BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code 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


    Haight Brown & Bonesteel Attorneys Named Super Lawyers in 2016

    Contractor Disputes Report Amid Amazon Warehouse Collapse Lawsuit

    Illinois Insureds are Contesting One Carrier's Universal Denial to Covid-19 Losses

    Adjuster's Report No Substitute for Proof of Loss Under Flood Policy

    The Quiet War Between California’s Charter Cities and the State’s Prevailing Wage Law

    NYC Shuts 9 Pre-Kindergartens for Health, Safety Issues

    IoT: Take Guessing Out of the Concrete Drying Process

    Actual Cost Value Includes Depreciation of Repair Labor Costs

    United States Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in EEOC Subpoena Case

    Meet the Forum's Neutrals: TOM DUNN

    Anthony Luckie Speaks With Columbia University On Receiving Graduate Degree in Construction Administration Alongside His Father

    Policy Language Matters: New Jersey Court Bars Cleanup Coverage Under Broad Policy Terms

    Breach of a Construction Contract & An Equitable Remedy?

    Hurricane Damage Not Covered for Home Owner Not Named in Policy

    Colorado’s Need for Condos May Spark Construction Defect Law Reform

    South Carolina Supreme Court Asked Whether Attorney-Client Privilege Waived When Insurer Denies Bad Faith

    Workers Compensation Immunity and the Intentional Tort Exception

    Couple Perseveres to Build Green

    Estimate Tops $5.5B for Cost of Rebuilding After Maui Fires

    Tests Find Pollution From N.C. Coal Ash Site Hit by Florence Within Acceptable Levels

    Arizona Is Smart About Water. It Should Stay That Way.

    Anti-Assignment Provision Unenforceable in Kentucky

    Let the 90-Day Countdown Begin

    Partner Lisa M. Rolle and Associate Vito John Marzano Obtain Dismissal of Third-Party Indemnification Claims

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

    San Diego: Compromise Reached in Fee Increases for Affordable Housing

    Three Attorneys Elevated to Partner at Newmeyer & Dillion, LLP

    When Construction Defects Appear, Don’t Choose Between Rebuilding and Building Your Case

    Nine ACS Lawyers Recognized as Super Lawyers – Including One Top 10 and Three Top 100 Washington Attorneys

    Are Modern Buildings Silently Killing Us?

    FEMA, Congress Eye Pre-Disaster Funding, Projects

    When is a Contract not a Contract?

    Tall and Sustainable Is Not an Easy Fix

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (02/08/23) – The Build America, Buy America Act, ESG Feasibility, and University Partnerships

    Trumark Homes Hired James Furey as VP of Land Acquisition

    From ‘Cuckoo’s Egg’ to Today’s Cyber Threat Landscape

    Liquidated Damages Clause Not Enforced

    Why You Make A Better Wall Than A Window: Why Policyholders Can Rest Assured That Insurers Should Pay Legal Bills for Claims with Potential Coverage

    Building on New Risks: Construction in the Age of Greening

    Department Of Labor Recovers $724K In Back Wages, Damages For 255 Workers After Phoenix Contractor Denied Overtime Pay, Falsified Records

    No Bond, No Recovery: WA Contractors Must Comply With WA Statutory Requirements Or Risk Being Barred From Recovery If Their Client Refuses To Pay

    Not All Design-Build Projects are Created Equal

    TARP Funds Demolish Homes in Detroit to Lift Prices: Mortgages

    Washington Supreme Court Expands Contractor Notice Obligations

    New York Establishes a Registration Requirement for Contractors and Subcontractors Performing Public Works and Covered Private Projects

    Attorneys' Fees Awarded "Because Of" Property Damage Are Covered by Policy

    The Hunton Policyholder’s Guide to Artificial Intelligence: SEC’s Recent AI-Washing Claims Present D&O Risks, Potential Coverage Challenges

    CISA Clarifies – Construction is Part of Critical Infrastructure Activities

    9 Basic Strategies for Pursuing Coverage for Construction Accident Claims

    Virginia Joins California and Nevada in Passing its Consumer Privacy Act
    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

    Save a Legal Fee: Prevent Costly Lawsuits With Claim Limitation Clauses

    April 25, 2012 —

    Ever had that lingering problem with a contracting partner that went away for awhile and then came back to bite you ? years later? In Washington, construction contract claims can be raised for up to six years after substantial completion. Six years!? Why would I want to wait that long to find out if I have a problem? You don’t have to.

    Over the past few years, I have discussed the notion of “contractual claim periods” on The Builders Counsel. For today’s Save a Legal Fee column, I cannot think of a better topic. These provisions are specifically intended to save you from unnecessary legal fees that might arise if a problem goes unnoticed for too long.

    Contractual claim periods are simply a way to reduce the amount of time that a contracting party has to raise a claim against its contracting partner. For example, a subcontractor might require that a general contractor raise any claim that it might have ? for defective or incomplete work, injury, damages, etc ? within a particular amount of time or forever lose the ability to raise the claim in a legal proceeding.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

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

    Application of Set-Off When a Defendant Settles in Multiparty Construction Dispute

    January 05, 2017 —
    The defense of set-off is an important defense in construction disputes, particularly multiparty disputes. For more information on this defense, please check out this article as it explains the application of set-off in civil disputes in detail. The issue of set-off will come up in a multiparty dispute when a plaintiff settles with one or more of the defendants. The remaining defendant(s) wants the benefit of that settlement to set-off and reduce any judgment against it. An example of this scenario can be found in Escadote I Corp. v. Ocean Three Limited Partnership, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D23a (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). In this case, an owner of a condominium unit sued the condominium association, the developer, and the general contractor for water intrusion and mold infestation. The claim against the condominium association was the only claim that entitled the owner to attorney’s fees pursuant to its lawsuit (thus, attorney’s fees were isolated to only that claim against the association). During trial, the owner settled with the association. In entering a settlement, the owner smartly allocated the settlement amount such that $500 was allocated to its principal damages and $374,500 was allocated to its attorney’s fees. The owner then obtained a jury verdict against the contractor and developer for approximately $2M, jointly and severally, and the contractor and developer wanted the entire $375,000 settlement amount with the association to be set-off from the $2M verdict. The trial court set-off the entire $375,000 from the jury verdict when entering judgment. The appellate court reversed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@katzbarron.com

    Insurer’s Consent Not Needed for Settlement

    October 14, 2013 —
    The Texas Supreme Court has concluded in Lennar Corp. v. Markel Am. Ins. Co. that “the costs incurred by a builder to locate and repair damage caused by the builder’s defective product are covered under its general liability insurance policy.” Hunton & Williams have issued a Client Alert discussing the case. For the background of the case, Lennar built about 800 homes using EIFS. The EIFS trapped water and the homes suffered from rot, structural damage, mold, mildew, and termites. Lennar fixed all the homes so built, avoiding litigation. Lennar “notifed its insurers of the defects and invited its insurers to participate in the proactive remediation program.” A lower court had agreed with Markel, one of Lennar’s insurers, that the losses were not “caused by property damage,” and that Lennar should not have made “voluntary payments without Markel’s consent.” The Texas Supreme Court granted review, rejecting Markel’s argument and affirming the jury’s finding. According to Hunton & Williams, the implications of the Texas Lennar decision is that it “confirms that all insurers with policy in effect at the time of property damage are responsible for all sums for which the policyholder is liable.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Home Sales and Stock Price Up for D. R. Horton

    February 04, 2013 —
    They call themselves "America's Builder," and in the last three months of 2013, D. R. Horton exceeded the market's predictions of how many of the homes they built would translate into sales. At the end of 2011, they had $27.7 million in earnings. At the end of last year, they saw $66.3 million in earnings. The 2011 earnings work out to 9 cents per share. Analysts were expecting 14 cents per share, but D. R. Horton delivered 20 cents per share. The stock market responded with a 3.7% increase in the home builder's stock price, upping it by 79 cents to $22.10. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Are Defense Costs In Addition to Policy Limits?

    December 02, 2015 —
    I recently had a discussion with an insurer about whether defense costs were included within the policy limits of a client’s coverage or in addition to policy limits. This was an important discussion because if costs of defense were included in the policy limits, my client was going to exceed those policy limits in a hurry. How would this situation play out with your insurance? Fortunately, the majority of insurance policies, such as Commercial General Liability (CGL) policies, provide that defense costs are “in addition” to the policy limits. But some policies, often times referred to as “burning limits” policies, provide that cost of defense is included in the policy limits. This means that if you have $1,000,000.00 policy limits, your costs of defense will reduce that limit throughout the course of litigation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Failure to Cover Collapse Fails

    April 13, 2017 —
    The insurer was unsuccessful in moving to dismiss the property owner's complaint that was filed after coverage for collapse of basement walls was denied. Cyr v. CCAA Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39387 (D. Conn. March 20, 2017). The Cyrs began observing cracking patterns in the basement wall of their home. A structural engineer inspected the wall and determined that the cracks were due to a chemical reaction in the concrete that would ultimately render the walls unstable. The Cyrs made a claim with CCAA under their homeowner's policy. The insureds contended that the progressive deterioration of the concrete in the basement walls was a collapse under the policy. 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

    Useful Life: A Valuable Theory for Reducing Damages

    March 29, 2017 —
    The situation is one all too familiar to construction defect litigants. A homeowner contracts with a roofing contractor to install a new roof with a life expectancy of ten years.[1] After only five years, the homeowner brings a claim for construction defects in the roof alleging that the roof requires complete replacement due to water intrusion. The homeowner seeks damages for the full replacement cost of the roof. However, under a “useful life” theory, the homeowner would not be entitled to damages for the full amount of the replacement cost. Instead, the homeowner would be entitled to one-half of the cost of the replacement roof, taking into account the fact that he or she had been deprived of only five, rather than ten, years of use. “Useful life” is best understood as the expected length of time that a newly built construction element can be reasonably anticipated to last, subject to routine maintenance and ordinary wear and tear. The “useful life” theory holds that granting the homeowner damages for the full replacement cost of the roof would result in unjust enrichment to the homeowner, who had contracted for a roof with a ten-year, rather than a fifteen-year, useful life. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brooke E. Beebe, Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.
    Ms. Beebe may be contacted at brooke.beebe@csklegal.com

    Snooze You Lose? Enforcement of Notice and Timing Provisions

    November 11, 2024 —
    Deadlines are an inescapable part of the construction industry. Bid deadlines. Submittal deadlines. Material delivery deadlines. Substantial completion. Final completion. And so, inevitably, fighting about deadlines becomes a necessary byproduct. Was the deadline really a deadline? Was the schedule slippage on the critical path? Should there be an equitable extension to the date of substantial completion? Given the amount of attention and concern conferred on deadlines, those drafting construction contracts naturally seek to clarify which deadlines really matter with the inclusion of notice and timing provisions. A contract’s change order and claims procedures are often a key friction point for those drafting and administering the contract. Should there be a requirement for prior written notice of a claim for cost/time relief? How much advance notice? Who should the request be sent to? Is a specific form of notice required? What are the consequences of failing to provide timely notice? A practitioner should pay careful attention to negotiating these terms on the front end, because rest assured, these contract provisions will garner scrutiny when a change order dispute boils over. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cornelius F. "Lee" Banta, Jr., Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Banta may be contacted at lbanta@pecklaw.com