BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield 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


    Is Solar the Next Focus of Construction Defect Suits?

    Corps Proposes $4.6B Plan to Steel Miami for Storm Surge

    Application of Set-Off When Determining Prevailing Party for Purposes of Attorney’s Fees

    Wisconsin High Court Rejects Insurer’s Misuse of “Other Insurance” Provision

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment Based Upon Vandalism Exclusion

    County Sovereign Immunity Invokes Change-Order Ordinance

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Newmeyer & Dillion Welcomes Three Associates to Newport Beach Office

    Nine ACS Lawyers Recognized as Super Lawyers

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    BofA Said to Near Mortgage Deal for Up to $17 Billion

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds Fire Damage Resulted from Single Occurrence

    Pennsylvania Homeowner Blames Cracks on Chipolte Construction

    Denver Officials Clamor for State Construction Defect Law

    You Are on Notice: Failure to Comply With Contractual Notice Provisions Can Be Fatal to Your Claim

    Fourth Circuit Finds Insurer Reservation of Rights Letters Inadequate to Preserve Coverage Defenses Under South Carolina Law

    24th Annual West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar A Success

    What If Your CCP 998 Offer is Silent on Costs?

    Power & Energy - Emerging Insurance Coverage Cases of Interest

    Hotel Owner Makes Construction Defect Claim

    Naughty or Nice. Contractor Receives Two Lumps of Coal in Administrative Dispute

    Court Grants Summary Judgment to Insurer in HVAC Defect Case

    Penn Station’s Revival Gets a $1.6 Billion Down Payment

    South Carolina Supreme Court Asked Whether Attorney-Client Privilege Waived When Insurer Denies Bad Faith

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    May Heat Wave Deaths Prompt New Cooling Rules in Chicago

    Kiewit Hired as EPC for Fire-Damaged Freeport Gas Terminal Fix

    Insurer Liable for Bad Faith Despite Actions of Insured Contributing to Excess Judgment

    Flood Sublimit Applies, Seawater Corrosion to Amtrak's Equipment Not Ensuing Loss

    Life After McMillin: Do Negligence and Strict Liability Causes of Action for Construction Defects Still Exist?

    Zero-Net Energy Homes Costly Everywhere but at the Electric Meter

    Not so Fast! How Does Revoking Acceleration of a Note Impact the Statute of Limitations?

    The Economic Loss Rule: From Where Does the Duty Arise?

    Fire Tests Inspire More Robust Timber Product Standard

    Remand of Bad Faith Claim Evidences Split Among Florida District Courts

    Duty to Defend For Accident Exists, But Not Duty to Indeminfy

    Second Circuit Finds Potential Ambiguity in Competing “Anti-Concurrent Cause” Provisions in Hurricane Sandy Property Loss

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Los Angeles Tier 1 “Best Law Firm” and Tier 2 for Los Angeles and Orange County by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2022

    Dispute Review Boards for Real-Time Dispute Avoidance and Resolution

    16 Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2021 Top Lawyers!

    Montana Federal District Court Finds for Insurer in Pollution Coverage Dispute

    Message from the Chair: Kelsey Funes (Volume I)

    Jean Nouvel’s NYC ‘Vision Machine’ Sued Over Construction Defects

    Testimony from Insureds' Expert Limited By Motion In Limine

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

    Kansas Man Caught for Construction Scam in Virginia

    You're Doing Construction in Russia, Now What?

    Florida extends the Distressed Condominium Relief Act

    Alabama Federal Magistrate Recommends Dismissal of Construction Defect Declaratory Judgment Action Due to Expanded Duty to Defend Standard

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (08/15/23) – Manufacturing Soars with CHIPS Act, New Threats to U.S. Infrastructure and AI Innovation for One Company
    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

    Construction Job Opening Rise in October

    December 20, 2012 —
    There was a significant increase in the number of open construction jobs during October, according to a report for the National Association of Home Builders. Working from preliminary data provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the NAHB said that the number of open positions reached “levels and rates last seen in 2007.” As the data is still preliminary, the NAHB noted that the conclusions should be taken with caution. While there was a spike in job openings, the hiring of people to fill these positions hasn’t caught up with it, and there was a small decline in hires. But to return to the good news, there was also a drop in layoffs in that same period. Through October, about 8,000 people have been hired in the construction sector. The NAHB notes that this does not correspond with the recent increases with home construction. They suggest that “it may be the case that startups in the home building and remodeling sectors are being missed by the establishment survey.” Another possibility they raise is that already-employed construction workers are simply working more hours. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Massachusetts Federal Court Rejects Adria Towers, Finds Construction Defects Not an “Occurrence”

    July 03, 2022 —
    In an important ruling for insurers, U.S. District Court Judge Patti Saris found that Massachusetts does not follow the position taken in Cypress Point Condo Association v. Adria Towers, LLC, 226 N.J. 403, 418 (2016), i.e., it does not hold that "faulty workmanship claims [should be recognized] as ... an 'occurrence,' thus triggering coverage, 'so long as the allegedly defective work [was] performed by a subcontractor rather than the policyholder itself."[1] Instead, Judge Saris reaffirmed earlier Massachusetts authority holding faulty work is not an "occurrence" for coverage purposes,[2] and found this authority applied whether or not the work in question was subcontracted. In the alternative, Judge Saris found, even if a contractor's faulty work could be deemed an an "occurrence," such work did not constitute covered "property damage," because none of the alleged damage was "outside the scope of the work that Tocci was contractually required to fulfill as general contractor."[3] Reprinted courtesy of Eric B. Hermanson, White and Williams and Austin D. Moody, White and Williams Mr. Hermanson may be contacted at hermansone@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Moody may be contacted at moodya@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2021

    November 23, 2020 —
    White and Williams has achieved national recognition from U.S. News and World Report as a "Best Law Firm" in the practice areas of Insurance Law, Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law and Media Law. Our Delaware, New York and Philadelphia offices have also been recognized in their respective metropolitan regions in several practice areas. Firms included in the “Best Law Firms” list are recognized for professional excellence with persistently impressive ratings from clients and peers. Achieving a tiered ranking signals a unique combination of quality law practice and breadth of legal experience. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Pre-Covid Construction Contracts Unworkable as Costs Surge, Webuild Says

    October 17, 2022 —
    Infrastructure construction contracts signed before the pandemic have become widely unworkable because of the surging cost of labor and materials, supply-chain blockages and difficulties in securing manpower, according to builder Webuild SpA. Milan-based Webuild is wrestling with a 2019 agreement with the Australian government to construct the country’s largest hydroelectric power station for A$5.1 billion ($3.2 billion). It’s meant to be completed by 2026. The Snowy 2.0 project, in the Snowy mountains about six hours’ drive south of Sydney, has come to highlight the challenges of completing large-scale projects on terms that were struck before Covid-19, and before Russia invaded Ukraine. Webuild’s Asia-Pacific director, Marco Assorati, said the value of the Snowy contract, as well as certain other parameters, need to be changed to reflect the current market. He declined to comment specifically on media reports that the consortium has asked the Australian government for an extra A$2.2 billion to complete the work and that the project is 18 months behind schedule. “It is challenging,” Assorati said. “I think clients understand this conversation must happen and there must be a way to cope with unforeseen increases in cost,” Assorati said. “It’s not needed only on the Snowy project. It’s affecting projects everywhere globally.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Angus Whitley, Bloomberg

    Avoid the Headache – Submit the Sworn Proof of Loss to Property Insurer

    September 28, 2020 —
    Property insurance policies (first party insurance policies) contain post-loss obligations that an insured must (and should) comply with otherwise they risk forfeiting insurance coverage. One post-loss obligation is the insurer’s right to request the insured to submit a sworn proof of loss. Not complying with a post-loss obligation such as submitting a sworn proof of loss can lead to unnecessary headaches for the insured. Most of the times the headache can be avoided. Even with a sworn proof of loss, there is a way to disclaim the finality of damages and amounts included by couching information as estimates or by affirming that the final and complete loss is still unknown while you work with an adjuster to quantify the loss. The point is, ignoring the obligation altogether will result in a headache that you will have to deal with down the road because the property insurer will use it against you and is a headache that is easily avoidable. And, it will result in an added burden to you, as the insured, to demonstrate the failure to comply did not actually cause any prejudice to the insurer. By way of example, in Prem v. Universal Property & Casualty Ins. Co., 45 Fla. L. Weekly D2044a (Fla. 3d DCA 2020), the insured notified their property insurer of a plumbing leak in the bathroom. The insurer requested for the insured to submit a sworn proof of loss per the terms of the insured’s property insurance policy. The insurer follow-up with its request for a sworn proof of loss on a few occasions. None was provided and the insured filed a lawsuit without ever furnishing a sworn proof of loss. The insurer moved for summary judgment due the insured’s failure to comply with the post-loss obligations, specifically by not submitting a sworn proof of loss, and the trial court granted the insurer’s motion. Even at the time of the summary judgment hearing, the insured still did not submit a sworn proof of loss. 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

    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

    Biden's Next 100 Days: Major Impacts Expected for the Construction Industry

    May 10, 2021 —
    As President Joe Biden’s busy first 100 days in office—which included enactment of a $1.9-trillion pandemic rescue bill and proposals for two other massive measures—wrap up, the months ahead also are expected to generate plenty of legislative and regulatory action with major impact for the construction sector. Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, ENR, Pam Radtke Russell, ENR and Bruce Buckley, ENR Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com Ms. Russell may be contacted at Russellp@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ill-fated Complaint Fails to State Claims Against Broker and FEMA

    September 10, 2014 —
    A complaint lodged against the insureds' broker and FEMA was dismissed for failure to state a claim. Lopez v. State Farm Gen. Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109803 (E.D. La. Aug. 8, 2014). The insureds held a Standard Flood Insurance Policy (SFIP) issued by FEMA, but sold by the broker. The insureds alleged that their property was totally destroyed by Hurricane Isaac. FEMA paid the insureds $234,513.02 for damage to their dwelling and $80,566.17 for its contents, for a total of $315,079.19. This was $34,920.81 below the policy limits. The insureds sued, claiming FEMA negligently miscalculated their damages, misvalued their property, and improperly adjusted their claim. The insureds also alleged that the broker failed to properly advise them regarding the nature of their coverage, the true value of their property, or to purchase the correct amount of insurance on their behalf. The negligent procurement claim against the broker failed because the insureds did not allege any specific facts tending to establish that the broker failed to use reasonable diligence in procuring their insurance. Likewise, the negligent misrepresentation claim against the broker was dismissed. Insurance agents had a duty to supply their customers with correct information, and they could be liable for negligent misrepresentation if they provided incorrect information and an insured was damaged. Here, the insureds did not allege a breach of the duty to supply correct information. 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