BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction 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


    Builder’s Be Wary of Insurance Policies that Provide No Coverage for Building: Mt. Hawley Ins. Co v. Creek Side at Parker HOA

    What Is a Construction Defect in California?

    Florida Enacts Property Insurance Overhaul for Benefit of Policyholders

    Colorado Finally Corrects Thirty-Year Old Flaw in Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    Daniel Ferhat Receives Two Awards for Service to the Legal Community

    Firm Claims Construction Defects in Hawaiian Homes

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

    Indicted Union Representatives Try Again to Revive Enmons

    Construction Law Job Opps and How to Create Them

    Homebuilders Call for Housing Tax Incentives

    With Historic Removal of Four Dams, Klamath River Flows Again Unhindered

    A Networked World of Buildings

    Contractor Sues License Board

    Senator Ray Scott Introduced a Bill to Reduce Colorado’s Statute of Repose for Construction Defect Actions to Four Years

    Civil RICO Case Against Johnny Doc Is Challenging

    Home Building Mergers and Acquisitions 2014 Predictions

    NYC’s Next Hot Neighborhoods Targeted With Property Funds

    Changes and Extra Work – Is There a Limit?

    No Bad Faith in Insurer's Denial of Collapse Claim

    Revel Closing Shows Gambling Is No Sure Thing for Renewal

    Haight Welcomes Elizabeth Lawley

    Nevada Legislature Burns Insurers' Rights to Offer Eroding Limits

    Tropical Storms Pile Up Back-to-Back-to-Back Out West

    Judgment for Insurer Reversed Due to Failure to Establish Depreciation

    Modernist Houses Galore! [visual candy for architects]

    Will Claims By Contractors on Big Design-Build Projects Ever End?

    The Relevance and Reasonableness of Destructive Testing

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

    SFAA and Coalition of Partners Encourage Lawmakers to Require Essential Surety Bonding Protections on All Federally-Financed Projects Receiving WIFIA Funds

    U.S. Judge Says Wal-Mart Must Face Mexican-Bribe Claims

    New York Construction Practice Team Obtains Summary Judgment, Dismissal of Labor Law §240(1) Claim Against Municipal Entities

    140 Days Until The California Consumer Privacy Act Becomes Law - Why Aren't More Businesses Complying?

    Indiana Court of Appeals Holds That Lease Terms Bar Landlord’s Carrier From Subrogating Against Commercial Tenant

    CA Supreme Court Rejects Proposed Exceptions to Interim Adverse Judgment Rule Defense to Malicious Prosecution Action

    10 Safety Tips for General Contractors

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    Homebuilders See Record Bearish Bets on Shaky Recovery

    CGL Coverage for Liquidated Damages and the Contractual Liability Exclusion

    Arkansas Federal Court Fans the Product Liability Flames Utilizing the Malfunction Theory

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Awarded Sacramento Business Journal’s Best of the Bar

    Pennsylvania Sues Firms to Recoup Harrisburg Incinerator Losses

    Saudi Prince’s Megacity Shows Signs of Life

    Claim for Consequential Damages Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Owners and Contractors are Liable for Injuries Caused by their Independent Contractors under the “Peculiar Risk Doctrine”

    Arizona Court of Appeals Rules Issues Were Not Covered in Construction Defect Suit

    U.S. Housing Starts Top Forecast on Single-Family Homes

    How I Prevailed on a Remote Jury Trial

    Governor Ducey Vetoes Water and Development Bills

    From the Ground Up

    Safety Accusations Fly in Dispute Between New York Developer and Contractor
    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. Leveraging 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

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (01/11/23) – Construction Tech, Housing Market Confidence, and Decarbonization

    February 01, 2023 —
    To kick of 2023, this week’s news round-up dives into contech inventions projected to impact the industry, shifting home prices and buyer confidence, investors prioritizing decarbonization efforts, and more.
    • From holograms to robots, these 6 contech innovations are projected to tackle some of construction’s toughest issues. (Robyn Griggs Lawrence, Construction Dive)
    • Manufacturing and data center projects will support the U.S. construction industry as work begins to slow on retail projects, warehouses and offices. (Sebastian Obando, Construction Dive)
    • Despite macroeconomic headwinds, doubling down on decarbonization efforts is projected to be top-of-mind for investors and occupiers in 2023. (JLL)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    California Court of Appeal Holds That the Right to Repair Act Prohibits Class Actions Against Manufacturers of Products Completely Manufactured Offsite

    February 06, 2019 —
    In Kohler Co. v. Superior Court, 29 Cal. App. 5th 55 (2018), the Second District of the Court of Appeal of California considered whether the lower court properly allowed homeowners to bring class action claims under the Right to Repair Act (the Act) against a manufacturer of a plumbing fixture for alleged defects in the product. After an extensive analysis of the language of the Act, the court found that class action claims under the Act are not allowed if the product was completely manufactured offsite. Since the subject fixture was completely manufactured offsite, the Court of Appeal reversed the lower court’s decision. The court’s holding establishes that rights and remedies set forth in the Right to Repair Act are not available for class action claims alleging defects in products completely manufactured offsite. In Kohler Co., homeowners instituted a class action against Kohler, the manufacturer of water pressure and temperature regulating valves that were installed into their homes during original construction. The class action was filed on behalf of all owners of residential dwellings in California in which these Kohler valves were installed as part of original construction. The complaint asserted, among other claims, a cause of action under the Act. Kohler filed a motion for anti-class certification on the ground that causes of actions under the Act cannot be certified as a class action. The trial court denied the motion with respect to the Act but certified its ruling for appellate review. Kohler filed a petition with the Court of Appeals, arguing that certain sections of the Act explicitly exclude class action claims under the Act. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Appraisal May Include Cause of Loss Issues

    March 21, 2022 —
    The federal district court determined that an appraisal can include causation issues when determining the amount of loss. B&D Inv. Grp., LLC v. Mid-Century Ins. Co., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 246853 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 28, 2021). B&D commercial building was damaged by hail. B&D submitted a claim to Mid-Century, but the parties disagreed as to the damage. Mid-Century found there was hail damage to metal vents on the roof and estimated the repair costs to be $4,271.95. Mid-Century found no hail damage to the roof itself. B&D disagreed and insisted that there was additional damage to the property, specifically the roof. B&D requested an appraisal, but Mid-Century denied the request. Mid-Century found that the condition of the roof was due to wear and tear and therefore constituted an excluded cause under the policy. B&D filed suit seeking a declaratory judgment compelling the parties to proceed with an appraisal. 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

    The Job is Substantially Complete, the Subcontract was Never Signed, the Subcontractor Wants to be Paid—Now What?

    July 28, 2016 —
    A recent case in North Carolina illustrates the types of problems created when a general contractor accepts a subcontractor’s bid and then allows the subcontractor to perform the work without obtaining a signed subcontract.[i] In this case, the general contractor (Choate Construction Company – “Choate”) accepted a bid from a foundation subcontractor (Southeast Caissons, LLC – “SEC”). Choate sent the subcontract to SEC. SEC provided its changes in a “Proposed Addendum” to the subcontract stating, “[SEC] hereby accepts the terms of the attached Subcontract, subject to and conditioned upon Choate[’s] acceptance of the terms set forth in this Addendum[.]” After that, Choate called SEC and exchanged emails concerning the subcontract terms, but did not reach an agreement. SEC then performed its subcontract and sought payment, and acknowledged it had not signed the subcontract. Choate agreed it owed SEC something, but refused to pay because SEC did not have a signed subcontract, asserting the subcontract was not binding on Choate. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at jahlers@ac-lawyers.com

    Bertha – The Tunnel is Finished, but Her Legacy Continues

    September 28, 2017 —
    The Tunnel Boring Machine (“TBM”) known as “Bertha,” built by Hitachi Zosen Corp in Osaka, Japan, was the world’s largest TBM at 57.5 ft. in diameter. The TBM was built to drill the Seattle SR 99 Viaduct replacement tunnel. Seattle Tunnel Partners (“STP”) has a contract with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to dig the two-mile tunnel which is now complete. In December of 2013, tunneling was stopped ostensibly because a 119 ft.-long, eight-inch diameter steel well casing halted the TBM. See 2/15 Blog “Bertha is Stuck and She Remains Mired in Controversy.” Reports are that WSDOT installed the pipe in 2002 to measure groundwater levels and the pipe was allegedly mentioned in the reference material provided to bidders. STP had assumed that the pipe had been removed until the steel casing got stuck in Bertha’s cutting teeth, halting progress. See 1/30/14 Blog “Big Bertha Stuck: Differing Site Condition Principles Revisited.” STP had a design-build contract with WSDOT. The contract contains a Differing Site Conditions (“DSC”) clause pursuant to which if the contractor can prove that the eight-inch pipe was an unforeseen condition (not disclosed in the contract documents), and that the unforeseen condition caused the TBM’s failure, STP is entitled to an equitable adjustment of its contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at jahlers@ac-lawyers.com

    Eighth Circuit Remands to Determine Applicability of Collapse Exclusion

    January 06, 2012 —

    The Eighth Circuit determined a jury instruction regarding the applicability of the "all-risk" policy’s exclusion for "collapse" was inadequate. See KAAPA Ethanol, LLC v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 22158 (8th Cir. Nov. 3, 2011).

    KAAPA had nine large, cylindrical, stainless steel tanks fabricated at its location. Soon after operations began in 2003, some of the tanks experienced unusual movement and began to shift. A geotechnical engineer found "silty clay" had been used for infill instead of compacted granular fill called for in engineering drawings. A year long plan to repair all nine tanks was implemented.

    Affiliated’s "all-risk" policy excluded damage caused by faulty workmanship. It also excluded damage caused by settling or cracking. The settling exclusion went on to provide, "This exclusion will not apply to loss or damage resulting from collapse of: a building or structure; or material part of a building or structure." Affiliated denied coverage because of the faulty workmanship and settling exclusions.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    Unpredictable Opinion Regarding Construction Lien (Reinstatement??)

    January 17, 2023 —
    Here comes the discussion of an appeal I was intimately involved in dealing with a construction lien. See Suntech Plumbing and Mechanical Corp. v. Bella Isla, LLC, 2022 WL 14672765 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022). Unfortunately, it was a losing result on my end but not a losing result to the issue at-hand. You should ask what in the world does this mean. I will tell you. Here is the fact pattern. A subcontractor files a construction lien foreclosure lawsuit against an owner for unpaid contract balance. In the same lawsuit, the subcontractor sues the general contractor for breach of contract and unjust enrichment associated with an approximate three-year delay on a construction project. The project was scheduled to be completed in 2019. It was not. The project was pushed into COVID and into 2022. (The subcontractor did not sue the general contractor for amounts subject to the lien foreclosure claim.) The general contractor, assuming the defense of the owner, moved to stay the lawsuit pending the outcome of arbitration based on an arbitration provision in the subcontract. The subcontractor did not dispute the arbitration provision, but argued that arbitration provision should not extend to the owner that was (a) not bound by the subcontract, (b) would not be a party to the arbitration, and (c) the amounts pled against the general contractor did not include the amounts subject of the lien foreclosure lawsuit. At a minimum, the lawsuit should be stayed, not dismissed. Nevertheless, the trial court dismissed the entire lawsuit in an order that states that it is a final order with language that the lien may be “reinstated” after the outcome of the arbitration (that the owner is not a party to). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Transportation Officials Make the Best of a Bumpy 2020

    January 18, 2021 —
    The year 2020 provided a bumpy budgetary ride for all modes of transportation, and some industry insiders don’t expect airport and transit ridership to return to pre-pandemic levels for years. Agencies are taking lessons learned, coupled with hopes for the new Biden administration, to carry on as best they can. Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, Engineering News-Record and Aileen Cho, Engineering News-Record Ms. Cho may be contacted at choa@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of