BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expert
    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


    Manhattan’s Property Boom Pushes Landlords to Sell Early

    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    Nashville Stadium Bond Deal Tests Future of Spectator Sports

    Home-Sales Fall in 2014 Has U.S. Waiting for 2015: Economy

    UCP Buys Citizen Homes

    Union THUGS Plead Guilty

    Related’s $1 Billion Los Angeles Project Opens After 15-Year Wait

    Despite Misapplying California Law, Federal Court Acknowledges Virus May Cause Physical Alteration to Property

    Texas Federal District Court Dismisses COVID-19 Claim

    Civility Is Key in Construction Defect Mediation

    Generally, What Constitutes A Trade Secret Is A Question of Fact

    Pinterest Nixes Big San Francisco Lease Deal in Covid Scaleback

    “Slow and Steady Doesn’t Always Win the Race” – Applicability of a Statute of Repose on Indemnity/Contribution Claims in New Hampshire

    Communicate with the Field to Nip Issues in the Bud

    Quick Note: Notice of Contest of Claim Against Payment Bond

    Motion for Summary Judgment Gets Pooped Upon

    Negligence Against a Construction Manager Agent

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twelve White and Williams Lawyers

    Don't Count On a Housing Slowdown to Improve Affordability

    John Aho: Engineer Pushed for Seismic Safety in Alaska Ahead of 2018 Earthquake

    Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies the Meaning of "Living in the Same Household" for Purposes of Coverage Under a Homeowners Policy

    Unbilled Costs Remain in Tutor Perini's Finances

    Contract, Breach of Contract, and Material Breach of Contract

    COVID-19 Response: Key Legal Considerations for Event Cancellations

    Alabama Supreme Court States Faulty Workmanship can be an Occurrence

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Incorrect Information Provided on Insurance Application Defeats Claim for Coverage

    Court Says KBR Construction Costs in Iraq were Unreasonable

    Trump Soho May Abandon Condos to Operate Mainly as Hotel

    An Occurrence Under Builder’s Risk Insurance Policy Is Based on the Language in the Policy

    “I Didn’t Sign That!” – Applicability of Waivers of Subrogation to Non-Signatory Third Parties

    Australia Warns of Multi-Billion Dollar Climate Disaster Costs

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Gets Construction Defect Bill to Committee

    Governor Signs AB5 Into Law — Reshaping California's Independent Contractor Classification Landscape

    Waiver Of Arbitration by Not Submitting Claim to Initial Decision Maker…Really!

    The Murky Waters Between "Good Faith" and "Bad Faith"

    Small Airport to Grow with Tower

    NEHRP Recommendations Likely To Improve Seismic Design

    Nevada Court Adopts Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    Former Owner Not Liable for Defects Discovered After Sale

    Insurers' Motion to Determine Lack of Occurrence Fails

    How Does Your Construction Contract Treat Float

    Pennsylvania Court Extends Construction Defect Protections to Subsequent Buyers

    Coverage Established for Property Damage Caused by Added Product

    Preparing Your Business For Internal Transition

    HB24-1014: A Warning Bell for Colorado Businesses Amid Potential Consumer Protection Changes

    Top Five Legal Mistakes in Construction

    First Railroad Bridge Between Russia and China Set to Open

    Repairs Commencing on Defect-Ridden House from Failed State Supreme Court Case

    A Word to the Wise about Construction Defects
    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

    Florida Courts Say that Developers Are Responsible for Flooding

    July 31, 2013 —
    The Florida Supreme Court recently handed down a decision that developers can be held responsible if problems with infrastructure lead to damage to homes. Aaron Kase, writing on Lawyers.com, reviews the case, noting that the court said that “habitability of a home is impacted by stagnant standing water and the erosion of soil upon which the home is constructed. One need not wait until floodwaters inundate the home or the erosion swallows the residential structure to find protection.” Kase notes that a trial court “sided with the developers’ argument that because the water infrastructure didn’t immediately support the houses, implied warranties of fitness and habitability shouldn’t apply and they shouldn’t be liable.” This was overturned at the district court, with the Supreme Court upholding the district court decision. Lisa Wilcox of Wilcox Law notes that “the Supreme Court determined that the warranty of habitability should be applied to protect home buyers from defects in the construction of these essential services even though they are not part of a home’s completed structure.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hawaii Court of Appeals Affirms Broker's Liability for Failure to Renew Coverage

    July 16, 2014 —
    The Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals affirmed the jury's finding that the broker was liable for failing to secure coverage for the insureds' home. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London v. Vreeken, 2014 Haw. App. LEXIS 322 (Haw. Ct. App. June 30, 2014). Based upon their dealings with the broker, the insureds thought they had coverage for their home from March 3, 2004 to March 3, 2005 and from May 9, 2005 to May 8, 2006. The house was elevated nine feet above the ground for structural renovation, but collapsed on May 23, 2005. The original policy had lapsed on March 3, 2005. The second policy was voided because the application prepared by the broker stated there was no renovation work underway on the property. The insureds sued. The jury found the broker and its agent liable for general, special and punitive damages. An appeal was filed. The ICA largely affirmed after addressing the many points raised on appeal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Insurance Agent Sued for Lapse in Coverage after House Collapses

    October 29, 2014 —
    Property Casualty 360 reported a Hawaii case where the court ruled that an “insurance brokerage firm is responsible for the wrongful conduct of its employees, agents and independent contractors as long as they give the public the appearance that the individual is working as an agent of the brokerage.” The case involved a home that collapsed “during an attempted structural renovation.” The original insurance policy had lapsed, and the “application used to procure the second policy stated that there was no renovation work underway on the property, and thus contained a material misrepresentation which voided the second policy, the [homeowners] were left without insurance on the house.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    What’s in a Name? Trademarks and Construction

    April 25, 2022 —
    Every company, no matter the industry, relies on its name and reputation to develop customers and generate revenue. Think about the brands that dominate American culture such as Nike, Wal-Mart, Amazon or McDonald’s, then imagine those businesses without the ability to adequately protect their names, slogans and logos. No doubt the vultures would circle and brand power would most likely become short lived or otherwise diluted to the point of non-existence. The construction industry is not exempt, and the industry leaders benefit from identifiable names and logos, built over years of reputation and brand building. While the tools necessary to protect your company’s brand exist at the state and federal level, many business owners or leaders are unfamiliar with the trademark process and unaware of the consequences of not utilizing those tools. Trademark Registration Trademarks are “concise and unequivocal identifiers” that provide potential customers with essential information about your business. With a single word, tagline, logo, color—essentially anything that can carry meaning—potential customers learn to associate particular product or service characteristics and expected quality level with a particular source. That is, your mark is the way that consumers connect your expertise and reputation to your business and nobody else’s. It serves a critical role in reducing consumer search costs and capturing your hard-earned business opportunities. Reprinted courtesy of Carol Wilhelm and J.P. Vogel, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Vogel may be contacted at jpvogel@grayreed.com Ms. Wilhelm may be contacted at cwilhelm@grayreed.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Builder’s Risk Indeed”

    October 24, 2023 —
    A contractor for a hotel in Seattle was tasked with constructing the hotel utilizing premanufactured modular hotel rooms. The modular unit portion of the project was the subject of a $15.8 million subcontract between the general contractor and the manufacturer. The manufacturer was also responsible to the GC for shipping and installing the modular units. Shipping was to be “DDP,” or “Delivery Duty Paid” – which, according to a New York federal court, “is an international shipping term meaning that the seller assumes all responsibilities and costs for delivering property to the named place of destination, including export and import clearance, fees, duties, and taxes.” Additionally, per the subcontract, the manufacturer was responsible for “ensur[ing] all modular units [were] covered, secured[,] and protected from damage during the shipping process….” The modular units were shipped from Poland to Seattle. In the shipping process, the units spent some time in the Port of Everett in Washington state, where the units sustained water damage while sitting in port. A related damage claim made by the subcontractor against the general contractor’s builder’s risk policy. On the face of the policy, the policy covered subcontractors as “additional insured” parties, covered all manner of materials and the like to be used on the project, and would provide that coverage in the process of transporting the materials insofar as “inland or coastal waters” were concerned. Yet, the builder’s risk insurer refused to cover the claim for the damages to the modular units which occurred while sitting in port in Everett. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Construction Lien Needs to Be Recorded Within 90 Days from Lienor’s Final Furnishing

    March 22, 2018 —

    A lienor needs to record its construction lien within 90 days of its final furnishing date. This final furnishing date excludes punchlist, warranty, or the lienor’s own corrective work. A lien recorded outside of the 90-day window will be deemed invalid.

    The opinion in In re: Jennerwein, 309 B.R. 385 (M.D. Fla. 2004) provides a good discussion of this 90-day window. This matter dealt with a debtor / owner’s bankruptcy where the owner was contesting the validity of a construction lien by its pool contractor. The owner contended that the lienor’s lien was recorded outside of this 90-day window thus rendering the lien invalid. The bankruptcy court was determining the validity of the lien.

    In this matter, the owner hired a swimming pool contractor to construct a pool. On October 25, 2002, the pool contractor installed pavers around the pool. After this was performed, the pool contractor realized the owner was unable to obtain the financing to pay for the pool. As a result, the pool contractor ceased doing any more improvements. But, neither the pool contractor nor the owner terminated the contract. Then, on November 27, 2002, the pool contractor sent a supervisor to the property to inspect the pool (work-in-place), the pool equipment, the installed pavers, made a list of the unfinished work, and remove any debris. On January 27, 2003, the pool contractor recorded its lien.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    New York Condominium Association Files Construction Defect Suit

    December 10, 2015 —
    According to The Real Deal, “The condominium association at 15 Union Square West has filed a $5 million lawsuit against developer Brack Capital Real Estate eight years after the building first launched sales, alleging that the firm did not deliver the quality of units it promised when residents originally signed their contracts.” Alleged problems include roof leaks, lack of terrace landscaping, and patchy electrical work, The Real Deal reported. A spokesperson for Brack stated, “We stand behind our product and are very proud of it.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2020

    December 22, 2019 —
    White and Williams has achieved national recognition from U.S. News and World Report as a "Best Law Firm" in the practice areas of Insurance Law and Media Law. Our Boston, New York and Philadelphia offices have also been recognized in their respective metropolitan regions in several practice areas. Firms included in the “Best Law Firms” list are recognized for professional excellence with persistently impressive ratings from clients and peers. Achieving a tiered ranking signals a unique combination of quality law practice and breadth of legal experience. National Tier 1 Insurance Law National Tier 3 Media Law Metropolitan Tier 1 Boston Product Liability Litigation – Defendants Delaware Product Liability Litigation – Defendants New Jersey Labor Law – Management Philadelphia Commercial Litigation Insurance Law Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs Metropolitan Tier 2 Boston Insurance Law Delaware Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants New Jersey Employment Law - Management Litigation - Labor & Employment Philadelphia Bet-the-Company Litigation Legal Malpractice Law – Defendants Media Law Real Estate Law Tax Law Trusts & Estates Law Metropolitan Tier 3 New York City Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Philadelphia Appellate Practice Construction Law First Amendment Law Litigation – Construction Litigation – Labor & Employment Patent Law Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP