BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer 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


    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2019

    Partner Jonathan R. Harwood Obtained Summary Judgment in a Coverage Action Arising out of a Claim for Personal Injury

    Tennessee Court of Appeals Holds Defendant Has the Burden of Offering Alternative Measure of Damages to Prove that Plaintiff’s Measure of Damages is Unreasonable

    No Coverage for Foundation Collapse

    Colorado Senate Bill 13-052: The “Transit-Oriented Development Claims Act of 2013.”

    Corporate Transparency Act’s Impact on Real Estate: Reporting Companies, Exemptions and Beneficial Ownership Reporting (webinar)

    Another TV Fried as Georgia Leads U.S. in Lightning Costs

    Contract Should Have Clear and Definite Terms to Avoid a Patent Ambiguity

    COVID-19 Damages and Time Recovery: Contract Checklist and Analysis

    Be a Good Neighbor: Protect Against Claims by an Adjacent Landowner During Construction

    Coverage for Injury to Insured’s Employee Not Covered

    Court Grants Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment After Insured Fails to Provide Evidence of Systemic Collapse

    Pa. Contractor Pleads No Contest to Prevailing-Wage Charges, Pays Workers $20.7M

    First Circuit: No Coverage, No Duty to Investigate Alleged Loss Prior to Policy Period

    Arezoo Jamshidi Selected to the 2023 San Diego Super Lawyers List

    Preparing the Next Generation of Skilled Construction Workers: AGC Workforce Development Plan

    New York Court Finds Insurers Cannot Recover Defense Costs Where No Duty to Indemnify

    Two New Developments in Sanatoga, Pennsylvania

    In Appellate Division First, New York Appellate Team Successfully Invokes “Party Finality” Doctrine to Obtain Dismissal of Appeal for Commercial Guarantors

    Product Liability Alert: Evidence of Apportionment of Fault Admissible in Strict Products Liability Action

    Sacramento’s Commercial Construction Market Heats Up

    Hawaii Appellate Court Finds Duty to Defend Group Builders Case

    Res Judicata Not Apply to Bar Overlapping Damages in Separate Suits Against Contractor and Subcontractor

    Trial Victory in San Mateo County!

    California Department of Corrections Gets Hit With the Prison Bid Protest Blues

    Navigating Casualty Challenges and Opportunities

    Duty to Defend Affirmed in Connecticut Construction Defect Case

    Construction Contract Language and Insurance Coverage Must Be Consistent

    Is It Time to Get Rid of Retainage?

    How Does Your Construction Contract Treat Float

    Former Hoboken, New Jersey Mayor Disbarred for Taking Bribes

    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    WSHB Ranks No.10 in Law360’s Best of Law Firms for Women

    New York Building Boom Spurs Corruption Probe After Death

    Here's How Much You Can Make by Renting Out Your Home

    Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell Recognized in 2024 Best Law Firm® Rankings

    “A No-Lose Proposition?”

    Angela Cooner Appointed Vice-Chair of Arizona’s Inaugural Board of Legal Specialization Construction Defect Law Advisory Commission

    California Complex Civil Litigation Superior Court Panels

    Court Finds No Coverage for Workplace “Prank” With Nail Gun

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

    “You’re Out of Here!” -- CERCLA (Superfund) Federal Preemption of State Environmental Claims in State Courts

    Fire Damages Unfinished Hospital Tower at NYU Langone Medical Center

    Blindly Relying on Public Adjuster or Loss Consultant’s False Estimate Can Play Out Badly

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Excess Can Sue Primary for Equitable Subrogation

    OSHA Issues New Rules on Injury Record Keeping

    Another Way a Mechanic’s Lien Protects You

    Nevada Governor Signs Construction Defect Reform Bill

    Venue for Miller Act Payment Bond When Project is Outside of Us

    What to do about California’s Defect-Ridden Board of Equalization Building
    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

    Commercial Real Estate Brokerages in an Uncertain Russian Market

    March 28, 2022 —
    Several commercial real estate firms have joined the growing list of companies temporarily suspending – or outright terminating – property and facility management operations in Russia amid economic sanctions and mounting international pressure. CBRE is the latest to make such a move, discontinuing its Russian leasing, investment and property management operations and denouncing Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in a statement issued March 7th. Other major players, including Savills, Knight Frank, and Colliers, have already suspended operations in the country, citing similar concern for international sanctions and the humanitarian impact of the invasion. Colliers is going even further to suspend operations in Belarus as well. Recently, global real estate service giant JLL switched course, issuing a formal statement that “with great sadness,” it will begin the process of separating from its domestic operations in Russia, though not commenting on whether the separation will be temporary or permanent. This is a significant change from just earlier this month , where, when asked about pulling operations from the country, JLL stated it would stay abreast of the situation abroad and continue to ensure the safety of its people and clients. Now that CBRE and Dallas-based JLL have joined the list, Houston-based powerhouse Hines appears to be continuing its “wait and see” approach. Hines currently owns Russian assets valued at $2.9 billion, nearly 2 percent of its entire $160 billion asset portfolio, and its property management portfolio manages more than 243 million square feet worldwide. While other firms have temporarily suspended current operations, Hines has gone so far as to say it will avoid servicing any future investments in the country, though it did similarly condemn Russia’s actions. With JLL’s recent decision , if Hines does take a stronger stance, it will likely happen soon. Reprinted courtesy of Cait Horner, Pillsbury and Adam J. Weaver, Pillsbury Ms. Horner may be contacted at cait.horner@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Weaver may be contacted at adam.weaver@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Strategy for Deterring Intracorporate Litigation?: Delaware Supreme Court Supports Fee-Shifting Bylaws

    May 13, 2014 —
    A fee-shifting bylaw of a Delaware non-stock corporation is not facially invalid according to the Delaware Supreme Court’s May 8, 2014 opinion in ATP Tour, Inc. v. Deutscher Tennis Bund. In this case, ATP Tour, Inc., a non-stock membership corporation (“ATP”) governed by a seven member board, had adopted a bylaw provision which provided that current and former members of ATP would be responsible for the litigation costs arising out of any litigation initiated by any such member against ATP or any of the other members in which the initiating party did not obtain a judgment on the merits that substantially achieved in substance and amount the full remedy sought. The bylaw provision had been adopted, in accordance with ATP’s charter, by the Board unilaterally without any consent from the members. The members had agreed at the time they joined ATP to be bound by the bylaws, as amended from time to time. Two members of ATP initiated a suit against ATP relating to certain actions taken with respect the ATP’s tournament schedule and format alleging both federal antitrust claims and Delaware fiduciary duty claims but did not prevail on any of their claims. ATP then moved to recover its legal fees relating to such actions. Reprinted courtesy of Marc Casarino, White and Williams LLP and Lori Smith, White and Williams LLP Mr. Casarino may be contacted at casarinom@whiteandwilliams.com; Ms. Smith may be contacted at smithl@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado Senate Bill 13-052: The “Transit-Oriented Development Claims Act of 2013.”

    January 25, 2013 —

    Last fall the Denver Regional Council of Governments approached the Colorado Association of Home Builders to inquire as to why there are no builders developing or constructing for-sale, multi-family projects along the newly constructed light rail lines. By surveying its membership, the CAHB quickly learned that the biggest impediment to such construction is Colorado’s litigation environment, i.e., “if you build it, they will sue.” This started a dialogue within the industry in order to determine what changes developers and general contractors would like to see made in order to consider again building for-sale, multi-family construction. The result of this dialogue is Senate Bill 13-052, introduced on January 16, 2013, and known as the Transit-Oriented Development Claims Act of 2013, sponsored by Senators Scheffel and Cadman and Representative DelGrosso. You can find the current iteration of SB 13-052 here

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain
    Mr. McLain can be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Canada Home Resales Post First Fall in Eight Months

    October 15, 2014 —
    Canadian existing home sales fell from a four-year high in September (TNBHICY%), the first decline in eight months, led by Calgary and Edmonton in oil-rich Alberta. Sales fell 1.4 percent to 41,666 units, the Canadian Real Estate Association said today from Ottawa. From a year earlier sales rose 10.6 percent and the average price climbed 5.9 percent to C$408,795 ($362,100). The decline came in part because of a shortage of “affordably priced single family homes,” Beth Crosbie, CREA President, said in the report. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Greg Quinn, Bloomberg
    Mr. Quinn may be contacted at gquinn1@bloomberg.net

    Construction Defect Leads to Death, Jury Awards $39 Million

    November 27, 2013 —
    A failure in the installation of a 13-ton concrete panel in Milwaukee County lead to the death of a 15-year-old boy in 201; two others were also injured. A lawsuit over this has concluded with the contractor, Advance Cast Stone, found culpable due to their concealing that the panel was not installed as prescribed. The incident happened at a parking garage operated by the county. Advanced Cast Stone made the claim that the method they used to secure the panel had been approved by other in the project. The jury awarded $6.3 million to the estate of Jared Kellner, $1.5 million each to the young man who was injured, Eric Wosniki, and his parents. The county was also awarded $6 million for lost revenue in the parking garage and for repairs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Florida’s Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    August 24, 2017 —
    Butler Weihmuller of Katz Craig LLP discussed Florida’s 10-year statute of repose law: “Under § 95.11(3)(c), the action must commence within 10 years after the date of actual possession by the owner, the date of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the date of abandonment of construction if not completed, or the date of completion or termination of the contract between the professional engineer, registered architect, or licensed contractor and his or her employer, whichever date is latest.” However, Weihmuller explains that parties may disagree on the specific date For instance, in Busch v. Lennar Homes, LLC, Florida’s 5th DCA recently “reversed a trial court’s dismissal of a homeowner’s construction defect claim that was filed just beyond 10 years after the closing date on the property.” The previous decision had been based on the notion that the contract had been completed upon the date of closing. The 5th DCA declared that “a contract is not completed until both sides of a contract have been performed” and “pointed to the ‘inspection and punch-list clause’ of the contract.” The clause indicated that “[a]ny remaining items that Seller has agreed to correct will be corrected by Seller at Seller’s sole cost and expense prior to closing or at Seller’s option within a reasonable time after closing.” Since not all punch-list items had been completed prior to closing, the 5th DCA held that the contract had not been completed at closing, and therefore the statute of repose did not begin until the punch-items had been accomplished. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Defect Reform Bill Passes Colorado Senate

    April 15, 2015 —
    The Denver Business Journal reported that a construction defect reform bill has “passed the Colorado Senate by a 24-11 vote Tuesday, with six Democrats joining all 18 Republicans in the chamber in backing the measure.” The bill now moves to the House. According to the Denver Business Journal, the bill “faces a tougher path in the House, where Speaker Dickey Lee Hullinghorst, D-Gunbarrel, has said she was not going to support a bill that does not include a provision giving aggrieved condominium owners the right to take their disputes with builders to court. No such amendment was added in the Senate.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    10 Answers to Those Nagging Mechanics Lien Questions Keeping You Up at Night. Kind of

    November 05, 2014 —
    Construction lawyers may not ponder the great questions in life. We leave that to the estate planning attorneys. But ponder we do. And the next case, as I’ll explain below, “kind of” answers 10 important mechanics lien questions we construction attorneys toss and turn over at night. Background In Palomar Grading & Paving, Inc. v. Wells Fargo Bank, Case Nos. G049907 and G049910 (October 14, 2014), developer Inland-LGC Beaumont, LLC (“Inland”) hired general contractor 361 Group Construction Services, Inc. (“361″) to construct a Kohl’s department store in Beaumont, California. The Kohl’s department store was to be constructed on one parcel of a three-parcel tract. Inland later sold the parcel on which the Kohl’s department store was to be located to Kohl’s and the two other parcels were later acquired by Wells Fargo who foreclosed on the construction loan for the project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@kmtg.com