BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs 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


    Residential Mortgage Lenders and Servicers Beware of Changes to Rule 3002.1

    City of Sacramento Approves Kings NBA Financing Plan

    NYC Hires Engineer LERA for Parking Garage Collapse Probe

    Construction of New U.S. Homes Declines on Plunge in South

    Roof's "Cosmetic" Damage From Hail Storm Covered

    Fourth Circuit Finds Insurer Reservation of Rights Letters Inadequate to Preserve Coverage Defenses Under South Carolina Law

    The Black Woman Architect Who Hopes to Change the Face of Design in America

    Albert Reichmann, Builder of NY, London Finance Hubs, Dies at 93

    Insurer Beware: Failure to Defend Ends with Hefty Verdict

    Flood Insurance Claim Filed in State Court Properly Dismissed

    Gain in Home Building Points to Sustained U.S. Growth

    Thousands of London Residents Evacuated due to Fire Hazards

    Steven Cvitanovic to Present at NASBP Virtual Seminar

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Los Angeles Office on Another Successful MSJ!

    Actual Cost Value Includes Depreciation of Repair Labor Costs

    The Double-Breasted Dilemma

    Remodels Replace Construction in Redding

    Seattle Council May Take a New Look at Micro-Housing

    Virtual Jury Trials of Construction Disputes: The Necessary Union of Both Sides of the Brain

    US Moves to Come Clean on PFAS in Drinking Water

    Coloradoans Deserve More Than Hyperbole and Rhetoric from Plaintiffs’ Attorneys; We Deserve Attainable Housing

    While Construction Permits Slowly Rise, Construction Starts and Completions in California Are Stagnant

    The Expansion of Potential Liability of Construction Managers and Consultants

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

    Second Circuit Court Differentiates the Standard for Determining Evident Partiality for a Neutral Arbitrator and a Party-Appointed Arbitrator

    New York Converting Unlikely Buildings into Condominiums

    Plaintiffs Not Barred from Proving Causation in Slip and Fall Case, Even With No Witnesses and No Memory of Fall Itself

    Singer Akon’s Multibillion-Dollar Futuristic City in Africa Gets Final Notice

    Project-Specific Policies and Products-Completed Operations Hazard Extensions

    Product Defect Allegations Trigger Duty To Defend in Pennsylvania

    Waive It Goodbye: Despite Evidence to the Contrary, Delaware Upholds an AIA Waiver of Subrogation Clause

    Flag on the Play! Expired Contractor’s License!

    Peckar & Abramson Once Again Recognized Among Construction Executive’s “Top 50 Construction Law Firms™”

    Pennsylvania Federal Court Confirms: Construction Defect Claims Not Covered by CGL Policies

    Georgia Appellate Court Supports County Claim Against Surety Company’s Failure to Pay

    Takeaways From Schedule-Based Dispute Between General Contractor and Subcontractor

    Last, but NOT Least: Why You Should Take a Closer Look at Your Next Indemnification Clause

    Nondelegable Duties

    Fifth Circuit Asks Texas Supreme Court to Clarify Construction Defect Decision

    Colorado Drillers Show Sensitive Side to Woo Fracking Foes

    McDermott International and BP Team Arbitrate $535M LNG Site Dispute

    Utility Contractor Held Responsible for Damaged Underground Electrical Line

    What are the Potential Damages when a House is a Lemon?

    The EPA and the Corps of Engineers Propose Another Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States”

    Counterpoint: Washington Supreme Court to Rule on Resulting Losses in Insurance Disputes

    Coping With The New Cap And Trade Law

    Putting 3D First, a Model Bridge Rises in Norway

    Review of Recent Contractors State License Board Changes

    What to Do Before OSHA Comes Knocking

    The Argument for Solar Power
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    New Case Law Update: Mountain Valleys, Chevron Deference and a Long-Awaited Resolution on the Sacketts’ Small Lot

    June 12, 2023 —
    This is a brief roundup of recent federal court environmental and regulatory law decisions from the federal courts over the past few months, including the much anticipated ruling in Sackett, et ux., v, Environmental Protection Agency. THE U.S. SUPREME COURT Sackett, et ux., v, Environmental Protection Agency Last year, the Supreme Court issued a significant decision curtailing some of the EPA’s regulatory powers in the Clean Air Act in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency. On May 25, 2023, the Court limited EPA’s—and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ authority—under the Clean Water Act. This, too, is a major environmental ruling. The Court held that the EPA could not classify the wetlands located on the Idaho property of Michael and Chantell Sackett as “Waters of the United States” on the basis of the “significant nexus” test devised by Justice Kennedy in his separate opinion in the 2005 case of Rapanos v. United States. Accordingly, the Court unanimously held that their property was not subject to the EPA’s or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ permitting and enforcement power. In 2004, the Sacketts purchased a small lot near Priest Lake in Bonner County, Idaho, on which to build a home. As related by Justice Alito, once they began to fill in their property with dirt and rocks, they were notified by EPA that their backfilling operation violated the Clean Water Act (CWA) because they were affecting protected wetlands. The Sacketts challenged this action, thus beginning a long legal battle with EPA and the federal government. In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the federal government’s regulatory authority over these wetlands, holding that the CWA covers “adjacent” wetlands having a significant nexus to traditional navigable waters. The Supreme Court decided that this case was suitable for determining whether the Sackett’s wetlands are “waters of the United States” and thus subject to the permitting and regulatory enforcement powers of the EPA and the Corps of Engineers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    How a Robot-Built Habitat on Mars Could Change Construction on Earth

    October 14, 2019 —
    According to a 2018 report by the International Energy Agency and UN Environment, the global construction industry is responsible for 39% of energy-related carbon-dioxide emissions. That is a huge, scary number—but one that comes with an equally large opportunity to mitigate climate change. The 2015 Paris climate talks revealed that by using existing technology, construction could cut global carbon emissions by up to a third. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Drew Turney, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Leonard Fadeeff v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    September 21, 2020 —
    In Fadeeff v. State Farm Gen. Ins. Co., 50 Cal.App.5th 94 (May 22, 2020), the California Court of Appeal reversed the entry of summary judgment in favor of State Farm General Insurance Company (“State Farm”) in connection with a smoke and soot damage claim made by Leonard and Patricia Fadeeff (the “Fadeeffs”) for damage sustained by their home due to the 2015 Valley Fire. The parties’ dispute arose out of the Valley Fire, which took place in Lake County, California. The Fadeeffs’ home was located in Hidden Valley Lake. The Fadeeffs submitted a claim to State Farm under their homeowners policy. Initially, after an adjuster inspected the home and noted that it was “well maintained” with no apparent maintenance issues, State Farm made a series of payments and arranged for ServPro to clean the smoke and soot damage. Subsequently, the Fadeeffs retained an independent adjuster and submitted a supplemental claim in the amount of $75,000. State Farm retained a different unlicensed adjuster to investigate the claim and retained expert, Forensic Analytical Consulting Services (FACS) to inspect the Fadeeffs’ home, and another company referred to as HVACi, to inspect the Fadeeffs’ HVAC system. The independent adjuster used to investigate the Fadeeffs’ supplemental claim failed to follow company guidelines in connection with using experts, which required specific questions to be addressed by the expert. In addition, FACS only took surface samples of the walls in the Fadeeffs’ home. Ultimately, the reports prepared by FACS and HVACi concluded that no additional work was required to remediate the damage sustained by the Fadeeffs’ home. Thereafter, State Farm denied the Fadeeffs’ supplemental claim. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Velladao, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Velladao may be contacted at Michael.Velladao@lewisbrisbois.com

    Hirers Must Affirmatively Exercise Retained Control to be Liable Under Hooker Exception to Privette Doctrine

    September 12, 2023 —
    Don’t drink and drive people. I mean seriously. It’s been over 40 years since California native Candace Lightner formed Mothers Against Drunk Driving in 1980 after her 13-year-old daughter, Candace, was killed by a drunk driver who later served just 9 months in jail before getting out and getting into his sixth (yes, sixth) drunk driving accident. It hurts the victims and their families, makes a mess for the offender (and their family), and, as the next case, Marin v. Department of Transportation, 88 Cal.App.5th 529 (2023), illustrates, can needlessly draw out the pain as the victim’s family seeks financial recourse for their emotional loss from others. Miguel Angel Rodriguez De La Cruz, a highway construction worker, was killed by a drunk driver. I’m not sure what his family did on the legal front after his death – perhaps sued the drunk driver – but among possible others they sued the California Department of Transportation. And they lost. Although there is no such thing as “winning” and “losing” in these types cases. It’s just losing and losing. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Using the Prevention Doctrine

    April 22, 2019 —
    The following scenario happens regularly in the construction industry. A contractor on a project reaches out to a subcontractor to perform work. Excited about the prospect of performing the work, the subcontractor signs a contract and puts it nose to the grindstone. After dutifully completing the work the subcontractor turns to the contractor and asks to be paid. But, the contractor refuses saying that there is a provision in the subcontract that says the contractor is only obligated to pay the subcontractor if the contractor receives payment from the owner. So the contractor has completed the work, but has no money to show for it. One potential remedy for a subcontractor in this situation is the use of the prevention doctrine. “Under the prevention doctrine, ‘if a promisor prevents or hinders fulfillment of a condition to his performance, the condition may be waived or excused.’” Cox v. SNAP, Inc., 859 F.3d 304, 308 (4th Cir. 2017) (quoting Moore Bros. Co. v. Brown & Root, Inc., 207 F.3d 7171, 725 (4th Cir. 2000)). “Put simply, ‘where a party to a contract is the cause of the failure of the performance of the obligation due him or her, that party cannot in any way take advantage of that failure.’” Haddon Hous Assocs v. United States, 711 F.3d 1330, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (quoting Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 245; Williston, § 39:4). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Erhart, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Mr. Erhart may be contacted at derhart@grsm.com

    Waive It Goodbye: Despite Evidence to the Contrary, Delaware Upholds an AIA Waiver of Subrogation Clause

    April 19, 2022 —
    Subrogation professionals have always been looking for ways to defeat onerous waiver of subrogation provisions in contracts signed by insureds. However, even when contracts are unsigned, if there is intent when the contract is made – usually long before a loss occurs – a waiver of subrogation can doom what otherwise may have been a strong case. The Superior Court of Delaware considered such a scenario to determine whether a waiver of subrogation provision applied to a multimillion-dollar subrogation case. In State of Delaware Insurance Coverage Office and Factory Mutual Insurance Co., both as subrogee of the University of Delaware v. DiSabatino Construction Co., Schlosser & Associates Mechanical Contractors, Inc. and V.E. Guerrazzi, Inc., C.A. No. N19C-08-080, 2022 Del. Super. LEXIS 108 (March 17, 2022), the court granted the defendants’ motions for summary judgment, holding that the plaintiffs’ claims were barred by a waiver of subrogation provision in the underlying contract. Thus, the court held that the plaintiffs could not pursue the defendants in their suit to recover damages as a result of a fire. The court specifically denied the plaintiffs’ argument that since the contract was not signed and another “short form” version was later used the waiver of subrogation provision should not apply. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lian Skaf, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Skaf may be contacted at skafl@whiteandwilliams.com

    Arctic Roads and Runways Face the Prospect of Rapid Decline

    July 19, 2021 —
    Melting permafrost across Arctic regions has already caused highways to buckle and homes to sink. A new study conducted in the north of Alaska helps explain why rising temperatures are hitting roads, airports and other infrastructure particularly hard. Researchers who monitored temperatures and melting near Prudhoe Bay on Alaska’s North Slope documented how the thawing of frozen ground beneath a highway tended to spread laterally to the side of the road, with the melting process accelerated by snow accumulations and puddling. Those interactions led to more rapid thawing than in areas of undisturbed permafrost. Researchers also found that melting in their test area, alongside a highway that runs atop permafrost, followed a two-phase process — a gradual initial thaw, followed by an accelerated process once warming exceeded a critical point. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tony Frangie Mawad, Bloomberg

    Blackstone Said in $1.7 Billion Deal to Buy Apartments

    January 21, 2015 —
    Blackstone Group LP (BX), the biggest owner of U.S. single-family houses, agreed to buy 36 apartment properties across the country for about $1.7 billion as it expands its rental business, according to two people with knowledge of the transaction. The low-rise, garden-style properties are being sold by Praedium Group, a New York-based real estate investment firm, and contain about 11,000 apartments, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the deal is private. About half of the buildings are in California, Washington, D.C., and Boston, with the rest located around the U.S., they said. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hui-yong Yu, Bloomberg
    Hui-yong Yu may be contacted at hyu@bloomberg.net