BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimony
    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


    Texas Supreme Court Holds that Invoking Appraisal Provision and Paying Appraisal Amount Does Not Insulate an Insurer from Damages Under the Texas Prompt Payment of Claims Act

    Construction Defect Litigation at San Diego’s Alicante Condominiums?

    Documentation Important for Defending Construction Defect Claims

    I’m Sorry Ms. Jackson, I [Sovereign Immunity] am For Real

    "Multiple Claims" Provisions on Contractor's Professional Liability Policy Creates a Trap for Policyholders

    NYC’s First Five-Star Hotel in Decade Seen at One57 Tower

    Fifth Circuit Reverses Summary Judgment Award to Insurer on Hurricane Damage Claim

    Diggerland, UK’s Construction Equipment Theme Park, is coming to the U.S.

    Kahana & Feld P.C. Enhances Client Offerings, Expands Litigation Firm Leadership

    Sacramento Water Works Recognized as a Historic Civil Engineering Landmark

    Toll Brothers Shows how the Affluent Buyer is Driving Up Prices

    Haight Celebrates 2024 New Partner Promotions!

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules that Insurance Salesman had No Fiduciary Duty to Policyholders

    War-Torn Ukraine Looks to Europe’s Green Plans for Reconstruction Ideas

    A Word to the Wise about Construction Defects

    How to Protect a Construction-Related Invention

    Eighth Circuit Remands to Determine Applicability of Collapse Exclusion

    The Devil is in the Details: The Texas Construction Trust Fund Pitfalls Residential Remodelers (and General Contractors) Should Avoid

    Rooftop Solar Leases Scaring Buyers When Homeowners Sell

    Thank You for Seven Years of Election to Super Lawyers

    Bid Bonds: The First Preventative Measure for Your Project

    Bridges Need More Attention

    Will AI Completely Transform Our Use of Computers?

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2024 “Top Lawyers” in New York by Hudson Valley Magazine

    Too Late for The Blame Game: Massachusetts Court Holds That the Statute of Repose Barred a Product Manufacturer from Seeking Contribution from a Product Installer

    California Restricts Principles of “General” Personal Jurisdiction

    Homeowners Sued for Failing to Disclose Defects

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

    Pallonji Mistry, Indian Billionaire Caught in Tata Feud, Dies at 93

    Wisconsin High Court Rejects Insurer’s Misuse of “Other Insurance” Provision

    Denver Council Committee Approves Construction Defects Ordinance

    California Court Broadly Interprets Insurance Policy’s “Liability Arising Out of” Language

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2020 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    Largest Dam Removal Program in US History Reaches Milestone

    Georgia Court Clarifies Landlord Liability for Construction Defects

    Construction Firm Sues Town over Claims of Building Code Violations

    Georgia Local Government Drainage Liability: Nuisance and Trespass

    Wisconsin Court of Appeals Re-affirms American Girl To Find Coverage for Damage Caused by Subcontractors

    Proposed Bill Provides a New Federal Tax Credit for the Conversion of Office Buildings

    Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Strikes a Deathblow to Substantial Factor Causation in Most Cases; Is Asbestos Litigation Next?

    July Sees Big Drop in Home Sales

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

    Considering Stormwater Management

    Former Zurich Executive to Head Willis North America Construction Insurance Group

    Boston Tower Project to Create 450 Jobs

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Partner John Van Vlear Named to Board Of Groundwater Resources Association Of California

    How to Defend Stucco Allegations

    Insured's Failure to Prove Entire Collapse of Building Leads to Dismissal

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

    Bad Faith and a Partial Summary Judgment in Seattle Construction Defect Case
    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. Drawing 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

    Notes from the Nordic Smart Building Convention

    June 29, 2017 —
    The first Nordic Smart Building Convention took place in Helsinki on June 14 and 15, 2017. It was an inspiring event with great keynotes, tech talks, and an exhibition of smart building products and services. The event was organized by HUB13, a leading co-working space provider in Finland. I had met with the producer of the convention, Sjoerd Postema, when he was planning the event. He asked for my ideas on possible topics and presenters. Later, he invited me to host a workshop and a roundtable at the convention. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at info@aepartners.fi

    EO or Uh-Oh: Biden’s Executive Order Requiring Project Labor Agreements on Federal Construction Projects

    March 14, 2022 —
    On February 4, 2022, President Biden issued Executive Order (“EO”) 14063[1]. The EO requires that a Project Labor Agreement (“PLA”) be in place for any federal “large-scale construction projects” estimated at $35 million or more. To compete for or perform projects subject to the PLA requirement contractors must agree to be subject to the applicable PLA. For federal projects under $35 million or projects receiving federal financial assistance are not required by the EO to have PLA, but federal agencies will have discretion to require PLAs. The EO will not go into effect until after implementing regulations are finalized, probably after the beginning of June 2022. Requiring PLAs on federal construction projects is a substantial shift from even the Obama Administration’s policy in favor of PLAs. Biden’s PLA EO will have an impact on federal contractors and likely industry repercussions beyond federal procurement. Only time and experience will tell whether those impacts will all be positive as the Biden Administration insists or will drive up construction costs and give unions more leverage than they have in the market as the critics insist. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicole Stone, Jones Walker LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Ms. Stone may be contacted at nstone@joneswalker.com

    Traub Lieberman Partners Dana Rice and Jason Taylor Obtain Summary Judgment For Insurance Carrier Client in Missouri Federal Court Coverage Action

    April 19, 2022 —
    Traub Lieberman Partners Dana Rice and Jason Taylor were recently successful in obtaining summary judgment for a national insurance carrier client in a federal court declaratory judgment action pending in Missouri. The underlying lawsuit involved two wrongful death actions brought against an insured responsible for performing demolition work on a freight elevator shaft as part of a larger demolition project. The two decedents were operating a motorized wire rope pulley inside the shaft when the system failed, causing the work basket occupied by the decedents to fall and resulting in fatal injuries to the workers. Two state court actions followed against the general contractor on the project, the insured, and various other product suppliers and manufacturers of the freight elevator equipment. The firm’s client issued commercial general liability insurance policy, which included an “Injury to Employees, Contractors, Volunteers and Other Workers” exclusion that precluded coverage for bodily injury to a broad variety of workers. As respects the insured, the underlying plaintiffs alleged that the decedent-workers were “employed by” the insured, such that the carrier argued the “Injury to Workers” exclusion barred coverage. The carrier filed a declaratory judgment action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri seeking a declaration that the insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify its insured for the underlying state court actions under the exclusion, and moved for judgment on the pleadings. The carrier also claimed a related “Contractors and Subcontractors” exclusion barred coverage. Reprinted courtesy of Dana A. Rice, Traub Lieberman and Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman Mr. Rice may be contacted at drice@tlsslaw.com Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Detect and Prevent Construction Fraud

    August 28, 2018 —
    With construction ramping up in many markets, construction firms plan to hire more workers, indicating the industry's continued optimism about a healthy economy. It's news that is both exciting and perhaps a little daunting: hiring competent, qualified tradespeople is challenging under any conditions. No one wants to hire a poor employee—or worse, someone who turns out to be a thief. While no industry is immune to occupational fraud, the construction industry is one of the harder hit. The average construction fraud scheme costs business owners $227,000 before it is detected. Worse, the fraudster is very often someone the employer implicitly trusts, making it even harder to believe the company has been the victim of insider theft. Fraud can hurt a business's reputation, cost thousands and betray trust. It may seem uncontrollable and unforeseeable unless employers know how to detect and deter fraudulent behavior. Reprinted courtesy of Tiffany Couch, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Ms. Couch may be contacted at tcouch@acuityforensics.com

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Too Soon?”

    July 02, 2024 —
    Not at all, said the Louisiana Supreme Court, in a case dealing with the timing of filing of a claim for indemnity. In the case, a Louisiana intermediate appellate court had earlier ruled in very short order on a supervisory writ application (reversing the trial court) that a claim for indemnity (based upon an indemnity clause in a construction contract) was “premature” until a “determination that damages are actually owed and the indemnitee sustains a loss. … At this time, the lawsuit is still pending against [the putative indemnitee], and no determination of liability had been made; thus, there is no obligation for indemnity and defense costs. … Stated differently, indemnity (or reimbursement) is not available at this time because [the indemnitee] has not discharged a liability which [the indemnitor] should have assumed or otherwise suffered any loss or damages. … Accordingly, [the] cause of action for indemnity and defense is not ripe for adjudication.” Bennett v. Demco Energy Servs., LLC, 2023-0581 (La. App. 1 Cir. 09/11/23); 2023 La. App. LEXIS 1449. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Home-Building Climate Warms in U.S. as Weather Funk Lifts

    May 20, 2015 —
    The surge in April housing starts sends a clear signal that bad weather was the root cause of weak readings in the first quarter. The question now is whether the rebound is strong enough to lift the world’s largest economy. Builders broke ground on 1.14 million homes at an annualized rate last month, the most since November 2007 and up 20.2 percent from March, figures from the Commerce Department showed Tuesday in Washington. It was the single-biggest monthly surge since 1991, with both the Northeast and Midwest taking part, clearly showing milder temperatures had a hand. The rebound in home building is shaping up to be large enough to make a meaningful contribution to economic growth this quarter. Nonetheless, because residential construction accounts for less than 4 percent of the economy, it would take big gains to make up for what’s likely to be sustained weakness in manufacturing caused by slowing exports and cuts in business investment by the energy industry. Reprinted courtesy of Sho Chandra, Bloomberg and Steve Matthews, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Granting Stay, Federal Court Reviews Construction Defect Coverage in Hawaii

    January 06, 2012 —

    The federal district court ultimately stayed a construction defect case, but offered comments on the current status of coverage disputes for such defects in Hawaii. See National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. v. Simpson Mfg. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128481(D. Haw. Nov. 7, 2011).

    National Union filed a complaint for declaratory relief to establish it had no duty to defend or to indemnify Simpson Manufacturing Company in four actions pending in the Hawaii state courts. The state court actions concerned allegedly defective hurricane strap tie hold downs that were manufactured and sold by Simpson. The hurricane ties allegedly began to prematurely corrode and rust, causing cracking, spalling and other damage to homes.

    National Union contended the underlying allegations did not constitute "property damage" caused by an "occurrence," as defined in the policies.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    More (and Simpler) Options Under New Oregon Retention Law

    October 21, 2024 —
    Similar to the changes made by the Washington Legislature last year, the Oregon Legislature recently changed its retention law. Oregon public works agencies and large commercial project owners are now required to accept surety bonds in lieu of withholding retainage on construction projects. There is also no longer a requirement to deposit retention funds in an interest-bearing escrow account. The owner or public agency must accept the bond in lieu of retainage unless specific grounds exist. For example, public agencies must find there is “good cause” for rejection of the bond based on the “unique project circumstances. Private owners have less discretion to reject a bond and if the bond meets the statutory requirements, per ORS 701.435(1)(a) “the owner and lender shall accept” the bond “in lieu of all or any portion of the retainage…” Courts have not analyzed when “good cause” exists for public agencies to reject bonds or exactly what will allow a private owner to reject a bond. However, an agency or owner cannot have a general policy to reject retention bonds. The statute does not provide next steps if the contractor disagrees with a decision to reject the bond. It may be necessary to proceed under the contract’s dispute resolution procedure or it may be more appropriate to take the issue directly to the courts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Yelle, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Yelle may be contacted at michael.yelle@acslawyers.com