BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco 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


    South Africa Wants Payment From Colluding World Cup Builders

    This Is the Most Remote and Magical Hotel on Earth

    St Louis County Approves Settlement in Wrongful Death Suit

    The Independent Tort Doctrine (And Its Importance)

    Be Proactive Now: Commercial Construction Quickly Joining List of Industries Vulnerable to Cyber Attacks

    Get Creative to Solve Your Construction Company's Staffing Challenges

    Jury Could Have Found That Scissor Lift Manufacturer Should Have Included “Better” Safety Features

    General Liability Alert: ADA Requirements Pertaining to Wall Space Adjacent to Interior Doors Clarified

    Beam Cracks Cause Closure of San Francisco’s New $2B Transit Center

    Condominium Construction Defect Resolution in the District of Columbia

    HB24-1014: A Warning Bell for Colorado Businesses Amid Potential Consumer Protection Changes

    Don’t Kick the Claim Until the End of the Project: Timely Give Notice and Preserve Your Claims on Construction Projects

    Aurora Joins other Colorado Cities by Adding a Construction Defect Ordinance

    New York State Legislature Passes Legislation Expanding Wrongful Death Litigation

    Brown Act Modifications in Response to Coronavirus Outbreak

    Construction Law Breaking News: California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Beacon Residential Community Association

    Jinx: Third Circuit Rules in Favor of Teamsters in Withdrawal Case

    The Business of Engineering: An Interview with Matthew Loos

    CDJ’s #8 Topic of the Year: California’s Board of Equalization Tower

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twenty White and Williams Lawyers

    Can General Contractors Make Subcontractors Pay for OSHA Violations?

    Constructive Notice Established as Obstacle to Relation Back Doctrine

    Building Permits Up in USA Is a Good Sign

    Rattlesnake Bite Triggers Potential Liability for Walmart

    Fourth Circuit Rejects Application of Wrap-Up Exclusion to Additional Insured

    Documenting Contract Changes in Construction

    What are the Potential Damages when a House is a Lemon?

    Hawaii Federal District Rejects Another Construction Defect Claim

    Consequential Damage Claims for Insurer's Bad Faith Dismissed

    Highest Building Levels in Six Years in Southeast Michigan

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    Illinois Appellate Court Finds That Damages in Excess of Policy Limits Do Not Trigger Right to Independent Counsel

    Contrasting Expert Opinions Result in Denial of Cross Motions for Summary Judgment

    Blackstone Said to Sell Boston Buildings for $2.1 Billion

    Business and Professions Code Section 7031, Demurrers, and Just How Much You Can Dance

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2023 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    Peckar & Abramson Once Again Recognized Among Construction Executive’s “Top 50 Construction Law Firms™”

    General Indemnity Agreement Can Come Back to Bite You

    Public Housing Takes Priority in Biden Spending Bill

    Luxury-Apartment Boom Favors D.C.’s Millennial Renters

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: RACHEL CLANCY

    Automating Your Home? There’s an App for That

    Subcontract Should Flow Down Delay Caused by Subcontractors

    Duty to Defend Bodily Injury Evolving Over Many Policy Periods Prorated in Louisiana

    Florida's New Pre-Suit Notification Requirement: Retroactive or Prospective Application?

    Challenging Enforceability of Liquidated Damages (In Federal Construction Context)

    Policy's Limitation Period for Seeking Replacement Costs Not Enforced Where Unreasonable

    Settlement Reached in California Animal Shelter Construction Defect Case

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    Colorado’s New Construction Defect Law Takes Effect in September: What You Need to Know
    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

    Jet Crash Blamed on Runway Construction Defect

    December 11, 2013 —
    The Old Republic Insurance Company is suing Macon, Georgia, claiming that the runway was improperly built, leading to the crash of the corporate jet of one of their clients. The insurer paid out $1 million to the owner of the jet. Now it seeks to recover that from the city, claiming the runway was both too short and built in a manner that caused rainwater to pool. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Vermont Supreme Court Finds COVID-19 May Damage Property

    November 07, 2022 —
    As reported on this blog, policyholders have long been of the view that the presence of substances like COVID-19 and its causative virus SARS-CoV-2, which render property dangerous or unfit for normal business operations, should be sufficient to trigger coverage under commercial all-risk insurance, as has been the case for more than 60 years. However, many courts, federal courts in particular, despite decades of pro-policyholder precedent, have embraced the view that “viruses harm people, not [property].” Thirty-one months after the start of the pandemic, the first state high court has gone in a different direction, according greater weight to pro-policyholder precedent. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court finds subcontractor responsible for defending claim

    May 18, 2011 —

    In an unpublished decision, the California Fourth Appellate District Court has reversed the judgment of Judge Linda B. Quinn of the Superior Court of San Diego. In the case Inland California, Inc. v. G.A. Abell, Inland, a general contractor had subcontracted with Apache Construction and Precision Electric Company (G.A. Abell).

    Apache alleged that extra demolition and drywall work was needed due to Precision’s electrical work. Inland tendered a defense of Apache’s claims. However, Precision did not provide any defense. Inland withheld payment from Precision.

    At trial, Inland “conceded Precision earned the $98,000 in progress payments Inland withheld.” They were obligated to additionally pay Precision’s costs and attorney fees.

    The Fourth Appellate District court has overturned this and remanded the case back to the lower court. The judges determined that Precision was obligated to defend itself against the claims raised by Apache and therefore vacated the judgment against Inland.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    The Law of Patent v Latent Defects

    March 19, 2015 —
    Candice B. Macario of Gordon & Rees LLP analyzed the case Delon Hampton & Associates, Chartered v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles, and stated that “[i]n his case, a design professional successfully challenged a construction defect lawsuit brought against them, on the basis that the defect complained of was open and obvious and the County had ran out of time to bring their action.” Macario recommended “as lawsuits are filed close to the ten year statute of repose, one area to explore in a single issue case is if you can eliminate a cause of action based on patent defects. Moreover, in multi-issue cases for several construction defects, parties should always be aware of analyzing whether issues can be identified as patent and perhaps used as a tool in negotiations, settlement discussions or pre-trial motions.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Builder Must Respond To Homeowner’s Notice Of Claim Within 14 Days Even If Construction Defect Claim Is Not Alleged With The “Reasonable Detail”

    June 05, 2017 —
    On February 10, 2017, California’s Fourth District Court of Appeal held that if a builder fails to acknowledge receipt of a homeowner’s Notice of Claim within 14 days, as required by the Right to Repair Act (“SB800”), specifically California Civil Code §913, the homeowner is released from the requirements of SB800 and may proceed with the filing of a lawsuit. In Blanchette v. Superior Court, Blanchette owned 1 of 28 homes constructed by GHA Enterprises, Inc. (“GHA”). On February 2, 2016, Blanchette served GHA with notice of a claim, setting forth the alleged defects in all 28 homes. On February 23, 2016, GHA responded that the construction defects were not alleged with sufficient “reasonable detail” as required by Civil Code §910. In response, Blanchette asserted that GHA’s response was untimely and thus excused him and the other homeowners from any obligations under SB800. The trial court found for the builder, GHA, holding that Blanchette’s Notice of Claim lacked detail sufficient to trigger GHA’s obligations under SB800. Blanchette appealed the ruling. Reprinted courtesy of Richard H. Glucksman, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger and David A. Napper, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger Mr. Glucksman may be contacted at rglucksman@cgdrblaw.com Mr. Napper may be contacted at dnapper@cgdrblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hurricane Laura: Implications for Insurers in Louisiana

    October 19, 2020 —
    Just two days before the 15th Anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, Category 4 Hurricane Laura made landfall near Cameron, Louisiana. Although the “unsurvivable” 20-foot storm surge, which had been predicted ahead of the storm, thankfully was significantly less, the impact of Laura on the Southwest Coast of Louisiana and Southeast Coast of Texas and its neighboring parishes and counties, most notably Cameron Parish, was quite severe. Lake Charles, Louisiana suffered widespread flooding and sustained catastrophic wind damage. Although the storm moved quickly, it retained its strength longer than expected such that even areas well inland sustained considerable damage. Preliminary estimates for insured losses from storm surge, flooding, and winds range from $8 to $12 billion for residential and commercial properties. Insurers providing residential or commercial property insurance in Louisiana should keep the following statutory claims handling requirements in mind. Louisiana Statutory Provisions Under Louisiana law, an insurer is expected to comply with certain statutory requirements in investigating and handling claims submitted by its insureds and third-party claimants. The majority of these requirements, and the consequences of their violation, are codified by La. R.S. 22:1892, which governs the payment and adjustment of claims, and La. R.S. 22:1973, which delineates an insurer’s duty of good faith. Together, the statutes impose three requirements on insurers: timely initiation of loss adjustment, timely payment of claims, and a duty of good faith and fairness in the adjustment and payment of said claims. Reprinted courtesy of Jennifer Michel, Lewis Brisbois and Tabitha Durbin, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Michel may be contacted at Jenny.Michel@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Durbin may be contacted at Tabitha.Durbin@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    One Nation, Under Renovation

    November 07, 2022 —
    In late 2019, Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot announced a landmark investment in some of the city’s poorest neighborhoods. Invest South/West would direct $1.4 billion in total, including $750 million in public funds, to redevelop properties across the city’s South and West Sides. Focused on 10 specific neighborhoods, the program’s first projects broke ground in August and September. Teams of workers will turn a firehouse into a culinary hub and event space; a stately Art Deco bank is set to be converted into an art space that will anchor an attached mixed-use development. Another former bank, in Humboldt Park, will be renovated into Latino-owned commercial offices, an entrepreneurial incubator space, and a Latino cultural center, as well as housing. These reuse projects aim to do more than fill the gaps of Chicago’s legendary vacant-property crisis: In reanimating shuttered historic buildings, the initiative aims to restore the economies of commercial corridors that were victims of destructive mid-20th-century “urban renewal” initiatives. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Zach Mortice, Bloomberg

    Property Damage, Occurrences, Delays, Offsets and Fees. California Decision is a Smorgasbord of Construction Insurance Issues

    November 15, 2017 —
    I read once that 97 percent of cases never go to trial. However, there are still the ones that do. And, then, there are the ones that do both. The following case, Global Modular, Inc. v. Kadena Pacific, Inc., California Court of Appeals for the Fourth District, Case No. E063551 (September 8, 2017), highlights some of the issues that can arise when portions of cases settle and other portions go to trial, the recovery of delay damages on a construction project through insurance, and the recovery of attorneys’ fees. Global Modular, Inc. v. Kadena Pacific, Inc. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs contracted with general contractor Kadena Pacific, Inc. (Kadena) to oversee construction of its Center for Blind Rehabilitation in Menlo Park, California. Kadena, in turn, contracted with subcontractor Global Modular, Inc. (Global) to construct, deliver and install 53 modular units totaling more than 37,000 square feet for a contract price of approximately $3.5 million. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com