BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete 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


    Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Owner’s Claims Based on Contractual One-Year Claims Limitations Period

    Construction Contractors Must Understand Retainage In 2021

    Contractual Indemnification Limitation on Florida Public Projects

    Where-Forum Art Thou? Is the Chosen Forum Akin to No Forum at All?

    Microwave Transmission of Space-Based Solar Power: The Focus of New Attention

    Congratulations 2022 DE, MA, NJ, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Rio de Janeiro's Bursting Real-Estate Bubble

    Illinois Attorney General Warns of Home Repair Scams

    BWB&O Partner Tyler Offenhauser and Associate Lizbeth Lopez Won Their Motion for Summary Judgment Based on the Privette Doctrine

    Approaching Design-Build Projects to Avoid (or Win) Disputes

    Florida Supreme Court Decision Limits Special Damages Presented to Juries

    That Boilerplate Language May Just Land You in Hot Water

    Certificates Of Merit For NC Lawsuits Against Engineers And Architects? (Still No)(Law Note)

    Diggin’ Ain’t Easy: Remember to Give Notice Before You Excavate in California

    Fifth Circuit: Primary Insurer Relieved of Duty to Defend Without Release of Liability of Insured

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Allegations of Collapse Rejected

    Blackstone to Buy Cosmopolitan Resort for $1.73 Billion

    Occurrence Found, Business Risk Exclusions Do Not Bar Coverage for Construction Defects

    When Do You Call Your Lawyer?

    Consumer Confidence in U.S. Increases More Than Forecast

    Personal Injury Claims – The Basics

    Finding an "Occurrence," Appellate Court Rules Insurer Must Defend

    Quick Note: Submitting Civil Remedy Notice

    Construction Defects Claims Can Be Limited by Contract Says Washington Court

    Godfather Charged with Insurance Fraud

    The Privette Doctrine, the Hooker Exception, and an Attack at a Construction Site

    Pennsylvania: When Should Pennsylvania’s New Strict Products Liability Law Apply?

    Jury Trials and Mediation in Philadelphia County: Virtually in Person

    Considerations in Obtaining a Mechanic’s Lien in Maryland (Don’t try this at home)

    Wilke Fleury Secures Bid Protest Denial

    Allen, TX Board of Trustees Expected to Approve Stadium Repair Plans

    Newmeyer Dillion Secures Victory For Crown Castle In Years-Long Litigation With City Council Of Piedmont Over Small Cell Wireless Telecommunications Sites

    John Paulson’s $1 Billion Caribbean Empire Faces Betrayal

    Challenging and Defending a California Public Works Stop Payment Notice: Affidavit vs. Counter-Affidavit Process

    Federal Magistrate Judge Recommends Rescission of Policies

    The Privilege Is All Mine: California Appellate Court Finds Law Firm Holds Attorney Work Product Privilege Applicable to Documents Created by Formerly Employed Attorney

    Renovate or Demolish Milwaukee’s Historic City Hall?

    2018 Construction Outlook: Mature Expansion, Deceleration in Some Sectors, Continued Growth in Others

    Pennsylvania Mechanics’ Lien “Waivers” and “Releases”: What’s the Difference?

    Liability Insurer Precluded from Intervening in Insured’s Lawsuit

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

    Uniform Rules Governing New York’s Supreme and County Courts Get An Overhaul

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

    Association Bound by Arbitration Provision in Purchase-And-Sale Contracts and Deeds

    The Most Expensive Apartment Listings in New York That Are Not in Manhattan

    Court Narrowly Interprets “Faulty Workmanship” Provision

    Couple Sues for Construction Defects in Manufactured Home

    WSDOT Seeks Retraction of Waiver Excluding Non-Minority Woman-Owned Businesses from Participation Goals

    Homeowner Alleges Pool Construction Is Defective

    “If It Walks Like A Duck . . .” – Expert Testimony Not Always Required In Realtor Malpractice Cases Where Alleged Breach Of Duty Can Be Easily Understood By Lay Persons
    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

    Break out the Neon: ‘80s Era Davis-Bacon “Prevailing Wage” Definition Restored in DOL Final Rule

    August 21, 2023 —
    On August 8, 2023, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced its final rule related to the Davis-Bacon Act (the “Act”), entitled “Updating the Davis-Bacon and Related Acts Regulations.” However, the official final rule must be published in the Federal Register – likely by week’s end – before going into effect 60 days after publication. DOL issued its notice of proposed rulemaking (“NPRM”) in March 2022 and received more than 40,000 comments from interested stakeholders. Evaluating and addressing those comments took the better part of a year, as DOL did not send the rule to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (“OIRA”) for White House approval until December 16, 2022. After languishing for months, OIRA has now concluded its review, allowing DOL to move forward with its final rule. Reprinted courtesy of A. Scott Hecker, Seyfarth and Ted North, Seyfarth Mr. Hecker may be contacted at shecker@seyfarth.com Mr. North may be contacted at enorth@seyfarth.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    President Obama Vetoes Keystone Pipeline Bill

    February 26, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama issued his third veto Tuesday to reject legislation that would allow construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, escalating a battle over the project with Republicans in Congress. Notice of the long-expected veto was released without fanfare via a message to the Senate just hours after the bill formally arrived at the White House. The Senate has agreed to hold a vote on overriding the veto no later than March 3. Obama has repeatedly said a State Department review of the TransCanada Corp. project -- which would carry crude oil produced in Alberta, Canada, south through the U.S. -- should proceed before a decision is made on whether to allow construction of the $8 billion pipeline. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Angela Greiling Keane, Bloomberg

    Distressed Home Sales Shrinking

    October 22, 2014 —
    According to Molly Boesel in CoreLogic, “Distressed sales (REO and short sales) accounted for 11.2 percent of total home sales in August 2014, the lowest share since December 2007 and a strong improvement from the same time a year ago when this category made up 15 percent of total sales.” Michigan had the largest amount of distressed sales, with 25.5 percent in August, while California “saw the largest improvement from peak distressed sales share of any state, falling 55.3 percent from the January 2009 peak share of 67.4 percent.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Defect Case Not Over, Despite Summary Judgment

    November 07, 2012 —
    The Supreme Court of Oregon has concluded in an en banc decision that a motion to reconsider a summary judgment is not a motion for a new trial. In coming to their conclusion the court overturned an earlier Oregon Supreme Court case, Carter v. U.S. National Bank. Although the decision does not bear on construction defects, the underlying case did. Due to the decision, these claims can now be evaluated in a trial. The case, Association of Unit Owners of Timbercrest Condominiums v. Warren, came about after an apartment complex was converted into condominium units. The developers hired Big Al’s Construction for some of the remodeling work. The condominium association later sued the developer and the contractor over claims of construction defects. The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, which the court granted. But that wasn’t the end of things. The plaintiff soon filed a “motion to reconsider,” noting that the summary judgment seemed to be in conflict with both law and other recent rulings, and additionally, the grounds for the decision were not in the order. The judge then notified the parties that the court had “pulled the trigger too quickly” and had seven questions for the parties to answer. The court dismissed all claims against the defendants. The defendants filed their responses, objecting that that “‘there is no such thing’ as a motion for reconsideration.” Further, while “the rules do allow for post-judgment review of pre-judgment rulings through a motion for a new trial,” the plaintiffs had not filed for a new trial. But did they need one? They did file an appeal. The judge in the case admitted that there was no such thing as a motion to reconsider, and felt bad about prematurely signing the judgment. The case was sent to the Court of Appeals to determine if the motion to reconsider was a request for a new trial. The Court of Appeals concurred. In reviewing the decision, the Oregon Supreme Court concluded that there were a maximum of three questions to address. Was the motion for reconsideration a motion for a new trial? If so, was the later notice of appeal premature? And if so, was the plaintiff required to file a new appeal? The court determined that the answer to the first question was no. Prior decisions pointed to the conclusion “that a motion for reconsideration of a summary judgment amounts to a motion for a new trial,” but here the court concluded that “our prior cases erred,” and turned to the summary judgment rule for clarification. The court noted that “the rule contemplates that summary judgment and trial are separate and distinct events.” With this conclusion, the Oregon Supreme Court remanded the case to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Building Resiliency: Withstanding Wildfires and Other Natural Disasters

    September 25, 2023 —
    According to the National Fire Protection Association, between 2016 and 2020 an estimated average of 4,300 fires per year plagued structures under construction, adding up to about $376 million in annual property damage. More recently, the National Centers for Environmental Information reported that wildfires accounted for more than $3.2 billion in damages across the United States. These figures alone point to the heightened awareness that all companies—particularly construction companies—should maintain surrounding the unique challenges and risks that wildfires can present and how they could potentially impact the integrity of projects and the associated safety of their workers. As North America grapples with the increasing frequency and severity of wildfires, hurricanes and additional severe weather events, numerous industries have had to adapt and implement proactive measures to minimize their risks and associated exposures. The impact of these natural disasters on the construction industry is indisputable, necessitating proactive measures that construction companies should seriously consider adopting to effectively mitigate those risks, efficiently navigate insurance complexities and seamlessly integrate data-driven solutions alongside modern tools like AI and predictive modeling. Reprinted courtesy of Bill Creedon, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Creedon may be contacted at bill.creedon@wtwco.com

    Designed to Expose: Beware Lender Certificates

    August 20, 2018 —
    Danny the Developer wishes to build Greenacre, a large residential and retail condominium complex in downtown Boston. However, Danny’s lender – the Bank of Barbara – will not lend Danny the money to develop the complex unless Danny’s architect signs a lender certificate. Danny presents the lender certificate to Allie the Architect, the certificate is relatively short and simple, it states:
    “Allie the Architect prepared plans and specifications relating to Greenacre. Allie the Architect certifies that the plans are in accordance with all applicable zoning, building, housing and other laws, ordinances, regulations including but not limited to the Federal Fair Housing Act, the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards, and the Americans with Disability Act. The Plans do not encroach over, across or upon any such easements, rights-of-way, or subsurface rights and the like. Allie further certifies that the load bearing capacity of the soil is adequate to support the plans. The Bank of Barbara shall rely upon Allie the Architects certification in loaning money to Danny the Developer for Greenacre.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jacob Goodelman, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Mr. Goodelman may be contacted at jgoodelman@grsm.com

    Less Than Perfectly Drafted Endorsement Bars Flood Coverage

    January 21, 2015 —
    The court decided that the policy's flood exclusion, despite being poorly located within the policy, barred coverage for loss caused by flood. Great Lakes Int'l Trading Inc. v. Travelers Prop. Cas. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165378 (D. Conn. Nov. 26, 2014). Hurricane Sandy caused flood waters from the Hackensack River in New Jersey to inundate a warehouse where the insured had imported food products stored for sale in the United States. High winds also sheared open parts of the warehouse's roof, allowing extensive rainwater to enter the building. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Federal Court Requires Auto Liability Carrier to Cover Suit Involving Independent Contractor Despite “Employee Exclusion”

    August 30, 2017 —
    A recent federal court decision rendered in July of 2017 highlights the importance of worker classification in the transportation industry and the potential insurance implications. In Spirit Commercial Auto Risk Retention Grp., Inc. v. Kailey, 1 the court determined that an “employee exclusion” in a motor carrier’s automobile liability insurance policy did not exclude coverage for liability resulting from the bodily injury of an independent contractor operating the motor carrier’s tractor-trailer. In April of 2014, a team of two drivers hired by the motor carrier, Kailey Trucking Line (KTL), were involved in a collision while operating KTL’s truck. The passenger in the truck, who was not operating the vehicle at the time, was killed in the accident. Subsequently, the spouse of the decedent filed suit against KTL as well as the driver of the truck. KTL sought coverage for the suit under its automobile liability insurance policy, issued by Spirit Commercial Auto Risk Retention Group, Incorporated (Spirit). However, Spirit took the position that it had no duty to defend or indemnify KTL, and ultimately filed a declaratory judgment action in United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The policy issued to KTL provided coverage for damages due to bodily injury or property damage caused by an accident resulting from the ownership, maintenance, or use of a covered auto. However, the policy excluded from coverage any bodily injury to an employee or fellow employee of the insured arising out of and in the course of employment of the insured. Accordingly, to the extent that the decedent qualified as an “employee” of KTL, Spirit had no duty to indemnify KTL in the litigation. Reprinted courtesy of H. Scott Williams, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Brendan C. Colt, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Holt may be contacted at bch@sdvlaw.com Mr. Williams may be contacted at hsw@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of