BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windows
    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


    Surge in Home Completions Tamps Down Inflation as Fed Meets

    When Employer’s Liability Coverage May Be Limited in New York

    Labor Code § 2708 Presumption of Employer Negligence is Not Applicable Against Homeowners Who Hired Unlicensed Painting Company

    Last, but NOT Least: Why You Should Take a Closer Look at Your Next Indemnification Clause

    Ready, Fire, Aim: The Importance of Targeting Your Delay Notices

    Best Lawyers Honors Hundreds of Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Names Four Partners ‘Lawyers of the Year’

    Roof Mounted Solar Panels: Lower Your Risk of Fire

    Alleged Negligent Misrepresentation on Condition of Home is Not an Occurrence Causing Property Damage

    A Compilation of Quirky Insurance Claims

    Don’t Do this When it Comes to Construction Liens

    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

    The Basics of Subcontractor Defaults – Key Considerations

    Courts Favor Arbitration in Two Recent Construction Dispute Cases

    Sobering Facts for Construction Safety Day

    Newmeyer & Dillion Named as One of the 2018 Best Places to Work in Orange County for Seventh Consecutive Year

    Christopher Leise Recognized by US News – Best Lawyers 2022 "Lawyer of the Year"

    Pending Home Sales in U.S. Increase Less Than Forecast

    I-35W Bridge Collapse may be Due to “Inadequate Load Capacity”

    Construction Halted in Wisconsin Due to Alleged Bid Issues

    To Sea or Not to Sea: Fifth Circuit Applies Maritime Law to Offshore Service Contract, Spares Indemnity Provision from Louisiana Oilfield Indemnity Act

    1 De Haro: A Case Study on Successful Cross-Laminated Timber Design and Construction in San Francisco

    "Decay" Found Ambiguous in Collapse Case

    Governmental Immunity Waived for Independent Contractor - Lopez v. City of Grand Junction

    Is Arbitration Final and Binding?

    Re-Thinking the One-Sided Contract: Considerations for a More Balanced Approach to Contracting

    WSHB Ranked 4th Most Diverse Law Firm in U.S.

    New York’s Highest Court Gives Insurers “an Incentive to Defend”

    Workers Hurt in Casino Floor Collapse

    Seven Key Issues for Construction Professionals to Consider When Dealing With COVID-19

    BKV Barnett, LLC v. Electric Drilling Technologies, LLC: Analyzing the Impact of Colorado’s Anti-Indemnification Statute

    Preparing Your Business For Internal Transition

    ASCE Statement on House Passage of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    NYC Developer Embraces Religion in Search for Condo Sites

    Construction Legislation Likely to Take Effect July 1, 2020

    Don’t Be Lazy with Your Tenders

    Eleventh Circuit Finds Professional Services Exclusion Applies to Construction Management Activities

    With No Evidence of COVID-19 Being Present, DC Trial Court Finds No Claim for Business Interruption

    Assessing Defective Design Liability on Federal Design-Build Projects

    Engineers Propose 'River' Alternative to Border Wall

    Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Applied to Pass-Through Agreements

    Hawaii Federal District Court Grants Preliminary Approval of Settlement on Volcano Damage

    HB 20-1046 - Private Retainage Reform - Postponed Indefinitely

    Tender the Defense of a Lawsuit to your Liability Carrier

    New York Restaurant and Bar Fire Caused by Electric Defect

    Call to Conserve Power Raises Questions About Texas Grid Reliability

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Named to Hudson Valley Magazine’s 2022 Top Lawyers List

    Boston Building Boom Seems Sustainable

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Subcontractor Has No Duty to Defend Under Indemnity Provision

    California Bullet Train Clears Federal Environmental Approval

    Limiting Liability: Three Clauses to Consider in your Next Construction Contract
    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

    Washington Supreme Court Expands Contractor Notice Obligations

    November 28, 2018 —
    The Washington State Supreme Court dealt another blow to public works contractors in Washington State. In a case recently issued by the court, Nova Contracting, Inc. v. City of Olympia, [1] the court expanded contractors’ obligations when providing notice on public works construction projects. The Nova Contracting case was the subject of a previous blog. The case involved Nova Contracting and the City of Olympia. Nova was the low bidder on the contract. Nova alleged that the City of Olympia did not want Nova to win the job and intentionally hindered Nova’s ability to perform the job. The facts alleged by Nova, which were covered in the previous blog, involved the City’s improper and apparently punitive rejection of submittals on the job and the City’s eventual wrongful termination of Nova. Of significance in the case is that Nova never actually began work on the job. All that Nova had done at the time of termination was begin mobilizing its equipment on site. The Court of Appeals found that Nova had alleged sufficient facts to establish that the City violated the duty of good faith and fair dealing by improperly rejecting Nova’s submissions and had breached the contract with Nova by improperly terminating. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brett M. Hill, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at brett.hill@acslawyers.com

    Insurance Firm Defends against $22 Million Claim

    June 15, 2011 —

    The Houston law firm of Eggleston & Briscoe successfully defended their client, Colony Insurance Company, which was being sued for $22 million over roof hail damage. The Summer Hill Village Community Association did not convince a jury that the insurance company had violated state law or breached its contract when it denied coverage for the roofs. The homeowners association contended that the roof damage was due to a hail storm in 2007. The jury agreed with experts who contended the damage was already present at that time.

    Mr. Eggleston noted that “when your client is sued for a claim of $22 million, it is very satisfying to hear a jury agree that they in fact acted honorably and owed nothing.”

    Read the full story…

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

    New York Court Finds Insurers Cannot Recover Defense Costs Where No Duty to Indemnify

    March 01, 2021 —
    In a case of first impression, the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, found the insurer had no right to reimbursement of defense costs paid to defend the insured. Am. W. Home Ins. Co. v. Gjoaj Realty & Mgt. Co., 2020 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8286 (N.Y. App. Div. Dec. 30, 2020). Gjonaj Realty was sued by Viktor Gecaj when he fell from a ladder at the premises managed by Gjonaj Realty. The matter was not tendered to American Western Home Insurance Company until four years after the accident and after a judgment of $900,000 had been entered against Gjonaj Realty after its default. American denied coverage after late notice was given. Thereafter, the Supreme Court in the underling action vacated the default judgment. American then agreed to defend under a reservation of rights. The Appellate Division reversed the vacatur of the default judgment and reinstated the default against the insured. American then advised Gjonaj Realty that it was denying coverage and reserving its right to recover any fees and costs incurred in defending the underlying action. 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

    Amazon’s Fatal Warehouse Collapse Is Being Investigated by OSHA

    December 13, 2021 —
    The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has opened an investigation into the collapse of an Amazon.com Inc. warehouse, according to a Labor Department spokesperson. A tornado struck the Amazon delivery station in Edwardsville, Illinois, on Friday, killing six workers and destroying much of the facility at the peak of the holiday shopping season. “OSHA has had compliance officers at the complex since Saturday, Dec. 11, to provide assistance,” the spokesperson said. “OSHA has six months to complete its investigation, issue citations and propose monetary penalties if violations of workplace safety and or health regulations are found.” Reprinted courtesy of Josh Eidelson, Bloomberg and Spencer Soper, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Relief Bill's Highway Funds Could Help Construction Projects

    January 04, 2021 —
    Among the many provisions in the coronavirus relief bill, one key item is $10 billion to help state highway agencies make up for losses in state fuel taxes and other revenue due to the pandemic-caused falloff in traffic this year. Construction is one of a list of several eligible uses for the money—one of only a few construction funding provisions in the relief measure. Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Alabama Supreme Court States Faulty Workmanship can be an Occurrence

    July 16, 2014 —
    Carl A. Salisbury of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP in his Lexology article, stated that “it is now official and final: Alabama is no longer one of the outlier jurisdictions on the issue of coverage for faulty workmanship.” In the case Owners v. Jim Carr Homebuilders, in September 2013 the Alabama Supreme Court had “sided with insurers in holding that construction defects can never be accidental and, therefore, can never be covered by Commercial General Liability insurance.” However, in March “the Court withdrew that decision and reversed course,” holding “that faulty workmanship can, in fact, constitute a covered ‘occurrence,’ which CGL policies define as ‘an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to the same generally harmful conditions.’” “This is obviously good news for construction contractors that do work in the state of Alabama,” Salisbury stated. “It is also good news for policyholders in general as it continues the strong trend among state high courts that have been finding in favor of coverage in this important area of insurance law.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York City Council’s Carbon Emissions Regulation Opposed by Real Estate Board

    July 01, 2019 —
    On April 10, 2019, the New York City Council adopted Intro No. 1253 – the largest effort in a series of bills known as the Climate Mobilization Act. Intro No. 1253 enacts new regulations to reduce the city’s current largest source of carbon emissions – the operation of buildings. Jared Brey, in his April 25, 2019 article in U.S. News and World Report, “How an Evolving Movement Pushed NYC to Address the Climate Crisis,” states that “[i]n the city, around 70% of carbon emissions are produced by buildings, and around half of all building emissions are produced by just 2% of structures larger than 25,000 square feet that are covered by the bill.” The level of development, population density and relative economic power of a city such as New York have made this bill particularly interesting to other jurisdictions around the globe which may be considering their own similar legislation. In his article, Brey cites David Miller, a former mayor of Toronto and the North American regional director for C40, a group of cities coordinating strategies to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement:
    “I think what New York has done is globally significant … It’s really a huge step forward, using the city’s powers and influence to directly address a huge source of greenhouse gas emissions without waiting for the national government or the international community to act.”
    Several other jurisdictions have already begun to approach this issue, generally either by passing bills or creating task forces to further investigate how to meet stated emissions reduction goals. In 2018, Governor Jerry Brown of California signed an executive order with a stated goal of net-zero carbon emissions within the state by the year 2045. The California State Assembly subsequently passed a bill creating a task force to investigate the potential to reduce the emission of greenhouse gasses by both commercial and residential buildings by 2030, although their plan is not due until January 1, 2021. The city of San Jose has implemented new building standards for all new residential buildings to be net-carbon neutral by 2020, and all new commercial buildings must be so by 2030. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kristen E. Andreoli, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Andreoli may be contacted at andreolik@whiteandwilliams.com

    Five-Year Statute of Limitations on Performance-Type Surety Bonds

    December 01, 2017 —
    The statute of limitations on a claim against a performance-type bond is 5 years from the breach of the bond, i.e., the bond-principal’s default (based on the same statute of limitations that governs written contracts / obligations). See Fla. Stat. s. 95.11(2)(b). This 5-year statute of limitations is NOT extended and does NOT commence when the surety denies the claim. It commences upon the default of the bond-principal, which would be the act constituting the breach of the bond. This does not mean that the statute of limitations starts when a latent defect is discovered. This is not the case. In dealing with a completed project, the five-year statute of limitations would run when the obligee (beneficiary of the bond) accepted the work. See Federal Insurance Co. v. Southwest Florida Retirement Center, Inc., 707 So.2d 1119, 1121-22 (Fla. 1998). This 5-year statute of limitations on performance-type surety bonds has recently been explained by the Second District in Lexicon Ins. Co. v. City of Cape Coral, Florida, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D2521a (Fla. 2d DCA 2017), a case where a developer planned on developing a single-family subdivision. 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