BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect 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


    Connecticut’s New False Claims Act Increases Risk to Public Construction Participants

    No Duty to Defend Faulty Workmanship Under Hawaii Law, but All is not Lost for Insured Contractor

    Windstorm Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    Florida Courts Say that Developers Are Responsible for Flooding

    Contract Change #1- Insurance in the A201 (law note)

    New York Court Discusses Evidentiary Standards for Policy Rescission Based on Material Misrepresentation

    Five Reasons to Hire Older Workers—and How to Keep Them

    Nevada OSHA Provides Additional Requirements for Construction Employers to Address Feasibility of Social Distancing at Construction Sites

    First Quarter Gains in Housing Affordability

    Sick Leave, Paid Time Off, and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act

    Monitoring Building Moisture with RFID – Interview with Jarmo Tuppurainen

    Solicitor General’s Views to Supreme Court on Two Circuit Court Rulings that Groundwater Can be Considered “Waters of the United States”

    Defenses Raised Three-Years Too Late Estop Insurer’s Coverage Denial

    Sixth Circuit Holds that Some Official Actions Taken in the “Flint Water Crisis” Could Be Constitutional Due Process Violations

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

    Singer Akon’s Multibillion-Dollar Futuristic City in Africa Gets Final Notice

    Insurer Must Produce Documents After Failing To Show They Are Confidential

    Miller Act and “Public Work of the Federal Government”

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (05/18/22)

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Listed in the Best Lawyers in America© 2017

    Brenner Base Tunnelers Conquer Peaks and Valleys in the Alps

    Florida Lawmakers Fail to Reach Agreement on Condominium Safety Bill

    Congratulations to Partner Nicole Whyte on Receiving the Marcus M. Kaufman Jurisprudence Award

    Cause Still Unclear in March Retaining Wall Collapse on $900M NJ Interchange

    Insurer Prevails on Summary Judgment for Bad Faith Claim

    The Law Clinic Paves Way to the Digitalization of Built Environment Processes

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increased 5% in Year to June

    Hurricane Harvey Victims Face New Hurdles In Pursuing Coverage

    Colorado Court of Appeals to Rule on Arbitrability of an HOA's Construction Defect Claims

    Someone Who Hires an Independent Contractor May Still Be Liable, But Not in This Case

    Second Circuit Affirms Win for General Contractor on No Damages for Delay Provision

    SunTrust Will Pay $968 Million to Resolve Mortgage Probes

    Can Your Small Business Afford to Risk the Imminent Threat of a Cyber Incident?

    2023 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    Quick Note: Steps to Protect and Avoid the “Misappropriation” of a “Trade Secret”

    Executive Insights 2024: Leaders in Construction Law

    Rich NYC Suburbs Fight Housing Plan They Say Will ‘Destroy’ Them

    Sales of Existing U.S. Homes Unexpectedly Fell in January

    Supreme Court Set to Alter Law on Key Project, Workforce Issues

    Denver Council Committee Approves Construction Defects Ordinance

    Florida County Suspends Impact Fees to Spur Development

    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    “A No-Lose Proposition?”

    Fifth Circuit -- Damage to Property Beyond Insured’s Product/Work Not Precluded By ‘Your Product/Your Work Exclusion’

    One More Statutory Tweak of Interest to VA Construction Pros

    City Wonders Who’s to Blame for Defective Wall

    Hirers Must Affirmatively Exercise Retained Control to be Liable Under Hooker Exception to Privette Doctrine

    Why Construction Law- An Update

    Options When there is a Construction Lien on Your Property

    Trial Court’s Grant of Summary Judgment On Ground Not Asserted By Moving Party Upheld
    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

    A Reminder to Get Your Contractor’s License in Virginia

    April 25, 2023 —
    How are ducks and contractors alike? A question I get often, particularly from construction contractors outside of Virginia is whether they need to get a Virginia contractor’s license. The answer is almost invariably “yes.” The next question is why? The answer is almost always “Because state law says so.” With some minor exceptions for material suppliers and the like, Virginia law requires that all of those that perform construction for others carry the proper license and specialization for the work performed. There is no exception for the proverbial “paper contractor” that takes money from an owner and subcontracts all of the actual physical work. It does not matter if you use a different term for what you do for the owner. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. . .its a duck. If you take money to perform construction, you’re a contractor. Some of the consequences of contracting without a license (aside from possible criminal charges) include among other things, the inability to perfect a mechanic’s lien under Va. Code 43-3(D) and, with minor exceptions, the ability to enforce a contract (meaning it really hurts your ability to get paid). 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

    Water Alone is Not Property Damage under a CGL policy in Connecticut

    July 22, 2024 —
    The Connecticut Appellate Court recently provided guidance on what does not constitute property damage under a typical contractor’s Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurance policy in Westchester Modular Homes of Fairfield County, Inc. v. Arbella Protection Ins. Co., 224 Conn App. 526 (2024). In this case, the contractor defended construction defect claims brought by an owner and then sued its insurer to recover $500,000 in defense costs for failing to provide a defense under the contractor’s policy. In Connecticut, an insurer is obligated to provide a defense based on what is alleged in a complaint and if it has actual knowledge of any facts establishing a reasonable possibility of coverage. The contractor provided extrinsic evidence for two defects claimed by the owner: (1) windows were installed improperly such that water was collecting and will continue to collect in the window soffit areas and eventually rot the wall, and (2) the vapor barrier was not installed in the second-floor ceiling which will result in water condensation and water damage to the roof structure if not remedied. The insurer relied on typical provisions included in most CGL policies. The insurer has no duty to defend the insured against any suit seeking damages for property damage to which the insurance does not apply. The term “property damage” is defined as “physical injury to tangible property, including all resulting loss of use of that property.” Under well-established Connecticut law, the phrase “physical injury” unambiguously connotes damage to tangible property, causing an alteration in appearance, shape, color, or some other material dimension. It is also well-established that claims for property damage caused by defective work are covered under a CGL policy but claims for repair of the defective work itself are not. The insurer denied any duty to defend because no coverage was triggered under the liability policy. Both parties moved for summary judgment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bill Wilson, Robinson & Cole LLP
    Mr. Wilson may be contacted at wwilson@rc.com

    Uniformity in Florida’s Construction Bond Laws Brings About Fairness for the Industry

    August 17, 2020 —
    Before Florida updated its laws for construction bonds, there were some significant differences between how liens and bond claims were litigated. Forms and procedures lacked uniformity that created unnecessary challenges for the construction industry and legal practitioners serving the industry. Now, more consistency among the laws should benefit contractors, as well as lower-tiered subcontractors and suppliers. Since the updates were instated in October 2019, some of the procedures and rules used for lien enforcement have been extended to bond claims, which may make it easier to resolve differences over payment and performance. That should come as a relief to local contractors and law firms, as well as to the numerous developers and construction companies based outside of Florida that operate in the state or are considering doing so. Florida is now the number one destination for new residents, especially from high-tax states, according to IRS data. With them come new homes, retail centers, offices, industrial space, roads and other infrastructure in what is now the third-most-populous state in the nation. Reprinted courtesy of Gary L. Brown, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Brown may be contacted at gbrown@kklaw.com

    Living With a Millennial. Or Grandma.

    July 23, 2014 —
    It turns out millennials really do live in their parents’ houses -- at least according to a Pew Research Center report out today. Almost 57 million people in the U.S. -- 18.1 percent of the population -- lived in a multigenerational household in 2012, including almost one in four 25- to 34-year-olds. This provides needed context to the "millennials living in the basement" phenomenon, and, well, stereotype. Of course, "multigenerational household" is not synonymous with "millennial living in the basement." Pew's definition of the former term is more expansive than the one used by the U.S. Census Bureau (whose data Pew analyzes in the report). There's more detail in the report, but here’s the Sparknotes version: A multi-generational household is a household that includes at least two adult generations (for example, parents and adult children ages 25 or older where either generation can be the household head) or two non-sequential generations (for example, grandparents and grandchildren of any age). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Zara Kessler, Bloomberg
    Ms. Kessler may be contacted at zkessler@bloomberg.net

    Contractors Should be Aware of Homeowner Duties When Invited to Perform Residential Work

    September 26, 2022 —
    Division 2 of the Court of Appeals[1] recently addressed a property owner’s liability to a contractor who is injured performing work on their property. The action arose from an incident in which Virgil Mihaila, a remodeling contractor, fell from a ladder while installing a new roof on the Troths’ shed and landed on a metal grounding rod that was sticking over a foot out of the ground. Mihaila saw the grounding rod as he was working and recognized the danger, but he claimed that he could not complete the roofing job without encountering it. Although he tried to position his ladder so that he would avoid the grounding rod if he fell, he somehow fell off the ladder and landed on the grounding rod, sustaining multiple rib fractures and a punctured lung. Mihaila filed a complaint against the Troths, alleging that they were negligent in failing to protect him from the danger of the grounding rod sticking out of the ground. The Troths denied that they were negligent and asserted the affirmative defense of contributory negligence. The Troths filed a motion for summary judgment, which the trial court granted, stating that summary judgment was appropriate regarding the Troths’ duty because Mihaila “became aware of the risk, undertook to encounter the risk, and made his own efforts to mitigate the risk.” The trial court denied Mihaila’s motion for reconsideration and Mihaila appealed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joshua Lane, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Lane may be contacted at joshua.lane@acslawyers.com

    Intentional Mining Neighbor's Property is Not an Occurrence

    October 30, 2018 —
    The Kentucky Supreme Court determined there was no coverage when the insured was sued for mineral trespass. Am. Mining Ins. Co. v. Peters Farms, LLC, 2018 Ky. LEXIS 287 (Ky. Aug. 16, 2018). Beginning in 2007, Ikerd Mining. LLC removed 20,212 toms of coal from land belonging to Peters Farms, LLC. Of that amount, 10,012 tons were wrongfully mined under Ikerd's alleged mistaken belief as to the correct location of Peters' boundaries. The other 1,200 tons were mined by Ikerd knowing that the land thereunder belonged to Peters, but pursuant to a disputed oral lease agreement between the two. Peters claimed that the lease was an ongoing negotiation that was never finalized. 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

    Florida “Property Damage” caused by an “Occurrence” and “Your Work” Exclusion

    July 23, 2014 —
    In J.B.D. Construction, Inc. v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co., * Fed.Appx. *, 2014 WL 3377690 (11th Cir. 2014), claimant property owner Sun City contracted with insured general contractor J.B.D. for the construction of a fitness center. The fitness center was to be physically connected to an existing Sun City building. J.B.D. utilized subcontractors for some of the work. Shortly after completion, leaks developed in the fitness center’s roof, windows and doors which J.B.D. attempted to fix. After Sun City refused to make the final contract payment, J.B.D. sued Sun City for contract amounts owed. Sun City counterclaimed for the construction defects, alleged damage to the fitness center and other property. J.B.D. tendered defense of the counterclaim to its CGL insurer Mid-Continent. After Mid-Continent failed to agree to defend, J.B.D. settled with Sun City, paying Sun City $182K. Following several demands from J.B.D. for reimbursement of defense costs and the settlement amount, Mid-Continent tendered the defense costs minus a deductible. J.B.D. then sued Mid-Continent for breach of duties to defend and indemnify. On cross motions for summary judgment, the federal district trial court entered judgment for Mid-Continent, finding no duties to defend or indemnify. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit reversed on the duty to defend while affirming on the duty to indemnify. Applying Florida law, the court first held that the defective work, including the defective installation of the fitness center’s windows, doors, and roof, did not constitute “property damage.” Thus, the costs to repair or replace the defective work did not constitute damages because of “property damage.” The court next held that, while damage to other portions of the fitness center would constitute “property damage” caused by an “occurrence,” all such “property damage” fell within the “your work” exclusion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott Patterson, CD Coverage

    BWB&O is Recognized in the 2024 Edition of Best Law Firms®!

    November 16, 2023 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is honored to announce the firm has been recognized for its fourth consecutive year in the 2024 edition of Best Law Firms® and is ranked by Best Lawyers® regionally in three practice areas. To read the publication, please click here. Regional Tier 1 Las Vegas: Litigation – Construction Orange County: Litigation – Construction Regional Tier 2 Orange County: Family Law Regional Tier 3 Orange County: Commercial Litigation Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP