BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window 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


    Connecticut Supreme Court Again Asked to Determine the Meaning of Collapse

    Client Alert: Expert Testimony in Indemnity Action Not Limited to Opinions Presented in Underlying Matter

    Coronavirus and Contract Obligations

    Tension Over Municipal Gas Bans Creates Uncertainty for Real Estate Developers

    Licensing Reciprocity Comes to Virginia

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    Time is Money. Unless You’re an Insurance Company

    Energy Efficiency Ratings Aren’t Actually Predicting Energy Efficiency

    Progress, Property, and Privacy: Discussing Human-Led Infrastructure with Jeff Schumacher

    Trump Abandons Plan for Council on Infrastructure

    Did Deutsche Make a Deal with the Wrong Homeowner?

    New Evidence Code Requires Attorney to Obtain Written Acknowledgement that the Confidential Nature of Mediation has been Disclosed to the Client

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (08/17/22) – Glass Ceilings, Floating Homes and the Inflation Reduction Act

    No Coverage Under Exclusions For Wind and Water Damage

    CA Supreme Court: Right to Repair Act (SB 800) is the Exclusive Remedy for Residential Construction Defect Claims – So Now What?

    New Mexico Adopts Right to Repair Act

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Museums

    Pulling the Plug

    Insurance Companies Score Win at Supreme Court

    White and Williams Defeats Policyholder’s Attempt to Invalidate Asbestos Exclusions

    New Megablimp to Deliver to Remote Alaskan Construction Sites

    School District Settles Over Defective Athletic Field

    City in Ohio Sues Over Alleged Roof Defects

    Arezoo Jamshidi Selected to the 2023 San Diego Super Lawyers List

    Don’t Spoil Me: Oklahoma District Court Rules Against Spoliation Sanctions

    Righting Past Wrongs Through Equitable Development

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increased 4.3% in November

    Eye on Housing Examines Costs of Green Features

    Jason Feld Awarded Volunteer of the Year by Claims & Litigation Management Alliance

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2023 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Washington Court of Appeals Divisions Clash Over Interpretations of the Statute of Repose

    Alaska District Court Sets Aside Rulings Under New Administration’s EO 13795

    Subcontractor Sued for Alleged Defective Work

    2015-2016 California Labor & Employment Laws Affecting Construction Industry

    Don’t Kick the Claim Until the End of the Project: Timely Give Notice and Preserve Your Claims on Construction Projects

    Massachusetts High Court: Attorney's Fee Award Under Consumer Protection Act Not Covered by General Liability Insurance Policy

    Roni Most, Esq., Reappointed as a City of Houston Associate Judge

    Carbon Sequestration Can Combat Global Warming, Sometimes in Unexpected Ways

    Ohio Court of Appeals Affirms Judgment in Landis v. Fannin Builders

    Showdown Over Landmark Housing Law Looms at U.S. Supreme Court

    Revisiting OSHA’s Controlling Employer Policy

    Fourth Circuit Clarifies What Qualifies As “Labor” Under The Miller Act

    Ruling Closes the Loop on Restrictive Additional Insured Endorsement – Reasonable Expectations of Insured Builder Prevails Over Intent of Insurer

    Mississippi Supreme Court Addresses Earth Movement Exclusion

    Maintenance Issues Ignite Arguments at Indiana School

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

    Alleged Damage to Personal Property Does Not Revive Coverage for Construction Defects

    Partner Jonathan R. Harwood Obtained Summary Judgment in a Case Involving a Wedding Guest Injured in a Fall

    9th Circuit Plumbs Through the Federal and State False Claims Acts

    Loan Snarl Punishes Spain Builder Backed by Soros, Gates
    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

    Statutory Bad Faith and an Insured’s 60 Day Notice to Cure

    April 11, 2018 —
    A recent case came out in favor of an insured and against a first-party property insurer in the triggering of a statutory bad faith action. Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal in Demase v. State Farm Florida Insurance Company, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D679a (Fla. 5th DCA 2018) held that if an insurer pays a claim after the 60-day notice to cure period provided by Florida Statute s. 624.155(3), this “constitutes a determination of an insurer’s liability for coverage and extent of damages under section 624.155(1)(b) even when there is no underlying action.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

    BWB&O’s Los Angeles Partner Eileen Gaisford and Associate Kelsey Kohnen Win a Motion for Terminating Sanctions!

    April 25, 2023 —
    Congratulations to Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP Partner Eileen Gaisford and Associate Kelsey Kohnen for successfully arguing and winning a Motion for Terminating Sanctions for BWB&O’s client, a hotel in Los Angeles County. The court granted BWB&O’s Motion for Terminating Sanctions and Plaintiff’s Complaint was dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff filed a complaint alleging she sustained multiple injuries after a slip and fall in a hotel. Plaintiff’s complaint alleged that BWB&O’s client was negligent, careless, and reckless in the ownership, care, control, and maintenance of the premises. BWB&O aggressively defended its client and filed several motions, arguing Plaintiff’s conduct abused the discovery process. The Court sided with BWB&O and granted its Motion for Terminating Sanctions, and the lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Houston Office Secures Favorable Verdict in Trespass and Nuisance Case Involving Subcontractor’s Accidental Installation of Storm Sewer Pipe on Plaintiff’s Property

    June 12, 2023 —
    Houston, Texas (May 26, 2023) - Houston Partners Joelle Nelson and Matt Begley secured a defense verdict on behalf of a gasoline services company following a four-day trial in the 284th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas. In this case, Lewis Brisbois represented a client who hired a contractor to install a storm sewer line to mitigate flood risks to the client’s property. The contractor, however, deviated from the engineering plans and installed the storm sewer line on a neighboring property owned by the plaintiff. The storm sewer line then remained on the plaintiff’s property for five years while the parties attempted to negotiate potential solutions to the situation. The plaintiff refused multiple reasonable settlement attempts and ultimately sued the client and the contractor for continuous trespass and private nuisance. The contractor’s carrier denied coverage, making the client the target defendant. The matter proceeded to trial. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Avoid Drowning in Data: Keep Afloat with ESI in Construction Litigation

    May 15, 2023 —
    Maybe it is another lawyer on your team, a client, the Court. Maybe it is you. Almost every lawyer has heard (or thought, felt, or anguished over) the following: Wait — What? Discovery is going to cost how much? The concern is real. Per a 2019 Southern District of New York opinion:
    1. The average case can involve collection, review and production of 100 gigabytes of data (or 6.5 million pages of Word documents).
    2. At a typical rate of review of 40-60 documents per hour, assuming 100,000 documents are collected, that is about 2,000 hours of attorney review time.
    3. Adding in fees for forensic collection, storage, and processing to maintain metadata can result in a bill totaling $500,000.
    Brown v. Barnes & Noble, Inc., 474 F. Supp. 3d 637, 645 & n.3 (S.D.N.Y. 2019). What's counsel to do? The following four points can help counsel streamline and reduce costs in discovery: (1) know your case, (2) know your data — understand it and document collection, (3) cooperate with counsel, and (4) implement a protocol for electronically-stored information ("ESI"). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Steve Swart, Williams Mullen
    Mr. Swart may be contacted at sswart@williamsmullen.com

    Virtual Jury Trials: The Next Wave of Remote Legal Practice

    July 13, 2020 —
    One of the most obvious and unavoidable results of the COVID-19 crisis has been the postponement of jury service and, by extension, all jury trials. Given the inherent difficulties of convening juries in a world of social distancing, it is likely that multiple jurisdictions will be unable to conduct live jury trials for at least the next several months. Recognizing the mounting delay and substantial docket backlog that is attendant to several months without jury trials, one court most recently permitted the litigants, upon consent, to try a new innovation – the nation’s first virtual jury trial conducted entirely on the Zoom platform. More than two dozen potential jurors in Collin County, Texas attended jury selection from home by smartphone, laptop, and tablet, a process that was streamed live on YouTube. The presiding judge occasionally provided prospective jurors technical advice on how to best use their devices. Once selected, the jurors virtually attended a one-day, “summary jury trial” of an insurance dispute in which they heard a condensed version of the case and delivered a non-binding verdict. The parties were then able to gauge how their cases would fare before a jury in a full-scale trial and, with that insight, agreed to proceed to a mediation in an attempt to reach a resolution. Court officials further touted the abbreviated, non-binding experience as an ideal test for the viability of remotely holding jury trials that would result in a final judgment. This real-world test, albeit in a non-binding exercise, may be an indication of things to come, as courts in Indiana and Arizona have already communicated an intention to conduct jury trials remotely once able. Reprinted courtesy of David R. Zaslow, White and Williams and Mark Paladino, White and Williams Mr. Zaslow may be contacted at zaslowd@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Paladino may be contacted at paladinom@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Washington Court Denies Subcontractor’s Claim Based on Contractual Change and Notice Provisions

    January 29, 2024 —
    The recent unpublished case, Cascade Civil Construction, LLC v. Jackson Dean Construction, Inc., et al.,[1] provides a legal justification for contractors to require a directive or change order in advance of performing changed work—thereby preventing the party who requested the changed work from later arguing that notice provisions were not complied with. In the case, Jackson Dean, the prime contractor, hired Cascade to perform excavation work on a project to build a new Costco Corporate headquarters. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic and other issues, Jackson Dean directed resequencing, which required Cascade to perform excavation concurrent to dewatering. Jackson Dean also required deeper-than-planned excavation under one of the buildings. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wendy Rosenstein, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Ms. Rosenstein may be contacted at wendy.rosenstein@acslawyers.com

    Wait, You Want An HOA?! Restricting Implied Common-Interest Communities

    September 17, 2018 —
    While the butt of many jokes and a thorn in the side of some property owners, homeowners associations (“HOAs”) serve the vital function of collecting and disbursing funds to care for and maintain common areas of residential developments. Without HOAs, neighborhood open spaces, parks, and other amenities risk falling into disrepair through a type of tragedy of the commons, wherein residents use such amenities but refuse to subsidize care and maintenance for these common areas believing someone else will pony-up the funds. HOAs, when properly organized and managed, avoid this problem by ensuring everyone pays their fair shares for the common areas. Colorado’s Common Interest Ownership Act (“CCIOA”), C.R.S. § 38-33.3-101 et seq., sets forth the manner in which such common-interest communities, and their related associations, must be established. Earlier this summer, the Colorado Supreme Court issued an opinion limiting the application of previous case law that allowed for the establishment of common-interest communities (and their related HOAs) by implication. See McMullin v. Hauer, 420 P.3d 271 (Colo. 2018). Prior to McMullin, Colorado courts had been increasing the number of factual scenarios implying the creation of common-interest communities under CCIOA. See e.g., Evergreen Highlands Assoc. v. West, 73 P.3d 1 (Colo. 2003) (finding an implied obligation of landowners to fund a pre-existing HOA’s obligations); DeJean v. Grosz, 412 P.3d 733 (Colo. App. 2015) (finding an implied right of a homeowner to found an HOA after the developer filed a declaration expressing an intent to form one but ultimately failed to do so); and Hiwan Homeowners Assoc. v. Knotts, 215 P.3d 1271 (Colo. App. 2009) (finding the existence of an HOA despite no common property existing within the development). The McMullin opinion highlights the importance of strict compliance with CCIOA to preserve common areas in a development, ensure the ability to fund maintenance of such areas, and avoid future litigation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Neil McConomy, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. McConomy may be contacted at nmcconomy@swlaw.com

    Homeowner Sues Brick Manufacturer for Spalling Bricks

    October 22, 2013 —
    A Columbia, South Carolina homeowner has sued Kinney Brick Co., alleging that the bricks used in his home were defective and are now crumbling. The lawsuit alleges that the manufacturer and the distributor were both aware that the bricks would retain moisture and crumble. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of