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


    Insured's Complaint for Breach of Contract and Bad Faith Adequately Pleads Consequential Damages

    Toll Brothers Climbs After Builder Reports Higher Sales

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

    Between Scylla and Charybids: The Mediation Privilege and Legal Malpractice Claims

    Critical Materials for the Energy Transition: Of “Rare Earths” and Even Rarer Minerals

    Miller Act Bond Claims Subject to “Pay If Paid”. . . Sometimes

    Insurer Must Defend Claims of Alleged Willful Coal Removal

    Conn. Appellate Court Overturns Jury Verdict, Holding Plaintiff’s Sole Remedy for Injuries Arising From Open Manhole Was State’s Highway Defect Statute

    Housing Agency Claims It Is Not a Party in Construction Defect Case

    2018 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!

    Product Manufacturers Beware: You May Be Subject to Jurisdiction in Massachusetts

    Non-compliance With Endorsement Means No Indemnity Coverage

    Who's Who Legal Recognizes Two White and Williams Lawyers as Thought/Global Leaders in Insurance and Reinsurance

    Developer Transition – Washington DC Condominiums

    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

    Hurricane Harvey Victims Face New Hurdles In Pursuing Coverage

    Shifting the Risk of Delay by Having Float Go Your Way

    Partner Denis Moriarty and Of Counsel William Baumgaertner Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2017

    Georgia Supreme Court Limits Damages Under Georgia Computer Systems Protection Act

    New Proposed Regulations Expand CFIUS Jurisdiction Regarding Real Estate

    NAHB Reports on U.S. Jobs Created from Home Building

    Construction Professionals Could Face More Liability Exposure Following California Appellate Ruling

    Eighth Circuit Rejects Retroactive Application of Construction Defect Legislation

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    Re-Thinking the One-Sided Contract: Considerations for a More Balanced Approach to Contracting

    Manhattan Gets First Crowdfunded Condos

    Construction Contracts and The Uniform Commercial Code: When Does it Apply and Understanding the Pre-Dominant Factor Test

    Was Jury Right in Negligent Construction Case?

    After Fatal House Explosion, Colorado Seeks New Pipeline Regulations

    CA Homeowners Challenging Alternate Pre-Litigation Procedures

    Ambiguity Kills in Construction Contracting

    Ten Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to the Best Lawyers in America© 2019

    No Coverage for Contractor's Faulty Workmanship

    Lien Release Bonds – Remove Liens, But Not All Liability

    South Carolina’s New Insurance Data Security Act: Pebbles Before a Landslide?

    Heat Stress Deaths Show Europe Isn’t Ready for Climate Change

    Court Addresses Damages Under Homeowners Insurance Policy

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa Rolle and Christopher Acosta Win Summary Judgment in Favor of Property Owner

    Coverage for Named Windstorm Removed by Insured, Terminating Such Coverage

    Drone Operation in a Construction Zone

    Indiana Court of Appeals Holds That Lease Terms Bar Landlord’s Carrier From Subrogating Against Commercial Tenant

    Another Reminder that Your Construction Contract is Only as Good as Those Signing It

    Florida Law: Interplay of SIR and the Made-Whole Doctrine

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

    Florida Legislative Change Extends Completed Operations Tail for Condominium Projects

    When OSHA Cites You

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

    Blog: Congress Strikes a Blow to President Obama’s “Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces” Executive Order 13673

    Condo Association Settles with Pulte Homes over Construction Defect Claims

    Alaska Supreme Court Dismisses Claims of Uncooperative Pro Se Litigant in Defect Case
    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's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings for Construction Defect Claim Rejected

    January 22, 2024 —
    The magistrate judge recommended that the insurer's motion for judgment on the pleadings be denied in a case involving coverage for the insured subcontractor's alleged faulty workmanship. Evanston Ins. Co. v. Sonny Glasbrenner, Inc., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190019 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 20, 2023). Cone & Graham (C&G), the general contractor, subcontracted with Sonny Glasbrenner, Inc. (SGI) to work on the project. The project involved the rehabilitation of a bridge due to deterioration of the existing concrete bridge deck by adding additional cross bracing to further stiffen the steel girders and using special lightweight concrete. C&G contracted SGH to demolish the existing concrete bridge deck. SGI completed the work. Thereafter, C&G made a demand to SGI for alleged damaged caused by SGI's work. C&G alleged that SGI was negligent in performing the demolition work, causing substantial damage to the existing bridge girders. C&G sued SGI. 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

    Washington Supreme Court Sides with Lien Claimants in Williams v. Athletic Field

    September 30, 2011 —

    The Washington Supreme Court issued their opinion today on Williams v. Athletic Field, perhaps the most talked about construction law case in the past few years. I have discussed this case exhaustively here on Builders Counsel. Today we have a resolution.

    In an unanimous opinion issued today, the high court sided with lien filers who followed a sample form provided in RCW 60.04.091. Additionally, the court found that a lien company - and presumably other persons - could sign the lien for the lien claimant, as an agent, without invalidating the lien.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

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

    Courts Take Another Swipe at the Implied Warranty of the Plans and Specifications

    December 15, 2016 —
    Implied warranties are warranties created by law, legislation, or courts. In the construction industry, one of the most prominent implied warranties is that owners who provide plans and specifications to their contractors impliedly warrant the adequacy of their plans and specifications.[i] That implied warranty had its beginning in the 1918 US Supreme Court decision of U.S. v. Spearin[ii] and is, therefore, popularly known as the Spearin Doctrine. Under the Spearin Doctrine, if the contractor completes the work in accordance with the owner’s plans and specifications, but there is a deficiency or failure, the owner, not the contractor, is responsible. When the owner breaches its implied warranty, in most instances, the contractor is entitled to additional compensation for extra work performed, delays experienced, and other additional expense or loss occasioned by the warranty breach. A recent case demonstrates that this implied warranty is not “immunity.” The contractor must still act reasonably and diligently, particularly when the contract provisions so require. In the recent Fifth Circuit case of Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport v. INet Airport Systems,[iii] the court, despite the implied warranty that existed, did not grant the contractor summary judgment on claims involving admitted plan deficiencies, since factual issues existed regarding the contractor’s cooperation and participation in the solution to the defects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers & Cressman, PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at jahlers@ac-lawyers.com

    The Court-Side Seat: FERC Reviews, Panda Power Plaints and Sovereign Immunity

    April 26, 2021 —
    This is a brief report on new environmental law decisions, regulations and legislation. THE U.S. SUPREME COURT Massachusetts Lobsterman’s Association v. Raimondo, Secretary of Commerce On March 22, 2021, the Supreme Court rejected a petition to review a Presidential decision to invoke the Antiquities Act of 1906 to designate as a monument “an area of submerged land about the size of Connecticut” in the Atlantic Ocean. This action forbids all sorts of economic activity, which compelled the filing of litigation in the First Circuit challenging this designation. Chief Justice Roberts supported the Court’s denial of certiorari, but remarked that a stronger legal case may persuade the Court to review such liberal uses of the Antiquities Act. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    ADP Says Payrolls at Companies in U.S. Increase 200,000

    October 02, 2015 —
    Companies stepped up hiring in September, indicating the U.S. job market is standing firm in the face of weaker global demand, according to a private report based on payrolls. A 200,000 increase in employment followed a revised 186,000 rise in the prior month, figures from the ADP Research Institute showed Wednesday. The median projection of economists surveyed by Bloomberg called for an advance of 190,000. The additions to company headcounts are consistent with resilient demand in the U.S. even as some industries face challenges of weaker overseas sales. Labor Department data on Friday are projected to show payroll gains accelerated this month compared with August. “The U.S. job machine continues to produce jobs at a strong and consistent pace,” Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics Inc. in West Chester, Pennsylvania, said in a statement. Moody’s produces the figures with ADP. “Despite job losses in the energy and manufacturing industries, the economy is creating close to 200,000 jobs per month. At this pace, full employment is fast approaching.” Estimates in the Bloomberg survey ranged from gains of 120,000 to 215,000 after a previously reported August advance of 190,000. Goods Producers Goods-producing industries, which include manufacturers and builders, increased headcounts by 12,000, the ADP report showed. Hiring in construction climbed by 35,000, almost twice the 18,000 gain a month earlier. Factories cut 15,000 jobs in September, which was the biggest decline since December 2010. Payrolls at service providers increased by 188,000. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sho Chandra, Bloomberg

    Meritage Acquires Legendary Communities

    July 23, 2014 —
    According to Big Builder, Meritage entered Atlanta through its acquisition of Legendary Communities for $130 million, “completing a two-year quest.” “Probably for about two years, we’ve been looking in the market, talking to builders, and studying the geography, and meeting different people to learn who the players are and learn about the area,” Meritage Homes chairman and CEO Steven J. Hilton told Big Builder. This acquisition makes Meritage Homes “the number one builder in the Greenville-Anderson-Mauldin, S.C. market, owning more than 16 percent of the 2013 market share with 266 closings, according to Metrostudy data. It also owns almost seven percent of the market share in nearby Spartanburg, S.C. with 44 closings.” Legendary fits “in very nicely with what we do at Meritage,” Hilton said to Big Builder. “We’re a strong first and second move up builder, as are they at Legendary. It’s a very complementary fit between the two companies.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Forum Selection Provisions Are Not to Be Overlooked…Even On Federal Projects

    September 16, 2024 —
    Forum selection provisions are NOT to be overlooked. Ever. Treat them seriously. Even on federal projects where there is a Miller Act payment bond. Consider forum selection provisions on the front end when negotiating your contract. In a recent opinion, U.S. f/u/b/o Timberline Construction Group, LLC vs. Aptim Federal Services, LLC, 2024 WL 3597164 (M.D.Fla. 2024), a joint venture prime contractor was hired by the federal government to build a temporary housing site. The joint venture prime contractor obtained a Miller Act payment bond. The joint venture then entered into a subcontract with one of its joint venture members and the member-subcontractor then engaged a sub-subcontractor. The sub-subcontractor claimed it was owed $3.5 Million and sued the member-subcontractor, as well as the prime contractor’s Miller Act payment bond, in the Middle District of Florida. The member-subcontractor and the Miller Act payment bond sureties moved to transfer venue to the Middle District of Louisiana pursuant to a forum selection clause in the contract between the sub-subcontractor and the member-subcontractor. The contract provided that the exclusive venue would be a United States District Court located in Louisiana. Forum selection provisions are analyzed in federal court under 28 U.S.C. 1404(a): “For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought or to any district or division to which all parties have consented.” U.S. f/u/b/o Timberline, supra at *2. A forum selection provision is presumptively valid and given controlling weight. Id. (quotations and citations omitted). 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

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Coverage for Post-Completion Defects

    December 21, 2016 —
    The general contractor, an additional insured on the subcontractor's policy, was not entitled to coverage for construction defect claims that arose after completion of the project. Weitz Co. v. Acuity, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150433 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 31, 2016). Weitz was the general contractor hired by Twin Lakes for construction of a residential community. One of the subcontractors, Miter Masonry, was insured by Acuity under a CGL policy. Work on the project began in 2002 and was substantially completed in 2005. In 2011, Twin Lakes notified Weitz that there were moisture infiltration issues at the project that may be related to work during the project. Twin Lakes filed a Demand for Arbitration against Weitz on November 30, 2012. Twin Lakes alleged that the defects included the building wrap, windows, doors, wood trim, aluminum wrap, vinyl siding, flashing and brick veneer not being installed in accordance with contract documents and/or industry standards. The arbitration panel awarded damages to Twin Lakes in the amount of $2,775,771.86. The panel found that Weitz breached sections of the contract which caused moisture intrusion and damage to all the units. The panel ultimately held that Weitz could recover from the subcontractors 100% of the $2,775,771.86 awarded. Acuity's insured, Miter Masonry, was determined to be 4% at fault for the damages. 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