BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance 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


    Industry News: New Partner at Burdman Law Group

    Contractors Prepare for a Strong 2021 Despite Unpredictability

    Ahlers & Cressman’s Top 10 Construction Industry Contract Provisions

    Canada Housing Starts Increase on Multiple-Unit Projects

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment to Reject Collapse Coverage Denied

    When Coronavirus Cases Spike at Construction Jobsites

    #10 CDJ Topic: Carithers v. Mid-Continent Casualty Company

    Courts Take Another Swipe at the Implied Warranty of the Plans and Specifications

    DC Wins Largest-Ever Civil Penalty in US Housing Discrimination Suit

    MGM Seeks to Demolish Harmon Towers

    Buy Clean California Act Takes Effect on July 1, 2022

    Why Do Construction Companies Fail?

    Delaware Settlements with Minors and the Uniform Transfer to Minor Act

    Insurer Motion to Intervene in Underlying Case Denied

    Condo Developers Buy in Washington despite Construction Defect Litigation

    New Change Order Bill Becomes Law: RCW 39.04.360

    Lessee Deemed Statutory Employer, Immune from Tort Liability by Pennsylvania Court

    UPDATE: ACS Obtains Additional $13.6 Million for General Contractor Client After $19.2 Million Jury Trial Victory

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Jessica Burtnett and Jessica Kull Obtain Dismissal of Claim Against Insurance Producer Based Upon Statute of Limitations

    Vancouver’s George Massey Tunnel Replacement May Now be a Tunnel Instead of a Bridge

    Thieves Stole Backhoe for Use in Bank Heist

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 7: How to Successfully Prepare, Submit and Negotiate the Claim

    U.S. Supreme Court Allows Climate Change Lawsuits to Proceed in State Court

    South Carolina Legislature Redefining Occurrences to Include Construction Defects in CGL Policies

    Pile Test Likely for Settling Millennium Tower

    “But it’s 2021!” Service of Motion to Vacate Via Email Found Insufficient by the Eleventh Circuit

    There’s the 5 Second Rule, But Have You Heard of the 5 Year Rule?

    The California Legislature Passes SB 496 Limiting Design Professional Defense and Indemnity Obligations

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/27/21)

    Safer Schools Rendered Unsafe Due to Construction Defects

    Is Privity of Contract with the Owner a Requirement of a Valid Mechanic’s Lien? Not for GC’s

    Newmeyer Dillion Named 2020 Best Law Firm in Multiple Practice Areas by U.S. News-Best Lawyers

    Colorado Court of Appeals Finds Damages to Non-Defective Property Arising From Defective Construction Covered Under Commercial General Liability Policy

    Google Advances Green Goal With AES Deal for Carbon-Free Power

    Can You Really Be Liable For a Product You Didn’t Make? In New Jersey, the Answer is Yes

    California’s Prompt Payment Laws: Just Because an Owner Has Changed Course Doesn’t Mean It’s Changed Course on Previous Payments

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in “The Best Lawyers in America” & “Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch” 2025 Editions

    Congress to be Discussing Housing

    Housing Stocks Rally at End of November

    OSHA Issues Fines for Fatal Building Collapse in Philadelphia

    Best U.S. Home Sales Since 2007 Show Momentum in Housing Market

    Tenants Underwater: Indiana Court of Appeals Upholds Privity Requirement for Property Damage Claims Against Contractors

    Getting U.S to Zero Carbon Will Take a $2.5 Trillion Investment by 2030

    Deck Police - The New Mandate for HOA's Takes Safety to the Next Level

    Vermont Supreme Court Finds COVID-19 May Damage Property

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives First Tier Ranking by U.S. News and World Reports

    Construction Termination Issues Part 5: What if You are the One that Wants to Quit?

    Flood Sublimit Applies, Seawater Corrosion to Amtrak's Equipment Not Ensuing Loss

    Appeals Court Affirms Civil Engineer Owes No Duty of Care to General Contractor

    Four Key Steps for a Successful Construction Audit Process
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Reversing Itself, West Virginia Supreme Court Holds Construction Defects Are Covered

    July 31, 2013 —
    The West Virginia Supreme Court previously held that construction defects were not covered under a CGL policy. The Court, however, reversed itself in Cherrington v. Erie Ins. Prop. & Cas. Co., 2013 W.Va. LEXIS 724 (W.V. June 18, 2013). The underlying complaint against the general contractor alleged various defects in the plaintiff’s recently constructed house, including an uneven concrete floor, water infiltration through the roof and chimney joint, a sagging support beam, and numerous cracks in the drywall walls and partitions throughout the house. Erie Insurance denied coverage. The insured general contractor sued, but the trial court found that faulty workmanship was not sufficient to give rise to an “occurrence.” The West Virginia Supreme Court reversed its prior rulings determining there was no coverage for construction defects. The court recognized its prior position was in the minority, as is Hawaii's position on coverage for construction defects. See Group Builders Inc. v. Admiral Ins. Co., 123 Haw. 142, 148, 231 P.3d 67, 73 (Haw. Ct. App. 2010). Now joining the majority position, the West Virginia Supreme Court found that defective workmanship causing property damage was an “occurrence” under a CGL policy. Further, the homeowner had demonstrated that she sustained "property damage" as a result of the allegedly defective construction of her home. The trial court also determined that the business risk exclusions barred coverage. Again, the West Virginia Supreme Court disagreed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    California Insurance Commissioner Lacks Authority to Regulate Formula for Estimating Replacement Cost Value

    April 15, 2015 —
    In Assn. of Cal. Insurance Companies v. Jones ( No. B248622, filed 4/8/15), a California appeals court held that California’s Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones lacked the authority to promulgate California Code of Regulations, title 10, section 2695.183, which set out specific requirements for estimating replacement cost as part of any application or renewal for homeowners insurance. The regulation was promulgated in 2010 in response to complaints from homeowners who lost their homes in the wildfires in Southern California in 2003, 2007, and 2008, and who discovered that they did not have enough insurance to cover the full cost of repairing or rebuilding their homes because the insurers’ estimates of replacement value were too low when they purchased the insurance. Reprinted courtesy of Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    January 21, 2015 —
    American cities are starting an architectural arms race to the sky with super-sized Ferris wheels, a 100-story observation tower and maybe even a mammoth golf ball atop a 300-foot tee planted in the Arizona desert. From Phoenix to Camden, New Jersey, city officials and developers are seeking to punctuate their skylines with exclamation points, vying for the world’s attention with the next Eiffel Tower or London Eye. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Toluse Olorunnipa, Bloomberg
    Mr. Olorunnipa may be contacted at tolorunnipa@bloomberg.net

    Overruling Henkel, California Supreme Court Validates Assignment of Policies

    October 02, 2015 —
    In a major ruling, the California Supreme Court applied a statutory provision to overrule its prior decision in Henkel Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemn. Co., 29 Cal. 4th 934 (2003) and ruled that liability policies can be assigned despite non-assignment provisions. See Fluor Corp. v. Superior Court, 2015 Cal. LEXIS 5631 (Cal. Aug. 20, 2015). The Hawaii Supreme Court relied on Henkel when it also found anti-consent provisions valid. See Del Monte Fresh Fresh Produce (Hawaii), Inc. v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 117 Haw. 357, 183 P.3d 734 (2007) [see posts here and here]. For decades, Fluor Corporation performed engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) operations through various corporate entities and subsidiaries. Beginning in 1971, Hartford issued up to 11 CGL policies to Fluor from 1971 to 1986. Each policy contained a consent-to-assignment clause reading: "Assignment of interest under the policy shall not bind the Company until its consent is endorsed hereon." Beginning in the mid-1980s, Fluor Corporation was sued in numerous lawsuits claiming personal injury from asbestos exposure. Fluor Corporation tendered the early lawsuits to Hartford, which accepted the defense. Fluor Corporation subsequently went through a reverse spinoff under which a newly formed subsidiary, Fluor 2, took over the continuation of the company's EPC businesses. The original Fluor transferred all of its EPC-related assets and liabilities to Fluor-2, making Fluor-2 the parent of the EPC subsidiaries. The transaction did not except any insurance rights from the transfer of "any and all" assets. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Affirmed: Nationwide Acted in Bad Faith by Failing to Settle Within Limits

    July 19, 2017 —
    The Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed that Nationwide acted in bad faith by refusing to settle a claim against its insured for the policy limits, exposing the policyholder to an excess verdict.1 The case arose out of a 2005 automobile accident where Seung Park, who was insured by Nationwide, struck and killed another driver, Stacey Camacho. Shortly after the accident, Ms. Camacho’s estate issued a time-limited demand for the full limits of the policy Nationwide issued to Mr. Park, $100,000, to settle the case. After the deadline to respond to the demand expired, Nationwide rejected the demand and made a counteroffer. A settlement could not be reached and a wrongful death suit was filed against Mr. Park, resulting in a massive jury verdict of $5.83 million. Following the jury verdict, Mr. Park assigned his rights against Nationwide to Ms. Camacho’s estate, which then filed claims for negligence and bad faith failure to settle against Nationwide. The case was tried to a jury, which found in favor of the estate. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bethany Barrese, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Barrese may be contacted at blb@sdvlaw.com

    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

    Excess Carrier's Declaratory Judgment Action Stayed While Underlying Case Still Pending

    June 11, 2014 —
    The federal district court determined the excess carrier's declaratory judgment action to establish it had no coverage obligations should be stayed while the underlying case was still pending. Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Ortiz & Assocs., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64286 (D. Ore. May 9, 2014). The subcontractor's employee was killed on the job site when struck by a dump truck owned by the general contractor, Inland Asphalt Co. Island was sued for wrongful death. Island was an additional insured under the subcontractor's primary policy and excess policy with Scottsdale. Inland put Scottsdale on notice of the underlying wrongful death lawsuit, but did not tender its defense to Scottsdale. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Commercial Construction Lenders Rejoice: The Pennsylvania Legislature Provides a Statutory fix for the “Kessler” Decision

    July 16, 2014 —
    In May 2012, the Pennsylvania Superior Court rendered its now infamous “Kessler” decision. The Kessler decision resulted in fundamental changes in the operation of the Pennsylvania Mechanics Lien Act as it applied to construction loans where the visible commencement of work on the project commenced before the recordation of the construction loan’s open-end mortgage. Essentially, the Kessler decision held that if the visible commence of work on the project began prior to the recording of the open-end mortgage and any loan advances were made other than for what are commonly considered “hard construction” costs, then any unpaid contractors and subcontractors who later filed mechanics’ liens would have their liens take priority over the lien of all of the construction loan advances. Subsequent to the Kessler decision, both the lending and title insurance communities in Pennsylvania have struggled mightily to structure deals around the problems created by Kessler and to provide lenders with title insurance coverage for construction loans when work commenced before the recordation of the open-end mortgage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Thomas C. Rogers, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Rogers may be contacted at rogerst@whiteandwilliams.com