BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut construction defect 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


    DoD Issues Guidance on Inflation Adjustments for Contractors

    Google Advances Green Goal With AES Deal for Carbon-Free Power

    Miller Act Statute of Limitations and Equitable Tolling

    The ALI Restatement – What Lies Ahead?

    Construction Costs Absorb Two Big Hits This Quarter

    A Primer on Suspension and Debarment for Federal Construction Projects

    Putting for a Cure: Don’t Forget to Visit BHA’s Booth at WCC to Support Charity

    Florida Self-Insured Retention Satisfaction and Made Whole Doctrine

    April Rise in Construction Spending Not That Much

    Colorado “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: LISA D. LOVE

    Be a Good Neighbor: Techniques to Mitigate the Risk of Claims from Adjacent Landowners

    Mississippi Floods Prompt New Look at Controversial Dam Project

    Were Condos a Bad Idea?

    #11 CDJ Topic: Cortez Blu Community Association, Inc. v. K. Hovnanian at Cortez Hill, LLC, et al.

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolution Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    President Trump Issued Two New EOs on Energy Infrastructure and Federal Energy Policy

    How Are You Dealing with Material Delays / Supply Chain Impacts?

    A Community Constantly on the Brink of Disaster

    Shoring of Problem Girders at Salesforce Transit Center Taking Longer than Expected

    Palo Alto Proposes Time Limits on Building Permits

    Don’t Believe Everything You Hear: Liability of Asbestos Pipe Manufacturer Upheld Despite Exculpatory Testimony of Plaintiff

    Georgia Federal Court Says Fact Questions Exist As To Whether Nitrogen Is An “Irritant” or “Contaminant” As Used in Pollution Exclusion

    As Climate Changes, 'Underwater Mortgage' May Take on New Meaning

    Colorado Court Holds No Coverage for Breach of Contract Claim

    Professional Services Exclusion in CGL Policies

    Contract Should Have Clear and Definite Terms to Avoid a Patent Ambiguity

    General Release of Contractor Upheld Despite Knowledge of Construction Defects

    Construction Defect Claim Must Be Defended Under Florida Law

    William Lyon to Acquire RSI Communities

    Fire Consultants Cannot Base Opinions on Speculation

    New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Coverage Gap Dispute

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says South Carolina High Court

    Insurer's Quote on Coverage for Theft by Hacker Creates Issue of Fact

    Let it Shine: California Mandates Rooftop Solar for New Residential Construction

    AIA Releases Decennial 2017 Updates to its Contracts Suites

    Doctrine of Avoidable Consequences as Affirmative Defense

    Attorneys' Fee Clauses are Engraved Invitations to Sue

    Jinx: Third Circuit Rules in Favor of Teamsters in Withdrawal Case

    Can’t Get a Written Change Order? Document, Document, Document

    Kiewit and Two Ex-Managers Face Canada Jobsite Fatality Criminal Trial

    Material Prices Climb…And Climb…Are You Considering A Material Escalation Provision?

    But Wait There’s More: Preserving Claims on Commonwealth Projects

    When an Insurer Proceeds as Subrogee, Defendants Should Not Assert Counterclaims Against the Insured/Subrogor

    Former Hoboken, New Jersey Mayor Disbarred for Taking Bribes

    Dallas Condo Project to Expand

    When an Intentional Act Results in Injury or Damage, it is not an Accident within the Meaning of an Insurance Policy Even When the Insured did not Intend to Cause the Injury or Damage

    Ignoring Employee ADA Accommodation Requests Can Be Costly – A Cautionary Tale

    Best Practices: Commercial Lockouts in Arizona

    Montana Federal Court Upholds Application of Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause
    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

    Slip and Fall Claim from Standing Water in Parking Garage

    January 22, 2014 —
    In Metairie, Louisiana, Paul Unkauf filed a lawsuit after he allegedly “slipped and fell on standing water in the parking garage,” located at Heritage Plaza, according to the Louisiana Record. The defendants, Stewart Development LLC, Stirling Properties LLC, Platinum Parking LLC and First Financial Company, are “accused of permitting standing water to dampen the pathway leading to the elevator bank, failing to dry the pathway, failing to warn of the hazard, failing to properly inspect the area in question, failing to provide a safe means of exit and entrance, being careless and negligent under the circumstances, failing to properly identify and correct defects in design and failing to properly supervise and train employees,” reports the Louisiana Record. Unkauf is seeking an “unspecified amount in damages” for “medical expenses, physical pain, loss of function, mental anguish, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life and permanent partial disability.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Supreme Court Protects California Policyholders for Intentional Acts of Employees

    July 02, 2018 —
    Recently, the California Supreme Court ruled that liability insurers are obligated to cover negligent supervision, hiring, and retention claims against employers resulting from the intentional acts of their employees. The case, Liberty Surplus Insurance v. Ledesma & Meyer Construction, case no. S236765 (2018), involved an insurance coverage dispute between a construction company, Ledesma & Meyer Construction (“L&M”), and its insurers, Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. (“Liberty”) and Liberty Surplus Insurance Corp (“Liberty Surplus”). Liberty was L&M’s primary insurer, while Liberty Surplus had the excess policy. L&M had contracted with the San Bernardino Unified School District to renovate a school building while the school was still in session. In a separate action, another court found that an L&M employee sexually assaulted a 13-year-old student while working at the project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William S. Bennett, Saxe Doernberger & Vita P.C.
    Mr. Bennett may be contacted at wsb@sdvlaw.com

    Ensuing Losses From Faulty Workmanship Must be Covered

    May 10, 2012 —

    Coverage for damages resulting from faulty workmanship in the construction of an apartment complex was at issue in The Bartram, LLC v. Landmark Am. Ins. Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44535 (N.D. Fla. March 30, 2012).

    The owner of the apartments, Bartram, had primary coverage and three layers of excess coverage. Each contract excluded loss from faulty workmanship. The policies provided, however, "if loss or damage by a Covered Cause of Loss results, we will pay for that resulting loss or damage."

    Bartram contended water intrusion occurred because of faulty workmanship, which caused damage to the buildings’ exterior and interior finishes, wood sheathing, framing, balcony systems, drywall ceilings and stucco walls. This damage was separate from the work needed to simply fix the faulty workmanship. Therefore, Bartram argued, the ensuing losses that resulted from the water intrusion was covered.

    The insurer argued the ensuing loss exception was not applicable if the ensuing loss was directly related to the original excluded loss.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    Colorado Court of Appeals Finds Damages to Non-Defective Property Arising From Defective Construction Covered Under Commercial General Liability Policy

    December 20, 2012 —
    The recently decided case of Colorado Pool Systems, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance Company (Colo. Ct. App. 10CA2638, October 25, 2012), confirms that absent specific exclusions in the policy, a commercial general liability (“CGL”) policy covers damages to non-defective property arising from a builder’s own defective workmanship. Colorado Pool Systems, Inc. (“Colorado Pool”) was hired as a subcontractor to install a swimming pool at Founders Village Pool and Community Center (“Founders Village”) in Castle Rock, Colorado. After the concrete shell of the pool was placed, some of the rebar frame was found to be too close to the surface. Founders Village demanded that Colorado Pool remove and replace the pool, and Colorado Pool contacted its insurance carrier, Scottsdale Insurance Company (“Scottsdale”), with which Colorado Pool held a CGL policy. After inspecting the pool, Scottsdale’s claims adjuster stated that the insurance policy would cover losses associated with removing and replacing the pool. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Heidi Gassman, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC.
    Ms. Gassman can be contacted at gassman@hhmrlaw.com

    Construction Workers Unearth Bones

    June 28, 2011 —

    While digging for a new steam line at Eastern Michigan University, workers unearthed some old bones. Experts have yet to determine if the bones are human or animal, however Walter Kraft, the EMU vice president of communications, noted that a handle also unearthed might have come from a casket. Cindy Heflin, reporting in AnnArbor.com notes that until 1900 a Catholic cemetery was located in the area. Although the bodies were relocated, these may have been left behind.

    Read the full story…

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

    The Miller Act: More Complex than You Think

    October 07, 2016 —
    Keith Bremer, senior partner of Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara LLP, has a feature article in the Fall 2016 issue of Construction Claims Magazine, and discusses how the Miller Act has been slowly changing: “This is a complex piece of legislation that is evolving and has been decided differently depending on the federal district a case is heard in,” Bremer wrote. Bremer explained how the courts continue to rule differently in regards to the Miller Act. “Currently it seems jurisdictions are split on the issue of whether or not subcontractors should be allowed to bring both a federal and state cause of action stemming from payment by a Miller Act bond. Therefore, any surety writing these bonds should pay strict attention to how broad or narrow the federal district that would hear the claim has interpreted the scope of a subcontractor’s remedies for Miller Act claims.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Understanding Liability Insurer’s Two Duties: To Defend and to Indemnify

    December 26, 2022 —
    A liability insurer has two duties that are the crux of a liability policy: the duty to defend the insured in legal actions and the duty to indemnify the insured from losses covered under the policy. Many times, policyholders (insureds) do not fully understand or appreciate these two important duties. They need to and this is why having private counsel assist with coverage-related considerations is an absolute must. An insurers’ duty to defend is separate from its duty to indemnify. A recent opinion out of the Middle District of Florida in Progressive Express Ins. Co. v. Tate Transport Corp., 2022 WL 16963815 (M.D.Fla. 2022) clarifies the distinction between these duties with a focus on an insurer’s initial duty — the duty to defend. Please read below so you can have more of an appreciation of these duties. The court does a good job discussing Florida law with the emphasis on when an insurer’s initial duty to defend kicks-in: Duty to Defend Under Florida law, “an insurer’s duty to defend its insured against a legal action arises when the complaint alleges facts that fairly and potentially bring the suit within policy coverage.” The duty to defend is a broad one, broader than the duty to indemnify, and “[t]he merits of the underlying suit are irrelevant.” We determine whether an insurer has a duty to defend its insured based only on “the eight corners of the complaint and the policy,” and only as the complaint’s alleged facts are “fairly read[.]” The “facts” we consider in evaluating the duty to defend come solely from the complaint, regardless of the actual facts of the case and regardless of any later developed and contradictory factual record. “Any doubts regarding 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

    Construction Is Holding Back the Economy

    February 28, 2018 —
    Changes in contracts and rules could make the sector a lot more efficient. The question of whether to prioritize jobs or economic efficiency is always difficult. Nowhere is this more of a dilemma than in the construction industry. In a world of rapid technological disruption, construction is a rock of solidity to which many blue-collar workers can cling. The industry still employs about 7 million workers in the U.S. The job doesn’t change that much from decade to decade. It’s a big broad occupation, unlike social-media marketing or other new niche jobs, so it allows working-class people to minimize the time and effort they spend building for a career. And workers get trained on the job, without years of college. What’s more, construction workers are mostly male. To the degree this is a result of sexism, that’s bad. But it also means that the construction industry employs lots of men, at a time when they haven’t been doing so well in the jobs department. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Noah Smith, Bloomberg