BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural 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


    Cliffhanger: $451M Upgrade for Treacherous Stretch of Highway 1 in British Columbia

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (05/11/22)

    Deleted Emails Cost Company $3M in Sanctions

    Tightest Credit Market in 16 Years Rejects Bernanke’s Bid

    Court Holds That One-Year SOL Applies to Disgorgement Claims Under B&P Section 7031

    New Orleans Reviews System After Storm Swamps Pumps

    Harmon Tower Case Settled Prior to Start of Trial

    White and Williams Recognizes Women’s History Month: Remembering Virginia Barton Wallace

    Property Damage Caused By Construction Next Door Covered as Ensuing Loss

    Appeals Court Explains Punitive Damages Awards For Extreme Reprehensibility Or Unusually Small, Hard-To-Detect Or Hard-To-Measure Compensatory Damages

    New York Court Discusses Evidentiary Standards for Policy Rescission Based on Material Misrepresentation

    The Leaning Tower of San Francisco

    When Is a Project Delay Material and Actionable?

    Amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 – Expert Testimony

    Lake Texoma, Texas Condo Case may go to Trial

    Federal Judge Issues Preliminary Injunction Blocking State's Enforcement of New Law Banning Mandatory Employee Arbitration Agreements

    Traub Lieberman Partner Stephen Straus Wins Spoliation Motion in Favor of Defendant

    Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Calls for CFPB Investigation into Tenant Screening Businesses

    Nevada Supreme Court Clarifies the Litigation Waiver of the One-Action Rule

    Public Contract Code 9204 – A New Mandatory Claims Process for Contractors and Subcontractors – and a Possible Trap for the Unwary

    A Game of Texas Hold’em: How Texas Stopped Wage Increases for Salaried Exempt Employees Nationwide

    When an Intentional Act Results in Injury or Damage, it is not an Accident within the Meaning of an Insurance Policy Even When the Insured did not Intend to Cause the Injury or Damage

    Contract Change #1- Insurance in the A201 (law note)

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

    Obama Asks for $302 Billion to Fix Bridges and Potholes

    Balestreri Potocki & Holmes Attorneys Named 2020 Super Lawyers and Rising Star

    Jobs Machine in U.S. Created More Than Burger Flippers Last Year

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (8/14/24) – Commercial Real Estate AI, Hotel Pipeline Growth, and Housing Market Improvements

    History of Defects Leads to Punitive Damages for Bankrupt Developer

    Insurer Doomed in Delaware by the Sutton Rule

    Power of Workers Compensation Immunity on Construction Project

    FEMA Offers to Review Hurricane Sandy Claims

    Three Attorneys Named Among The Best Lawyers in America 2018

    No Escape: California Court of Appeals Gives a Primary CGL Insurer’s “Other Insurance” Clause Two Thumbs Down

    Ethical Limits on Preparing a Witness for Deposition or Trial

    As Evidence Grows, Regions Prepare for Sea Level Rise

    Another Guilty Plea In Nevada Construction Defect Fraud Case

    SEC Proposes Rule Requiring Public Firms to Report Climate Risks

    Happy New Year from CDJ

    US Moves to Come Clean on PFAS in Drinking Water

    Senior Housing Surplus Seen as Boomers Spur Building Boom

    US Attorney Alleges ADA Violations in Chicago Cubs Stadium Renovation

    The Impact of the IIJA and Amended Buy American Act on the Construction Industry

    Flawed Welding Faulted in Mexico City Subway Collapse

    California Imposes New Disabled Access Obligations on Commercial Property Owners

    It’s Not What You Were Thinking!

    Less Than Perfectly Drafted Endorsement Bars Flood Coverage

    Insurance Firm Defends against $22 Million Claim

    NYC Rail Tunnel Cost Jumps and Construction Start Pushed Back

    Damages to Property That is Not the Insured's Work Product Are Covered
    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

    Construction Defects Are Not An Occurrence Under New York, New Jersey Law

    June 18, 2014 —
    The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, determined there was no coverage for construction defects under New York or New Jersey law. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA v. Turner Constr. Co., 2014 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3546 (N.Y. App. Div. May 15, 2014). The property owner retained Turner Construction to serve as the general contractor. Turner subcontracted with Permasteelisa North America Corporation to design and build the exterior wall, a "curtain wall," which consisted of granite and glass. A segment of the pipe rail system fell to the street from the eighth floor of the building. An investigation determined that more than 20% of the pipe rail connections surveyed did not conform to the building plans. Additional problems included inconsistencies in the method of rail attachment, bent brackets on the pipe rail system, cracked glass louvers, cracked glass panels, and water infiltration. 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

    Insurers May Not Be Required to Defend Contractors In a Florida §558 Proceeding

    November 06, 2018 —
    In recent holding, the Florida Supreme Court held that an insurer may not have a duty to defend a contractor in a Florida §558 proceeding. Chapter 558 of the Florida Statutes sets forth procedural requirements which must be met before a claimant may file a construction defect action. These requirements include serving a contractor, subcontractor or supplier with written notice of the claim. The contractor, in turn, must serve a written response to the notice of claim in which the contractor provides either an offer to repair the alleged construction defect at no cost to the claimant, resolution of the claim through a monetary payment, a statement disputing the claim, or a statement that any monetary payment will be determined by the recipient’s insurer. The claimant may file suit if the contractor disputes the claim and refuses to remedy the alleged defect or provide monetary compensation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Erik Simpson, Gordon & Rees
    Mr. Simpson may be contacted at esimpson@grsm.com

    Potential Coverage Issues Implicated by the Champlain Towers Collapse

    March 21, 2022 —
    In June 24, 2021, the Champlain Towers South in Surfside, Florida collapsed, killing nearly 100 individuals (the “Collapse”). As experts uncover more information regarding the cause of the Collapse, those individuals who have filed lawsuits as well as the potentially culpable defendants are looking to insurers for coverage of their bodily injury and property damage claims. Contractors, engineers, and other professionals are or anticipate being sued for their roles in the Collapse. Those professionals have professional liability policies and/or director and officer liability policies. Likewise, the condominium association’s commercial general liability (CGL) policies and its business property policy may have a duty to defend and/or indemnify their insureds as well. Finally, individual unit owners/renters may look to their homeowners’ insurance, auto insurance, health insurance, and/or life insurance policies for coverage.1 The potential breadth of insurance coverage issues raised by the Collapse is beyond the scope of this article. The article will consider some concerns that could impact insurance coverage under a standard CGL policy in the case of a building collapse. Reprinted courtesy of Theresa A. Guertin, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Holly A. Rice, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Guertin may be contacted at TGuertin@sdvlaw.com Ms. Rice may be contacted at HRice@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Capitol View-Corridor Restrictions Affect Massing of Austin’s Tallest Tower

    October 17, 2023 —
    The stepped-back profile of a 66-story skyscraper in Austin, which will be the state capital’s tallest building when completed this fall, is a consequence of the city's height and massing limits to keep the view corridor to the capitol's dome unblocked. Reprinted courtesy of David M. Brown, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Recent Environmental Cases: Something in the Water, in the Air and in the Woods

    July 22, 2019 —
    State of Texas, et al. v. US EPA. The revised regulatory definition of “Waters of the U.S.” continues to generate litigation in the federal courts. On May 28, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas held that the 2015 rulemaking proceedings used by EPA and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers to redefine this important component of the Clean Water Act were flawed in that the notice and comment provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) were violated because insufficient notice was provided by these agencies that “adjacent” waters newly subject to the regulatory jurisdiction of these agencies, can be determined on the basis of specific distances, which was a change in the agencies’ thinking, and insufficient notice of this change was provided to the public. In addition, the final rule “also violated the APA by preventing interested parties from commenting on the scientific studies that served as the technical basis” for the rule. However, the court did not vacate the new rule, but remanded the matter to the “appropriate administrative agencies” to give them an opportunity to fix this problem. State of Oklahoma, ex rel. Mike Hunter, Attorney General of Oklahoma v. US EPA and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. A day later, on May 29, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma rejected arguments that the new redefinition should be preliminarily enjoined.While this case was filed in 2015, intervening litigation in the federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, caused a substantial delay in the disposition of this case. The court, noting that the tests for granting such an injunction against the federal government are fairly exacting, held that the plaintiffs, the State of Oklahoma and a number of industry groups and associations, failed to convince the court that the harm they would suffer if the rules remained effective would be irreparable. Presumably, this case will be going to trial in the near future. 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

    California Rejects Judgments By Confession Pursuant to Civil Code Section 1132

    May 08, 2023 —
    The Elimination of Judgment by Confession Following in the footsteps of Massachusetts and Florida, California recently updated California Code of Civil Procedure section 1132 which renders judgments by confession unenforceable and inadmissible in any superior court, effective January 1, 2023. The bar is not retroactive, so judgments by confession obtained or entered before January 1, 2023 are still valid. Moving forward, consider the following. What is a Judgment By Confession? A judgment by confession, also known as a confession of judgment or "cognovit" clause, is a mechanism by which a debtor agrees that a creditor may summarily obtain a legal judgment against that debtor and enforce it in the event of the debtor's breach of contract or default. In other words, it is a private admission by a debtor that they are liable for a debt without the need for a trial, and consequently, agree to forfeit very important rights. Most importantly, parties agreeing to such clauses are waiving rights such as the right to notice of the judgment and the right to assert defenses against the creditor or third party's claims. Historically, without any judicial involvement, these types of out-of-court judgments would be enforceable. Reprinted courtesy of Drew M. Jorgenson, Newmeyer Dillion and Louis "Dutch" Schotemeyer, Newmeyer Dillion Mr. Jorgenson may be contacted at drew.jorgenson@ndlf.com Mr. Schotemeyer may be contacted at dutch.schotemeyer@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hawaii Federal District Court Rejects Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    November 06, 2018 —
    Taking into consideration a "Revised Occurrence Endorsement," the federal district court determined the insurer had a duty to defend. Gemini Ins Co. v. Constrx Ltd., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163453 (D. Haw. Sept. 24, 2018). Constrx Ltd. (CRX) contracted with the AOAO to perform remedial construction repairs to condominium buildings and apartment units. CRX asserted that it completed all work, including charge orders and punch list items and it left the site. CRX was paid less that the contract amount and demanded arbitration against the AOAO. In the arbitration the AOAO relied upon a report by Posard Brock & Associates (PBA) Report which set forth the AOAO's claims against CRX, including corrective work, remaining punch list work, construction delay costs, cost overruns, and other items justifying its payment than less that the contract amount. 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

    New Mexico Adopts Right to Repair Act

    April 25, 2023 —
    On April 7, 2023, New Mexico’s governor, Michelle Lujan Grisham, signed into law New Mexico’s Right to Repair Act (Act), 2023 N.M. SB 50. The Act’s effective date is July 1, 2023. The Act applies to construction defects in dwellings, i.e., newly constructed single family housing units designed for residential use. The Act applies to not only newly constructed housing units but also to systems and other components and improvements that are part of the housing unit at the time of construction. Pursuant to the Act, except for construction defect claims that involve an immediate threat to the life or safety of persons occupying the dwelling, that render the dwelling uninhabitable or in which the seller, after notice, refused to make a repair pursuant to any applicable express warranty, a purchaser must comply with the provisions of the Act before filing a complaint or pursing an alternative dispute mechanism related to a construction defect in the dwelling. A seller who receives a notice complying with the provisions of the Act must give notice to all construction professionals who may be responsible for the defect. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com