BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete 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


    A Property Tax Exemption, Misapplied, in Texas

    Colorado House Bill 19-1170: Undefined Levels of Mold or Dampness Can Make a Leased Residential Premises Uninhabitable

    Enforceability Of Subcontract “Pay-When-Paid” Provisions – An Important Update

    You Have Choices (Litigation Versus Mediation)

    Arizona Court Determines Statute of Limitations Applicable to a Claim for Reformation of a Deed of Trust (and a Related Claim for Declaratory Judgment)

    No Collapse Coverage Where Policy's Collapse Provisions Deleted

    Trial Court’s Grant of Summary Judgment On Ground Not Asserted By Moving Party Upheld

    Challenging and Defending a California Public Works Stop Payment Notice: Affidavit vs. Counter-Affidavit Process

    Beware of Statutory Limits on Change Orders

    Implied Warranty Claims–Not Just a Seller’s Risk: Builders Beware!

    New Index Tracking Mortgages for New Homes

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court: Fair Share Act Does Not Preempt Common Law When Apportioning Liability

    Reminder: Your Accounting and Other Records Matter

    New Recommendations for Healthy and Safe Housing Conditions

    CA Supreme Court Set to Rule on Important Occurrence Issue Certified by Ninth Circuit

    Massive Wildfire Near Boulder, Colo., Destroys Nearly 1,000 Homes and Businesses

    As Climate Changes, 'Underwater Mortgage' May Take on New Meaning

    Traub Lieberman Partner Michael Logan and Associate Christian Romaguera Obtain Voluntary Dismissal in Favor of Construction Company Under the Vertical Immunity Doctrine

    William Lyon Homes Unites with Polygon Northwest Company

    Replevin Actions: What You Should Know

    Home insurance perks for green-friendly design (guest post)

    Design-Assist Collaboration/Follow-up Post

    Illinois Legislature Enables Pre-Judgment Interest in Personal Injury Cases

    Options When there is a Construction Lien on Your Property

    Ohio subcontractor work exception to the “your work” exclusion

    Tall and Sustainable Is Not an Easy Fix

    Development in CBF Green Building Case in Maryland

    The ‘Sole Option’ Arbitration Provision in Construction Contracts

    California Supreme Court Rejects Insurers' Bid for Horizontal Exhaustion Rule in New Montrose Decision

    ‘Like a War Zone’: Malibu Fire Ravages Multimillion-Dollar Homes

    Employees Versus Independent Contractors

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Indemnity Coverage For Damage Caused by Named Insured

    New Jersey’s Governor Puts Construction Firms on Formal Notice of His Focus on Misclassification of Workers as Independent Contractors

    Repairs to Hurricane-damaged Sanibel Causeway Completed in 105 Days

    California Appellate Court Holds “Minimal Causal Connection” Satisfies Causation Requirement in All Risk Policies

    Sacramento’s Commercial Construction Market Heats Up

    Report Highlights Trends in Construction Tech, Digitization, and AI

    Caterpillar Said to Be Focus of Senate Overseas Tax Probe

    Brazil Congress Chiefs Deny Wrongdoing in Petrobras Scandal

    Georgia Super Lawyers Recognized Two Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

    Summary Judgment Granted to Insurer for Hurricane Damage

    Standard Lifetime Shingle Warranties Aren’t Forever

    Hawaii Federal Court Grants Insured's Motion for Remand

    Design-Build Contracting: Is the Shine Off the Apple?

    Indicted Union Representatives Try Again to Revive Enmons

    Blackstone Said in $1.7 Billion Deal to Buy Apartments

    The Starter Apartment Is Nearly Extinct in San Francisco and New York

    Attorney’s Fees Entitlement And Application Under Subcontract Default Provision

    Effectively Managing Project Closeout: It Ends Where It Begins

    Appeal of an Attorney Disqualification Order Results in Partial Automatic Stay of Trial Court Proceedings
    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

    Named Insured’s Liability Found Irrelevant to Additional Insured’s Coverage Under a Landlords and Lessors Additional Insured Endorsement

    November 16, 2020 —
    In Truck Ins. Exchange v. AMCO Ins. Co. (No. B298798, filed 10/26/20), a California appeals court held that even though the named insured restaurant-lessee was found not liable for premises liability to injured restaurant patrons, the respective liability of the named and additional insured was irrelevant to the landlord-lessor’s coverage for injuries “arising out of” the lessee’s “use” of the premises under a landlords, managers or lessors of premises additional insured endorsement on the lessee’s general liability policy. In Truck v. AMCO, restaurant patrons were injured when a vehicle crashed into the restaurant while they were dining. The landlord was aware of a similar accident that happened several years before, but the current lessee operating the restaurant was not. The patrons sued the lessee, alleging negligence and premises liability for failing to take precautionary measures and safeguard the patrons. On learning of the prior incident, the patrons added the landlord, alleging that it should have protected the property from a recurrence by reinforcing the door and installing bollards by the street. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/11/23) – Millennials Struggle Finding Homes, Additional CHIPS Act Funding Available, and the Supreme Court Takes up Hotel Lawsuit Case

    November 16, 2023 —
    In our latest roundup, EV charging stations become more prevalent at commercial locations, home ownership becomes more difficult for younger Americans, Macy’s announces plans to build additional stores within strip malls, and more!
    • Due to several factors including overpriced housing and student debt, millennials will not have the same level of home ownership as previous generations. (Jordan Rosenfeld, Yahoo)
    • With the U.S. being short about 3.8 million housing units according Freddie Mac, 3-D printing may prove to be the answer while also being cost effective and environmentally friendly. (Lesley Stahl, Aliza Chasan, Shari Finkelstein and Collette Richards, CBS)
    • The Department Commerce of announced a new initiative to funnel $500 million in CHIPS Act funding to projects with capital investments below $300 million that support the construction, expansion or modernization of semiconductor-related facilities in the U.S. (Sebastian Obando, Construction Dive)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team, Pillsbury

    Rental Assistance Program: Good News for Tenants and Possibly Landlords

    January 25, 2021 —
    The recently enacted $2.3 trillion Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (the Act), which combined a $900 billion coronavirus relief bill as part of a larger $1.4 trillion omnibus spending and appropriations bill for the 2021 federal fiscal year, contains key provisions that directly impact the hard-hit real estate industry. In particular, Section 501 of Subtitle A of Title V of Division N of the Act establishes the “Emergency Rental Assistance program” (ERA), which appropriates $25 billion through the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury) to provide eligible households with direct financial housing assistance. The enactment of the ERA provides landlords, tenants, borrowers, potential buyers, financial institutions and small businesses with a necessary lifeline to weather the ongoing economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic. From the $25 billion designated for rental assistance, $800 million is reserved for tribal communities and $400 million is reserved for U.S. territories, with the remaining funds to be distributed to state and local governments (grantees) within 30 days of enactment. Under the ERA, fund allocations will be based on a state’s population, with all states, and the District of Columbia, receiving at least $200 million. Local jurisdictions with populations of 200,000 or more may also apply directly to the Treasury for assistance, which would be reduced from the amount granted to the state in which the jurisdiction is located. Reprinted courtesy of Marissa Levy, White and Williams LLP, Rachel A. Schneidman, White and Williams LLP and Nancy Sabol Frantz, White and Williams LLP Ms. Levy may be contacted at levymp@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Schneidman may be contacted at schneidmanr@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Frantz may be contacted at frantzn@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nevada Supreme Court Holds That Insureds Can Use Extrinsic Evidence to Prove Duty to Defend

    February 28, 2022 —
    The recent Nevada Supreme Court ruling in Zurich American Insurance Company v. Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company1 benefits insureds seeking to establish an insurer’s duty to defend. As a matter of first impression, the court clarified that insureds have the burden to prove that an exception to a policy exclusion applies in order to trigger the insured’s duty to defend. However, while the policyholder may use extrinsic evidence to establish the insurer’s duty to defend, the insurer may not use extrinsic evidence to deny that duty. The facts of the underlying claim are set in the 2000s when the insured subcontractors worked to build thousands of homes in Nevada. The subcontractors were insured by Zurich American Insurance Company (“Zurich”) during that period. After the homes were complete, the subcontractors switched from Zurich to Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company (“Ironshore”). Between 2010 and 2013, homeowners brought claims against the subcontractors alleging that the properties were damaged due to construction defects. The subcontractors tendered the claims to Zurich as the insurer at the time of construction. Zurich then sought defense and indemnification from Ironshore. Ironshore denied coverage under a “continuing and progressive” policy exclusion, claiming that the property damage occurred due to faulty work that predated the Ironshore policy. Notably, an exception to the exclusion applied if “sudden and accidental” property damage occurred within the Ironshore policy period. Given that the underlying lawsuits did not include specific allegations describing when or how the property damage occurred, Ironshore and Zurich disagreed on whether the exception to the exclusion was triggered.. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bethany L. Barrese, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Ms. Barrese may be contacted at BBarrese@sdvlaw.com

    Delays Caused When Government (Owner) Pushes Contractor’s Work Into Rainy / Adverse Weather Season

    January 13, 2020 —
    There are a number of horizontal construction projects where a contractor’s sequence of work and schedule is predicated on avoiding the rainy season (or certain force majeure events). The reason is that the rainy season will result in delays due to the inability to work (and work efficiently) during the adverse weather (including flooding caused by the weather). If the work is pushed into the rainy season, is such delay compensable if the government (or owner) delayed the project that pushed work out into the rainy season? It very well can be. For example, in Meridian Engineering Co. v. U.S., 2019 WL 4594233 (Fed. Cl. 2019), a contractor was hired by the Army Corps of Engineers to construct a flood control project for a channel in Arizona. Due to delays, including those caused by the government, the project was pushed into the monsoon season, which caused additional delays largely due to flooding caused by the heavy rain. One issue was whether such delays were compensable to the contractor – the government raised the argument that the contractor assumed the risk of potential flooding from the rainy season. The Court found this argument unconvincing:
    [The contractor’s] initial construction schedule planned for a completion of the channel invert work, a necessary step in protecting the site from flooding, to be completed by late June 2008…[M]any issues arose in the project’s early stages that led to cumulative substantial delay, including those caused by the government’s failure….The government cannot now claim that [the contractor] assumed the risk of flooding from monsoon season when the government was largely responsible for [the contractor’s] inability to complete the project prior to the beginning of the monsoon season. Simply put, the government cannot escape liability for flood damages when the government is responsible for causing the contractor to be working during the flood-prone season. Meridian Engineering, 2019 WL at *7 (internal citations omitted)
    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

    Almost Half of Homes in New York and D.C. Are Now Losing Value

    September 03, 2015 —
    Almost half of single-family houses in the New York and Washington metropolitan areas are losing value, a sign that buyers' tolerance for high prices in many large U.S. cities may be reaching a limit. The values of 45 percent of houses in both the Washington and New York areas slumped by at least 2 percent in June from a year earlier, according to a new index created by Allan Weiss, co-founder of the Case-Shiller home price indexes. In June 2014, only 15 percent of Washington residences dropped in value, while 20 percent fell in New York. Because the index is of only single-family homes, it doesn't include Manhattan. More properties also were in decline in Los Angeles, Chicago, Phoenix and Miami. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Prashant Gopal, Bloomberg

    Billionaire Row Condo Board Sues Developers Over 1,500 Building Defects

    September 29, 2021 —
    The condo board at one of New York’s tallest and toniest towers sued the building’s developers, claiming design flaws are to blame for flooding, stuck elevators and “horrible and obtrusive noise and vibration.” The residential tower at 432 Park Avenue is a 1,396-foot skyscraper overlooking Central Park that was opened in 2015 on the city’s so-called Billionaire Row. The condo board claims its engineering consultant has identified more than 1,500 construction and design defects — “many of which are described as life safety issues.” The board that represents the condo owners sued the developers, CIM Group and Macklowe Properties, and the company, also known as sponsor, that the developers formed to build the tower. The board is seeking $250 million, plus punitive damages, in the lawsuit, filed Thursday in New York Supreme Court. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert Burnson, Bloomberg

    Michigan Court of Appeals Remands Construction Defect Case

    February 14, 2022 —
    After its prior decision holding there was no coverage for faulty workmanship was remanded by the Michigan Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals remanded to the trial court. Skanska United States Bldg. v. M.A.P. Mech. Contrs., 2021 Mich. App. LEXIS 7336 (Mich. Ct. App. Dec. 28, 2021). The post summarizing the Supreme Court decision is here. Skanska USA Building was the construction manager on a renovation project at a medical center. Skanska subcontracted the heating and cooling portion of the project to defendant M.A.P. MAP held a CGL policy from Amerisure. Skanska and the medical center were named as additional insureds. MAP installed a steam boiler and related piping for the heating system. When completed, the heating system did not function properly. MAP installed some of the expansion joints backwards, causing damage to concrete, steel, and the heating system. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com