BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction 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


    Location, Location, Location—Even in Construction Liens

    Fine Art Losses – “Canvas” the Subrogation Landscape

    That’s Common Knowledge! Failure to Designate an Expert Witness in a Professional Negligence Case is Not Fatal Where “Common Knowledge” Exception Applies

    General Contractors Can Be Sued by a Subcontractor’s Injured Employee

    The Requirement to Post Collateral Under General Agreement of Indemnity Is Real

    Anti-Assignment Provision Unenforceable in Kentucky

    This Times Square Makeover Is Not a Tourist Attraction

    Suing a Local Government in Land Use Cases – Part 1 – Substantive Due Process

    JD Supra’s 2017 Reader’s Choice Awards

    The Almost-Collapse of a Sarasota, Florida Condo Building

    Insurance Attorney Gary Barrera Joins Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group

    Electronic Signatures On Contracts: Are They Truly Compliant?

    White and Williams LLP Acquires 6 Attorney Firm

    Court Says No to Additional Lawyer in Las Vegas Fraud Case

    Moving Toward a Telework Future: A Checklist of Considerations for Employers

    How I Prevailed on a Remote Jury Trial

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Confident about Construction Defect Bill

    Congratulations to Karen Baytosh and August Hotchkin on Their Recognition as 2021 Nevada Legal Elites!

    Bertha – The Tunnel is Finished, but Her Legacy Continues

    “Professional Best Efforts” part 2– Reservation of Rights for Engineers who agree to “best” efforts? (law note)

    Missouri Asbestos Litigation Reform: New Bill Seeks to Establish Robust Disclosure Obligations

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    Florida Lien Law and Substantial Compliance vs. Strict Compliance

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

    Contractor Sued for Contract Fraud by Government

    You’re Only as Good as Those with Whom You Contract

    Blockbuster Breakwater: Alternative Construction Method Put to the Test in Tampa Bay

    Building Permits Hit Five-Year High

    NYC Design Firm Executives Plead Guilty in Pay-to-Play Scheme

    How VR and AR Will Help in Remote Expert Assistance

    Good-To-Know Points Regarding (I) Miller Act Payment Bonds And (Ii) Payment Bond Surety Compelling Arbitration

    Constructive Change Directives / Directed Changes

    Assembly Bill 1701 Contemplates Broader Duty to Subcontractor’s Employees by General Contractor

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (8/21/24) – REITs Show Their Strength, Energy Prices Increase Construction Costs and CRE Struggles to Keep Pace

    Spencer Mayer Receives Miami-Dade Bar Association's '40 Under 40' Award

    The International Codes Development Process is Changing to Continue Building Code Modernization

    Emerging Trends in Shortened Statutes of Limitations and Statutes of Repose

    Connecticut Crumbling Concrete Cases Not Covered Under "Collapse" Provision in Homeowner's Policy

    Foundation Differences Across the U.S.

    Factor the Factor in Factoring

    North Carolina Should Protect Undocumented Witnesses to Charlotte Scaffolding Deaths, Unions Say

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Los Angeles Tier 1 “Best Law Firm” in four practice areas and Tier 2 in one practice area by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2021

    Is the Manhattan Bank of America Tower a Green Success or Failure?

    Client Alert: Design Immunity Affirmative Defense Not Available to Public Entities Absent Evidence of Pre-Accident Discretionary Approval of the Plan or Design

    Gilroy Homeowners Sue over Leaky Homes

    “Rip and Tear” Damage Remains Covered Under CGL Policy as “Accident”—for Now.

    Congratulations 2019 DE, MA, NJ, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Another Reminder that Contracts are Powerful in Virginia

    How To Lock Disputes Out Of Your Project In Construction

    Hudson River PCB Cleanup Lands Back in Court
    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

    5 Questions about New York's Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act

    February 14, 2022 —
    On December 31, 2021, New York enacted the Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act (“CIDA”), requiring defendants to provide plaintiffs with “complete” information for any insurance policy through which a judgment could be satisfied, within sixty (60) days after serving an answer. The stated goal is to reduce delay tactics by compelling disclosures of all policies implicated by a claim as well as other claims, contracts, or agreements that may deplete available coverage or residual limits of policies that have already been eroded by other payments. The impact of CIDA’s disclosure requirements may be scaled back by proposed amendments currently pending before the New York state legislature. 1. What does CIDA Require? CIDA requires the automatic disclosure of insurance information to plaintiffs. New York’s Civil Practice Law & Rules (“CPLR”) 3101(f) permits civil discovery of the contents of existing insurance agreements by which an insurer may be liable for all or part of a judgment. However, CIDA amends the CPLR to mandate that defendants must automatically disclose the following information in all pending cases starting March 1, 2022, or within sixty (60) days of filing an answer to a complaint going forward:
    • Complete copy of all insurance policies that are available to satisfy all or part of a potential judgment.
      • This includes Primary, Excess, and Umbrella policies.
    • The relevant applications for insurance.
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard W. Brown, Saxe Doernberger & Vita and Michael V. Pepe, Saxe Doernberger & Vita Mr. Brown may be contacted at RBrown@sdvlaw.com Mr. Pepe may be contacted at MPepe@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado Senate Revives Construction Defects Reform Bill

    March 01, 2017 —
    A re-booted construction defects reform bill recently passed its first Senate committee, according to the Denver Business Journal. Next, Senate Bill 156, sponsored by Sen. Owen Hill, R-Colorado Springs, heads to the Senate floor for debate. SB 156 “would require that condominium owners alleging construction defects take their disputes to arbitration or mediation if requested by builders,” the Denver Business Journal reported. “It also would require that homeowners be informed of the consequences of filing legal actions over purported disputes and that a majority of all owners in a condominium complex vote to proceed with legal action, rather than just a majority of homeowners association board members.” However, it is almost identical to the failed measures that were introduced in 2014 and 2015. Homeowners association group members and owners of defective condominiums argued against the measure, stating “that the effort would not improve the quality of building in the state, but simply would block aggrieved Coloradans from taking their complaints before a jury of their peers.” Proponent of the bill, Tom Clark, CEO of Metro Denver Economic Development Corp., said “that Denver’s housing costs have risen since the first bill was introduced in 2013 to the sixth-most-expensive in the country – and are tops for any metro area not on a coast.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Ghosts of Projects Past

    December 17, 2015 —
    Sean Minahan, one of my partners, and I were discussing a construction dispute the other day and we commented again and again about the significant organization required to get a construction project to completion. From the contracts, to the schedule, to the funding—everything has to be in lock step or there will be problems that could bring the project to a halt, or worse yet litigation. The same is true of construction claims. To present a claim effectively, it has to be simple. But, to make it simple will require substantial documentation and organization of all aspects of a claim. This point was driven home this week when I received Long International’s Construction Claims Analysis Checklist Long International. The Checklist is 11 pages long and identifies various aspects of a claim, from the simple to the complicated. 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

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    June 17, 2015 —
    Aside from waiver of lien rights (something that will be illegal in Virginia after July 1, 2015), the most troublesome contractual impediment to payment for a subcontractor or supplier on a project often is the “pay if paid” clause. As a general rule, in Virginia, these clauses where drafted in the proper fashion, are enforceable. As I have said many times, in Virginia freedom of contract almost always wins out. While this is the case, I emphasize that such clauses must be very explicit and specific. Furthermore, and in something that should be obvious, these clauses are generally limited by the Courts of Virginia to only be enforceable and to only forgive the need for payment if the upstream contractor on the construction job has not been paid for the work that the sub claiming non payment has done. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Dealing with Abandoned Property After Foreclosure

    April 10, 2019 —
    California landlords must follow very specific steps before disposing of property that is clearly abandoned, left on real estate which has been the subject of court proceedings such as eviction or foreclosure, or otherwise left behind. Following the statutory procedures relating to abandoned property protects landlords from potential liability for an improper “conversion.” Former tenants/owners and others “reasonably believed” to be owners of the apparently abandoned personal property must be given proper written notice of the right to reclaim the abandoned property. The tenant is presumed to be the owner of any “records” remaining on the property. The California Code of Civil Procedure provides a template for such notice. The notice to be provided to former tenants/owners must be in “substantially” the same form provided in the California Code of Civil Procedure and must contain the following information:
    1. A description of the abandoned property in a manner reasonably adequate to permit the owner of the property to identify it;
    2. The location where the tenant can claim the property;
    3. The time frame that the tenant has to claim the property. The date specified in the notice shall be a date not less than fifteen (15) days after the notice is personally delivered or, if mailed, not less than eighteen (18) days after the notice is deposited in the mail;
    4. A statement that reasonable storage costs will be charged to the tenant/owner and the tenant/owner must pay those costs before claiming the property; and
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Failure to Allege Property Damage Within Policy Period Defeats Insured's Claim

    October 03, 2022 —
    The insured's inability to determine when water damage occurred meant it could not pursue claims of property damage against the insurers. Creek v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116939 (W.D. Wash. July 1, 2022). Gold Creek Condominium complex experienced water damage. The complex was completed in 1982. The owners sued State Farm and Travelers under all-risk policies when tenders for the damage were denied. In 2017, Creek hired an expert to investigate deterioration due to water intrusion. The expert noted that "water intrusion had been evident in the exterior walls, soffits, terraces, handrails and elevated entry walkways for some time." Thereafter, Creek tendered claims for property damage to State Farm and to Travelers. 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

    Ninth Circuit Resolves Federal-State Court Split Regarding Whether 'Latent' Defects Discovered After Duration of Warranty Period are Actionable under California's Lemon Law Statute

    December 17, 2015 —
    In Daniel v. Ford Motor Company (filed 12/02/15), the Ninth Circuit resolved a federal and state court split on the issue of whether consumers can sustain a breach of implied warranty claim under California’s Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (aka the “lemon law” statute) for “latent” defects discovered after the warranty period has expired. Answering this question in the affirmative, the Ninth Circuit followed the holding in the California state appellate decision of Mexia v. Rinker Boat Co. 95 Cal.Rptr.3d 285 (2009), which definitively determined there is nothing in California’s lemon law that requires a consumer to discover a latent defect during the duration of the warranty. The underlying class action lawsuit was brought in federal district court by purchasers of Ford Focus vehicles. The plaintiffs alleged Ford was aware of, but failed to disclose, a rear suspension defect in the Focus that resulted in premature tire wear which can cause decreased vehicle control, catastrophic tire failure and drifting on wet or snowy roads. The plaintiffs alleged a number of claims including violations of California’s Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and Magnuson Moss Warranty Act. Ford successfully moved for summary judgment on all claims prompting an appeal. Reprinted courtesy of Laura C. Williams, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Williams may be contacted at lwilliams@hbblaw.com Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Occurrence Where Contract Provides for Delays

    March 01, 2017 —
    Applying Montana law, the federal district court found there was no coverage for a subcontractor who was sued by the contractor for breach of the subcontract. Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Ed Boland Constr., Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6654 (D. Mont. Jan 18, 2017). Northbank was the general contractor on a project to repair a bridge for the Federal Highway Administration (FHA). Ed Boland Construction, Inc. (EBC) was the subcontractor to perform drilling and pile installation. After beginning its work, EBC ran into difficulties with unforeseen conditions at the work site. The FHA informed Northbank that it had concerns over EBC's ability to complete the work. The FHA alleged that EBC had brought equipment to the work site that differed from the equipment it had represented would be used. 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