BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineers
    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


    A Compilation of Quirky Insurance Claims

    Hawaii Construction Defect Law Increased Confusion

    Contractor's Agreement to Perform Does Not Preclude Coverage Under Contractual Liability Exclusion

    Record-Setting Construction in Fargo

    Seven Coats Rose Attorneys Named to Texas Rising Stars List

    The Construction Industry Lost Jobs (No Surprise) but it Gained Some Too (Surprise)

    Another Reminder that Your Construction Contract is Only as Good as Those Signing It

    Business Interruption Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    Defining Constructive Acceleration

    Self-Storage Magnates Cash In on the Surge in Real Estate

    Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Supports Coverage

    Let’s Give ‘Em Sutton to Talk About: Tennessee Court Enforces Sutton Doctrine

    Collapse of Breezeway Attached to Building Covered

    UPDATE - McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You May Want an Intervention …”

    Court Finds That $400 Million Paid Into Abatement Fund Qualifies as “Damages” Under the Insured’s Policies

    “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

    Tightest Credit Market in 16 Years Rejects Bernanke’s Bid

    Faulty Workmanship Causing Damage to Other Property Covered as Construction Defect

    Fixing the Problem – Not the Blame

    Employees in Construction Industry Entitled to Compensation for Time Spent Complying with Employer-Mandated Security Protocols

    Court of Appeals Expands Application of Construction Statute of Repose

    Georgia Court of Appeals Holds That Insurer Must Defend Oil Company Against Entire Lawsuit

    Jury Instruction That Fails to Utilize Concurrent Cause for Property Loss is Erroneous

    Wait! Don’t Sign Yet: Reviewing Contract Protections During the COVID Pandemic

    Another Case Highlighting the Difference Between CGL Policies and Performance Bonds

    Liability Policy’s Arbitration Endorsement Applies to Third Party Beneficiaries, Including Additional Insureds

    Will There Be Construction Defect Legislation Introduced in the 2019 Colorado Legislative Session?

    New Home for the Aged Suffers Construction Defects

    Are You a Construction Lienor?

    AAA Revises its Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Sales of U.S. New Homes Decline After Record May Revision

    3 Common Cash Flow Issues That Plague The Construction Industry

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    Scientists Are Trying to Make California Forests More Fire Resilient

    Do We Need Blockchain in Construction?

    Party Cannot Skirt Out of the Very Fraud It Perpetrates

    Florida’s Supreme Court Resolves Conflicting Appellate Court Decisions on Concurrent Causation

    A Third of U.S. Homebuyers Are Bidding Sight Unseen

    Fifth Circuit Finds Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case

    2017 California Employment Law Update

    OSHA Advisory Committee, Assemble!

    Northern District of Mississippi Finds That Non-Work Property Damages Are Not Subject to AIA’s Waiver of Subrogation Clause

    Courts Will Not Second-Guess Public Entities When it Comes to Design Immunity

    Acquisition, Development, and Construction Lending Conditions Ease

    What to Do Before OSHA Comes Knocking

    New York Bars Developers from Selling Condos due to CD Fraud Case

    Restrictions On Out-Of-State Real Estate Brokers Being Challenged In Nevada

    Hunton Andrews Kurth Insurance Attorney, Latosha M. Ellis, Honored by Business Insurance Magazine

    US Supreme Court Backs Panama Canal Owner in Dispute with Builders
    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

    New WOTUS Rule

    November 13, 2023 —
    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers amended the regulation to conform the definition of “waters of the United States” to conform to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency. See the prior blog post about the Supreme Court’s ruling: Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency – Construction and Utility Law | Atlanta | AHC Law Federal Register :: Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States”; Conforming Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook Jr., Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    French President Vows to Rebuild Fire-Collapsed Notre Dame Roof and Iconic Spire

    June 03, 2019 —
    Two British masonry experts familiar with centuries-old stone structures voiced concern that the catastrophic fire that collapsed the roof and spire of Notre Dame on April 15 could also have damaged stonework of the iconic Paris cathedral that may affect its stability. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Blair, ENR and Peter Reina, ENR Mr. Blair may be contacted at blairs@enr.com Mr. Reina may be contacted at reina@btinternet.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Property Owners Sue San Francisco Over Sinking Sidewalks

    June 20, 2022 —
    Residents of the Mission Bay neighborhood seek “to hold the City of San Francisco responsible for raising up the sinking sidewalks” reported KRON 4. The suit alleges that the city should shoulder the responsibility for the necessary work needed for the infrastructure. Historically, “the neighborhood around the Chase Center east of Interstate 280 was part of the bay,” according to SF Gate. Later, “the area was filled with dirt and rock and further filled with rubble after the 1906 earthquake.” In 1998, further development took place. All of the “new occupied buildings in Mission Bay, such as the UCSF campus, the Chase Center and the 6,000 residential units there, are anchored into the bedrock," but "the sidewalks, streets and parks are not, and that's a problem.” "We're not asking for a handout; we're asking for a hand. We want them to step forward and make the repairs that they can actually implement," Scott Mackey, Partner at Berding | Weil, told CBS News. "Everyone understood that it's built on fill and built in an area where there would be some settlement. But, there also is an expectation that when the city turns over the infrastructure that that homeowners and property owners have to maintain, is that it's built correctly - that they're able to maintain it. The homeowners cannot continually chase the differential movement.” Read the full story at KRON 4... Read the full story at SF Gate... Read the full story at CBS News... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    BHA at the 10th Annual Construction Law Institute, Orlando

    January 13, 2017 —
    Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc. is once again proud to be partnering with the Florida Bar Continuing Legal Education Committee and the Construction Law Committee of the Florida Bar Real Property, Probate and Trust Law Section, as a sponsor and exhibitor at the 10th Annual Construction Law Institute to be held March 16th, 17th & 18th, 2017 at the JW Marriott Orlando Grande Lakes in Orlando. With offices in Miami serving all of Florida, Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc. (BHA) offers the experience of over 20 years of service to carriers, defense counsel, and insurance professionals as designated experts in nearly 6,500 cases. BHA’s staff encompasses a broad range of licensed and credentialed experts in the areas of general contracting and specialty trades, as well as architects, and both civil and structural engineers, and has provided services on behalf of developers, general contractors and sub-contractors. BHA’s experience covers the full range of construction and construction defect litigation, including single and multi-family residential (including high-rise), institutional (schools, hospitals and government buildings), commercial, and industrial claims. BHA specializes in coverage, exposure, premises liability, and delay claim analysis as well. As the litigation climate in Florida continues to change, and as the number of construction defect and other construction related cases continues to rise, it is becoming more important for contractors and builders here to be aggressive in preparing for claims before they are made, and in defending against those claims once they are filed. Since 1993, Bert L. Howe & Associates has been an industry leader in providing construction consulting services, and has been a trusted partner with builders and insurance carriers, both large and small, across the Western and Southern United States. Here in Florida, we have been providing construction defect and construction-claims related forensic expert services for the past decade with a proven track record of successful results. For those of you planning on attending the conference, or those who may know someone who will be, we encourage you to stop by the BHA booth and we welcome the opportunity to discuss further the broad range of services provided by BHA. For your convenience, when registration information is made available, a link to the 10th Annual Construction Law Institute should be available here: http://www.rpptl.org/ Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Don MacGregor, Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc.
    Mr. MacGregor may be contacted at dmac@berthowe.com

    Specific Performance of an Option Contract to Purchase Real Property is Barred Absent Agreement on All Material Terms

    December 20, 2017 —
    On November 14, 2017, the Court of Appeals (Division 1), in Offerman v. Granada, LLC, 2017 WL 5352664, reversed a trial court order directing specific performance of an alleged option to purchase real property, holding that the alleged option was too indefinite to be specifically performed because the parties did not agree to all of the material terms of the option. Tenant-Purchaser Offerman executed a two-year lease with Landlord-Seller Granada, which granted Offerman “the option to purchase [the] property…for a sales price to be determined at that time by an independent appraiser acceptable to both Tenant and Landlord. (Terms and Conditions to be stipulated by both parties at such time).” (emphasis added). Offerman timely advised Granada he intended to exercise the option, asked Granada to name an appraiser, and, when Granada did not respond, Offerman tendered a $240,000 appraisal to exercise the option. Granada did not retain an appraiser but instead simply demanded $350,000 to close the sale. After a bench trial, the Court determined that Offerman was entitled to specific performance, and, as the parties had not agreed to certain terms, held a second evidentiary hearing to resolve the form of judgment, therein naming a title agency to handle the escrow, setting a closing date, allocating the transaction fees between the parties, and ordering Granada to pay for the property inspection. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard H. Herold, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Herold may be contacted at rherold@swlaw.com

    Massachusetts High Court: Attorney's Fee Award Under Consumer Protection Act Not Covered by General Liability Insurance Policy

    September 19, 2022 —
    In the case of Vermont Mutual Insurance Co. v. Poirier, 189 N.E.3d 306 (Mass. 2022), Massachusetts’ Supreme Judicial Court concluded that an award of attorney's fees pursuant to Chapter 93A (Massachusetts’ Consumer Protection Act) is not covered under an insured’s general liability insurance policy. Applying Massachusetts law, the Court found that a statutory award of attorney’s fees stemming from a bodily injury claim is not reasonably considered “damages because of bodily injury” or “costs taxed against the insured” so as to trigger general liability coverage. Facts of the Case A Servpro company (owned by Mr. and Mrs. Poirier) was hired to clean up a basement after a sewage spill. The owners of the home were injured by fumes from chemicals used in the cleanup and accordingly brought suit against the Poiriers and their Servpro business. In the lawsuit, the homeowners alleged negligence, breach of contract, and also a Chapter 93A claim, asserting breach of warranty of merchantability and warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. Prior to trial, the plaintiffs waived the negligence and breach of contract claims and sought a bench trial on the Chapter 93A claims alone. Reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey J. Vita, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and David G. Jordan, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Vita may be contacted at JVita@sdvlaw.com Mr. Jordan may be contacted at DJordan@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    U.K. to Set Out Plan for Fire-Risk Apartment Cladding Crisis

    March 01, 2021 —
    The U.K. government will set out its plans for stripping cladding from potentially unsafe apartment blocks, more than three years after a fire at London’s Grenfell Tower killed 72 people. Reports suggest Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick will set out a package of measures amounting to billions of pounds when he makes a statement to the House of Commons on Wednesday. Ministers announced a 1.6 billion pound ($2.2 billion) “safety fund” to remove dangerous cladding last year but Jenrick is expected to announce additional support on top of this. The price for the repairs could be as high as 15 billion pounds, according to a parliamentary committee last June. Reprinted courtesy of Emily Ashton, Bloomberg and Olivia Konotey-Ahulu, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Court of Appeal Vacates $30M Non-Economic Damages Award Due to Failure to Properly Apportion Liability and Attorney Misconduct During Closing Argument

    February 08, 2021 —
    On January 20, 2021, the California Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Six (Ventura), in Plascencia v. Deese (B299142), vacated a $30 million non-economic damages award in a highway fatality case because: (1) the award did not properly apportion non-economic damages among everyone at fault in violation of Proposition 51; and (2) the amount of the award appeared to have been influenced by plaintiffs’ counsel’s misconduct and prejudicial remarks during closing argument. In Plascencia, the plaintiffs sued several defendants for the wrongful death of their daughter arising from a highway fatality accident. All the defendants settled or were dismissed before trial except the trucking defendants. The highway fatality was caused when one defendant driver made an illegal U-turn on a highway as she left another defendant’s fruit stand. The plaintiffs’ daughter swerved to avoid the U-turn driver, lost control of her car, and crashed into the back of the trucking defendants’ diesel tractor-trailer. The truck driver had parked the truck on the side of the highway near the fruit stand, which the trucking defendants’ expert conceded fell below the standard of care. Reprinted courtesy of Krsto Mijanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP, Peter A. Dubrawski, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP, Arezoo Jamshidi, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Catherine M. Asuncion, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Mijanovic may be contacted at kmijanovic@hbblaw.com Mr. Dubrawski may be contacted at pdubrawski@hbblaw.com Ms. Jamshidi may be contacted at ajamshidi@hbblaw.com Ms. Asuncion may be contacted at casuncion@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of