BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing 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


    Denial of Claim for Concealment or Fraud Reversed by Sixth Circuit

    Trial Court's Award of Contractual Fees to Public Adjuster Overturned

    When Does a Claim Against an Insurance Carrier for Failing to Defend Accrue?

    Construction Firm Sues City and Engineers over Reservoir Project

    San Diego’s NFL Stadium Dream Counts on Munis for Chargers’ Home

    Super Lawyers Selects Haight Lawyers for Its 2024 Southern California Rising Stars List

    Mexico City Metro Collapse Kills 24 After Neighbors’ Warnings

    Duty to Defend For Accident Exists, But Not Duty to Indeminfy

    California Beach Hotel to Get $185 Million Luxury Rebuild

    SAFETY Act Part II: Levels of Protection

    Repairing One’s Own Work and the one Year Statute of Limitations to Sue a Miller Act Payment Bond

    San Francisco Half-Built Apartment Complex Destroyed by Fire

    Rise in Home Building Helps Other Job Sectors

    When Construction Defects Appear, Don’t Choose Between Rebuilding and Building Your Case

    The Texas Storm – Guidance for Contractors

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose in June at a Slower Pace

    Customer’s Agreement to Self-Insure and Release for Water Damage Effectively Precludes Liability of Storage Container Company

    Fed Inflation Goal Is Elusive as U.S. Rents Stabilize: Economy

    2022 Project of the Year: Linking Los Angeles

    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    Precedent-Setting ‘Green’ Apartments in Kansas City

    Competitive Bidding Statute: When it Applies and When it Does Not

    Choice of Laws Test Mandates Application of California’s Continuous and Progressive Trigger of Coverage to Asbestos Claims

    Hundreds of Coronavirus Coverage Cases Await Determination on Consolidation

    Court Exclaims “Enough!” To Homeowner Who Kept Raising Wrongful Foreclosure Claims

    Failure to Allege Property Damage Within Policy Period Defeats Insured's Claim

    With Wildfires at a Peak, “Firetech” Is Joining Smart City Lineups

    NY Appellate Court Holds Common Interest Privilege Applies to Parties to a Merger

    No Coverage for Restoring Aesthetic Uniformity

    No Coverage for Breach of Contract Claims Against Contractor

    Erdogan Vows to Punish Shoddy Builders Ahead of Crucial Election

    Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Vexed by Low Demand for Mortgages

    Why Insurers and Their Attorneys Need to Pay Close Attention to Their Discovery Burden in Washington

    Congratulations to Associate Madeline Arcellana on Her Selection as a Top Rank Attorney in Southern Nevada!

    No Duty to Defend Under Pollution Policy

    Serial ADA Lawsuits Targeting Small Business Owners

    Construction Defect Claims Not Covered

    Rhode Island Finds Pollution Exclusion Ambiguous, Orders Coverage for Home Heating Oil Leak

    Patriarch Partners Decision Confirms Government Subpoenas May Constitute a “Claim” Under D&O Policy; Warns Policyholders to Think Broadly When Representing Facts and Circumstances to Insurers

    With Trump's Tariff Talk, Time to Negotiate for Escalation Clauses in Construction Contracts

    No Coverage For Construction Defects When Complaint Alleges Contractual Damages

    Suit Limitation Provision Upheld

    Washington Supreme Court Interprets Ensuing Loss Exception in All-Risk Property Insurance Policy

    Alaska Supreme Court Finds Insurer Owes No Independent Duty to Injured Party

    EPA Fines Ivory Homes for Storm Water Pollution

    Ninth Circuit Upholds Corps’ Issuance of CWA Section 404 Permit for Newhall Ranch Project Near Santa Clarita, CA

    Contractors with Ties to Trustees Reaped Benefits from LA Community College Modernization Program

    Quick Note: Insurer Must Comply with Florida’s Claims Administration Act

    Modification: Exceptions to Privette Doctrine Do Not Apply Where There is No Evidence a General Contractor Affirmatively Contributed to the Injuries of an Independent Contractor’s Employee

    Illinois Appellate Court Finds Insurer Estopped From Denying Coverage Where Declaratory Judgment Suit Filed Too Late
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Failure to Meet Code Case Remanded to Lower Court for Attorney Fees

    May 24, 2011 —

    Judge Patricia J. Cottrell, ruling on the case Roger Wilkes, et al. v. Shaw Enterprises, LLC, in the Tennessee Court of Appeals, upheld the trial court’s conclusion that “the builder constructed the house in accordance with good building practices even though it was not in strict conformance with the building code.” However, Judge Cottrell directed the lower court to “award to Appellants reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in their first appeal, as determined by the trial court.”

    Judge Cottrell cited in her opinion the contract which specified that the house would be constructed “in accordance with good building practices.” However, after the Wilkes discovered water leakage, the inspections revealed that “that Shaw had not installed through-wall flashing and weep holes when the house was built.” The trial court concluded that:

    “Separate and apart from the flashing and weep holes, the trial court concluded the Wilkeses were entitled to recover damages for the other defects they proved based on the cost of repair estimates introduced during the first and second trials, which the court adjusted for credibility reasons. Thus, the trial court recalculated the amount the Wilkeses were entitled to recover and concluded they were entitled to $17,721 for the value of repairs for defects in violation of good business practices, and an additional 15%, or $2,658.15, for management, overhead, and profit of a licensed contractor. This resulted in a judgment in the amount of $20,370.15. The trial court awarded the Wilkeses attorneys” fees through the Page 9 first trial in the amount of $5,094.78 and discretionary costs in the amount of $1,500. The total judgment following the second trial totaled $26,973.93.”

    In this second appeal, Judge Cottrell concluded, that “the trial court thus did not have the authority to decide the Wilkeses were not entitled to their attorneys” fees and costs incurred in the first appeal.”

    Read the court’s decision

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

    Real Estate Trends: Looking Ahead to 2021

    November 09, 2020 —
    2020 has been an unprecedented year, and, while there are likely more twists and turns to come before December 31, it is essential to look at how the real estate markets have changed this year and which trends are likely to continue into 2021. The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted nearly every industry, including commercial real estate, and its impact will continue to influence the market and commercial real estate long after the virus has been eradicated. Commercial Real Estate Loan Modifications As the United States’ economy stalled, shut down and slowly started to recover throughout 2020, many businesses were negatively impacted, and most property owners found themselves negotiating with both their lenders and tenants. As tenants were unable to pay rent, property owners were unable to service their debt, which led to a surge of loan modifications this year. This trend certainly will continue through the first half of 2021, as the economy continues to recover. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Adam Weaver, Pillsbury
    Mr. Weaver may be contacted at adam.weaver@pillsburylaw.com

    Boys (and Girls) of Summer: New Residential Solar Energy System Disclosures Take Effect January 1, 2019

    October 02, 2018 —
    As we come to the end of Summer, the California Contractors State License Board advises licensees that it has finalized its Solar Energy System Disclosure Document. The Solar Energy System Disclosure Document, required under Business and Professions Code Section 7169 as amended by Assembly Bill 1070 in 2017, requires that the disclosure language of the document be:
    1. Included in all contracts providing for the installation of a “solar energy system” on a residential building;
    2. Included on the front page or cover page of the contract;
    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

    Nine Gibbs Giden Partners Listed in Southern California Super Lawyers 2022

    February 14, 2022 —
    Premiere law firm Gibbs Giden Locher Turner Senet & Wittbrodt, LLP announced that 9 of the firm's partners have been selected by their peers for inclusion in the 2022 Southern California Super Lawyers list. The Super Lawyers lists are issued by Thomson Reuters. These lists honor no more than 5% of licensed attorneys in each state, based on peer recognition and professional achievements. The following Gibbs Giden attorneys have been selected to the 2022 Southern California Super Lawyers list: LOS ANGELES Barbara Gadbois – Construction Law Sara Kornblatt – Construction Law and Litigation William (Bill) Locher - Real Estate and Business Law Ted Senet – Insurance and Construction Law Glenn Turner – Construction Law and Litigation Richard Wittbrodt – Construction Law and Litigation, AAA Mediator/Arbitrator IRVINE Philip Zvonicek – Business, Corporate, Construction, Insurance Law WESTLAKE Jason Adams – Construction and Insurance Law Christopher Ng – (Managing Partner) Construction and Business Law Gibbs Giden understands the complex challenges companies face in today’s competitive business environment. From our roots in construction law to our evolution into a premier law firm serving the diverse needs of the business community, we provide the insight and advice our clients need to position themselves for the future. www.gibbsgiden.com LOS ANGELES | IRVINE | SAN JOSE | WESTLAKE | LAS VEGAS Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Legislature Puts a Spear in Doctrine Making Contractor Warrantor of Owner Furnished Plans and Specifications

    May 31, 2021 —
    The Texas Legislature has just sent Senate Bill 219 (“S.B. 219”) to the Governor for signature; if this legislation is signed by the Governor, it will further erode the Texas legal doctrine that makes the contractor the warrantor of owner-furnished plans and specifications unless the prime contract specifically places this burden on the owner. Background 49 states follow what is known as the Spearin doctrine (named after the U.S. Supreme Court case of United States v. Spearin) in which owners warrant the accuracy and sufficiency of owner-furnished plans and specifications. Texas, on the other hand, follows the Texas Supreme Court created Lonergan doctrine, which has been an unfortunate presence in Texas construction law since 1907. In its “purest form,” as stated by the Texas Supreme Court, the Lonergan doctrine prevents a contractor from successfully asserting a claim for “breach of contract based on defective plans and specifications” unless the contract contains language that “shows an intent to shift the burden of risk to the owner.” Essentially, this then translates into the contractor warranting the sufficiency and accuracy of owner-furnished plans and specifications, unless the contract between them expressly places this burden on the owner. Over the years some Texas courts of appeal had ameliorated this harsh doctrine, but in 2012, the Texas Supreme Court indicated Lonergan was still the law in Texas, in the case of El Paso v. Mastec. In 2019, the Texas Legislature took the first step toward hopefully abrogating the Lonergan doctrine by implementing a new Chapter 473 to the Texas Transportation Code with respect to certain projects undertaken by the Texas Department of Transportation, and Texas political subdivisions acting under the authority of Chapters 284, 366, 370 or 431 of the Transportation Code, adopting, as it were, the Spearin Doctrine in these limited, transportation projects. Now, the legislature has further chipped away at the Lonergan doctrine with the passage of S.B. 219. Reprinted courtesy of Paulo Flores, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., Timothy D. Matheny, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Jackson Mabry, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Flores may be contacted at PFlores@Pecklaw.com Mr. Matheny may be contacted at tmatheny@pecklaw.com Mr. Mabry may be contacted at jmabry@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Were Quake Standards Illegally Altered for PG&E Nuclear Power Plant?

    October 29, 2014 —
    An environmental group has brought a lawsuit alleging that “[f]ederal regulators secretly and illegally revised the license for California’s last nuclear power facility — PG&E’s Diablo Canyon — to mask the aging plant’s vulnerability to earthquakes,” according to SF Gate. Friends of the Earth’s “suit claims that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. last year changed a key element of the plant’s license related to seismic safety without allowing public input as required by law — or even notifying the public at all.” However, spokesman Blair Jones claimed that “Friends of the Earth continues to mischaracterize the facts regarding seismic safety at Diablo Canyon. The facts are Diablo Canyon was built with earthquake safety at the forefront, is a seismically safe facility, and is in compliance with NRC licensing requirements.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Super Lawyers

    August 03, 2022 —
    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai has been recognized as a 2022 Northern California Super Lawyers honoree in the area of Construction Litigation. This is the ninth consecutive year that he has been recognized by Super Lawyers. Super Lawyers, an annual listing of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and personal achievement, is limited to no more than five percent (5%) of lawyers in a state who are selected through a multiphase process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent research evaluation and peer reviews by practice area. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Disruption: When Did It Start and Where Will It End?

    June 25, 2019 —
    If change is the only constant—as was famously observed by a Greek philosopher circa 500 B.C.—then why single out some changes as “disruption”? Disruption is about more than just technology; it’s about more, even, than the rapid rollout and development of technology in the past couple of decades. The word disruption refers to processes or products that are fundamentally different from what is currently in use and that render unforeseen, large-scale changes. Early discussions of disruption (the term was coined by Harvard Business School professor Clayton M. Christensen in a 1995 Harvard Business Review article) compared incremental change in existing systems, which are usually supported by established corporations, to innovations that start out as something completely fresh, limited in their appeal and flawed in initial iterations. The construction industry was—and still is—late to adopt most technologies and late in experiencing overall disruption. It also lags behind other industries when it comes to efficiency and productivity. McKinsey reported that construction is one of the “least digitized industries in the world,” despite employing approximately 7% of the world’s working-age population and representing one of the world economy’s largest sectors. Disruption is likely to be fast approaching now, even for the construction industry. But its delay may confer the benefit of allowing construction companies to learn from other industries’ mistakes. Reprinted courtesy of Brian Gallagher, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of