BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projects
    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


    Contingent Business Interruption Claim Denied

    Architectural Democracy – Interview with Pedro Aibéo

    Multisensory Marvel: Exploring the Innovative MSG Sphere

    Mississippi Floods Prompt New Look at Controversial Dam Project

    Drawing the Line: In Tennessee, the Economic Loss Doctrine Does Not Apply to Contracts for Services

    Pulled from the Swamp: EPA Wetland Determination Now Judicially Reviewable

    Illinois Appellate Court Address the Scope of the Term “Resident” in Homeowners Policy

    A Closer Look at an HOA Board Member’s Duty to Homeowners

    Construction Professionals Could Face More Liability Exposure Following California Appellate Ruling

    Be Wary of Construction Defects when Joining a Community Association

    Thanks for Four Years of Recognition from JD Supra’s Readers’ Choice Awards

    Antitrust Walker Process Claims Not Covered Under Personal Injury Coverage for Malicious Prosecution

    Insurance Law Client Alert: California FAIR Plan Limited to Coverage Provided by Statutory Fire Insurance Policy

    Water Leak Covered for First Thirteen Days

    Not All Work is Covered Under the Federal Miller Act

    Major Changes in Commercial Construction Since 2009

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

    Improperly Installed Flanges Are Impaired Property

    2019 Promotions - New Partners at Haight

    Arizona Court of Appeals Decision in $8.475 Million Construction Defect Class Action Suit

    From the Ashes: Reconstructing After the Maui Wildfire

    Legislatures Shouldn’t Try to Do the Courts’ Job

    Alabama Supreme Court Reverses Determination of Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

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

    “A No-Lose Proposition?”

    Construction Law Alert: Builder’s Alternative Pre-litigation Procedures Upheld Over Strong Opposition

    Attorneys' Fees Awarded "Because Of" Property Damage Are Covered by Policy

    How Contractors Can Prevent Fraud in Their Workforce

    The “Your Work” Exclusion—Is there a Trend against Coverage?

    New Jersey Traffic Circle to be Eliminated after 12 Years of Discussion

    Nevada Supreme Court Holds That Insureds Can Use Extrinsic Evidence to Prove Duty to Defend

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Harmon Towers Demolition Still Uncertain

    Lewis Brisbois Launches New Practice Focusing on Supply Chain Issues

    California Judicial Council Votes to Rescind Prohibitions on Eviction and Foreclosure Proceedings

    Construction Contract Basics: Indemnity

    Home Prices Expected to Increase All Over the U.S.

    How Small Mistakes Can Have Serious Consequences Under California's Contractor Licensing Laws.

    The Economic Loss Rule: From Where Does the Duty Arise?

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (07/13/22)

    Contractor Underpaid Workers, Pocketed the Difference

    After Fatal House Explosion, Colorado Seeks New Pipeline Regulations

    Montrose III: Appeals Court Rejects “Elective Vertical Stacking,” but Declines to Find “Universal Horizontal Exhaustion” Absent Proof of Policy Wordings

    ‘The Ground Just Gave Out’: How a Storm’s Fury Ravaged Asheville

    Contract Not So Clear in South Carolina Construction Defect Case

    SunCal Buys Oak Knoll Development for the Second Time

    Dear Engineer: Has your insurer issued a “Reservation of Rights” letter? (law note)

    Adaptive Reuse: Creative Reimagining of Former Office Space to Address Differing Demands

    Subprime Bonds Are Back With Different Name Seven Years After U.S. Crisis

    Architect Responds to Defect Lawsuit over Defects at Texas Courthouse
    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. Leveraging 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

    Counterpoint: Washington Supreme Court to Rule on Resulting Losses in Insurance Disputes

    September 01, 2011 —

    This is the fourth installment of posts on Vision One v. Philadelphia Indemnity, a Washington Supreme Court case touching on Washington construction and insurance law. After Williams v. Athletic Field got so much coverage, I wished that I had provided a forum for argument on Builders Counsel. While we await that opinion from the Supreme Court, I decided to let a few good writers have at Vision One here on the blog.  Last week, attorney Chris Carr weighed in. Today, insurance expert David Thayer returns to give his final impression. David provided an initial peak at the case earlier this year. Thanks to both Chris and David for contributing to the debate.

    In August 2011 the Washington Supreme Court will rule on a pair of joined cases that involve critical insurance coverage issues. The outcome of the ruling will impact a large swath of policyholders in Washington State including builders, developers, and homeowners to name a few.

    The cases are Vision One vs. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance and Sprague vs. Safeco. The Vision one case comes from Division Two of the Appellate Court which overturned a lower court decision in favor the plaintiff, Vision One. Division Two decided that the collapse of a concrete pour during the course of construction did not constitute a resulting loss due to faulty workmanship. They further went on to redefine efficient proximate cause in a way that is harmful to policyholders by broadening rather than narrowing the meaning of exclusionary language in Philadelphia’s Builders Risk Policy.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

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

    Certified Question Asks Hawaii Supreme Court to Determine Coverage for Allegations of Greenhouse Gas Emissions

    October 09, 2023 —
    The federal district court certified questions to the Hawaii Supreme Court regarding coverage for underlying allegations of greenhouse gas emissions. Aloha Petroleum, Ltd. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156211 (D. Haw. Sept. 5, 2023). Aloha was sued in two lawsuits, one filed by the County of Maui and the second filed by the City and County of Honolulu. The underlying lawsuits alleged that Aloha disregarded known risks of harm to the counties when selling its fuel products that would inevitably combust and produce greenhouse gasses, particularly carbon dioxide, thereby changing the climate and causing harm to the counties. Aloha tendered the suits to AIG. Coverage was denied based on AIG's determination there was no "occurrence" and the pollution exclusion barred coverage. Aloha sued AIG in federal district court seeking a declaratory judgment on AIG's obligations under the policy. 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

    No Additional Insured Coverage Under Umbrella Policy

    March 12, 2014 —
    The additional insured was not covered under a property policy for an injury occurring after work was completed. Lewark v. Davis Door Servs., 2014 Wash. App. LEXIS 341 (Wash. Ct. App. Feb. 10, 2014). Public Storage, Inc. hired Davis Door Service Inc. to perform work at its facilities. The master agreement required Davis Door to maintain a CGL policy that insured Public Storage "during the entire progress of the work." Davis Door secured a CGL policy with American Economy. It also took out an umbrella liability policy with American States. After Davis Door completed work on a door, Terrie Lewark injury her back opening the door. She sued Public Storage and Davis Door. Lewar and Public Storage settled. Public Storage assigned to Lewark its rights under the umbrella policy with American States. Lewark then sued Davis Door and American States. The trial court found that Public Storage was not an additional insured under the American States umbrella policy. 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

    Want to Make Your Jobsite Safer? Look to the Skies.

    October 10, 2022 —
    New York Gov. Kathy Hochul is set to sign Carlos’ Law for worker protection. The law would set a national precedent for construction site safety, substantially raising the minimum fines for construction companies found liable for onsite injuries. Worksites are very complex, and many factors go into creating a safe space. Following suit, innovative operators are looking at advanced technologies to boost onsite safety, including drone data visualization, which involves flying a drone over a site to capture a highly accurate 3D model of current conditions in close to real time. Using drones can't solve every problem, but it can help not only protect workers but also encourage new ones to join your team. How drone surveying improves jobsite safety 3D mapping a worksite with a drone keeps workers out of harm’s way, helping surveyors avoid potentially dangerous areas filled with constantly moving heavy equipment and machinery. Drone mapping also means surveyors can stay out of the heat, avoiding the risk of excess sun exposure by sending the drone out in their stead to traverse the terrains and slopes of the site. Reprinted courtesy of Rory San Miguel, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Recording “Un-Neighborly” Documents

    April 03, 2019 —
    In September 2018, in Baumgartner v. Timmins, 245 Ariz. 334, 429 P.3d 567, the Arizona Court of Appeals provided further clarification on what constitutes an “encumbrance” on a property for purposes of Arizona’s statutory scheme prohibiting the recording of “false documents.” The statute, A.R.S. § 33-420, prohibits the recording of documents that a person knows to be forged, are groundless, or that contain material misstatements (or false claims). A person who claims an “interest in, or a lien or encumbrance against” real property who records such documents can be held liable for $5,000 or treble the actual damages caused by the recording (whichever is greater), A.R.S. § 33-420(A), and perhaps even be found guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor, A.R.S. § 33-420(E). At issue in Baumgartner were neighbors fighting about CC&Rs—a typical neighborhood fight. In 2015, some of the neighbors filed suit against the Timminses for violating the CC&Rs. The Timminses did not contest the lawsuit, resulting in a default judgment. In what the Court of Appeals characterized as a lawsuit filed by the Timminses “in apparent response to the [first] lawsuit and resulting default judgment,” the Timminses created, signed, and recorded affidavits contending that the Plaintiffs in the original lawsuit were themselves “in violation of several provisions of the CC&Rs.” The Plaintiffs then filed suit again against the Timminses, this time contending that the Timminses had violated A.R.S. § 33-420 by recording the affidavits because the affidavits, the Plaintiffs contended, created encumbrances on their properties. The Apache County Superior Court agreed, and issued a final judgment nullifying the recorded documents and awarding the Timminses damages, along with their attorneys’ fees and costs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bob Henry, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Henry may be contacted at bhenry@swlaw.com

    Congratulations 2016 DE, MA, NJ, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    October 27, 2016 —
    Thirty-two White and Williams lawyers have been named by Super Lawyers as a Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York or Pennsylvania "Super Lawyer" while fourteen received "Rising Star" designations. Each lawyer who received the distinction competed in a rigorous selection process which took into consideration peer recognition and professional achievement. The lawyers named to this year's Super Lawyer list represent a multitude of practices throughout the firm. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    Texas Public Procurements: What Changed on September 1, 2017? a/k/a: When is the Use of E-Verify Required?

    October 11, 2017 —
    Every contractor that does business with the federal government is familiar with the requirement to use of E-Verify in order to document the employability of a contractor’s employees. But, when is a contractor required to use E-Verify in Texas? And, does this requirement to use E-Verify extend to the contractor’s subcontractors? All contractors and each of their subcontractors will be required to use E-Verify for a variety of goods and services contracts with state agencies. Failure to understand these requirements could lead to your company losing out on the award of the next Texas public procurement contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Timothy D. Matheny, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Matheny may be contacted at tmatheny@pecklaw.com

    EEOC Sues Whiting-Turner Over Black Worker Treatment at Tennessee Google Project

    October 18, 2021 —
    The Whiting-Turner Contracting Co., which ranks as one of the industry’s largest contractors, has been accused in a federal civil rights lawsuit of creating a racially hostile work environment at a Tennessee project site and of retaliating against employees who complained. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at https://www.enr.com/leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of