BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildings
    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


    AB 3018: Amendments to the Skilled and Trained Workforce Requirements on California Public Projects

    New York Office Secures Appellate Win in Labor Law 240(1) Fall in Basement Accident Case

    Not so Fast! How Does Revoking Acceleration of a Note Impact the Statute of Limitations?

    Arctic Roads and Runways Face the Prospect of Rapid Decline

    Winning Attorney Fees in Litigation as a California Construction Contractor or Subcontractor

    What to Expect From the New Self-Retracting Devices Standard

    Handshake Deals Gone Wrong

    Industrialized Construction News 7/2022

    Traub Lieberman Partner Michael K. Kiernan and Associate Brandon Christian Obtain Dismissal with Prejudice in Favor of Defendant

    Near-Zero Carbon Cement Powers Sustainable 3D-Printed Homes

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    The Right to Repair Act (Civ.C §895 et seq.) Applies and is the Exclusive Remedy for a Homeowner Alleging Construction Defects

    The Miller Act: More Complex than You Think

    Manhattan to Get Tall, Skinny Tower

    GOP, States, Industry Challenge EPA Project Water Impact Rule

    Treasure Island Sues Beach Trail Designer over Concrete Defects

    Safety Data: Noon Presents the Hour of Greatest Danger

    United States Supreme Court Upholds Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements

    Fed. Judge Blocks Release of Records on FIU Bridge Collapse, Citing NTSB Investigation

    Update to Washington State Covid-19 Guidance

    More Reminders that the Specific Contract Terms Matter

    Orange County Home Builder Dead at 93

    The Association of Southern California Defense Counsel (ASCDC) and the Construction Defect Claims Managers Association (CDMA) Annual Construction Defect Seminar

    No Coverage for Roof Collapse During Hurricane

    Coping with Labor & Install Issues in Green Building

    COVID-19 Win for Policyholders! Court Approves "Direct Physical Loss" Argument

    California Supreme Court Rejects Insurers' Bid for Horizontal Exhaustion Rule in New Montrose Decision

    Tesla Powerwalls for Home Energy Storage Hit U.S. Market

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to Best Lawyers in America© Orange County and as Attorneys of the Year 2018

    Fannie Overseer Moves to Rescue Housing With Lower Risk to Lenders

    Concerns About On-the-job Safety Persist

    What Lies Beneath

    No Subrogation, Contribution Rights for Carrier Defending Construction Defect Claim

    Virtual Mediation – How Do I Make It Work for Me?

    Undercover Sting Nabs Eleven Illegal Contractors in California

    A Call to Washington: Online Permitting Saves Money and the Environment

    The Business of Engineering: An Interview with Matthew Loos

    A Murder in Honduras Reveals the Dark Side of Clean Energy

    AB5 Construction Exemption – A Checklist to Avoid Application of AB5’s Three-Part Test

    Turmoil Slows Rebuilding of Puerto Rico's Power Grid

    New York's De Blasio Unveils $41 Billion Plan for Affordable Housing

    Specification Challenge; Excusable Delay; Type I Differing Site Condition; Superior Knowledge

    How the California and Maui Wildfires Will Affect Future Construction Projects

    Property Insurance Exclusion: Leakage of Water Over 14 Days or More

    Illinois Court Assesses Factual Nature of Term “Reside” in Determining Duty to Defend

    The National Building Museum’s A-Mazing Showpiece

    In Personal Injury Actions, Prejudgment Interest on Costs Not Recoverable

    Insured Cannot Sue to Challenge Binding Appraisal Decision

    Homebuilders Leading U.S. Consumer Stocks: EcoPulse

    NY Construction Safety Firm Falsely Certified Workers, Says Manhattan DA
    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

    Florida's New Pre-Suit Notification Requirement: Retroactive or Prospective Application?

    February 05, 2024 —
    Florida’s newly formed Sixth District Court of Appeal (“Sixth DCA”) recently certified conflict with Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal on the issue of retroactive application of the pre-suit notice requirement contained in Florida Statute §627.70152.1 Earlier this year, the Fourth District Court of Appeal (“Fourth DCA”) held that the pre-suit notice provision applies retroactively, meaning, it applies to all suits filed after July 1, 2021, regardless when the insurance policy was issued.2 The Sixth DCA, in Hughes v. Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company,3 directly rejected the Fourth DCA’s interpretation and instead found a retroactive application of the pre-suit notice to be unconstitutional under Florida law. Prior to the Fourth DCA’s ruling, most trial courts had found no retroactive application for the pre-suit notice provision.4 In August 2021, shortly after Florida Statutes Section 627.70152 went into effect on July 1, 2021, Rebecca Hughes (“Hughes”) sued Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company (“Universal Property”) for breach of contract after Universal Property denied her insurance claim. Hughes did not file a pre-suit notice under Section 627.70152. Universal Property moved to dismiss based on Hughes’ failure to file the pre-suit notice, arguing that the pre-suit notice requirement applies to all lawsuits filed after July 1, 2021, even if the claimant’s insurance policy was issued before the statute’s effective date. The trial court agreed with Universal Property and dismissed the lawsuit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Holly A. Rice, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Rice may be contacted at HRice@sdvlaw.com

    When a Construction Lender Steps into the Shoes of the Developer, the Door is Open for Claims by the General Contractor

    February 18, 2015 —
    Thank you to my partner Garret Murai for giving me the opportunity to post again on his excellent California Construction Law Blog. I am the author/editor of the Money and Dirt Blog, where I focus on issues relating to real estate investment, development, and secured lending. On the Money and Dirt Blog, I recently posted an article on an interesting new secured lending opinion from the California Court of Appeal (Fourth District in Riverside), California Bank & Trust v. Del Ponti. That blog post focused on guaranty liability, and the court’s holding that there are limits to the defenses that a guarantor can lawfully waive. But that same decision also highlights valuable lessons regarding the relationship between construction lenders and general contractors in distressed projects, which I’ll cover here. In short, the court held that when a construction lender “steps into the shoes” of the developer to manage a distressed project, the lender might open the door to liability to the general contractor under theories of breach of contract and promissory estoppel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kevin Brodehl, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Bordehl may be contacted at kbrodehl@wendel.com

    Mountain States Super Lawyers 2019 Recognizes 21 Nevada Snell & Wilmer Attorneys

    June 18, 2019 —
    Snell & Wilmer is pleased to announce that 21 attorneys from the Nevada offices have been selected for inclusion in the 2019 Mountain States Super Lawyers publication. Of those 21, 12 were recognized as Mountain States Rising Stars. Patrick Byrne was also named to the Top 100 list of attorneys for the Mountain States region. Super Lawyers, part of Thomson Reuters, is a listing of lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The annual selections are made using a patented multiphase process that includes independent research, peer nominations and peer evaluations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer

    Asserting Non-Disclosure Claim Involving Residential Real Property and Whether Facts Are “Readily Observable”

    September 29, 2021 —
    Under Florida law, there is a claim dealing with the purchase and sale of residential real property known as a Johnson v. Davis or a non-disclosure claim: “[W]here the seller of a home knows of facts materially affecting the value of the property which are not readily observable and are not known to the buyer, the seller is under a duty to disclose them to the buyer.” Lorber v. Passick, 46 Fla.L.Weekly D1952a (Fla. 4th DCA 2021). A seller’s duty to disclose extends to a seller’s real estate agent/broker. Id. A non-disclosure claim is asserted by the buyer of residential real property when the buyer discovers defects or damages with the real property that he believes materially affects the value of the property. While there may be the sentiment these are easy claims to prove, they are not. Remember, a non-disclosure claim deals with facts that materially affect the value of residential real property and are NOT readily observable. The use of the language “readily observable” has been found to mean:
    “[I]nformation [that] is within the diligent attention of any buyer. To exercise diligent attention…a buyer would be required to investigate any information furnished by the seller that a reasonable person in the buyer’s position would investigate and take reasonable steps to ascertain the material facts relating to the property and to discovery them—if, of course, they are reasonably ascertainable.”
    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

    Understanding Insurance Disputes in Construction Defect Litigation: A Review of Acuity v. Kinsale

    December 17, 2024 —
    Construction projects are inherently complex, and insurance coverage plays a crucial role in managing risks, especially when unforeseen issues arise. The case of Acuity v. Kinsale demonstrates the tangled web of insurance obligations, especially when multiple insurers provide coverage for a single event. This case, involving Monarch Stucco, Inc., Acuity, and Kinsale Insurance Company, sheds light on the challenges that contractors, subcontractors, and insurers may face when disputes over liability and coverage occur. The Background of the Case At the heart of this dispute lies a construction defect at a retirement community project in Lakewood, Colorado. Monarch Stucco, Inc. (“Monarch”), a subcontractor hired by GH Phipps Construction Company (“Phipps”), was responsible for stucco work on the project. Unfortunately, defects in the building’s envelope system, particularly Monarch’s stucco work, led to significant damage and costly repairs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    What Are The Most Commonly Claimed Issues In Construction Defect Litigation?

    April 22, 2019 —
    As a lawyer that has spent his career defending against construction defect claims, one of the most common questions I get when counseling clients regarding risk management is: “What are the most commonly claimed issues in construction defect litigation?” Until very recently, my answer to this question has been based on my own experience and knowledge on the subject, and only vaguely reliant on empirical data. Recently, two engineers, Elizabeth Brogan and William McConnell, along with Caroline Clevenger, an associate professor at the University of Colorado, Denver, wrote a paper entitled “Emerging Patterns in Construction Defect Litigation: A Survey of Construction Cases.” The authors analyzed 41 multifamily construction defect cases litigated in 2015, 2016 and 2017, mostly in the Denver metro area. The authors classified the 55 most prevalent alleged defects into the following categories: structural issues; civil issues; building envelope issues; roof issues; deck, balcony and porch issues; fire protection issues; and miscellaneous issues. The authors then identified the 10 most commonly claimed construction defects, which occurred in over half of all of the cases analyzed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Traub Lieberman Partner Michael Logan and Associate Christian Romaguera Obtain Voluntary Dismissal in Favor of Construction Company Under the Vertical Immunity Doctrine

    June 21, 2024 —
    In a lawsuit filed in Orange County, Traub Lieberman Partner Michael Logan and Associate Christian Romaguera achieved a voluntary dismissal in favor of their Client, a construction company. The Plaintiff claimed that he was seriously and permanently injured, and demanded $1,000,000.00. The Plaintiff turned out to be an employee of our Client’s subcontractor, and the Plaintiff received worker’s compensation benefits from his employer, the subcontractor. Under Florida Statute § 440.11(1), “The liability of an employer . . . shall be exclusive and in place of all other liability, including vicarious liability, of such employer to any third-party tortfeasor and to the employee . . .” When a subcontractor provides workers’ compensation benefits to its injured employee, workers’ compensation immunity would not only apply to the subcontractor but to the general contractor as well. This is also known as “vertical immunity.” The Traub Lieberman team filed a detailed motion and memorandum of law to argue its case, and the Plaintiff voluntarily withdrew the claim against the Client just before that motion was set to be argued before the Judge. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christian Romaguera, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Romaguera may be contacted at cromaguera@tlsslaw.com

    Important Insurance Alert for Out-of-State Contractors Assisting in Florida Recovery Efforts!

    November 01, 2022 —
    Significant portions of Florida suffered extensive damage from Hurricane Ian. Many out-of-state contractors have sent their workers to Florida to help with the cleanup and rebuilding process. SDV is sending out this important notice for all out-of-state contractors to contact their workers’ compensation brokers and insurers to ensure their out-of-state workers’ compensation policy will cover workers in Florida. The state of Florida does not recognize the “All States Endorsement” on workers’ compensation policies, and in some instances could potentially result in out-of-state contractors being without coverage in the State of Florida. As per the Florida Division of Workers’ Compensation: “Out of State Employers must notify their insurance carrier that they are working in Florida. If there is no insurance, the out-of-state employer is required to obtain a Florida Workers’ Compensation Insurance policy with a Florida approved insurance carrier which meets the requirements of Florida law and the Florida Insurance Code. This means that ‘Florida’ must be specifically listed in Section 3A of the policy (on the Information Page).” Reprinted courtesy of Richard W. Brown, Saxe Doernberger & Vita and Stephanie A. Giagnorio, Saxe Doernberger & Vita Mr. Brown may be contacted at RBrown@sdvlaw.com Ms. Giagnorio may be contacted at SGiagnorio@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of