BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation 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


    Norfolk Southern Agrees to $310M Settlement With Feds Over 2023 Ohio Derailment

    Bert L. Howe & Associates Returns as a Sponsor at the 30th Annual Construction Law Conference in San Antonio

    Construction defect firm Angius & Terry moves office to Roseville

    Appellate Court Reinforces When the Attorney-Client Relationship Ends for Purposes of “Continuous Representation” Tolling Provision of Legal Malpractice Statute of Limitations

    NLRB Finalizes Rule for Construction Industry Unions to Obtain Majority Support Representational Status

    President Trump Nullifies “Volks Rule” Regarding Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Recordkeeping Requirements

    The Benefits of Trash Talking: A Cautionary Tale of Demolition Gone Wrong

    Illinois Town’s Bond Sale Halted Over Fraudulent Hotel Deals

    Housing in U.S. Cools as Rate Rise Hits Sales: Mortgages

    It’s Time for a Net Zero Building Boom

    New York Team Secures Appellate Win on Behalf of National Home Improvement Chain

    Be Careful with Good Faith Payments

    2018 Super Bowl US. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis

    Insurance Company’s Reservation of Rights Letter Negates its Interest in the Litigation

    What’s in a Name? Trademarks and Construction

    City Council Authorizes Settlement of Basement Flooding Cases

    Kentucky Supreme Court Creates New “Goldilocks Zone” to Limit Opinions of Biomechanical Experts

    Construction Contract Basics: No Damages for Delay

    Fraud, the VCPA and Construction Contracts

    Eighth Circuit Considers Judicial Estoppel in Hazardous Substance Release-Related Personal Injury Case

    Haight Brown & Bonesteel Attorneys Named Super Lawyers in 2016

    Building Group Has Successful 2012, Looks to 2013

    Skipping Depositions does not Constitute Failure to Cooperate in New York

    General Partner Is Not Additional Insured For Construction Defect Claim

    Is Construction Heading Off the Fiscal Cliff?

    Mandatory Energy Benchmarking is On Its Way

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (06/28/23) – Combating Homelessness, U.S. Public Transportation Costs and the Future of Commercial Real Estate

    Construction Costs Up

    ASCE and Accelerator for America Release Map to Showcase Projects from Bipartisan Infrastructure Law

    Recent Decision Further Jeopardizes Availability of Additional Insured Coverage in New York

    New York Court Grants Insured's Motion to Dismiss Construction Defect Case and Awards Fees to Insured

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (02/08/23) – The Build America, Buy America Act, ESG Feasibility, and University Partnerships

    Insured's Motion for Reconsideration on Denial of Coverage Unsuccessful

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Sub-Contractor

    Federal Government May Go to Different Green Building Standard

    What to Expect From the New Self-Retracting Devices Standard

    Storm Debby Is Deadly — Because It’s Slow

    Construction Manager Has Defense As Additional Insured

    The Basics of Subcontractor Defaults – Key Considerations

    Toronto Skyscraper With $1.2 Billion of Debt Has Been Put in Receivership

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

    Ongoing Operations Exclusion Bars Coverage

    More on the VCPA and Construction

    Important Information Regarding Colorado Mechanic’s Lien Rights.

    How Artificial Intelligence Can Transform Construction

    Florida Governor Signs COVID-19 Liability Shield

    Delays in Filing Lead to Dismissal in Moisture Intrusion Lawsuit

    2019 Legislative Session

    Georgia Supreme Court Addresses Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Skyline Cockpit’s Game-Changing Tower Crane Teleoperation
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    August Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Appreciate at Faster Pace

    October 28, 2015 —
    Home prices in 20 U.S. cities rose at a faster pace in the year ended August, a sign the industry continues to strengthen on improving demand. The S&P/Case-Shiller index of property values climbed 5.1 percent from August 2014 after rising 4.9 percent in the year ended in July, the group said Tuesday in New York. The gain was the biggest in a year and matched the median forecast of economists surveyed by Bloomberg. Nationally, prices increased 4.7 percent after a 4.6 percent advance in the 12 months through July. A tight supply has supported price appreciation, which may in turn entice more owners to put their properties on the market as the payoff grows. More homes that are affordable for first-time or young buyers will be needed to keep the housing recovery on track, providing a boost to consumer spending in the process. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Victoria Stilwell, Bloomberg

    Appraiser Declarations Inadmissible When Offered to Challenge the Merits of an Appraisal Award

    March 14, 2018 —
    In Khorsand v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co. (No. B280273, filed 2/27/18), a California appeals court affirmed an appraisal award favorable to a homeowners insurer, ruling that it was improper to admit as evidence in opposition to a petition to confirm the award a declaration from the policyholders’ appraiser, except for the limited purpose of showing improprieties in the appraisal, bias, partiality or other improper conduct. The homeowners had a pipe leak and submitted a claim. The insurer responded to an estimate from the owners’ adjuster by retaining an expert and paying an undisputed amount that was significantly less. Eleven months later the owners had upper deck damage and submitted another claim. Relying on the same expert, the insurer paid another undisputed amount significantly less than the owner’s estimate. The owners requested appraisal but the insurer denied the request, contending that the dispute was over coverage and outside the scope of appraisal. The owners’ petition for appraisal was granted, with the court ordering separate listing of items the insurer disputed regarding coverage or causation. The appraisal panel issued an award stating that total damage was $132,293, of which $96,530 was contested by the insurer. The insurer filed a petition to confirm the award, which was granted despite the fact that the owners’ appraiser had refused to sign it. Reprinted courtesy of Valerie Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Does Your 998 Offer to Compromise Include Attorneys’ Fees and Costs?

    June 15, 2017 —
    In California, the “prevailing party” in litigation is generally entitled to recover its costs as a matter of law. See Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1032. But under California Code of Civil Procedure section 998, a party may make a so-called “offer to compromise,” which can reverse the parties’ entitlement to costs after the date of the offer, depending on the outcome of the litigation. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 998. The potential payoff of a 998 offer to compromise is explained in section 998(c)(1):
    If an offer made by a defendant is not accepted and the plaintiff fails to obtain a more favorable judgment or award, the plaintiff shall not recover his or her postoffer costs and shall pay the defendant’s costs from the time of the offer.
    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 998(c)(1) (emphasis added). The Basic Requirements for a Valid 998 Offer Pursuant to section 998(b), a 998 offer must satisfy three principal conditions: (1) it must be contained in a writing; (2) it must state the terms and conditions of the proposed judgment or award; and (3) it must contain a provision allowing the offeree to accept the offer by signing a statement to that effect. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 998(b). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony J. Carucci, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Carucci may be contacted at acarucci@swlaw.com

    Montana Federal Court Holds that an Interior Department’s Federal Advisory Committee Was Improperly Reestablished

    December 09, 2019 —
    On August 13, 2019, in a case that may have an impact on the leasing of federal lands for energy development in the future, the U.S. District Court for the Missoula, Montana Division, issued a ruling in the case of Western Organization of Resource Councils v. Bernhardt, which involves the application of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) to the Department of the Interior’s Royalty Policy Committee. This advisory committee, initially established in 1995 to provide advice to the Secretary on issues related to the leasing of federal and Indian lands for energy and mineral resources production, is subject to the provisions of FACA, codified at 5 U.S.C. app. Sections 1-16. The plaintiffs challenged the operations of this advisory committee, which was reestablished for two years beginning in 2017, because it allegedly “acts in secret and works to advance the goals of only one interest: the extractive industries that profit from the development of public gas, oil, and coal.” More specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that this advisory committee violated FACA because: (a) it was not properly established as provided in the implementing GSA rules (which are located at 41 CFR Section 102-3); (b) did not provide public notice of its meetings and publicly disseminate its materials; (c) ensure that its membership was fairly balanced; and (d) failed to exercise independent judgment without inappropriate influences from special interests. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Where Mechanic’s Liens and Contracts Collide

    July 02, 2018 —
    Today at Construction Law Musings, we’re back to a discussion of mechanic’s liens. This past week, the Loudoun County Circuit Court here in Virginia had an opportunity to discuss the interaction between mechanic’s liens, contracts and the law of fixtures. In TWP Enters. v Dressel, the Court considered a provision of a contract between the TWP Enterprises, a supplier of materials to the construction project, and the builder for the defendant. The provision between the supplier and builder essentially stated that until such time as TWP’s materials were paid for in full, TWP kept title to them (check out the case link above for the full text of the provision). Needless to say, the builder did not pay and TWP filed a mechanic’s lien then sued to enforce that lien. The owners demurred to the complaint and asked the Court to dismiss the claim on several grounds, among them that the contractual provision described above precluded the enforcement of the lien because TWP retained title to the materials despite the fact that they had been incorporated into the structure of the building and were therefore part of the realty. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    February 10, 2012 —

    The Hartford Courant reports that Connecticut is trying a very old tactic in a construction defect suit. The law library building at the University of Connecticut suffered from leaks which have now been repaired. The state waited twelve years after was complete to file lawsuit, despite that Connecticut has a six-year statute of limitations on construction defect claims. Connecticut claims that the statute of limitations does apply to the state.

    The state is arguing that a legal principle from the thirteenth century allows it to go along with its suit. As befits a medieval part of common law, the principle is called “nullum tempus occurrit regi,” or “time does not run against the king.” In 1874, the American Law Register said that nullum tempus occurrit reipublicae “has been adopted in every one of the United States” and “is now firmly established law.”

    In the case of Connecticut, Connecticut Solicitor General Gregory D’Auria said that “the statute of limitations does not apply to the state.” He also noted that “the state did not ‘wait’ to file the lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed only after all other options and remedies were exhausted.”

    Connecticut also argued that “nullus tempus occurrit regi” applied in another construction defect case at the York Correctional Institution. The judge in that case ruled in December 2008 to let the case proceed. But in the library case, Judge William T. Cremins ruled in February 2009 that the statute of limitations should apply to the state as well. Both cases have been appealed, with the library case moving more quickly toward the Connecticut Supreme Court.

    Read the full story…

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

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

    February 16, 2017 —
    A federal judge on Feb. 8 dismissed a claim by the state of South Carolina against the U.S. Dept. of Energy over delayed construction of the Mixed-Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility, near Aiken, S.C. The claim for financial compensation was part of a lawsuit the state filed in February 2016 seeking payment of $1 million per day—or an annual maximum of $100 million—for the MOX facility not producing fuel by Jan. 1, 2016. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Resolving Condominium Construction Defect Warranty Claims in Maryland

    September 04, 2018 —
    A Guide for Maryland Condominium Associations Newly constructed and newly converted condominiums in Maryland often contain concealed or “latent” construction defects. Left undetected and unrepaired, latent defects stemming from the original construction of a condominium can cause extensive damage over time, requiring associations to assess their members for unanticipated repair costs that could have been avoided by making timely developer warranty claims. This article provides a general overview of how Maryland condominium associations transitioning from developer control can proactively identify and resolve construction defect claims with condominium developers and builders before warranty and other legal rights expire. This proactive approach typically results in an amicable resolution without the need for litigation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas D. Cowie, Cowie & Mott
    Mr. Cowie may be contacted at ndc@cowiemott.com