BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim 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


    Revisiting OSHA’s Controlling Employer Policy

    Updated 3/13/20: Coronavirus is Here: What Does That Mean for Your Project and Your Business?

    Rio de Janeiro's Bursting Real-Estate Bubble

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

    EPA Can't Evade Enviro Firm's $2.7M Cleanup Site Pay Claim, US Court Says

    Attempt to Overrule Trial Court's Order to Produce Underwriting Manual Fails

    NTSB Faults Maintenance, Inspection Oversight for Fern Hollow Bridge Collapse

    Beverly Hills Voters Reject Plan for Enclave's Tallest Building

    California Committee Hosts a Hearing on Deadly Berkeley Balcony Collapse

    Sureties and Bond Producers May Be Liable For a Contractor’s False Claims Action Violation

    Rhode Island Affirms The Principle That Sureties Must be Provided Notice of Default Before They Can be Held Liable for Principal’s Default

    Identifying and Accessing Coverage in Complex Construction Claims

    Engineer Probing Champlain Towers Debacle Eyes Possibility of Three Successive Collapses

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

    Contract Should Have Clear and Definite Terms to Avoid a Patent Ambiguity

    Check The Boxes Regarding Contractual Conditions Precedent to Payment

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

    What to Do Before OSHA Comes Knocking

    A Quick Checklist for Subcontractors

    Some Insurers Dismissed, Others Are Not in Claims for Faulty Workmanship

    Ninth Circuit Upholds Corps’ Issuance of CWA Section 404 Permit for Newhall Ranch Project Near Santa Clarita, CA

    Attorney’s Fees Entitlement And Application Under Subcontract Default Provision

    Build, Baby, Build. But Not Like This, Britain.

    Pennsylvania Considers Changes to Construction Code Review

    Homebuyers Aren't Sweating the Fed

    Reminder: In Court (as in life) the Worst Thing You Can Do Is Not Show Up

    Top 10 OSHA Violations For The Construction Industry In 2023

    Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Is Still in Trouble, Two Major Reviews Say

    Colorado statutory “property damage” caused by an “occurrence”

    No Rest for the Weary: Project Completion Is the Beginning of Litigation

    Loss Caused by Subcontractor's Faulty Work Covered in Georgia

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives First Tier Ranking

    Boston Contractor Faces More OSHA Penalties

    Keep it Simple with Nunn-Agreements in Colorado

    Supreme Court Rejects “Wholly Groundless” Exception to Question of Arbitrability

    Don’t Sign a Contract that Doesn’t Address Covid-19 (Or Pandemics and Epidemics)

    Climate Change a Factor in 'Unprecedented' South Asia Floods

    2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar – Recap

    Contractors Sued for Slip

    Recent Environmental Cases: Something in the Water, in the Air and in the Woods

    Considering Stormwater Management

    Recent Opinions Clarify Enforceability of Pay-if-Paid Provisions in Construction Contracts

    New OSHA Regulations on Confined Spaces in Construction

    2018 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!

    TARP Funds Demolish Homes in Detroit to Lift Prices: Mortgages

    One More Thing Moving From California to Texas: Wildfire Risk

    Louis "Dutch" Schotemeyer Returns to Newmeyer Dillion as Partner in Newport Beach Office

    Nondelegable Duties

    Insured's Motion for Reconsideration on Protecting the Integrity of Referral Sources under Florida Statute s. 542.335

    A Murder in Honduras Reveals the Dark Side of Clean Energy
    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

    E-Commerce Logistics Test Limits of Tilt-Up Construction

    January 28, 2019 —
    While “fulfillment centers” and other e-commerce logistic facilities drive a hot market for the manufacturing sector, traditional construction methods such as tilt-up concrete panels are being pushed to ever-greater heights. At a recent project in Tulsa, Okla., contractor Clayco oversaw installation of tilt-up composite panels that reached 81 ft in height, using an unusual brace and a lot of careful pre-planning. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeff Rubenstone, ENR
    Mr. Rubenstone may be contacted at rubenstonej@enr.com

    Wisconsin Federal Court Addresses Scope Of Appraisal Provision In Rental Dwelling Policy

    September 05, 2022 —
    In Higgins v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., No. 22-C-198, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117477 (E.D. Wis. July 5, 2022), the Court addressed the often disputed question of whether an appraisal provision in an insurance policy is limited to disputes over valuation or extends beyond valuation to causation and/or coverage. The underlying loss in the Higgins case involved a fire at a rental dwelling owned by the Plaintiff and insured by State Farm under a Rental Dwelling policy for, among other things, fire losses. Subsequent to being notified of the fire, State Farm investigated and provided the Plaintiff with its estimated cost of repair. Plaintiff disputed the estimate, including the repairs necessary, and also sought additional sums for debris removal and lost rent. The insurance policy at issue in Higgins included an appraisal provision which provided: “If you and we fail to agree on the amount of loss, either one can demand that the amount of the loss be set by appraisal.” Pursuant to this provision, Plaintiff demanded that State Farm submit to an appraisal to resolve the parties' disagreements. State Farm responded by indicating that it would enter into appraisal over the areas where there were "pricing differences" but not areas where there were "scope differences." According to State Farm, there were a number of issues regarding the scope of repairs necessary to restore the dwelling to its pre-loss condition. Plaintiff disagreed with State Farm's position and did not seek to move forward with the appraisal process on only the items State Farm identified as appropriate for appraisal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James M. Eastham, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Eastham may be contacted at jeastham@tlsslaw.com

    Court of Appeal Holds That Higher-Tiered Party on Construction Project Can be Held Liable for Intentional Interference with Contract

    December 07, 2020 —
    In Caliber Paving Company, Inc. v. Rexford Industrial Realty and Management, Inc., Case No. G0584406 (September 1, 2020), the 4th District Court of Appeal examined whether a higher-tiered party on a construction project can be held liable for intentional interference with contract when it interferes with the contract between lower-tiered parties even though the higher-tiered party has an economic interest in the contract between the lower-tiered parties. The Caliber Paving Case Project owner Rexford Industrial Realty and Management, Inc. owns and operates industrial property throughout Southern California. In 2017, Rexford hired contractor Steve Fodor Construction to perform repaving work at Rexford’s property in Carson, California. Fodor Construction in turn hired subcontractor Caliber Paving Company, Inc. to perform the repaving work. The subcontract divided the parking lot into four areas, with separate costs to repave each area, and Caliber completed its work in one area in June 2017. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    24/7 Wall Street Reported on Eight Housing Markets at All-Time Highs

    June 18, 2014 —
    24/7 Wall St., using data from RealtyTrac, “identified the county-level housing markets that have recovered the most from the housing crisis as of March of this year.” Number eight on the list was Weld County, Colorado, which had a percentage change of 11.1% and an unemployment rate of only 6.5%. Next on the list, was San Francisco County. The California county had a percentage change of 15.3% and an unemployment rate of 5.2%. Making number one on the list was Jefferson County, Kentucky, with a percentage change of 63.1% and unemployment rate of 8.1%. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    NY Court Holds Excess Liability Coverage Could Never be Triggered Where Employers’ Liability Policy Provided Unlimited Insurance Coverage

    February 28, 2018 —
    In a potentially significant development in New York insurance law, a recent appellate level decision held that an excess liability policy was not obligated to provide coverage where the underlying employer’s liability policy provided unlimited coverage pursuant to New York regulations. The Arthur Vincent & Sons Construction, Inc. v. Century Surety Insurance Co.1 case arose out of an underlying wrongful death claim. Fordham University hired Arthur Vincent and Sons Construction, Inc. (“AVSC”) to install a new roof on its Lewis Calder Center. As is typical of most construction contracts, AVSC agreed to indemnify the University against any claims arising out of its negligence, and to name the University as an additional insured on its commercial general liability policy. AVSC was insured by three policies: (1) a worker’s compensation and employer’s liability policy issued by Commerce and Industry Insur¬ance Company (“CIIC”); (2) a primary CGL policy issued by Century Surety Insurance Company (“Century”); and (3) an excess liability policy issued by Admiral Insurance Company (“Admiral”). Reprinted courtesy of Theresa A. Guertin, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Samantha M. Martino, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Guertin may be contacted at tag@sdvlaw.com Ms. Martino may be contacted at smm@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Eleventh Circuit Reverses Attorneys’ Fee Award to Performance Bond Sureties in Dispute with Contractor arising from Claim against Subcontractor Performance Bond

    February 27, 2019 —
    On October 26, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (the “Eleventh Circuit”) issued a decision which reversed an award of prevailing party attorneys’ fees to performance bond sureties in their dispute with a contractor arising from the contractor’s claim against a subcontractor’s performance bond. Had the lower court’s decision been affirmed, the performance bond sureties would have been able to recover prevailing party attorneys’ fees against the contractor even though they were not parties to the underlying subcontract and the subcontract did not contain a prevailing party attorneys’ fee provision. The underlying case is complicated and arose from the construction of Brickell CityCentre in Miami. Americaribe-Moriarty JV (the “Contractor”) asserted a claim against a performance bond procured by a defaulted subcontractor and issued by International Fidelity Insurance Company and Allegheny Casualty Company (collectively, the “Sureties”). The Sureties filed a declaratory judgment action against the Contractor in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida (the “District Court”), seeking a declaration that the Contractor failed to perfect its claim against the performance bond. Reprinted courtesy of Gary M. Stein, Peckar & Abramson and K. Stefan Chin, Peckar & Abramson Mr. Stein may be contacted at gstein@pecklaw.com Mr. Chin may be contacted at kschin@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect, Bad Faith Claims

    October 07, 2019 —
    The federal district court denied the insurer's motion for summary judgment seeking to establish there was no coverage for construction defect claims and for bad faith. Country Mut. Ins. Co. v. AAA Constr. LLC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115935 (W.D. Okla. July 12, 2019). Jeffrey and Tammy Shaver entered two contracts with AAA Construction for the construction of a garage and of a barn on their property. After construction was completed, the Shavers sued AAA Construction for building the garage over two high-pressure gas pipelines and the utility easements associated with them. They alleged AAA Construction was negligent for constructing over a working utility line. AAA Construction's insurer, Country Mutual Insurance Company (CMIC) denied coverage because the alleged faulty workmanship of AAA Construction did not constitute an "occurrence" under the policy. CMIC sued AAA Construction for a declaratory judgment that it had no duty to defend or indemnify. CMIC moved for summary judgment. 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

    Return-to-Workplace Checklist: Considerations and Emerging Best Practices for Employers

    July 20, 2020 —
    As employers plan to return employees to the workplace, they should proceed with careful planning and incorporate best practices and measures to assure a safe, responsible and productive workplace. While there is no "one size fits all" plan, the following checklist will assist in assuring that your work environment includes the key safety components to return to the workplace in the midst of a pandemic. PREPARING THE WORKPLACE FOR RETURN & GENERAL HEALTH AND SAFETY
    • Create a company task force, safety committee or coordinator to oversee implementation of policies that address and enforce practices related to COVID-19.
    • Ensure HVAC systems are functional, have been properly cleaned and serviced and tuned to maximize airflow and filtration.
    • Review and increase cleaning protocols in coordination with lease terms and cleaning contracts. Ensure regular and thorough office cleanings, with a focus on high-touch surfaces and areas. Document cleaning protocols and schedule.
    • Implement social distancing requirements and provide visual markers on floors in compliance with applicable federal, state and local orders.
    • Rearrange work spaces, conference rooms and lunchrooms to comply with social distancing requirements.
    • Post notices about the number of individuals permitted in elevators, stairwells, rooms and on the premises.
    • Restrict movement between departments and floors.
    Reprinted courtesy of Nancy Conrad, White and Williams LLP and George C. Morrison, White and Williams LLP Ms. Conrad may be contacted at conradn@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Morrison may be contacted at morrisong@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of