BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield 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


    Dispute Resolution in Your Construction Contract

    Ex-Detroit Demolition Official Sentenced for Taking Bribes

    Beyond the COI: The Importance of an Owner's or Facilities Manager's Downstream Insurance Review Program

    Public Adjuster Cannot Serve As Disinterested Appraiser

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

    Congratulations to Woodland Hills Partner Patrick Au and Senior Associate Ava Vahdat on Their Successful Motion for Summary Judgment!

    California Committee Hosts a Hearing on Deadly Berkeley Balcony Collapse

    New York City Council’s Carbon Emissions Regulation Opposed by Real Estate Board

    Builders FirstSource to Buy ProBuild for $1.63 Billion

    High Attendance Predicted for West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Ill-fated Complaint Fails to State Claims Against Broker and FEMA

    Contractor Allegedly Injured after Slipping on Black Ice Files Suit

    Bridges Crumble as Muni Rates at Least Since ’60s Ignored

    Flexible Seattle Off-Ramp Would Retain Shape in Quake

    Florida Insurance Legislation Alert - Part I

    Architectural Democracy – Interview with Pedro Aibéo

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Super Lawyers

    Summarizing Changes to NEPA in the Fiscal Responsibility Act (P.L. 118-5)

    Attorney's Erroneous Conclusion that Limitations Period Had Not Expired Was Not Grounds For Relief Under C.C.P. § 473(b)

    Insureds Survive Motion to Dismiss Civil Authority Claim

    Louisiana Court Applies Manifestation Trigger to Affirm Denial of Coverage

    Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Holds that Nearly All Project Labor Agreements are Illegal

    Designing the Process to Deliver Zero-Carbon Construction – Computational Design in Practice

    Nevada’s Changing Liability Insurance Landscape—State Insurance Regulator Issues Emergency Regulation and Guidance Addressing Controversial “Defense-Within-Limits” Legislation

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation: A Redux

    Homebuilding Still on the Rise

    The Economic Loss Rule and the Disclosure of Latent Defects: In re the Estate of Carol S. Gattis

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

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    Personal Guarantor Cannot Escape a Personal Guarantee By…

    Bank Window Lawsuit Settles Quietly

    Patriarch Partners Decision Confirms Government Subpoenas May Constitute a “Claim” Under D&O Policy; Warns Policyholders to Think Broadly When Representing Facts and Circumstances to Insurers

    Value In Being Deemed “Statutory Employer” Under Workers Compensation Law

    Wall Street’s Favorite Suburban Housing Bet Is Getting Crowded

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/1/24) – IMF’s Data on Housing, REITs Versus Private Real Estate, and Suburban Versus Urban Office Property Market

    New Law Raises Standard for Defense Experts as to Medical Causation

    The Registered Agent Advantage

    MBIA Seeks Data in $1 Billion Credit Suisse Mortgage Suit

    Real Case, Real Lessons: Understanding Builders’ Risk Insurance Limits

    Landlord Duties of Repair and Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment

    Hake Law Attorneys Join National Law Firm Wilson Elser

    Governor Inslee’s Recent Vaccination Mandate Applies to Many Construction Contractors and their Workers

    North Carolina, Tennessee Prepare to Start Repairing Helene-damaged Interstates

    Antidiscrimination Clause Required in Public Works and Goods and Services Contracts­ –Effective January 1, 2024

    Ways of Evaluating Property Damage Claims in Various Contexts

    Faulty Workmanship Causing Damage to Other Property Covered as Construction Defect

    Supreme Court of Oregon Affirms Decision in Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, et al.

    Introducing Nomos LLP!

    The Show Must Go On: Navigating Arbitration in the Wake of the COVID-19 Outbreak

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/02/22) – Flexible Workspaces, Sustainable Infrastructure, & Construction Tech
    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

    Disjointed Proof of Loss Sufficient

    June 11, 2014 —
    The court found that when considered as a whole, separately filed proofs of loss and estimates of damage were sufficient to meet the requirements of a flood policy. Young v. Imperial Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51863 (April 15, 2014). On August 29, 2012, plaintiffs' property sustained flood damage due to Hurricane Isaac. After Imperial's adjustor inspected the property, advance payments were made for $5000 under the building coverage and $5000 under the contents coverage. On October 26, 2012, the plaintiffs' adjustor submitted a proof of loss for building damages, stating the amount of loss was $175,100, which was the policy limit minus the deductible. The insured wife signed the proof of loss. The actual case value, full cost of replacement or repair, and applicable depreciation were listed "undetermined." 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

    Lien Release Bonds – Remove Liens, But Not All Liability

    February 20, 2023 —
    Lien Release Bonds – Remove Liens, But Not All Liability Among owners and contractors, payment and performance bonds are commonly used together in an effort to mitigate future risk against derivative subcontractor claims. But what happens when despite the effort to mitigate risk, a derivative claimant nevertheless files a mechanics’ lien on the owner’s real property? Not all hope is lost. There is another classification of bond, a “lien release bond”—also commonly referred to as an indemnity bond or a mechanics’ lien bond—which provides protections for real property after a mechanics’ lien has already been filed. The purpose of a lien release bond is to remove claims against the relevant real property. Notably, a lien release bond does not necessarily eliminate all liability of an owner or a general contractor. In number of states, an owner or a general contractor can be held personally liable for derivative claims despite a valid lien release bond. What is a Lien Release Bond? A lien release bond is a specific type of surety bond that removes an existing mechanics’ lien from an owner’s real property. In an effort to protect real property, an owner, or a general contractor, can obtain a lien release bond that will substitute or take the place of a mechanics’ lien. In the event a lien claimant files suit on the mechanics’ lien and seeks to collect on their claim, any proceeds recovered will come from the lien release bond rather than proceeds from the sale or foreclosure of the real property. The threat of mechanics’ liens is always present on a construction project— it is estimated that over 60,000 mechanics liens were filed in 2021 alone. Lien release bonds are an added layer of protection for an owner’s real property against a pending mechanics’ lien. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mia Hughes, Jones Walker LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Ms. Hughes may be contacted at mhughes@joneswalker.com

    Updated Covid-19 Standards In The Workplace

    August 23, 2021 —
    With California reopening, many Californians will be heading back to the workplace soon and are wondering if employers may require their employees to get vaccinated. According to the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), an employer may require employees to receive an FDA-approved vaccination against COVID-19 infection so long as the employer (a) does not discriminate against nor harass employees on the basis of a protected characteristic, (b) provides reasonable accommodations related to disability or sincerely-held religious beliefs, and (c) does not retaliate against anyone for engaging in protected activity.[1] On June 15, 2021, California lifted its mask mandate across the state. The California Department of Public Health (“CDPH”) updated its guidance for the use of face coverings stating that masks are no longer required for fully vaccinated individuals.[2] However, masks are still required on public transit, indoors in k-12 schools, childcare, other youth settings, healthcare settings, long-term care facilities, correctional and detention facilities, and homeless shelters.[3] Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wilke Fleury LLP

    LAX Construction Defect Suit May Run into Statute of Limitations

    December 30, 2013 —
    Current arguments over the claims made by LAX that Runway 25L was built in a defective manner by Tutor-Saliba/O&G Industries are hinging over whether the airport knew the runway was defective less than four years after the construction was completed. The runway was built almost five years ago, and Tutor-Saliba is claiming that Los Angeles World Airports has delayed too long in making a construction defect complaint. Tutor-Saliba is not conceding that the runway is defective, only that if it were, the airport would have known it earlier. Los Angeles World Airports, which operates LAX, is not commenting on the matter, but Robert Span, an aviation attorney at Steinbrecher & Span, told the Daily Breeze that while “there is a four year statute of limitations for dealing with construction defects, but that’s for what they called patent defects,” and that “there’s a 10-year statute of limitations for construction projects where the defect that is alleged is called latent — something that would not be readily apparent.” Tim Pierce, a construction attorney at K&L Gates LLP described it as “a common defense,” though he said it is “raised in most cases and only works in some.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Repeal Process for Rejected Superstorm Sandy Grant Applications

    February 12, 2014 —
    Even though it’s been revealed that “faulty data” was used to reject many New Jersey recovery grants for victims of Superstorm Sandy, the state has announced that it’s too late to appeal, according to The Wall Street Journal. “The applicants were informed by letter that they weren't eligible,” state officials told The Wall Street Journal, “and it should have been clear that they needed to appeal last year, so the application process won't be reopened.” The majority of the rejected applicants that did appeal within the open period were found to be eligible for the grant: “Nearly 80% of people who appealed their rejections ended up winning their cases, according to data released by the Fair Share Housing Center, a public-interest law firm critical of the Christie administration. And of the 8,007 applicants rejected from both programs, 5,583 didn't appeal, or 70%, according to Fair Share Housing Center's analysis.” U.S. Representative Bill Pascrell called for “an independent monitor” to be “appointed to oversee the state’s storm spending ‘to ensure there isn’t further mismanagement.’” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    July 30, 2015 —
    The proper classification of workers by construction companies has been on the radar of the Department of Labor for both the US and Virginia governments for quite a while. While most of the misclassification is innocent and not done to create issues, there have been enough instances of purposeful misclassification of certain workers as independent contractors (thus avoiding workers comp and other payroll expenses) that innocent contractors have born the brunt of these issues through increased payroll costs over those that misclassify (in the form of necessarily higher bids, higher overhead, etc.). As an additional deterrent to improper classification of workers, the Virginia Department of Labor and Industry has issued guidelines for what will occur in Virginia Department of Safety and Health (VOSH) cases. 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

    Disputes Will Not Be Subject to Arbitration Provision If There Is No “Significant Relationship”

    November 29, 2021 —
    As you know from prior articles, arbitration is a creature of contract. This means if you want your disputes to be resolved by binding arbitration, as opposed to litigation, you want to make sure there is an arbitration provision in your contract. If there are certain types of disputes you do not want subject to arbitration, you want to specify those types of disputes/claims in your arbitration provision. If you are not sure, make sure to discuss the pros and cons of arbitration with your counsel when drafting and negotiating the contract. However, even with a broad arbitration provision, there are times where a dispute may still fall out of the scope of the arbitration provision, i.e., the dispute is not arbitrable. If this occurs, such dispute will be resolved by litigation. Parties that have buyer’s remove and do not want to arbitrate their dispute may try to make this argument that the dispute is not subject to the scope of the arbitration provision. There are times this argument carries weight because the dispute has no significant relationship to the agreement with the arbitration provision, as shown below. In Deweees v. Johnson, 46 Fla. L. Weekly D2356b (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), a plaintiff purchased a home in a private residential community. The purchase contract with the developer contained a broad arbitration provision that materially provided that, “all post-closing claims, disputes, and controversies…between purchaser and seller will be resolved by binding arbitration except those arising under section G.5 and G.6 above.” Dewees, supra. Sections G.5 and G.6 provided that the purchaser will not interfere in the sales process with other purchasers and will not interfere with workmen during the construction process. There was also a workmanship and structural defect warranty for the dwelling that also contained an arbitration provision. 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

    Value in Recording Lien within Effective Notice of Commencement

    August 03, 2020 —
    Construction lien priority is no joke! This is why a lienor wants to record its construction lien within an effective notice of commencement. A lien recorded within an effective notice of commencement relates back in time from a priority standpoint to the date the notice of commencement was recorded. A lienor that records a lien wants to ensure its lien is superior, and not inferior, to other encumbrances. An inferior lien or encumbrance may not provide much value if there is not sufficient equity in the property. Plus, an inferior lien or encumbrance can be foreclosed. An example of the importance of lien priority can be found in the recent decision of Edward Taylor Corp. v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., 45 Fla.L.Weekly D1447b (Fla. 2d DCA 2020). In this case, a contractor recorded a notice of commencement for an owner. While an owner is required to sign the notice of commencement that the contractor usually records, in this case, the owner did not sign the notice of commencement. Shortly after, the owner’s lender recorded a mortgage and then had the owner sign a notice of commencement and this notice of commencement was also recorded. When there is a construction lender, the lender always wants to make sure its mortgage is recorded first—before any notice of commencement—for purposes of priority and has the responsibility to ensure the notice of commencement is recorded. Here, the lender apparently did not realize the contractor had already recorded a notice of commencement at the time it recorded its mortgage. 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