BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim 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


    Alarm Cries Wolf in California Case Involving Privette Doctrine

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    A Funny Thing Happened to My Ground Lease in Bankruptcy Court

    Georgia Legislature Passes Additional Procurement Rules

    Consultant Says It's Time to Overhaul Construction Defect Laws in Nevada

    10-story Mass Timber 'Rocking' Frame Sails Through Seismic Shake Tests

    Housing Starts Plunge by the Most in Four Years

    Construction Legislation Likely to Take Effect July 1, 2020

    “Source of Duty,” Tort, and Contract, Oh My!

    Eighth Circuit Affirms Finding of Bad Faith, Award of Costs and Prejudgment Interest

    Tension Over Municipal Gas Bans Creates Uncertainty for Real Estate Developers

    Condo Buyers Seek to Void Sale over Construction Defect Lawsuit

    GRSM Attorneys Selected to 2024 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    Elon Musk's Boring Co. Is Feuding With Texas Over a Driveway

    Keeping KeyArena's Landmark Lid Overhead at Climate Pledge Arena Redevelopment Is A 22,000-Ton Balancing Act

    Five Frequently Overlooked Points of Construction Contracts

    The G2G Mid-Year Roundup (2022)

    Prevent Costly Curb Box Damage Due on New Construction Projects

    Defense Owed for Product Liability Claims That Do Not Amount to Faulty Workmanship

    Zillow Topping Realogy Shows Web Surge for Housing Market

    Revisiting OSHA’s Controlling Employer Policy

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud

    Is Modular Construction Destined to Fail?

    The Most Expensive Apartment Listings in New York That Are Not in Manhattan

    Colorado Mayors Should Not Sacrifice Homeowners to Lure Condo Developers

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

    Is There a Conflict of Interest When a CD Defense Attorney Becomes Coverage Counsel Post-Litigation?

    Kadeejah Kelly Named to The National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List

    Luxury Homes Push City’s Building Permits Past $7.5 Million

    Mediation is (Almost) Always Worth a Shot

    Mediation Clause Can Stay a Miller Act Claim, Just Not Forever

    New Jersey Legislation Would Bar Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause in Homeowners' Policies

    Deadline Nears for “Green Performance Bond” Implementation

    Default, Fraud, and VCPA (Oh My!)

    BWB&O Senior Associate Kyle Riddles and Associate Alexandria Heins Obtain a Trial Victory in a Multi-Million Dollar Case!

    Selected Environmental Actions Posted on the Fall 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulator Actions

    Is Your Home Improvement Contract Putting You At Risk?

    Cuba: Construction Boom Potential for U.S. Construction Companies and Equipment Manufacturers?

    Statute of Limitations Bars Lender’s Subsequent Action to Quiet Title Against Junior Lienholder Mistakenly Omitted from Initial Judicial Foreclosure Action

    BWBO Celebrating Attorney Award and Two New Partners

    What You Should Know About Liquidated Damages and Liability Caps for Delay and Performance Liquidated Damages

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/8/24) – Hotel Labor Disputes, a Congressional Real Estate Caucus and Freddie Mac’s New Policies

    Indiana Court of Appeals Rules Against Contractor and Performance Bond Surety on Contractor's Differing Site Conditions Claim

    Another Guilty Plea In Nevada Construction Defect Fraud Case

    Texas City Pulls Plug on Fossil Fuels With Shift to Solar

    California Homeowners Can Release Future, Unknown Claims Against Builders

    What You Need to Know to Protect the Project Against Defect Claims

    Banks Rejected by U.S. High Court on Mortgage Securities Suits

    Contractor Sues Yelp Reviewer for Defamation

    Does Stricter Decertification Mean More “Leedigation?”
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    ASCE Statement on House Failure to Pass the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    October 04, 2021 —
    The following is a statement by Tom Smith, Executive Director, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): WASHINGTON, DC. – Today, American families and businesses are paying the price while the House plays politics and fails to pass the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), a historic piece of legislation that would have monumental impacts on the economy, public safety, global competitiveness, and each American's well-being. After decades of kicking the can down the road on meaningful infrastructure legislation, Congress is missing an extraordinary chance to reverse this unsustainable trend with passage of the IIJA, instead choosing to allow critical projects to be delayed. This legislation was passed in a strong vote by the Senate on August 10th, and almost two months later, it sits on the sidelines as the federal program for transit, roads, and bridges expired on September 30th and projects come grinding to a halt. While other countries are making investments in their future, we are letting politics steal this opportunity to move forward. It does not have to be this way. This comprehensive bill would bring relief to communities facing strained power grids, aging bridges, leaking water pipes, and spotty broadband. American families do not want to have to wonder if their power will stay on in the next storm, if the bridge connecting their community will close for emergency repairs, or if a week of virtual school means their child will miss out. We urge the House to pass this bipartisan, commonsense legislation today to create jobs, make goods and services move more quickly and reliably, and make American communities more climate-resilient. Our infrastructure bill has come due, and now is the time to act. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 150,000 civil engineers worldwide and is America's oldest national engineering society. ASCE works to raise awareness of the need to maintain and modernize the nation's infrastructure using sustainable and resilient practices, advocates for increasing and optimizing investment in infrastructure, and improve engineering knowledge and competency. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Dreyer v. Am. Natl. Prop. & Cas. Co. Or: Do Not Enter into Nunn-Agreements for Injuries that Occurred After Expiration of the Subject Insurance Policy

    January 20, 2020 —
    While Nunn-Agreements[1] may be appealing for both plaintiffs and defendants where an insurer unreasonably fails to defend a lawsuit, a recent opinion from The Honorable Marcia Krieger in the United States District Court of Colorado[2] (“Opinion”) demonstrates the importance of first confirming that there exists a viable insurance claim before proceeding with such a Nunn- Agreement. The facts giving rise to the Opinion were as follows. In March 2015, a Homeowner couple (the “Homeowners”) suffered damages to their home resulting from a brushfire. Fortunately, the Homeowners were insured, they submitted their claim to their homeowners’ insurance carrier which was in effect at the time of the brushfire (the “Insurance Carrier”), and the Insurance Carrier paid the claim. Ostensibly as part of the Homeowners’ remediation efforts to their home they removed a large bush which left a hole in the ground. After paying the claim, in August 2015 the Insurance Carrier cancelled or elected not to renew the Homeowners’ policy. In October 2015, a repairman working on the Home (the “Repairman”) was injured after his ladder fell over allegedly because of the hole in the ground caused by the bush that had been removed. As a result of injuries caused by the fall from the ladder, the Repairman brought suit against the Homeowners. In response to the Repairman’s claim, the Homeowners again tendered to their Insurance Carrier. This time, however, the Insurance Carrier denied coverage on the basis that the Repairman’s injuries occurred after the expiration of the relevant policy. Without insurance coverage, the Homeowner’s entered into a Nunn-Agreement with the Repairman, conceding liability, and assigning any claims they might have had against the Insurance Carrier in lieu of execution of any judgment against the Homeowners. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jean Meyer, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Meyer may be contacted at meyer@hhmrlaw.com

    Maryland Legislation Prohibits Condominium Developers from Shortening Statute of Limitations to Defeat Unit Owner Construction Defect Claims

    May 16, 2018 —
    New Maryland legislation prevents developers from shortening the time period within which condominium associations and their unit owner members can assert claims for hidden construction defects in newly constructed condominium communities. The legislation known as HB 77 and SB 258 passed both houses of the Maryland General Assembly and was signed into law by Governor Lawrence J. Hogan on April 24, 2018 (see photo above). Nicholas D. Cowie, Esq. is the author of the legislation, which will be codified as Section 11-134.1 of the Maryland Condominium Act, effective October 1, 2018. This article discusses how this new legislation ends the practice by which some condominium developers attempted to use condominium documents to shorten the normal statute of limitations in order to prevent condominium associations and their unit owner members from having a fair opportunity to assert their warranty and other legal claims for latent construction defects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas D. Cowie, Esq., Cowie & Mott
    Mr. Cowie may be contacted at ndc@cowiemott.com

    Just Because You Label It A “Trade Secret” Does Not Make It A “Trade Secret”

    January 31, 2018 —

    Everything is a “trade secret,” right? Nope. What if I mark it as a “trade secret” Still nope. But, you already knew those answers.

    This is an especially important issue when dealing with public entities, as demonstrated by the recent opinion in Raiser-DC, LLC v. B&L Service, Inc., 43 Fla. L. Weekly D145a (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). In this case, Uber and Broward County entered into an agreement regarding Uber’s services at Fort Lauderdale airport and Port Everglades. Per the agreement, Uber furnished monthly reports relating to the number of pickups and drop-offs, as well as information relating to the fee associated with the pickups and drop-offs. Uber marked these reports as constituting trade secrets. It did so to preclude this information from being disclosed to the public.

    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

    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

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Confident about Construction Defect Bill

    February 21, 2013 —
    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson told the Las Vegas Review Journal that he was confident that his bill to reform construction defect legislation in Nevada would not meet the same fate as the bill he introduced in 2009, which made it through the Senate only to die in the Assembly. Senate Bill 161 would end the guarantee on legal fees for lawyers bringing construction defect suits. Further, the bill limits construction defects to those that include “an unreasonable risk of injury to a person or property.” According to the article, construction defect claims in Nevada are 38 times above the national average. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Bay Area Counties Issue Less Restrictive “Shelter in Place” Orders, Including for Construction

    May 04, 2020 —
    The short story: Construction can resume. The long story: Construction can resume beginning Monday, May 4, 2020, with extensive and detailed restrictions. Six Bay Area Counties Loosen Shelter-in-Place Restrictions Including Allowing Construction to Resume Earlier this week, six Bay Area counties and the City of Berkeley issued new orders requiring the use of face coverings when in public. The six Bay Area counties, which also happen to be the first counties in the nation to issue shelter-in-place orders, are Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo and Santa Clara. When do the revised shelter-in-place orders take effect? The revised shelter-in-place orders take effect at 11:59 p.m. on May 3, 2020 and will remain in effect until 11:59 p.m. on May 31, 2020 unless extended, rescinded, superseded, or amended. Thus, effectively, the new orders take effect on Monday, May 4, 2020. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Coverage for Construction Defects Barred by Business Risk Exclusions

    September 01, 2011 —

    Although the court determined there was an occurrence, coverage was excluded by the business risk exclusions.  See Cont’l W. Ins. Co. v. Shay Constr. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82839 (D. Colo. July 28, 2011).

    White was the general contractor on the project. White had three subcontracts with Shay to provide framing, siding, and related work on the project. Shay was insured under a CGL policy issued by Continental Western.

    Two of Shay’s subcontractors furnished materials, labor and equipment to Shay. These subcontractors filed suit in state court alleging they had not been compensated for the work and materials. White and Shay were named as defendants. White cross claimed against Shay, alleging Shay had breached its obligations under the subcontracts. Several allegations sounded in contract. Other allegations, however, contended Shay had performed defective work and had damaged the work of other trades in correcting deficiencies in its own performance.

    Shay sought coverage under Continental Western’s policy. Continental Western filed suit for a declaratory judgment and moved for summary judgment.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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