BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut contractor 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


    California Governor Signs SB 496 Amending California’s Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Lay Testimony Sufficient to Prove Diminution in Value

    Eleventh Circuit’s Noteworthy Discussion on Bad Faith Insurance Claims

    EPA Will Soon Issue the Latest Revision to the Risk Management Program (RMP) Chemical Release Rules

    Slowing Home Sales Show U.S. Market Lacks Momentum: Economy

    No Coverage for Restoring Aesthetic Uniformity

    Modification: Exceptions to Privette Doctrine Do Not Apply Where There is No Evidence a General Contractor Affirmatively Contributed to the Injuries of an Independent Contractor’s Employee

    Insurer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Earth Movement Exclusion Denied

    Formal Request for Time Extension Not Always Required to Support Constructive Acceleration

    Noncumulation Clause Limits Coverage to One Occurrence

    Court Requires Adherence to “Good Faith and Fair Dealing” in Construction Defect Coverage

    Another Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

    ABC Chapter President Comments on Miami Condo Collapse

    Timely Written Notice to Insurer and Cooperating with Insurer

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Stuck on You”

    Are Defense Costs In Addition to Policy Limits?

    Congratulations to Partner John O’Meara for Being Named as One of America’s Top 100 Civil Defense Litigators for Three Consecutive Years!

    White and Williams Obtains Reversal on Appeal of $2.5 Million Verdict Against Electric Utility Company

    A New Study: Unexpected Overtime is Predictable and Controllable

    Flood Insurance Claim Filed in State Court Properly Dismissed

    SEC Climate Change Disclosure Letter Foreshadows Anticipated Regulatory Changes

    Can General Contractors Make Subcontractors Pay for OSHA Violations?

    Minnesota Senate Office Building Called Unconstitutional

    One Sector Is Building Strength Amid Slow Growth

    Contract, Breach of Contract, and Material Breach of Contract

    Are You Taking Full Advantage of Available Reimbursements for Assisting Injured Workers?

    South Caroline Holds Actual Cash Value Can Include Depreciation of Labor Costs

    Congratulations to Nicole Whyte, Keith Bremer, John Toohey, and Tyler Offenhauser for Being Recognized as 2022 Super Lawyers!

    Florida Representative Wants to Change Statute of Repose

    New York Appellate Court Expands Policyholders’ Ability to Plead and Seek Consequential Damages

    Home Repair Firms Sued for Fraud

    Top 10 Lessons Learned from a Construction Attorney

    Cal/OSHA-Approved Changes to ETS Will Take Effect May 6, 2022

    Soldiers Turn Brickies as U.K. Homebuilders Seek Workers

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

    Sixth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Under Kentucky Law

    No Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims under Kentucky Law

    OSHA’s New Severe Injury and Fatality Reporting Requirements, Are You Ready?

    Waiver of Consequential Damages: The Most Important Provision in a Construction Contract

    Insurer Able to Refuse Coverage for Failed Retaining Wall

    Wilke Fleury and Attorneys Recognized as ‘Best Law Firm’ and ‘Best Lawyers’ by U.S. News!

    Navigating the Construction Burrito: OCIP Policies in California’s Construction Defect Cases

    OSHA Launches Program to Combat Trenching Accidents

    Norfolk Southern Accused of Trying to Destroy Evidence of Ohio Wreck

    Privette: The “Affirmative Contribution” Exception, How Far Does It Go?

    Managing Infrastructure Projects with Infrakit – Interview with Teemu Kivimäki

    Failure to Consider Safety Element in Design Does Not Preclude Public Entity’s Discretionary Authority Under Design Immunity Defense

    Some Construction Contract Basics- Necessities and Pitfalls

    Does Your 998 Offer to Compromise Include Attorneys’ Fees and Costs?

    City Drops Impact Fees to Encourage Commercial Development
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Arbitrator May Use Own Discretion in Consolidating Construction Defect Cases

    September 01, 2011 —

    The Mississippi Court of Appeals has ruled in the case of Harry Baker Smith Architects II, PLLC v. Sea Breeze I, LLC. Sea Breeze contracted with Harry Baker Smith Architects II, PLLC (HBSA) to design a condominium complex, which would be built by Roy Anderson Corporation. All parties agreed to arbitration.

    Subsequently, Sea Breeze alleged defects and sought arbitration against the architectural firm and started a separate arbitration proceeding against the contractor. The special arbitrator appointed by the American Arbitrators Association determined that it would be proper to consolidate the two actions “since they arose from a common question of fact or law.” HBSA filed in chancery court seeking injunctive relief and a reversal of the decision. Sea Breeze and Roy Anderson filed a motion to compel the consolidated arbitration.

    The court noted that the special arbitrator “established that the contract between Sea Breeze and Roy Anderson expressly allowed for consolidation of the two cases.” Further, the arbitrator “concluded that HBSA expressly agreed to consolidation by written consent through its 2008 letter, through which it insisted upon Roy Anderson’s involvement ‘in any mediation and/or arbitration.’”

    The court concluded that the chancery court “did not have the power to fulfill HBSA’s request.” The court affirmed the chancery court’s judgment.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Federal Judge Vacates CDC Eviction Moratorium Nationwide

    May 24, 2021 —
    Late last week a federal district court judge for the District of Columbia held that the nationwide eviction moratorium issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) went beyond the agency’s statutory authority and vacated it nationwide. This decision effectively expanded a similar decision by a Texas federal court last month that found the CDC’s moratorium was an improper use of federal power but limited its decision to the litigants to that case and declined to vacate the CDC order. The CDC eviction moratorium (the Order) was designed to halt certain cases of eviction for low-income tenants and was the most significant nationwide tenant protection for nonpayment of rent due to the COVID-19 pandemic. While the federal government has said it will appeal this week’s decision and has sought to stay its effect, it is a significant blow to the federal government’s efforts to halt evictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This decision may now open an avenue for landlords to begin evicting nonpaying tenants that had been halted by the eviction moratorium since mid-2020. Reprinted courtesy of Zachary Kessler, Pillsbury, Amanda G. Halter, Pillsbury and Adam Weaver, Pillsbury Mr. Kessler may be contacted at zachary.kessler@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Halter may be contacted at amanda.halter@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Weaver may be contacted at adam.weaver@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Colorado Court of Appeals Rules that a Statutory Notice of Claim Triggers an Insurer’s Duty to Defend.

    October 23, 2012 —

    Gene and Diane Melssen d/b/a Melssen Construction (“Melssen”) built a custom home for the Holleys, during which period of time Melssen retained a CGL insurance coverage from Auto Owners Insurance Company. Soon after completion of the house, the Holleys noticed cracks in the drywall and, eventually, large cracks developed in the exterior stucco and basement slab. Thereafter, the Holleys contacted Melssen, the structural engineer, an attorney, and Auto-Owners, which assigned a claims adjuster to investigate the claim.

    In April 2008, the Holleys sent Melssen a statutory notice of claim pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-20-803.5 (“NOC”). In this NOC, the Holleys claimed approximately $300,000 in damages related to design and construction defects. The Holleys also provided a list of claimed damages and estimated repairs, accompanied by two reports from the Holleys’ consultant regarding the claimed design and construction defects. In June 2008, Melssen tendered the defense and indemnity of the claim to Auto-Owners. While Auto-Owners did not deny the claim at that time, it did not inspect the property or otherwise adjust the claim. Thereafter, in October 2008, Auto-Owners sent Melssen a letter denying coverage on the basis that the damage occurred outside of the applicable policy period.

    Ultimately, Melssen settled the claims against it for $140,000.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. McLain can be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

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

    AB 685 and COVID-19 Workplace Exposure: New California Notice and Reporting Requirements of COVID Exposure Starting January 1, 2021

    February 01, 2021 —
    SUMMARY Effective January 1, 2021, a new California law requires employers to notify employees about possible or known exposure to COVID-19 at the workplace. The law requires actual notification to employees within one day. In addition, the law requires notifications to local public health authorities of a COVID-19 outbreak. The law also gives Cal/OSHA a new emergency police power to issue Orders Prohibiting Use (“OPU”), permitting Cal/OSHA to close workplaces that constitute an imminent hazard to employees due to COVID-19. ANALYSIS AND GUIDANCE On January 1, 2021, a new California law took effect, which will enforce stringent new mandatory protocols governing notification of employees of COVID-19 exposures in the workplace. Until now, federal agencies such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) and state agencies such as the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“Cal/OSHA”) have released guidance to help employers navigate employee training, workplace surveillance and temperature-taking, among many other issues, that have arisen during the COVID-19 pandemic. Beginning January 1st, the new law places mandatory notice requirements of COVID-19 contact on all public and private employers under Labor Code Section 6409.6, with two exceptions: (1) health facilities, as defined in Section 1250 of the Health and Safety Code and (2) employees whose regular duties include COVID-19 testing or screening, or who provide patient care to individuals who are known or suspected to have COVID-19. Reprinted courtesy of Sewar K. Sunnaa, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Nathan A. Cohen, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Ms. Sunnaa may be contacted at ssunnaa@pecklaw.com Mr. Cohen may be contacted at ncohen@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    One Nation, Under Renovation

    November 07, 2022 —
    In late 2019, Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot announced a landmark investment in some of the city’s poorest neighborhoods. Invest South/West would direct $1.4 billion in total, including $750 million in public funds, to redevelop properties across the city’s South and West Sides. Focused on 10 specific neighborhoods, the program’s first projects broke ground in August and September. Teams of workers will turn a firehouse into a culinary hub and event space; a stately Art Deco bank is set to be converted into an art space that will anchor an attached mixed-use development. Another former bank, in Humboldt Park, will be renovated into Latino-owned commercial offices, an entrepreneurial incubator space, and a Latino cultural center, as well as housing. These reuse projects aim to do more than fill the gaps of Chicago’s legendary vacant-property crisis: In reanimating shuttered historic buildings, the initiative aims to restore the economies of commercial corridors that were victims of destructive mid-20th-century “urban renewal” initiatives. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Zach Mortice, Bloomberg

    Contractors: Revisit your Force Majeure Provisions to Account for Hurricanes

    September 14, 2017 —
    We now know and can appreciate the threat of hurricanes. Not that we did not appreciate the reality of hurricanes–of course we did–but Hurricane Harvey and Hurricane Irma created the type of actual devastation we fear because they hit close to home. The fear came to life, creating panic, anxiety, and uncertainty. It is hard to plan for a force majeure event such as a hurricane because of the capriciousness of Mother Nature. But, we need to do so from this point forward. No exception! And, I mean no exception!! A force majeure event is an uncontrollable event that cannot be anticipated with any degree of definitiveness. The force majeure event will excusably delay or hinder performance obligations under a contract. One type of force majeure event is a hurricane—an uncontrollable and unforeseen act of Mother Nature. 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

    Illinois Appellate Court Affirms Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case

    August 04, 2015 —
    The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the trial court's ruling that the insurer had a duty to defend a construction defect case. West Bend Mut. Ins. Co. v. Pulte Home Corp., 2015 Ill App. Unpub. LEXIS 1039 (Ill. Ct. App. May 15, 2015). Pulte Home Corporation was a developer who developed and constructed a residential condominium development known as The Reserve of Elgin (The Reserve). G.H. Siding was subcontracted by Pulte to work on the development, including the installation of exterior siding. The Reserve Homeowners Association (HOA) filed suit against Pulte and James Hardie Building Products Inc., the company that manufactured the exterior siding. The complaint alleged that Pulte developed, designed, constructed and sold the units and common areas. Pulte installed siding manufactured by Hardie on the exterior of the units. The siding was allegedly defective. The HOA alleged breach of implied warranty of habitability and breach of contract by Pulte. Hardie was sued for breach of express warranty and breach of implied warrant of habitability. 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

    Death of Subcontractor’s Unjust Enrichment Claim Against Project Owner

    April 12, 2021 —
    In a previous article, I discussed a subcontractor’s unjust enrichment claim against a project’s owner and the death of this equitable claim if the owner fully paid the general contractor or paid the general contractor for the subcontractor’s work. This can be best summarized from a very short 1995 opinion out of the Fourth District Court of Appeal: “Unjust enrichment is equitable in nature and cannot exist where payment has been made for the benefit conferred. [Owner] paid [General Contractor] the full amount of its contract for the construction project. Accordingly, there can be no unjust enrichment claim to support [Subcontractor’s] claim.” Gene B. Glick Co., Inc. v. Sunshine Ready Concrete Co., Inc., 651 So.2d 90 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A. Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of