BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering 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


    A Reminder to Get Your Contractor’s License in Virginia

    Coyness is Nice. Just Not When Seeking a Default Judgment

    New York Considering Legislation That Would Create Statute of Repose For Construction

    More Money Down Adds to U.S. First-Time Buyer Blues: Economy

    Reminder: Always Order a Title Search for Your Mechanic’s Lien

    No Coverage for Foundation Collapse

    Motion for Reconsideration Challenging Appraisal Determining Cause of Loss Denied

    More on the VCPA and Construction

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Abandons "Integrated Systems Analysis" for Determining Property Damage

    Construction Termination Issues Part 5: What if You are the One that Wants to Quit?

    Insured's Commercial Property Policy Deemed Excess Over Unobtained Flood Policy

    Open & Known Hazards Under the Kinsman Exception to Privette

    Changes to Va. Code Section 43-13: Another Arrow in a Subcontractor’s Quiver

    North Carolina Learns More Lessons From Latest Storm

    Faulty Workmanship Causing Damage to Other Property Covered as Construction Defect

    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

    The Year 2010 In Review: Design And Construction Defects Litigation

    A Few Green Building Notes

    Skyline Cockpit’s Game-Changing Tower Crane Teleoperation

    Bid Protests: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (Redeux)

    Robinson+Cole’s Amicus Brief Adopted and Cited by Massachusetts’s High Court

    Flooded Courtroom May be Due to Construction Defect

    Incorporate Sustainability in Building Design to Meet Green Construction Goals

    Following California Law, Federal Court Adopts Horizontal Allocation For Asbestos Coverage

    Pending Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Increase 0.8% in November

    Application Of Two Construction Contract Provisions: No-Damages-For-Delay And Liquidated Damages

    Intentional Mining Neighbor's Property is Not an Occurrence

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2023 “Atlanta 500” List

    Insurer’s Confession Of Judgment Through Post-Lawsuit Payment

    Texas LGI Homes Goes After First-Time Homeowners

    San Diego Developer Strikes Out on “Disguised Taking” Claim

    Condominium Association Responsibility to Resolve Construction Defect Claims

    Quick Note: Lis Pendens Bond When Lis Pendens Not Founded On Recorded Instrument Or Statute

    The Need to Be Specific and Precise in Drafting Settling Agreements

    New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Coverage Gap Dispute

    Designer of World’s Tallest Building Wants to Turn Skyscrapers Into Batteries

    The Miller Act: More Complex than You Think

    Sales of Existing U.S. Homes Decrease on Fewer Investors

    When is a Contract not a Contract?

    U.K. High Court COVID-19 Victory for Policyholders May Set a Trend in the U.S.

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    Rainwater Collecting on Rooftop is not Subject to Policy's Flood Sublimits

    Newmeyer Dillion Named One of "The Best Places To Work In Orange County" by Orange County Business Journal

    Design-Assist, an Ambiguous Term Causing Conflict in the Construction Industry[1]

    Insurer Defends Denial in Property Coverage Dispute Involving Marijuana Growing Operations

    Think Twice About Depreciating Repair Costs in Our State, says the Tennessee Supreme Court

    Structural Defects Lead Schools to Close off Areas

    California Expands on Scope of Coverage for Soft Cost Claims

    Forget Backyard Pools, Build a Swimming Pond Instead

    Uneven Code Enforcement Seen in Earthquake-Damaged Buildings in Turkey
    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

    Housing-Related Spending Makes Up Significant Portion of GDP

    February 05, 2014 —
    According to Molly Boesel on the Insight Blog, “housing-related spending makes up 17.3 percent of the GDP.” Boesel explained: “To calculate the portion of domestic spending that is related to housing, CoreLogic looks at three expenditures from the release: residential investment (the construction of new single- and multi-family houses), spending on housing services (rent, owner’s equivalent rent and utilities) and spending on furnishings and durable goods. Together, these expenditures made up 17.3 percent of total real GDP in the fourth quarter of 2013.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Property Owner Found Liable for Injuries to Worker of Unlicensed Contractor, Again

    September 17, 2018 —
    It’s not like we didn’t warn you. In Jones v. Sorenson, Case No. C084870 (August 2, 2018), homeowner Danita Sorenson discovered to her chagrin that she had unwittingly become the employer of Mary Jones, who had been hired by Odette Miranda doing business as Designs by Leo to trim some trees, and was liable for Jones’ injuries when Jones fell off a ladder provided by Miranda. “How can this be?” you might ask. The reason, as it turns out, is simple. Miranda was required to hold a Class D-49 Tree Service Contractor’s license in order to contract with Sorenson to trim her trees, and because Miranda did not hold that license (or, for that matter, any contractor’s license), Sorenson automatically was deemed the employer of Jones under Labor Code Section 2750.5 and, therefore, liable for her injuries. 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

    Federal Courts Keep Chipping Away at the CDC Eviction Moratorium

    March 22, 2021 —
    In a March 10 decision, a federal court in Cleveland blocked the national eviction moratorium, making it the second court to challenge the emergency measure implemented under President Donald Trump and extended by the Biden administration. The order clears the way for courts and landlords to resume evictions against tenants across much of Ohio. But the landlord groups who brought the suit believe that the decision could have a broader national application, setting the stage for an earlier-than-anticipated resumption of eviction activity before the ban expires on March 31. The judge ruled that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which introduced its ban on evictions in September, lacks the authority to enact such a policy. While the court stopped short of issuing an injunction against the CDC ban, its decision goes further than the Texas court that made a similar call late in February. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kriston Capps, Bloomberg

    Design-Assist, an Ambiguous Term Causing Conflict in the Construction Industry[1]

    December 02, 2019 —
    “Design-Assist” is one of the recent cost-saving trends being touted for construction projects and, in particular, construction projects utilizing alternative procurement methods. If an internet search for the term, “design-assist” is made, the result will be numerous construction industry articles and white papers lauding “design-assist” as a recent cost-saving trend in construction procurement. From a legal perspective, however, the term “design-assist” is notably absent from court opinions and most state licensing laws. With the exception of the ConsensusDocs, few standard form contracts even include the term “design-assist” in their text. The ConsensusDocs agreement provides examples of the Constructor’s obligations to perform “assisting activities” (the term “design-assist” is not used) and states that, notwithstanding the performance of such “assisting activities” by the Constructor, the responsibility of the design remains with the Designer unless otherwise stated in the Contract:
    • Article 4.5 DESIGN PROFESSIONAL’S RESPONSIBIITIES The Designer shall furnish or provide all design and engineering services necessary to design the Project in accordance with the Owner’s objectives … the Designer shall draw upon the assistance of Constructor and others in developing the design, but the Designer shall retain overall responsibility for all design decisions….
    • Article 4.6 CONSTRUCTOR’S RESPONSIBILITIES [T]he Constructor shall assist the Designer in the development of the Project Plan and Project Design but shall not provide professional services which constitute the practice of architecture or engineering unless the Constructor needs to provide such services in order to carry out its responsibilities … or unless specifically called for by the Contract Documents.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at john.ahlers@acslawyers.com

    Ohio Supreme Court Rules That Wrongful Death Claims Are Subject to the Four-Year Statute of Repose for Medical Claims

    January 16, 2024 —
    Cleveland, Ohio (January 2, 2024) - In a landmark 4-3 ruling, the Supreme Court of Ohio ruled on December 28 that wrongful death claims are subject to the four-year statute of repose contained in O.R.C. 2305.113(C) (“Medical Claim Statute of Repose”). Everhart v. Coshocton County Memorial Hospital, Slip No. 2023-Ohio-4670. Statutes of repose create an absolute bar to filing a lawsuit. When applicable, they bar plaintiffs from filing claims outside a specified time frame. The Medical Claim Statute of Repose creates a four-year window for commencing medical claims, which begins to run from “the occurrence of the act or omission constituting the alleged basis of the medical…claim.” O.R.C. 2305.113(C)(1). Medical claims commenced after the four-year period are barred. The primary question before the Court was whether a wrongful death claim, which is separate and distinct from a medical negligence claim, can qualify as a “medical claim” within the context of the Medical Claim Statute of Repose. The Court answered in the affirmative. A wrongful death claim can qualify as a medical claim if the wrongful death claim “…arises out the medical diagnosis, care, or treatment, of any person.” O.R.C. 2305.113(E)(3). According to the majority, a wrongful death claim can fall within the broad definition of “medical claim” and, if it does, is subject to the Medical Claim Statute of Repose. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Dear Engineer: Has your insurer issued a “Reservation of Rights” letter? (law note)

    April 20, 2017 —
    In my previous post, I made reference to getting a “Reservation of Rights” letter. I noted that the carrier may decide to defend you under a Reservation of Rights (i.e., hire your lawyer) but may not, necessarily, accept the responsibility for paying the claim. Does this mean that the insurance company has denied your claim, or will never pay? No. Reservation of Rights (ROR) letters are sent for a variety of reasons- most notably, when some portion of the construction lawsuit against you is not covered under your E&O policy. The letter must state the reason(s) that the ROR is being issued. With the ROR, the insurance company is telling you that it reserves the right to withdraw from your defense and/or deny payment of damages at a later date, depending upon how facts in the case develop. The notice is intended to let you know that there *may* be issues later, and to put you notice that you have the right to hire your own lawyer (at your own expense) to protect yourself from that future potential risk. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    Workers on Big California Bridge Tackle Oil Wells, Seismic Issues

    February 02, 2017 —
    Surrounded by workers, Nik Pecci, project safety manager with PMCM Consulting Engineers for the $1.5-billion Gerald Desmond Bridge replacement project—which is revitalizing a 50-year-old link in Long Beach—gestured in several directions: “I’ve got all these [port] tenants here, I’ve got a massive bridge over here. I have to build this thing intertwined with one of the busiest ports in the world. I constantly have commuters, cargo trucks and trailers and trains.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aileen Cho, ENR
    Ms. Cho may be contacted at choa@enr.com

    Eighth Circuit Affirms Finding of Bad Faith, Award of Costs and Prejudgment Interest

    October 25, 2021 —
    The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's finding of bad faith and award to the insured of taxable costs and prejudgment interest. Selective Ins. Co. v. Sela, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 26062 (8th Cir. Aug. 30, 2021). The insured suffered two hail storms that damaged his home. In 2010, the first storm caused over half a million dollars in loss. Before submitting a claim to his original insurer or beginning any repairs, the insured secured a new policy with Selective. The policy did not exclude pre-existing damage, it did preclude coverage if the insured "willfully and with intent to defraud, concealed or misrepresented any material fact or circumstance relating to the insurance." Before issuing the policy, Selective appraised the property and assigned a $1.6 million value to the home. The insured then filed a claim with his original insurer and received $510,787.23 for actual cash value of his loss. Neither the terms of this settlement nor this new policy with Selective required the insured to repair all of the 2010 damage. 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