BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling 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


    New York Court of Appeals Addresses Choice of Law Challenges

    Sales of U.S. New Homes Decline After Record May Revision

    Do Engineers Owe a Duty to Third Parties?

    Drawing the Line: In Tennessee, the Economic Loss Doctrine Does Not Apply to Contracts for Services

    Just Decided – New Jersey Supreme Court: Insurers Can Look To Extrinsic Evidence To Deny a Defense

    Court Finds Duty To Defend Environmental Claim, But Defense Limited to $100,000

    Power of Workers Compensation Immunity on Construction Project

    Insurer Rejects Claim on Dolphin Towers

    Playing Hot Potato: Indemnity Strikes Again

    Appellate Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    Texas Supreme Court to Review Eight-Corners Duty-to-Defend Rule

    An Interesting Look at Mechanic’s Lien Priority and Necessary Parties

    Will They Blow It Up?

    Class Action Certification by Association for “Matters of Common Interest”

    Personal Thoughts on Construction Mediation

    Candlebrook Adds Dormitories With $230 Million Purchase

    OSHA Reinforces COVID Guidelines for the Workplace

    Just Because You Record a Mechanic’s Lien Doesn’t Mean You Get Notice of Foreclosure

    California Home Sellers Have Duty to Disclose Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Sanctions Award Against Pro Se Plaintiff Upheld

    U.S. Architecture Firms’ Billing Index Faster in Dec.

    Death, Taxes and Attorneys’ Fees in Construction Disputes

    Choice of Laws Test Mandates Application of California’s Continuous and Progressive Trigger of Coverage to Asbestos Claims

    Apartment Investors Turn to Suburbs After Crowding Cities

    Guarantor’s Liability on Partially Secured Debts – The Impacts of Pay Down Provisions in Serpanok Construction Inc. v. Point Ruston, LLC et al.

    Washington State May Allow Common Negligence Claims against Construction Professionals

    Georgia Legislature Passes Additional Procurement Rules

    The Overlooked Nevada Rule In an Arena Project Lawsuit

    Skyline Bling: A $430 Million Hairpin Tower and Other Naked Bids for Tourism

    Construction in the Time of Coronavirus

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: The Colorado Court of Appeals’ Decision Protecting a Declarant’s Right to Arbitration in Construction Defect Cases

    Senior Housing Surplus Seen as Boomers Spur Building Boom

    School Board Settles Construction Defect Suit

    Recommendations and Drafting Considerations for Construction Contingency Clauses Part III

    Badly Constructed Masonry Walls Not an Occurrence in Arkansas Law

    No Third-Quarter Gain for Construction

    Home Numbers Remain Small While Homes Get Bigger

    Florida’s Statute of Limitations / Repose for Actions Founded on Construction Improvement Modified

    Pinnacle Controls in Verano

    Sioux City Building Owners Sue Architect over Renovation Costs

    Maria Latest Threat to Puerto Rico After $1 Billion Irma Hit

    Surplus Lines Carriers Cannot Compel Arbitration in Louisiana

    Structural Failure of Precast-Concrete Span Sets Back Sydney Metro Job

    Federal Court Holds That Other Insurance Analysis Is Unnecessary If Policies Cover Different Risks

    Grad Student Sues UC Santa Cruz over Mold in Residence

    More Regulations for Federal Contractors

    Eleventh Circuit Rules That Insurer Must Defend Contractor Despite “Your Work” Exclusion, Where Damage Timing Unclear

    Product Liability Economic Loss Rule and “Other Property” Damage

    Wisconsin Court of Appeals Holds Economic Loss Doctrine Applies to Damage to Other Property If It Was a Foreseeable Result of Disappointed Contractual Expectations

    Court Concludes That COVID-19 Losses Can Qualify as “Direct Physical Loss”
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Indemnification Provisions Do Not Create Reciprocal Attorney’s Fees Provisions

    November 21, 2018 —
    In a good, recent decision, the Eleventh Circuit in International Fidelity Insurance Co. v. Americabe-Moriarity, JV, 2018 WL 5306683 (11th Cir. 2018), held that Florida Statute s. 57.105(7) cannot be used to shift attorney’s fees in a contractual indemnification clause in a dispute between a general contractor and subcontractor’s performance bond surety, when the dispute does not involve an actual indemnification claim stemming from a third-party. In this case, a prime contractor terminated a subcontractor and looked to the subcontractor’s performance bond surety to pay for the completion work. The subcontractor had a standard AIA A312 performance bond that requires the prime contractor to comply with the terms of the bond, as well as the incorporated subcontract, in order to trigger the surety’s obligations under the bond. The surety filed an action for declaratory relief against the prime contractor arguing that the prime contractor breached the terms of the performance bond through non-compliance thereby discharging the surety’s obligations. The trial court agreed and the surety moved for attorney’s fees. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Defense Owed for Product Liability Claims That Do Not Amount to Faulty Workmanship

    December 30, 2013 —
    The trial court's holding that there was no occurrence based on claims from faulty workmanship was reversed by the appellate division of the Pennsylvania Superior Court. The underlying claims were based on product liability tort claims, not faulty workmanship. Indalex Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, PA., 2013 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3186 (Pa. Superior Court Dec. 3, 2013). The underlying lawsuits claimed that the insureds' windows and doors were defectively designed or manufactured, which resulted in water leakage causing physical damage, such as mold and cracked walls. There were also personal injury claims. The insureds had a primary policy with OneBeacon Insurance Group, but the policy limits were exhausted. The insureds turned to their commercial umbrella policy issued by National Union. The policy defined occurrence as "an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to conditions, which results in Bodily Injury or Property Damage neither expected nor intended from the standpoint of the Insured." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Big Policyholder Win in Michigan

    January 05, 2017 —
    Jeremiah Welch and Michael Barrese recently had a big win in front of the Michigan Court of Appeals. The case (Skanska-Schweitzer v. Farm Bureau General Insurance Company of Michigan) involved Skanska’s claim for defense and indemnity from Farm Bureau Ins. Co. of Michigan for an injury to an elementary school student arising out of the removal of playground equipment by a landscaping company, Horrocks. Farm Bureau denied coverage because it claimed that the work was not part of Horrocks’ contract with the project owner and therefore Skanska, the construction manager, did not qualify as an additional insured on the policy. SDV argued that the AI endorsement did not specify that Horrocks’ work be performed as part of its contract with the owner; it only required that the work be performed “for Skanska.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremiah M. Welch, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Welch may be contacted at jmw@sdvlaw.com

    Curtain Wall Suppliers Claim Rival Duplicated Unique System

    February 28, 2022 —
    Chicago-area construction material suppliers that hold patents for a curtain wall system used in high-rise construction projects are suing a rival, claiming it created a knock-off of the system based on a former employee’s knowledge and put the system to use on construction projects. Reprinted courtesy of Annemarie Mannion, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    SunEdison Gets Shinsei Bank Funding for Japan Solar Power Plant

    March 12, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- SunEdison Inc., a U.S. solar developer, got financing from Tokyo-based Shinsei Bank Ltd. for a large-scale project in the country. The 9.6-megawatt Tarumizu project on the southern Japanese island of Kyushu will power about 3,000 homes, Maryland Heights, Missouri-based SunEdison said Wednesday in a statement. The project is under construction and expected to be completed in September. Financial details weren’t disclosed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ehren Goossens, Bloomberg
    Mr. Goossens may be contacted at egoossens1@bloomberg.net

    Housing Starts in U.S. Little Changed From Stronger January

    March 19, 2014 —
    Housing starts in the U.S. were little changed in February after declining less than previously estimated a month earlier, indicating the home-building industry is stabilizing after bad winter weather curbed construction. The 0.2 percent decrease to 907,000 homes at an annualized rate last month followed a revised 909,000 pace in January, figures from the Commerce Department in Washington showed today. The median estimate in a Bloomberg survey called for a 910,000 rate after a previously reported 880,000 in January. Warmer temperatures, a pickup in demand during the spring selling season and limited housing supply may help fuel further gains in new residential construction. The outlook for the industry later this year depends on whether hiring picks up enough to overcome higher mortgage rates and home prices. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeanna Smialek, Bloomberg
    Ms. Smialek may be contacted at jsmialek1@bloomberg.net

    Infrastructure Money Comes With Labor Law Strings Attached

    July 25, 2022 —
    The federal government has committed to spending $1 trillion under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act on nationwide construction, alteration and repair projects. Billions of dollars have already been deployed on projects to improve highways, bridges, airports, electrical infrastructure and drinking water distribution, and the government is poised to spend the remaining funds on a massive infrastructure build-out over the next five years. While federal government contracts may provide a lucrative and reliable stream of revenue for construction companies, contractors must be prepared to comply with special requirements, particularly under the labor and employment laws enforced by the U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL). 1. The Davis Bacon Act Requires Payment of Prevailing Wages and Fringe Benefits The Davis Bacon Act (DBA) applies to most federally funded and federally assisted projects for construction, alteration or repair work. This law requires all contractors and subcontractors on a covered project to pay all “laborers or mechanics” the wages and fringe benefits that “prevail” in the locality where the work is being performed. The USDOL determines what the prevailing wages and fringe benefits are for each trade and publishes them in wage determinations that should be issued to all contractors on the project. Reprinted courtesy of Cheryl Behymer, Patrick M. Dalin & Collin Cook, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    May 19, 2011 —

    The importance of careful preparation and documentation was the take away lesson in a Texas bad faith case, C.K. Lee v. Catlin Specialty Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19145 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 28, 2011).

    C.K. Lee owned a commercial shopping center in Houston. Catlin issued a commercial property policy to Lee. On September 12, 2008, Hurricane Ike hit and caused substantial property damage throughout the Texas Gulf Coast area. On September 24, 2008, Lee submitted a claim for damage to the roof of his shopping center to Catlin.

    Catlin hired Engle Martin to represent its interests in adjusting the claim. Engle Martin eventually adjusted over 200 Ike-related claims for Catlin.

    In November 2008, Engle Martin and Emergency Services Inc., retained by Lee, inspected Lee’s property. Engle Martin observed evidence of roof repairs that had apparently been made both before and after Hurricane Ike. Engle Martin decided it was necessary to use an infrared scan of the roof to help identify which damages, if any, were attributable to wind and which, if any, were attributable to sub par, prior repairs or natural deterioration.

    Engle Martin retained Project, Time & Cost (PT&C) to conduct the infrared inspection. PT&C’s inspection determined there was no wind-related damage to the roof and no breaches or openings created by wind. Instead, the roof had exceeded its life expectancy and was in need of replacement due to normal wear and weathering. Consequently, Catlin decided that the damage to Lee’s roof was not caused by winds from Hurricane Ike.

    Meanwhile, Lee’s contractor, Emergency Services, prepared a report estimating that the total cost of repairing the roof would be $871,187. Engle Martin’s estimate for repair of the roof was $22,864.

    Lee filed suit for breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, and violations of the Texas Insurance Code. Catlin moved for summary judgment on all claims but breach of contract, arguing that because there was a bona fide dispute concerning the cause of the damages and whether they were covered under the policy, there was no evidence of bad faith or violations of the Texas Insurance Code.

    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