Additional Insured Coverage

    More Thoughts on “Green” (the Practice, not the Color) Building

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight Nationally Ranked as a 2020 “Best Law Firm” by U.S. News – Best Lawyers®

    Judge Nixes SC's $100M Claim Over MOX Construction Delays

    Professional Services Exclusion in CGL Policies

    Is Construction Defect Litigation a Cause for Lack of Condos in Minneapolis?

    Developer Pre-Conditions in CC&Rs Limiting Ability of HOA to Make Construction Defect Claims, Found Unenforceable

    Ruling Finds Builder and Owners at Fault in Construction Defect Case

    New York State Legislature Reintroduces Bills to Extend Mortgage Recording Tax to Mezzanine Debt and Preferred Equity

    Nevada Assembly Sends Construction Defect Bill to Senate

    Too Late for The Blame Game: Massachusetts Court Holds That the Statute of Repose Barred a Product Manufacturer from Seeking Contribution from a Product Installer

    No Duty to Defend under Homeowner's Policy Where No Occurrence, No Property Damage
    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

    Hail Damage Requires Replacement of Even Undamaged Siding

    February 05, 2015 —
    In a dispute over the property policy's requirement that lost or damaged property be repaired or replaced, the Minnesota Supreme Court held that the policy language called for replacement of undamaged siding panels to obtain a color match. Cedar Bluff Townhome Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co., 2014 Minn. LEXIS 661 (Minn. Dec. 17, 2014). During a hail storm, all 20 of Cedar Bluff's buildings sustained some damage. The roofs on all of the buildings needed to be replaced, and at least one siding panel on each building sustained damage. Eleven of the 20 buildings had three or fewer damaged panels. At the time of the hail storm, the siding was approximately 11 years old, and the color of the panels had faded. Replacement panels were available, but not in the same color. Cedar Bluff submitted a claim under its business owners' policy to American Family. The policy obligated the insurer to pay for "direct physical loss of or damage to Covered Property at the premises . . . caused by or resulting from any Covered Cause of Loss." "Covered Property" was broadly defined in the policy to include buildings at the premises. 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

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    July 18, 2011 —

    Coverage of the ongoing litigation concerning the Harmon Hotel continues to proliferate. Architectural Record and a number of other news outlets continue to provide additional details and coverage of the matter. Chief among the conditions alleged are improperly installed reinforcing steel inside link beams on 15 floors. MGM Claims that the conditions amount to hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, while Perini (the builder) indicated in a July 12th statement that the buildings problems are related to the design, and the they are “fixable.”

    There is significant speculation that MGM Resorts International isn’t interested in repairing the hotel due to a glut of hotel rooms attendant to the troubled economy. In a statement Tuesday Perini reportedly stated that “Repairing and opening the Harmon would only create a greater glut of unused hotel rooms for MGM,” “If market conditions were better and MGM found that demand existed for the Harmon hotel rooms, MGM would not be claiming that the Harmon is unstable.”

    MGM asserts that Perini failed to ”properly construct” the project. Clark County’s Department of Development Services has reportedly asked MGM to provide a plan to fix the project by August 15th.

    The Harmon is part of the $8.5 billion CityCenter project that opened in the fourth quarter of 2009 and is jointly owned by MGM Resorts and Dubai World.

    Prior reports indicated that the owner (MGM) had considered razing the entire project. The future of the project remains uncertain.

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

    Colorado Homebuyers Must be in Privity of Contract with Developer to Assert Breach of Implied Warranty of Suitability

    May 03, 2017 —
    On April 17, 2017, the Colorado Supreme Court announced its decision in Forest City v. Rogers, No. 15SC1089, 2017 CO 23 (Colo. Apr. 17, 2017). The Court held that privity of contract is necessary for a homebuyer to assert a claim for breach of implied warranty of suitability against a developer. In other words, one must be a party to a contract to pursue a claim for breach of any implied warranty of suitability therein. Defendant Forest City was the developer of a mixed use property in Stapleton. Forest City subdivided the land and sold the vacant lot at issue to a professional builder, Infinity. Infinity then built a residence and sold it to the plaintiff, Tad Rogers. After moving into the home, Rogers came to believe that the water table beneath the house along with calcite leaching from the road material led to a buildup of calcite in the foundation drain, making the basement uninhabitable and causing the sump pump to work overtime. Rogers sued Forest City on various theories, including breach of the warranty of suitability. In particular, Rogers alleged that Forest City impliedly warranted to him that his lot was suitable for a home with a finished basement, when in fact it was not. He prevailed on this claim at the trial court level. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Maggie Stewart, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Stewart may be contacted at stewart@hhmrlaw.com

    Colorado Supreme Court Weighs in on Timeliness of Claims Against Subcontractors in Construction Defect Actions

    March 16, 2017 —
    On February 27, 2017, the Colorado Supreme Court announced its decision in the Goodman v. Heritage Builders, No. 16SA193, 2017 CO 13 (Colo. February 27, 2017) case. In ten short pages, the Colorado Supreme Court completely reshuffled Colorado construction law with respect to application of the statutes of limitation and repose on third-party claims in construction defect cases. Specifically, the Colorado Supreme Court overruled a series of earlier Court of Appeals' decisions that found C.R.S. § 13-80-104(1)(b)(II) (“104(1)(b)(II)”) had no effect on the six-year statute of repose. For context, 104(1)(b)(II) permitted third-party actions for indemnity and contribution to toll until ninety days after the claims in the underlying action were resolved by settlement or judgment. In the construction context, 104(1)(b)(II) was intended to allow a general contractor’s claims against liable subcontractors to toll for the statutorily defined period. This allowed the general contractor to first focus its attention on defending the claims against and thereafter to pursue its claims against the subcontractors. However, beginning in 2008, in the Thermo Dev., Inc. v. Cent. Masonry Corp., 195 P.3d 1166 (Colo. App. 2008) case, the Colorado Court of Appeals began chipping away at the force of 104(1)(b)(II). This trend continued in the Shaw Constr., LLC v. United Builder Servs., Inc., 2012 COA 24, 296 P.3d 145 decision, the Sierra Pac. Indus., v. Bradbury, 2016 COA 132, ­_ P.3d_ decision, and culminating in the Sopris Lodging, LLC v. Schofield Excavation, Inc., 2016 COA 158, reh'g denied (Nov. 23, 2016) decision. Effectively, in these decisions, the Colorado Court of Appeals determined that third-party claims could not be brought beyond Colorado’s six-year statute of repose, regardless if they were brought within the ninety day tolling provision set forth in 104(1)(b)(II). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jean Meyer, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Meyer may be contacted at meyer@hhmrlaw.com

    3D Printing Innovations Enhance Building Safety

    October 07, 2019 —
    The mention of 3D printing alone is enough to get people excited, often conjuring images of a desktop console that can download and create three dimensional objects such as prototypes, or mechanical parts. And yet, in recent years the technology has given way to a slight impatience, as people begin to wonder how and when it will have a direct impact on both their lifestyles and their businesses. The construction industry has been quick to take advantage of these innovations, and the effects are tangible, especially regarding building safety. The 3D construction technology allows for several key advantages in terms of faster construction times, uncompromised quality of construction and lower costs—allowing for affordable dwellings to be quickly built for people in need. These advantages also lead to safety improvements during the building process. The ability to accelerate construction time without requiring an increase in labor results in a fewer construction-related workplace injuries and a reduction in material waste, making it an environmentally friendly construction method as well. ICC-Evaluation Service (ICC-ES), a subsidiary of the International Code Council (ICC) which develops model codes and standards (i.e. International Building Code, International Residential Code) and delivers a wide array of building safety services, has taken the lead on developing acceptance criteria to address building code compliance of 3D printed construction. Currently, 3D construction technology is not within the provisions of the International Building Code (IBC) or International Residential Code (IRC). The acceptance criteria introduces new compliance measures for interior and exterior 3D printed concrete walls (with and without structural steel reinforcement), load-bearing and non-load-bearing walls, and shear walls in one-story, single-unit, residential dwellings. The 3D walls are constructed by printing two outer layers of 3D concrete and then filling the core with 3D concrete to form a solid wall. Reprinted courtesy of Mahmut Ekenel & Melissa Sanchez, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Ekenel may be contacted at mekenel@icc-es.org Ms. Sanchez may be contacted at msanchez@icc-es.org Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Drill Rig Accident Kills Engineering Manager, Injures Operator in Philadelphia

    August 10, 2021 —
    Philadelphia officials and engineering firm Langan have confirmed that a company project manager and geotechnical engineer died July 6 in a nighttime drill rig accident while he was on site to inspect foundation work for a pedestrian bridge project. Reprinted courtesy of Stephanie Loder, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Empire State Building Owners Sue Photographer for Topless Photo Shoot

    January 22, 2014 —
    USA Today reports that the owners of New York’s Empire State Building are suing photographer Allen Henson for taking pictures of a topless woman on the sky scraper’s observation deck. “The owners claim Henson damaged the building's reputation as a safe, family-friendly attraction when he took photos of the model in August,” according to USA Today. Henson allegedly did not ask the owners for permission prior to the shoot. Henson retorted that he took the photos when children were not present, and the pictures do not have any “commercial value; he just posted them on social media.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Federal District Court Dismisses COVID-19 Claim

    October 25, 2020 —
    Judge Ezra, formerly on the bench in Hawaii, dismissed a COVID-19 claim pursued by a Texas policy holder. Diesel Barbershop, LLC v. State Farm Lloyds, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147276 (W.D. Texas Aug. 13, 2020). Local and state officials in Texas issued shutdown orders in March 2020 due to the spread of the cornavirus. All non-essential businesses, including the insureds' barbershop businesses, were ordered closed from April 2, 2020 until April 30, 2020. The insureds submitted a claim for business interruption and civil authority coverage to their carrier, State Farm. The claim was denied based on the policy's exclusion for loss caused by enforcement of ordinance or law, virus, and consequential losses. For Civil Authority coverage, State Farm contended the policy required that there by physical damage within one mile of the described property and that the damage be the result of a Covered Cause of Loss, which, State Farm asserted, a virus was not. The insureds sued and State Farm moved to dismiss. The court noted cases in which courts had found physical loss even without tangible destruction to the covered property. Yet, the court found that the line of cases requiring tangible injury to property were more persuasive. Therefore, the court found that the insureds failed to plead a direct physical loss. 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