BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut 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 retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architect
    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


    Property Damage to Insured's Own Work is Not Covered

    Fourth Circuit Confirms Scope of “Witness Litigation Privilege”

    Case Alert Update: SDV Case Tabbed as One of New York’s Top Three Cases to Watch

    State Supreme Court Cases Highlight Importance of Wording in Earth Movement Exclusions

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (8/6/24) – Construction Tech Deals Surge, Senators Reintroduce Housing Bill, and Nonresidential Spending Drops

    Significant Victory for the Building Industry: Liberty Mutual is Rejected Once Again, This Time by the Third Appellate District in Holding SB800 is the Exclusive Remedy

    Eighth Circuit Rejects Retroactive Application of Construction Defect Legislation

    Bad Faith and a Partial Summary Judgment in Seattle Construction Defect Case

    New York Court Holds Insurer Can Rely on Exclusions After Incorrectly Denying Defense

    Unlocking the Potential of AI and Chat GBT in Construction Management

    EPA and the Corps of Engineers Repeal the 2015 “Waters of the United States” Rule

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Endorsements in CGL Insurance Policies: A Word of Caution

    "Ordinance or Law" Provision Mandates Coverage for Roof Repair

    Lorelie S. Masters Nominated for Best in Insurance & Reinsurance for the Women in Business Law Awards 2021

    Idaho Supreme Court Address Water Exclusion in Commercial Property Exclusion

    Negligence Claim Not Barred by Gist of the Action Doctrine

    Contract Provisions That Help Manage Risk on Long-Term Projects

    Louis "Dutch" Schotemeyer Returns to Newmeyer Dillion as Partner in Newport Beach Office

    Be Careful When Walking Off of a Construction Project

    The Risks and Rewards of Sustainable Building Design

    Godfather Charged with Insurance Fraud

    Florida Project Could Help Address Runoff, Algae Blooms

    'Perfect Storm' Caused Fractures at San Francisco Transit Hub

    Terminating Notice of Commencement Without Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    Demonstrating A Fraudulent Inducement Claim Or Defense

    Insurer Able to Refuse Coverage for Failed Retaining Wall

    The Overlooked Nevada Rule In an Arena Project Lawsuit

    Statute of Limitations and Bad Faith Claims: Factors to Consider

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increased 5% in Year to June

    Administration Launches 'Buy Clean' Construction Materials Push

    Planes, Trains and Prevailing Wages. Ok, No Planes, But Trains and Prevailing Wages Yes

    Contractors Must Register with the L&I Prior to Offering or Performing Work, or Risk Having their Breach of Contract Case Dismissed

    New York Labor Laws and Action Over Exclusions

    Recycled Water and New Construction. New Standards Being Considered

    BHA Expands Construction Experts Group

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

    Court Holds That Public Entity Can Unilaterally Replace Subcontractor Under California’s Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act

    Construction Law Client Alert: California Is One Step Closer to Prohibiting Type I Indemnity Agreements In Private Commercial Projects

    Where Do We Go From Here?

    Best Lawyers Honors 48 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Recognizes Four Partners as 'Lawyers of the Year'

    Couple Sues Attorney over Construction Defect Case, Loses

    City of Seattle Temporarily Shuts Down Public Works to Enforce Health and Safety Plans

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa M. Rolle, Eric D. Suben, and Justyn Verzillo Secure Dismissal of All Claims in a Premises Liability Case

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2020

    SFAA Commends U.S. House for Passage of Historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill

    California’s Wildfire Dilemma: Put Houses or Forests First?

    Best Lawyers Honors 43 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Recognizes Three Partners as 'Lawyers of The Year'

    Housing Starts Fall as U.S. Single-Family Projects Decline

    EPA Coal Ash Cleanup Rule Changes Send Utilities, Agencies Back to Drawing Board

    IRMI Expert Commentary: Managing Insurance Coverage from Multiple Insurers
    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

    Insurer Must Defend Where Possible Continuing Property Damage Occurred

    January 13, 2017 —
    The California Court of Appeal overturned the trial court's issuance of summary judgment based upon the possibility of continuing property damage during the insurer's policy period. Tidwell Enters. v. Fin. Pac. Ins. Co., 2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 1038 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 29, 2016). Financial Pacific insured Greg Tidwell, Tidwell Enterprises, Inc. and Tidwell Enterprises Fireplace Division (Tidwell) under CGL policies issued between March 2003 and March 2010. In 2006 or 2007, Tidwell installed a fireplace in a home. On November 11, 2011, 20 months after the end of the last policy period of Financial Pacific's coverage, the home owned by Kendall Fox, was damaged by fire. Fox was insured by State Farm. State Farm's attorney advised Tidwell of the fire, and Tidwell forwarded the information to Financial Pacific. State Farm hired an investigator who reported that the fire was caused by the installation of an "unlisted shroud at the top of the chimney chase". This prevented the fireplace from drafting properly, resulting in overheating of the fireplace and heat transfer to the surround wood framing members. This resulted in the ignition of the framing members at the sides, top and bottom of the fireplace. State Farm sent the report to Financial Pacific. 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

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

    July 06, 2011 —

    Last November, mold problems were discovered at the Siena Condominiums in Montclair, New Jersey, which had been described by their developers as “an enclave of luxury in an urban village setting.” The owners have filed a lawsuit against Pinnacle Companies, Kohl Parnters, and Herod Development, seeking “compensatory damages, interest, reasonable attorney’s fee and costs, and for such other, further, and different relief as the Court may deem just and proper.”

    According to the article on Baristanet.com, an engineering report commissioned by the condominium association revealed many problems, including improperly installed windows and siding. The developers commissioned two engineering reports themselves and found evidence of water pounding on the roof. Despite these reports and repeated promises, no repairs have been made.

    Read the full story…

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

    Another Reminder that Your Construction Contract Language Matters

    June 06, 2018 —
    Here at Musings, I have often (some might say too often) discussed the fact that in Virginia (as well as other places), your construction contract language will be strictly enforced. I have also discussed the need for attorney fees provisions as well as other language in order to mitigate your risk as a contractor. A recent case from the City of Roanoke Circuit Court discussed both of these principals and their intersection. In LAM Enterprises, LLC v. Roofing Solutions, Inc., the Roanoke Court looked at a contract between LAM and Roofing Solutions, Inc. that contained two provisions of the construction contract between the parties. The first provision limited the liability of Roofing Solutions to the contract price. The second provision is a relatively typical “prevailing party” attorney fees provision in which the winner of any lawsuit would be entitled to collect its attorney fees. For the specific language of these provisions, I commend the opinion linked above for your reading. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Sometimes it Depends on “Whose” Hand is in the Cookie Jar

    January 21, 2015 —
    In a lengthy and somewhat detailed decision, the California Court of Appeal for First District, in Pittsburg Unified School District v. S.J. Amoroso Construction Company, Inc., Case No. A138825 (December 22, 2014), held that a public entity could unilaterally withdraw retention funds during a pending legal dispute without the court first finding that the contractor had defaulted on the public works project. Background In 2008, general contractor S.J. Amoroso Construction Company, Inc. (“S.J. Amoroso”) entered into a construction contract with the Pittsburg Unified School District (“District”) for the reconstruction and modernization of a high school in Pittsburg, California. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Roger Hughes, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Hughes may be contacted at rhughes@wendel.com

    Contractor Wins in Arbitration Only to Lose Before the Superior Court on Section 7031 Claim

    June 19, 2023 —
    If you’re a regularly reader of the California Construction Law Blog you’re aware of Business and Professions Code section 7031 which courts have variously described as “harsh[ ],” “draconian” and “unjust,” but, importantly, nevertheless valid. We haven’t seen many cases applying Section 7031 in an arbitration setting, however, until now. In Vascos Excavation Group LLC v. Gold, 87 Cal.App.5th 842 (2022), a contractor who prevailed on a payment claim in arbitration, had its victory snatched from its fingertips by the Superior Court which found that the arbitrator had exceeded her authority because the contractor was subject to Section 7031. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claim Against Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    June 10, 2015 —
    While some of their claims were dismissed, plaintiffs' breach of fiduciary duty survived the insurer's motion to dismiss. Senft v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61870 (D. N.J. May 12, 2015). Plaintiffs' waterfront home was insured by Fireman's Fund. Plaintiffs alleged that the broker represented that the policy would provide (1) coverage in the event of a hurricane,(2) the "highest level of protection" offered by Fireman's Fund, and (3) "exceptional" services in the event of a catastrophe. The policy included a 2% hurricane deductible because of the home's proximity to the ocean. Hurricane Sandy badly damaged plaintiffs' home. Plaintiffs alleged that the winds from Sandy battered their home long before the storm surge reached the structure. 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

    CA Supreme Court Rejects Proposed Exceptions to Interim Adverse Judgment Rule Defense to Malicious Prosecution Action

    August 24, 2017 —
    In Parrish v. Latham & Watkins (No. S228277 - August 10, 2017) (“Parrish”), the California Supreme Court examined the “interim adverse judgment rule” in a different context than previous decisions on the subject. The rule provides that if an earlier action succeeds after a hearing on the merits, this success establishes the existence of probable cause and precludes a subsequent malicious prosecution action. In a typical case applying the rule, a plaintiff in the underlying action defeats the defendant’s motion for summary judgment but then loses the case at trial leading to a subsequent malicious prosecution claim. In Parrish, the Court addressed whether the rule applies when the trial court had denied the defendant’s summary judgment motion but concluded after the defense prevailed at a bench trial that the suit had been brought in “bad faith” due to a lack of evidentiary support. Reprinted courtesy of David W. Evans, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Stephen J. Squillario, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Evans may be contacted at devans@hbblaw.com Mr. Squillario may be contacted at ssquillario@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Thousands of London Residents Evacuated due to Fire Hazards

    June 29, 2017 —
    Nearly 4,000 residents were ordered by municipal authorities to “urgently evacuate apartments in five London high-rise buildings…after fire inspectors warned that the safety of the residents could not be guaranteed,” reported the New York Times. Displaced families were urged to find shelter with family or friends, but temporary accommodations were offered. Repairs may take up to four weeks. The five London towers that were evacuated all contain the same exterior cladding and insulation that is similar to what was used in Grenfell Tower, where 79 people died in fire only the preceding week, according to the New York Times. Camden Council stated that the cladding material would be removed. They had ordered noncombustible cladding, but later learned that combustible cladding had been installed. “Preliminary tests on the insulation samples from Grenfell Tower show that they combusted soon after the test started,” Detective Superintendent McCormack said in a televised statement, as quoted by the New York Times. “Cladding tiles had also failed initial tests,” she continued. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of