BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating 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


    Employee Exclusion Bars Coverage for Wrongful Death of Subcontractor's Employee

    Building Inspector Refuses to State Why Apartments Condemned

    No Trial Credit in NJ Appellate Decision for Non-Settling Successive Tortfeasors – Must Demonstrate Proof of Initial Tortfeasor Negligence and Proximate Cause

    Michigan Claims Engineers’ Errors Prolonged Corrosion

    Eleven WSHB Attorneys Honored on List of 2016 Rising Stars

    California Appellate Court Confirms: Additional Insureds Are First-Class Citizens

    Duty To Defend Construction Defect Case Affirmed, Duty to Indemnify Reversed In Part

    NJ Condo Construction Defect Case Dismissed over Statute of Limitations

    Building Group Has Successful 2012, Looks to 2013

    Faulty Workmanship Claims Amount to Multiple Occurrences

    Florida Self-Insured Retention Satisfaction and Made Whole Doctrine

    New California "Construction" Legislation

    SE 2050 Is In Quixotic Pursuit of Eliminating Embodied Carbon in Building Structures

    History and Gentrification Clash in a Gilded Age Resort

    The Importance of the Recent Amendment to Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence

    Surge in Home Completions Tamps Down Inflation as Fed Meets

    Bridges Crumble as Muni Rates at Least Since ’60s Ignored

    New OSHA Regulations on Confined Spaces in Construction

    Fix for Settling Millennium Tower May Start This Fall

    Low Interest Rates Encourages Homeowners to become Landlords

    Excessive Corrosion Cause of Ohio State Fair Ride Accident

    Final Thoughts on New Pay If Paid Legislation in VA

    Surety Bond Producers Keep Eye Out For Illegal Waivers

    False Implied Certifications in Making Payment Requests: What We Can Learn from Lance Armstrong

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

    Ex-Turner Exec Gets 46 Months for Bloomberg Construction Bribes

    Two Injured in Walkway Collapse of Detroit Apartment Complex

    Toward Increased Citizen Engagement in Urban Planning

    Construction Firms Complain of Missed Payments on Redevelopment Project

    Contractors Sued for Slip

    Federal District Court Declines Invitation to Set Scope of Appraisal

    Four White and Williams Lawyers Recognized as "Lawyer of the Year" by Best Lawyers®

    Little Known Florida Venue Statue Benefitting Resident Contractors

    Defining Catastrophic Injury Claims

    Traub Lieberman Partner Greg Pennington and Associate Kevin Sullivan Win Summary Judgment Dismissing Homeowner’s Claim that Presented an Issue of First Impression in New Jersey

    Dallas Home Being Built of Shipping Containers

    ASCE Statement on House Failure to Pass the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    Are COVID-19 Claims Covered by Builders Risk Insurance Policies?

    Give Way or Yield? The Jurisdiction of Your Contract Does Matter! (Law note)

    Get Smarter About Electric Construction Equipment

    Other Colorado Cities Looking to Mirror Lakewood’s Construction Defect Ordinance

    CDJ’s #6 Topic of the Year: Does Colorado Need Construction Defect Legislation to Spur Affordable Home Development?

    Account for the Imposition of Material Tariffs in your Construction Contract

    End of an Era: Los Angeles County Superior Court Closes the Personal Injury Hub

    Law Firm Fails to Survive Insurer's and Agent's Motions to Dismiss

    Texas and Georgia Are Paying the Price for Sprawl

    Failure to Consider Safety Element in Design Does Not Preclude Public Entity’s Discretionary Authority Under Design Immunity Defense

    No Concrete Answers on Whether Construction Defects Are Occurrences

    If I Released My California Mechanics Lien, Can I File a New Mechanics Lien on the Same Project? Will the New Mechanics Lien be Enforceable?

    Extreme Heat, Smoke Should Get US Disaster Label, Groups Say
    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

    Third Circuit Holds That Duty to Indemnify "Follows" Duty to Defend

    December 27, 2021 —
    In a win for policyholders, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed a District Court’s 2018 ruling, which held that the duty to indemnify follows the duty to defend where a settlement precludes a determination on the facts of the case relative to liability and apportionment. In Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Penn National Mutual Casualty Insurance Co.,1 a large concrete panel collapsed and killed a construction worker at a construction site in New Kensington, Pennsylvania. Cost Company (“Cost”), Liberty Mutual’s insured, was a masonry subcontractor on the project and had further subcontracted with Pittsburgh Flexicore Co. (“Flexicore”), Penn National’s insured, for the concrete panels. Cost’s subcontract agreement required Flexicore to name Cost as an additional insured under its general liability policy issued by Penn National. When the construction worker’s widow filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Cost and Flexicore, Cost demanded that Penn National defend and indemnify it as an additional insured under the policy. Penn National refused, arguing that any additional insured status had terminated at the conclusion of Flexicore’s work for Cost. As a result, Liberty Mutual defended Cost in the lawsuit, which was ultimately settled. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey J. Vita, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Vita may be contacted at JVita@sdvlaw.com

    Colorado Introduces Construction Defect Bill for Commuter Communities

    January 23, 2013 —
    A Colorado State Senator has introduced a bill suggesting a change to the way that construction defect claims are handled in "transit-oriented developments." And what are these? According to the bill these are "any multi-family residential or mixed-use project within one-half mile of any commuter rail stop, commuter light rail stop, or commuter bus stop." So the bill would treat homes with good public transportation differently from those not so convenient to public transportation. The bill, SB 52, would institute a right to repair for construction defects in these developments. Construction defect claims would be referred to binding arbitration. Further, construction professionals could not be sued for environmental conditions related to transit, commercial, public, or retail use. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Manhattan Townhouse Sells for a Record $79.5 Million

    April 05, 2017 —
    A home on Manhattan’s Upper East Side sold for $79.5 million, according to property records made public Wednesday, making it the highest price ever paid for a townhouse in the borough. The 20,500-square-foot (1,905-square-meter) property, at 19 E. 64th St., had been owned by the Wildenstein family, billionaire art dealers whose gallery was located at the site for more than 80 years. The previous record for a Manhattan townhouse was the $53 million paid for 4 E. 75th St., in 2006, according to appraiser Miller Samuel Inc. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Oshrat Carmiel, Bloomberg
    Mr. Carmiel may be followed on Twitter @OshratCarmiel

    Legal Implications of 3D Printing in Construction Loom

    July 10, 2018 —
    Imagine a printer in the middle of a construction site programmed with a designer’s plans and specifications to build an entire home from scratch. As concrete is fed into the printing device, a technician hits enter on her computer and a 3D printer starts fabricating the structure’s walls and roof. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aldo E. Ibarra, ENR
    ENR staff may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Former Hoboken, New Jersey Mayor Disbarred for Taking Bribes

    September 17, 2014 —
    The New Jersey Law Journal reported that Peter Cammarano III, a former Hoboken, New Jersey, mayor, was disbarred after admitting “four years ago that he took $25,000 in bribes from a federal informant in exchange for promising his help in getting approval for a high-rise.” Cammarano “was one of 44 public officials and rabbis arrested in July 2009 as part of a massive federal investigation, known as Operation Bid Rig, into public corruption and money laundering operations.” The Disciplinary review board had recommended a three year suspension, however, the New Jersey Supreme Court rejected that recommendation. “An elected official who sells his office—who offers favored treatment in exchange for money—betrays a solemn public trust,” Justice Barry Albin wrote for the court, as quoted by the New Jersey Law Journal. “This form of corruption is corrosive to our democracy and undermines public confidence in honest government, and its rippling pernicious effects are incalculable.” “I believe the Disciplinary Review Board’s decision was right,” Joseph Jr. Hayden, Cammarano’s attorney, told the New Jersey Law Journal. “There were sufficient mitigating factors to justify only a suspension.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    South Dakota Supreme Court Holds That Faulty Workmanship Constitutes an “Occurrence”

    September 14, 2017 —
    The South Dakota Supreme Court recently determined that damage resulting from a subcontractor’s failure to test soil compaction before constructing a home constituted an “accident” and was therefore an “occurrence” under a commercial general liability (CGL) policy. In Owners Ins. Co. v. Tibke Construction, Inc., the homeowners hired Tibke Construction, Inc. to build a new house, and Tibke Construction hired subcontractor Jerry’s Excavating to perform excavation work. The homeowners contended that Jerry’s Excavating failed to do soil compaction testing before commencing construction, which resulted in the home being built on highly expansive soils, leading to damage including excessive settlement, cracking and structural unsoundness. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Samantha Martino, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Martino may be contacted at smm@sdvlaw.com

    Indirect Benefit Does Not Support Unjust Enrichment Claim Against Prime Contractor

    July 05, 2023 —
    A recent case out of the Northern District of Florida dealing with a federal project provides an interesting discussion about a sub-subcontractor asserting a claim against the prime contractor for unjust enrichment. The prime contractor argued any benefit to it was indirect which does not support an unjust enrichment claim as the actual direct benefit flowed to the owner of the project – the government. The federal district court agreed and dismissed the sub-subcontractor’s unjust enrichment claim against the prime contractor because an indirect benefit does NOT support an equitable unjust enrichment claim. See U.S.A f/u/b/o Eco Universe Contracting, LLC v. Calvary Construction Group, Inc., 2023 WL 3884642 (N.D.Fla. 2023). 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

    Timely and Properly Assert Affirmative Defenses and Understand Statutory Conditions Precedent

    August 05, 2024 —
    A recent case serves as a reminder to TIMELY and PROPERLY assert affirmative defenses and to understand statutory conditions precedent to construction lien claims. Failing to do one or the other could be severely detrimental to the position you want to take in a dispute, whether it is a lien foreclosure dispute, or any other dispute. In Scherf v. Tom Krips Construction, Inc., 2024 WL 3297592 (Fla. 4th DCA 2024), the president of a construction company and his wife were building a residence. They orally accepted the proposal from the concrete shell contractor and asked for invoices to be submitted to the president’s construction company. No written contract was memorialized. The president and his wife did not pay the concrete shell contractor and the contractor recorded a lien and sued to foreclose on the lien. Years later (the case had been stayed because the president and his wife filed for bankruptcy and the shell contractor had to get leave of the automatic bankruptcy stay to pursue the lien foreclosure), the shell contractor moved for summary judgment. The president and his wife moved for leave to file an amended answer and affirmative defenses. They claimed the oral contract was with the construction company and the shell contractor was required to serve a Notice to Owner under Florida Statute s. 713.06. Alternatively, they argued that if the oral contract was with the president and his wife, the shell contractor was required to serve a Final Contractor’s Payment Affidavit at least 5 days before filing its lien foreclosure claim, and did not, as required by s. 713.06. 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