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


    Department Of Labor Recovers $724K In Back Wages, Damages For 255 Workers After Phoenix Contractor Denied Overtime Pay, Falsified Records

    The National Building Museum’s A-Mazing Showpiece

    Scope of Alaska’s Dump Lien Statute Substantially Reduced For Natural Gas Contractors

    Ten Years After Colorado’s Adverse Possession Amendment: a brief look backwards and forwards

    Fla. Researchers Probe 'Mother of All Sinkholes'

    Wildfires Threaten to Make Home Insurance Unaffordable

    Newmeyer & Dillion Welcomes Three Associates to Newport Beach Office

    Canadian Developer Faces Charges After Massive Fire on Construction Site

    Couple Sues Attorney over Construction Defect Case, Loses

    No Hiring Surge by Homebuilders Says Industry Group

    Court Holds That Insurance Producer Cannot Be Liable for Denial of COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim

    Coverage for Named Windstorm Removed by Insured, Terminating Such Coverage

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Water Damage Claims

    Alaska Supreme Court Dismisses Claims of Uncooperative Pro Se Litigant in Defect Case

    Building Materials Price Increase Clause for Contractors and Subcontractors – Three Options

    Nobody Knows What Lies Beneath New York City

    New Case Law Update: Mountain Valleys, Chevron Deference and a Long-Awaited Resolution on the Sacketts’ Small Lot

    Attorneys' Fees Awarded as Part of "Damages Because of Property Damage"

    Identifying and Accessing Coverage in Complex Construction Claims

    School Blown Down by Wind Still Set to Open on Schedule

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: LESLIE KING O'NEAL

    MTA’S New Debarment Powers Pose an Existential Risk

    Balfour Taps Qinetiq’s Quinn as new CEO to Revamp Builder

    Arizona Is Smart About Water. It Should Stay That Way.

    Quick Note: Independent Third-Party Spoliation Of Evidence Claim

    U.S. Firm Helps Thais to Pump Water From Cave to Save Boys

    Construction Contract Basics: Attorney Fee Provisions

    Housing Starts in U.S. Beat 1 Million Pace for Second Month

    Bailout for an Improperly Drafted Indemnification Provision

    Approaching Design-Build Projects to Avoid (or Win) Disputes

    Fourth Circuit Rejects Application of Wrap-Up Exclusion to Additional Insured

    Congratulations to San Diego Partner Johnpaul Salem and Senior Associate Scott Hoy for Obtaining a Complete Defense Verdict!

    David M. McLain to Speak at the CLM Claims College - School of Construction - Scholarships Available

    Musk’s Cousins Battle Utilities to Make Solar Rooftops Cheap

    Claims Against Broker Dismissed

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Business Interruption Claim Denied

    Home Repair Firms Sued for Fraud

    New Jersey Law regarding Prior Expert’s Testimony

    Competitive Bidding Statute: When it Applies and When it Does Not

    Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Calls for CFPB Investigation into Tenant Screening Businesses

    Hotel Claims Construction Defect Could Have Caused Collapse

    Federal Contractors – Double Check the Terms of Your Contract Before Performing Ordered Changes

    Spotting Problem Projects

    2021 2Q Cost Report: Industry Execs Believe Recovery Is in Full Swing

    Colorado Supreme Court Rules that Developers Retain Perpetual Control over Construction Defect Covenants

    Eighth Circuit Affirms Judgment for Bad Faith after Insured's Home Destroyed by Fire

    Fence Attached to Building Covered Under Dwelling Provisions

    Is the Manhattan Bank of America Tower a Green Success or Failure?

    Recommencing Construction on a Project due to a Cessation or Abandonment

    Excess Insurer On The Hook For Cleanup Costs At Seven Industrial Sites
    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

    Tenth Circuit Finds Appraisal Can Decide Causation of Loss Under Colorado Law

    November 29, 2021 —
    The Tenth Circuit determined that the Colorado Supreme Court would agree with other state courts that appraisers can decide the causation of a loss. Bonbeck Parker, LLC v. The Travelers Indem. Co. of Am., 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 29607 (10th Cir. Oct. 1, 2021). A hailstorm damaged three buildings owned by BonBeck. A claim was submitted to Travelers under BonBeck's commercial property policy. Travelers acknowledged that some hail damage occurred to all the buildings except for the roofs. Travelers paid $34,200 for damage to the buildings. Coverage for the roof damage was denied because it resulted not from the hail damage but from uncovered events like wear and tear, deterioration, and improperly installation. BonBeck requested an appraisal. Travelers insisted that the appraisal would only determine the amount of loss of covered claims. BonBeck rejected these conditions and Travelers filed suit. 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

    Disputes Over Arbitrator Qualifications: The Northern District of California Offers Some Guidance

    August 10, 2021 —
    The selection of an arbitration panel can often lead to disputes between the parties regarding things like whether a particular candidate is qualified, whether a challenge to an arbitrator’s qualifications can be addressed pre-award and whether a party that names an unqualified arbitrator should lose the opportunity to name a replacement. In Public Risk Innovations v. Amtrust Financial Services, No. 21-cv-03573, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129464 (N.D. Ca. July 12, 2021), the court provided answers on all three of these issues. In Amtrust, the parties filed cross-motions to compel arbitration. Although both parties agreed the dispute was arbitrable, they disagreed about whether Public Risk Innovations, Solutions and Management’s (PRISM) arbitrator was qualified under the terms of the applicable contract. In seeking to have PRISM’s arbitrator disqualified, Amtrust argued that he: (1) was not a “current or former official of an insurance or reinsurance company”; and (2) was not “disinterested.” Amtrust also argued that because PRISM named an unqualified arbitrator (and presumably the time to appoint had passed), PRISM should be deemed to have failed to select an arbitrator as required by the contract and that Amtrust had the right to select a second arbitrator of its choice. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Justin K. Fortescue, White and Williams
    Mr. Fortescue may be contacted at fortescuej@whiteandwilliams.com

    Colorado Court of Appeals Confirms Senior Living Communities as “Residential Properties” for Purposes of the Homeowner Protection Act

    November 06, 2023 —
    The Third Division of the Colorado Court of Appeals recently interpreted the Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 (the “HPA”) in Heights Healthcare v. BCER, 2023 COA 44, decided on May 25, 2023. The Court held that a senior living community that is located on a parcel zoned “commercial” or “mixed use” constitutes “residential property” that is protected by the HPA, regardless of the zoning designation. The claims in Heights Healthcare arose from a contract between BCER and Heights Healthcare for BCER to provide mechanical and electrical services relating to the installation of Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner units at the senior living community. The contract between the parties included a limitation of liability clause, limiting BCER’s liability to a total of $22,500 for the total cost of services rendered. After the installation, Heights Healthcare discovered that the air conditioner units were malfunctioning, causing too few of the eighty-four units to run and tripping the breaker—shutting down the entire system—when the outdoor temperature dropped too low. Following the discovery of the malfunction, Heights Healthcare filed suit against BCER for breach of contract under the Construction Defect Action Reform Act (“CDARA”). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hal Baker, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Baker may be contacted at baker@hhmrlaw.com

    District of Oregon Predicts Oregon’s Place in “Plain Meaning” Pollution Camp

    March 29, 2017 —
    The Federal District Court for the District of Oregon recently decided that Carbon Monoxide constitutes a pollutant within the meaning of a pollution exclusion in a Commercial General Liability (“CGL”) policy. In Colony Ins. V. Victory Constr. LLC, No. 3: 16-cv-00457-HZ (Mar. 14, 2017), the District Court considered whether there was coverage for a pool company that allegedly failed to warn of the “risks of carbon monoxide poisoning associated with operating the heater in an insufficiently ventilated area,” leading to carbon monoxide sickness. 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

    US-Mexico Border Wall Bids Include Tourist Attraction, Solar Panels

    April 05, 2017 —
    SAN DIEGO (AP) — Tuesday was the deadline for companies to propose designs for President Donald Trump's border wall with Mexico . U.S. Customs and Border Protection will ask several of the bidders to build prototypes in San Diego . The government won't identify companies until contracts are awarded around June 1 — and even then, only the winners — but some bidders released plans on their own. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Additional Insured Secures Defense Under Subcontractor's Policy

    October 14, 2013 —
    The court determined there were sufficient allegations in the underlying complaint and third party complaints to raise a duty to defend for the additional insured. Ill. Emcasco Ins. Co. v. Waukegan Steel Sales, 2013 Ill. App. LEXIS 624 (Ill. Ct. App. Sept. 13, 2013). Waukegan was named as an additional insured under subcontractor I-MAXX Metalworks, Inc.'s policy with Emcasco. An employee of I-MAXX, John Walls, was injured on the job site and sued Waukegan. The complaint alleged Waukegan was negligent in failing to property manage, operate and maintain the premises. I-MAXX had a policy with Emcasco which named Waukegan as an additional insured. The coverage was limited, however, to the additional insured's vicarious liability as a result of the insured's conduct. Emcasco refused to defend Waukegan because the allegations of direct negligence against Waukegan were excluded by the vicariously liability provision. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Be Careful in Contracting and Business

    May 06, 2019 —
    After an hour long phone conference with a client, I have had several thoughts, only a few of which I can share here (grin). The first is that my friends and clients in the construction industry are hurting, but need to work with an attorney to assure that the pain is lessened. The second is that more, not less, precision is needed in construction contracting these days. The reason for the first thought is that the construction industry has taken a hit lately. The news is fraught with stories of the economic downturn and its impact on construction. While the money may be hard to part with, all construction professionals should get their contracts and business practices audited regularly to avoid risk and assure, as best as is possible, that they are protected. One place to get such triage is at my firm. If you don’t use me, please use someone else. On the second point, clients need attorney fees provisions, indemnity clauses and to assure that a scope of work is very specifically defined. Wiggle room is not available. In tough economic times. Owners will look for something closer to perfection when money is tight than when money is not. Contractors should also. Your contract is the first line of defense. While no contract can possibly cover every contingency and contracts are only as good as those who sign them when it comes right down to it, a good base contract is the best shield. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    White and Williams Recognized by BTI Consulting Group for Client Service

    April 12, 2021 —
    White and Williams is proud to be included in BTI Consulting Group’s report of “The 70 Law Firms Improving Client Service Performance More Than All Others." The pandemic forced law firms to navigate and respond instinctively as new client situations popped up daily and weekly. White and Williams was quick to establish a Covid-19 team and resource center to help clients navigate the rapidly developing business and legal issues brought on by the pandemic and provide timely and practical advice. This recognition is a testament to the firm’s commitment to provide clients with best-in-class service and the trust that clients have instilled in the firm. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP