BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield 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


    Attorney's Erroneous Conclusion that Limitations Period Had Not Expired Was Not Grounds For Relief Under C.C.P. § 473(b)

    Insurer Must Defend Additional Insured Though Its Insured is a Non-Party

    Commercial Construction in the Golden State is Looking Pretty Golden

    State Farm Too Quick To Deny Coverage, Court Rules

    Northern District of Mississippi Finds That Non-Work Property Damages Are Not Subject to AIA’s Waiver of Subrogation Clause

    Damages in First Trial Establishing Liability of Tortfeasor Binding in Bad Faith Trial Against Insurer

    ASCE Statement on Senate Passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024

    Endorsement to Insurance Policy Controls

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Could Cost $1B and Take One Year

    The Case For Designers Shouldering More Legal Responsibility

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/03/21)

    New York Court Enforces Construction Management Exclusion

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2023 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    U.S. Department of Justice Settles against Days Inn

    Right to Repair Reform: Revisions and Proposals to State’s “Right to Repair Statutes”

    Smart Contracts Poised to Impact the Future of Construction

    Sometimes, Being too Cute with Pleading Allegations is Unnecessary

    What If an Irma-Like Hurricane Hit the New York City Metro Area?

    Courts Will Not Second-Guess Public Entities When it Comes to Design Immunity

    What is a “Force Majeure” Clause? Do I Need one in my Contract? Three Options For Contractors, Subcontractors and Suppliers to Consider

    Insured's Lack of Knowledge of Tenant's Growing Marijuana Means Coverage Afforded for Fire Loss

    A Race to the Finish on Oroville Dam Spillway Fix

    CRH to Buy Building-Products Firm Laurence for $1.3 Billion

    Yes, Virginia, Contract Terms Do Matter: Financing Term Offers Owner an Escape Hatch

    DOD Contractors Receive Reprieve on Implementation of Chinese Telecommunications Ban

    Grad Student Sues UC Santa Cruz over Mold in Residence

    Harsh New Time Limits on Construction Defect Claims

    Harmon Towers to Be Demolished without Being Finished

    Illinois Court of Appeals Addresses Waiver and Estoppel in Context of Suit Limitation Provision in Property Policy

    Owner’s Slander of Title Claim Against Contractor Recording Four Separate Mechanics Liens Fails Under the Anti-SLAPP Statute

    You Are Not A “Liar” Simply Because You Amend Your Complaint

    Insurer Not Bound by Decision in Underlying Case Where No Collateral Estoppel

    Making Construction Innovation Stick

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    Architects and Engineers Added to Harmon Towers Lawsuit

    Minnesota Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C" Grade for the Second Time

    Kansas City Airport Terminal Project Faces Delays, Rising Costs

    Social Distancing and the Impact on Service of Process Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic

    Overruling Henkel, California Supreme Court Validates Assignment of Policies

    The Difference Between Routine Document Destruction and Spoliation

    Decaying U.S. Roads Attract Funds From KKR to DoubleLine

    Landlords Challenge U.S. Eviction Ban and Continue to Oust Renters

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

    Duty to Defend Affirmed in Connecticut Construction Defect Case

    Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claim Against Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Harmon Towers Case to Last into 2014

    Homeowner’s Claims Defeated Because “Gravamen” of Complaint was Fraud, not Breach of Contract

    2017 California Construction Law Update

    Entire Fairness or Business Judgment? It’s Anyone’s Guess

    EPA Looks to Reduce Embodied Carbon in Materials With $160M in Grants
    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

    District Court's Ruling Affirmed in TCD v American Family Mutual Insurance Co.

    May 10, 2012 —

    In the case, TCD, Inc. v American Family Mutual Insurance Company, the district court’s summary judgment was in favor of the defendant. In response, the Plaintiff, TCD, appealed “on the ground that the insurance company had no duty to defend TCD under a commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policy.” The appeals court affirmed the decision.

    The appeals ruling provides a brief history of the case: “This case arises out of a construction project in Frisco, Colorado. The developer, Frisco Gateway Center, LLC (Gateway), entered into a contract with TCD, the general contractor, to construct a building. TCD entered into a subcontract with Petra Roofing and Remodeling Company (Petra) to install the roof on the building. The subcontract required Petra to "indemnify, hold harmless, and defend" TCD against claims arising out of or resulting from the performance of Petra’s work on the project. The subcontract also required Petra to name TCD as an additional insured on its CGL policy in connection with Petra’s work under the subcontract.”

    Furthermore, “TCD initiated this case against Petra and the insurance company, asserting claims for declaratory judgment, breach of insurance contract, breach of contract, and negligence. The district court entered a default judgment against Petra, and both the remaining parties moved for summary judgment. The court granted summary judgment on the entirety of the action, in favor of the insurance company, concluding that the counterclaims asserted by Gateway against TCD did not give rise to an obligation to defend or indemnify under the CGL policy.”

    The appeals court rejected each contention made by TCD in turn. First, “TCD contend[ed] that Gateway’s counterclaims constitute[d] an allegation of ‘property damage,’ which is covered under the CGL policy.” The appeals court disagreed. Next, “TCD argue[d] that [the court] should broaden or extend the complaint rule, also called the ‘four corners’ rule, and allow it to offer evidence outside of the counterclaims to determine the insurance company’s duty to defend in this case.” The appeals court was not persuaded by TCD’s argument.

    The judgment was affirmed. Judge Roman and Judge Miller concur.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Athletic Trainers Help Workers Get Back to the Jobsite and Stay Healthy After Injury

    August 12, 2024 —
    There are a number of factors on an active jobsite that can lead to workplace injuries. Heavy machinery, fast-moving equipment, material handling, loud noises and more can create safety hazards and make it easy to lose focus or become distracted. Additionally, the movements workers have to do in their roles—such as lifting or pushing objects or crouching low to the ground for extended periods—can add strain to the body if not done correctly. The goal is always to minimize the risk of injury, and yet, incidents still occur. According to 2020 Bureau of Labor Statistics data, slips, trips and falls are the most common injuries, accounting for 18% of non-fatal work injuries resulting in days away from work. When workers are injured, it can lead to downtime, lost productivity on the site and workers’ compensation claims. Employers and site leaders can take various approaches to help workers return to the jobsite safely and effectively and keep them healthy once they return. Introducing an onsite clinic and athletic trainers can help prevent injuries, improve worker health, get people back to work effectively and keep them healthy in the long run. Here are three ways athletic trainers help workers get back to the job and improve their overall health. Reprinted courtesy of Bryan Lockhart, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Termination for Convenience Is Not a Termination for Default

    April 22, 2024 —
    A termination for convenience is NOT a termination for default. They are NOT the same. They should NOT be treated as the same. I am a huge proponent of termination for convenience provisions because sometimes a party needs to be able to exercise a termination for convenience, but the termination is not one that rises to a basis for default. However, exercising a termination for convenience does not mean you get to go back in time and convert the termination for convenience into a termination for default. It does not work like that. Nor should it. An opinion out of the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals – Williams Building Company, Inc. v. Department of State, CBCA 7147, 2024 WL 1099788 (CBCA 2024 – demonstrates a fundamental distinction between a termination for convenience and a termination for default, i.e., that you don’t get to conjure up defaults when you exercise a termination for convenience:
    Because a termination for convenience essentially turns a fixed-price construction contract into a cost-reimbursement contract, allowing the contractor to recover its incurred performance costs, the resolution of this appeal will involve identifying the total costs that [Contractor] incurred in performing this contract before [Government] terminated it for convenience. Since [Government] terminated the contract for convenience rather than for default, it no longer matters whether, in the past,[Contractor] acted intentionally in overstating the amount of its incurred costs or committed a contract breach. Ultimately, as permitted in response to a termination for convenience, [Contractor] will recover those allowable costs that [Contractor]establishes it incurred in performing the contract.
    Williams Building Company, supra.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Maintenance Issues Ignite Arguments at Indiana School

    January 31, 2014 —
    Students and faculty at Roosevelt College and Career Academy in Gary, Indiana have dealt with the building’s burst pipes since last year, however, the recent cold temperatures have worsened the issue, “disrupting classes and causing costly repairs,” according to the Post-Tribune. EdisonLearning now runs the school: “The state tapped the private, for-profit education management company for Roosevelt after six straight years of anemically low test scores.” The “lengthy agreement” between EdisonLearning and the school district states holds the district “responsible for major repairs and to maintain the building just like the other schools it runs.” “The money we were provided is for academic purposes, not for the operation of the building,” said Michael Serpe, spokesman for EdisonLearning told the Post-Tribune. “If you rent a home and the heat doesn’t work, you contact the landlord.” “If the building is monitored properly, we could stop these problems but we have to get to them earlier,” said Charles Prewitt, the district’s director of building, grounds and maintenance, as reported by the Post-Tribune. Prewitt added that part of the maintenance problems is lack of access. He alleges that “EdisonLearning changed the locks and provided a swipe card for only one door.” “There always seem to be reasons that things don’t get fixed at Roosevelt when they get fixed everywhere else,” Serpe retorted. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer's Failure to Settle Does Not Justify Multiple Damages under Unfair Claims Settlement Law

    February 04, 2013 —
    Although the insurer failed to understand the pertinent law that mandated coverage under the policy, its actions did not rise to an unfair claim settlement practice justifying multiple damages. Gelwan v. Vermont Mut. Ins. Co., 2013 U.S. app. LEXIS 210 (2nd Cir. Jan. 4, 2013). In 1999, a contractor re-roofed the insureds' home. The job was poorly done, and an imperfect seal was created. Over several years, various structures within the house were damaged by water, which caused the rotting of structural beams and joists. The insureds sued for coverage under their homeowners policy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Texas “your work” exclusion

    January 06, 2012 —

    In American Home Assurance Co. v. Cat Tech, L.L.C., No. 10-20499 (5th Cir. Oct. 5, 2011), claimant Ergon hired insured Cat Tech to perform service on a reactor at Ergon’s refinery. During a start-up of the reactor after Cat Tech had completed its work, the reactor suffered damage. Cat Tech performed additional service and repairs. However, again upon start-up of the reactor, it suffered additional damage. Ergon hired another contractor to repair the reactor. Ergon initiated arbitration proceedings against Cat Tech. Cat Tech’s CGL insurer American Home defended Cat Tech against the Ergon arbitration under a reservation of rights.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

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

    Toll Plans to Boost New York Sales With Pricing, Incentives

    December 10, 2015 —
    Toll Brothers Inc. plans to use competitive pricing and offer buyers incentives to speed up sales at some of its New York City condominium projects. “There are certain units in certain locations within a building that are hot, and then there are other units that may be in a dark, cold corner that you have to incentivize a bit more,” Chief Executive Officer Douglas Yearley said on the company’s earnings conference call Tuesday. While Toll “will not fire-sale it to move” units, “we will price to the market.” Incentives would be offered for certain units at Pierhouse at Brooklyn Bridge Park and 400 Park Ave. South and 1110 Park Ave. in Manhattan, Yearley said. While the supply in New York City has grown most for condos selling for more than $7.5 million, most of Toll’s units are less expensive, he said. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Prashant Gopal, Bloomberg

    Sustainable, Versatile and Resilient: How Mass Timber Construction Can Shake Up the Building Industry

    April 10, 2023 —
    Design professionals, real estate developers and builders alike are advocating for a relatively new way of using one of the world’s oldest building materials—wood—in large-scale commercial and residential construction projects. Mass timber, or structural timber, touts such benefits as carbon reduction and seismic durability—all with a lower construction time. With ESG on the minds of clients, investors and tenants, mass timber projects present an attractive construction option for the integration of sustainable resources and these various benefits. The most common and popular form of mass timber, cross-laminated timber (CLT), has been recently gaining popularity in the U.S. after widespread adoption in Europe over the past 20 years. CLT consists of layers of trimmed and kiln-dried lumber boards, usually three, five or seven across, stacked and glued crosswise at 90-degree angles. These stacked lumber boards create large slabs that are used to build floors, walls and ceilings—put those fabricated pieces together, and you have a whole building constructed of CLT. Reprinted courtesy of Cait Horner, Pillsbury, Adam J. Weaver, Pillsbury and Allan C. Van Vliet, Pillsbury Ms. Horner may be contacted at cait.horner@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Weaver may be contacted at adam.weaver@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Van Vliet may be contacted at allan.vanvliet@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of