BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction 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


    Orange County Home Builder Dead at 93

    Federal Court in New York Court Dismisses Civil Authority Claim for COVID-19 Coverage

    Insurer's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings for Construction Defect Claim Rejected

    Everyone's Moving to Seattle, and It's Stressing Out Sushi Lovers

    Location, Location, Location—Even in Construction Liens

    Illinois Court Addresses Rip-And-Tear Coverage And Existence Of An “Occurrence” In Defective Product Suit

    Developer Boymelgreen Forced to Hand Over Financial Records for 15 Broad Street

    US-Mexico Border Wall Bids Include Tourist Attraction, Solar Panels

    Colorado Governor Polis’s Executive Order D 2020 101: Keeping Up with Colorado’s Shifting Eviction Landscape during COVID-19

    How Palm Beach Balances Mansion Politics Against Climate Change

    Las Vegas Team Obtains Complete Dismissal of a Traumatic Brain Injury Claim

    Melissa Pang Elected Vice President of APABA-PA Board of Directors

    Nonresidential Construction Employment Expands in August, Says ABC

    California Court of Appeal Finds Alleged Inadequate Defense by Insurer-Appointed Defense Counsel Does Not Trigger a Right to Independent Counsel

    Victoria Kajo Named One of KNOW Women's 100 Women to KNOW in America for 2024

    The Pandemic, Proposed Federal Privacy Regulation and the CCPA

    Insurance Telematics and Usage Based Insurance Products

    Deescalating Hyper Escalation

    The Requirement to Post Collateral Under General Agreement of Indemnity Is Real

    Utah Digs Deep and Finds “Design Defect” Includes Pre-Construction Geotechnical Reports

    New York Appellate Court Affirms 1966 Insurance Policy Continues to Cover WTC Asbestos Claims

    DoD Testing New Roofing System that Saves Energy and Water

    U.K. Construction Growth Unexpectedly Accelerated in January

    Home Prices Beat Estimates With 0.8% Gain in November

    7 Sustainability Ideas for Modular Classrooms in the Education Industry (guest post)

    Construction Contract Basics: No Damages for Delay

    JPMorgan Blamed for ‘Zombie’ Properties in Miami Lawsuit

    Failing to Pay Prevailing Wages May Have Just Cost You More Than You Thought

    Ohio: Are Construction Defects Covered in Insurance Policies?

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Reaffirms Validity of Statutory Employer Defense

    Construction Defect Claim Did Not Harm Homeowner, Court Rules

    Prison Contractors Did Not Follow the Law

    Trump Order Waives Project Environment Rules to Push COVID-19 Recovery

    Wait, You Want An HOA?! Restricting Implied Common-Interest Communities

    Alabama Supreme Court Reverses Determination of Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa Rolle and Christopher Acosta Win Motion to Dismiss in Bronx County Trip and Fall

    Potential Coverage Issues Implicated by the Champlain Towers Collapse

    An Increase of US Metro Areas’ with Normal Housing & Economic Health

    Florida District Court Finds That “Unrelated” Design Errors Sufficient to Trigger “Related Claims” Provision in Architects & Engineers Policy

    $48 Million Award and Successful Defense of $135 Million Claim

    Four Dead After Crane Collapses at Google’s Seattle Campus

    Travelers v. Larimer County and the Concept of Covered Cause of Loss

    New Plan Submitted for Explosive Demolition of Old Tappan Zee Bridge

    Funding the Self-Insured Retention (SIR)

    Construction Workers Face Dangers on the Job

    Infrared Photography Illuminates Construction Defects and Patent Trolling

    Energy Company Covered for Business Interruption Losses Caused by Fire and Resulting in Town-Ordered Shutdown

    No Additional Insured Coverage Under Umbrella Policy

    Happenings in and around the West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Colorado “occurrence”
    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. Leveraging 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

    California Builders’ Right To Repair Is Alive

    March 19, 2014 —
    The California Supreme Court surprised everyone on December 11, 2013 when it denied Brookfield Homes’ request for review of the ruling in the case of Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove, LLC (2014) 219 Cal.App.4th 98, which was decided by the Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District Division Three (Orange County). In that case the Court of Appeal held that the Right to Repair Act aka SB800 is not the exclusive remedy for a homeowner seeking damages for construction defects that have resulted in property damage. Under the ruling, homeowners may choose to sue builders under common law theories of liability such as strict liability and negligence, in addition to liability under the Act. This ruling made homeowners' compliance with the prelitigation requirements of the Act optional and thereby put builders' “right to repair” in jeopardy. The ruling undermined the expectations of California's homebuilders who, for the past decade, understood that their liability is limited by the Act and that they have a right to repair. Since the Liberty Mutual case was handed down, the topic has become a hotbed item with several divisions of the Court of Appeal. On February 19, 2014, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District Division Three (Los Angeles County) issued a ruling against Premier Homes in the case of Burch v. Superior Court 2014 Cal.App.LEXIS 159 that, without independent analysis, simply adopted the holding in the Liberty Mutual case. But on February 21, 2014, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District Division Four (Los Angeles County) ruled in the case of KB Home Greater Los Angeles, Inc. v.Superior Court 2014 Cal.App.LEXIS 167 that a homeowner's failure to give the builder an opportunity to inspect and repair a construction defect excused the builder's liability under the Act. Additionally, the Court of Appeal went out of its way to state it had ruled earlier in that case that the Act is the exclusive remedy. The various rulings lay a foundation for ultimate intervention by the California Supreme Court. In the meantime, these opposing cases will be cited by counsel for homeowners and builders alike for opposing positions as they continue to navigate construction defect disputes. Mr. Byassee is a strategic litigator specializing in representation of builders and developers. For more information regarding dispute resolution procedures under SB800, Mr. Byassee may be contacted at (949) 250-9797 or by email at dbyassee@ut-law.com. Published courtesy of David J. Byassee, Ulich & Terry LLP Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    November 18, 2019 —
    The National Labor Relations Board (the Board) continues to modify the way employers, unions and employees view and relate to each other in the workplace. In two decisions right before Labor Day, the Board strengthened employer rights in their workplaces, while at the same time making life for their union counterparts more difficult. On August 23, 2019, the Board revisited the issue of whether an employer must grant access to the off-duty employees of an onsite contractor so they can engage in Section 7 activities on the employer’s property. In general, Section 7 activities consist of employees acting together to improve their pay and working conditions, which constitute fundamental rights under the National Labor Relations Act (the Act). In Bexar County Performing Arts Center Foundation d/b/a Tobin Center, the San Antonio-based performing arts center, the Tobin Center, owned the Center as well as grounds that abutted the famed San Antonio River Walk. The Tobin Center housed three resident companies, one of which was the Ballet San Antonio with whom it had a licensor-licensee agreement. In addition to plays, movies and other productions, the Tobin Center hosted the San Antonio Symphony (the Symphony) to perform for 22 weeks of the year. The Ballet San Antonio also occasionally utilized the Symphony for live musical performances at its ballets. When, however, the Ballet San Antonio decided to use recorded music for a particular production, off-duty employees of the Symphony protested by leafletting the public on the Tobin Center property. The leaflets advised the public of this decision and urged that they “DEMAND LIVE MUSIC!” Their protests were not directed at the property owner, who denied them access to its property. Reprinted courtesy of John Baker, White and Williams LLP and Robert Pettigrew, White and Williams LLP Mr. Baker may be contacted at bakerj@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Pettigrew may be contacted at pettigrewr@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    LEED Certified Courthouse Square Negotiating With Insurers, Mulling Over Demolition

    June 06, 2011 —

    Apparently, Courthouse Square is still unresolved. The County hasnow hired an attorney to handle its insurance claim against Affiliated FM. Is there a lawsuit coming?

    Right now, no lawsuit is expected. According to officials, the insurer has been acting in good faith. But, its been quite a while since Salem officials learned that the Courthouse Square building had significant concrete issues that would result in probable demolition of the LEED certified building.

    If you have yet to hear about Courthouse Square, let me fill you in briefly. The Salem building was substantially completed in 2000 and LEED certified by the US Green Building Council in 2002. The project cost more than $30 Million to complete and the building was revered for its innovation as a crowning achievement for city leaders.

    But, structural problems in the building’s core were discovered as early as 2002, writes Chris Cheatham of Green Building Law Update. Final tests earlier in the year, determined that the building had to be vacated. The building has been clear since July 2010.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

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

    CGL Insurer’s Duty To Defend Broader Than Duty To Indemnify And Based On Allegations In Underlying Complaint

    April 10, 2019 —
    The duty to defend an insured with respect to a third-party claim is broader than the duty to indemnify the insured for that claim. The duty to defend is triggered by allegations in the underlying complaint. However, an insurer is only required to indemnify its insured for damages covered under the policy. A recent case example demonstrating the duty to defend is broader than the duty to indemnify can be found in Southern Owners Ins. Co. v. Gallo Building Services, Inc., 2018 WL 6619987 (M.D.Fla. 2019). In this case, a homebuilder built a 270-unit condominium project where the units were included in 51-buildings. Upon turnover of the condominium association to the unit owners, the condominium association served a Florida Statutes Chapter 558 Notice of Construction Defects letter. There was numerous nonconforming work spread out among various subcontractor trades including nonconforming stucco work. The homebuilder incurred significant costs to repair defective work and resulting property damage, and relocated unit owners during repairs. The homebuilder then filed a lawsuit against implicated subcontractors. One of the implicated subcontractors was the stucco subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Repairs to Hurricane-damaged Sanibel Causeway Completed in 105 Days

    February 12, 2024 —
    Permanent repairs to the roadway portion of the Sanibel Causeway are substantially complete one year and four months after more than 6,000 Sanibel Island residents lost access to the mainland in the wake of Hurricane Ian. The Superior Construction and The De Moya Group joint-venture team, responsible for the work, say that all travel lanes are now permanently open to the island off Florida's southwest coast near Fort Myers. Reprinted courtesy of Marigo Farr, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Four Companies Sued in Pool Electrocution Case

    June 26, 2014 —
    Back in April of this year, a seven-year old boy was electrocuted while swimming in his family’s pool in North Miami, Florida, according to CBS Miami. Now, the family is suing four companies in a wrongful death suit. The complaint claims that the victim “was electrocuted due to a faulty pool light and electrical grounding and bonding on the pool’s lighting system.” Pentair Water Pool and Spa, Inc., manufactured and designed the pool light. Florida Pool & Spa Center “provided periodic cleaning, maintenance and inspections of the pool,” while Gary B Electric and Construction Consultant is being sued for “improper bonding and grounding.” Also, Jorge Perez Enterprises Inspection Company is listed in the lawsuit since they conducted the inspection when the family purchased the home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Explore Legal Immigration Options for Construction Companies

    August 29, 2022 —
    Although the visa options are limited, there are some that can be explored by construction companies in the United States, including the following. H-1B The H-1B visa category may be available for construction positions that require at least a bachelor’s degree in a specific field such as civil engineering, construction management or accounting. The timing can be challenging if an employer is looking to hire a recent graduate or someone outside of the United States for a role because of the H-1B lottery but can work well if the candidate is already in H-1B status and working for another company. These visas are site-specific, so they may need amending if a worker is moved from one site to another. H-2B The H-2B visa category is an option if the construction work is seasonal in nature and recurs each year, and if the company can plan its specific needs sufficiently far in advance. Timing is difficult with these; they require proving a shortage of U.S. workers and are subject to a lottery system like the H-1B. Reprinted courtesy of Megan R. Naughton, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Too Costly to Be Fair: Texas Appellate Court Finds the Arbitration Clause in a Residential Construction Contract Unenforceable

    November 21, 2022 —
    In Cont’l Homes of Tex., L.P. v. Perez, No. 04-21-00396-CV, 2022 Tex. App. LEXIS 7691, the Court of Appeals of Texas (Appellate Court) considered whether the lower court erred in refusing to enforce an arbitration clause in a construction contract between the parties. The Appellate Court considered the costs of the arbitration forum required by the contract in the context of the plaintiffs’ monthly household income. The court also compared the arbitration cost to the estimated cost of litigating the dispute. The court held that the arbitration clause was substantively unconscionable on the grounds that the arbitration costs were not affordable for the plaintiffs and not an “adequate and accessible substitute to litigation.” The Appellate Court affirmed the lower court’s decision denying the defendant’s motion to compel arbitration. The plaintiffs, Giancarlo and Krystle Perez (collectively, the Perezes), hired the defendant, Continental Homes of Texas, LP d/b/a Express Home (Express Homes), to build a new home in San Antonio. Express Homes provided its standard contract, which included a binding arbitration clause. The clause stated that every potential dispute between the parties occurring before and after the closing of the purchase of the home was subject to binding arbitration, to be administered and conducted by the American Arbitration Association (AAA). The clause also stated that the costs of the arbitration were to be split by the parties. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com