BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production 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 Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic 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


    Taking Advantage of New Tax Credits and Prevailing Wage Bonuses Under the Inflation Reduction Act for Clean Energy Construction Projects

    Utah’s Highest Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Properly Commence an Action to Rely on the Relation-Back Doctrine to Overcome the Statute of Repose

    Don’t Assume Your Insurance Covers A Newly Acquired Company

    Insurer Not Responsible for Insured's Assignment of Policy Benefits

    2016 California Construction Law Upate

    Is Modular Construction Destined to Fail?

    What Makes a Great Lawyer?

    Recovering Attorney’s Fees and Treble Damages in Washington DC Condominium Construction Defect Cases

    Lenders and Post-Foreclosure Purchasers Have Standing to Make Construction Defect Claims for After-Discovered Conditions

    Patagonia Will Start Paying for Homeowners' Solar Panels

    Construction Defect Coverage Barred Under Business Risk Exclusion in Colorado

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (01/18/23) – Construction Inventory, 3D Printing, and Metaverse Replicas

    Nine ACS Lawyers Recognized as Super Lawyers

    Contractor Wins in Arbitration Only to Lose Before the Superior Court on Section 7031 Claim

    TOLLING AGREEMENTS: Construction Defect Lawyers use them to preserve Association Warranty Claims during Construction Defect Negotiations with Developers

    Developer Sues TVA After It Halts Nuke Site Sale

    Fifth Circuit: Primary Insurer Relieved of Duty to Defend Without Release of Liability of Insured

    Home Building Up in Kansas City

    #5 CDJ Topic: David Belasco v. Gary Loren Wells et al. (2015) B254525

    Heads I Win, Tails You Lose. Court Finds Indemnity Provision Went Too Far

    Chicago Debt Document Says $8.5B O'Hare Revamp May Be Delayed

    First Circuit Rejects Insurer’s “Insupportable” Duty-to-Cooperate Defense in Arson Coverage Suit

    Subrogation Waiver Unconscionable in Residential Fuel Delivery Contract

    Indemnity Clauses—What do they mean, and what should you be looking for?

    Be Careful in Contracting and Business

    Construction Contractor “Mean Tweets” Edition

    Michigan Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C-" Grade, Improving from "D+" Grade in 2018

    PulteGroup Fires Exec Accused of Defamation By Founder’s Heir

    Newark Trial Team Obtains Affirmance of Summary Judgment for General Contractor Client

    London's Walkie Talkie Tower Voted Britain's Worst New Building

    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    Genuine Dispute Over Cause of Damage and Insureds’ Demolition Before Inspection Negate Bad Faith and Elder Abuse Claims

    Meet the Forum's Neutrals: TOM DUNN

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Named 2019 Super Lawyers

    And the Cyber-Beat Goes On. Yet Another Cyber Regulatory Focus for Insurers

    Contractor Allegedly Injured after Slipping on Black Ice Files Suit

    Updates to AIA Contract Applications

    Nine Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Recognized as Southern California Super Lawyers

    Lewis Brisbois Launches New Practice Focusing on Supply Chain Issues

    Limited Number of Insurance-Related Bills Passed by 2014 Hawaii Legislature

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    Amada Family Limited Partnership v. Pomeroy: Colorado Court of Appeals Expressly Affirms the Continuing Viability of the Common-Law After-Acquired Title Doctrine and Expressly Recognizes Utility Easements by Necessity

    Commercial Real Estate in 2023: A Snapshot

    Tips for Drafting Construction Contracts

    New Pedestrian, Utility Bridge Takes Shape on Everett Waterfront

    Connecticut Answers Critical Questions Regarding Scope of Collapse Coverage in Homeowners Policies in Insurers’ Favor

    Update Regarding New York’s New Registration Requirement for Contractors and Subcontractors Performing Public Works and Covered Private Projects

    California Court of Appeal Finds Coverage for Injured Worker Despite Contractor's Exclusion

    NJ Supreme Court Declines to Review Decision that Exxon Has No Duty to Indemnify Insurers for Environmental Liability Under Prior Settlement Agreement
    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

    Boston Catwalk Collapse Injures Three Workers

    May 10, 2022 —
    The collapse of a catwalk in a defunct, 124-year-old power plant building in Boston on May 4 injured three workers in the latest in a spate of serious construction accidents in the city and its environs. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Van Voorhis, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Court-Side Seat – Case Law Update (February 2022)

    March 06, 2022 —
    It is already early in 2022, but several important environmental cases have already been decided by the federal district and federal appellate courts. THE COURTS OF APPEAL The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit West Virginia State University Board of Governors v. The Dow Chemical Company, et al. On January 10, 2022, the court decided this case, in which Dow and the other defendants attempted to remove a state groundwater contamination lawsuit to federal court, citing the federal officer removal statute and the presence of a significant federal question. Both the federal district court and the appellate court rejected these arguments and remanded the lawsuit to the state court. For many years, Dow and other parties had been engaged in a RCRA hazardous waste cleanup at an industrial site located in Institute, West Virginia. RCRA permits and corrective action authorizations were issued or supervised by EPA. The plaintiffs complained that the groundwater cleanup, insofar as it affected their property, was deficient, which compelled them to supplement the ongoing federal cleanup with a lawsuit based on West Virginia causes of action and unique to their property. After a careful review of the record, the Fourth Circuit held that the defendants were not acting under the “subjection, guidance or control” of the EPA, and therefore the federal officer removal statute did not apply. Moreover, there was no federal question to resolve as the separate state lawsuit did not challenge a CERCLA cleanup nor did it arise from the RCRA remedial measures that had been taken. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Contractor Covered for Voluntary Remediation Efforts in Completed Homes

    October 10, 2013 —
    The Texas Supreme Court held that a home builder was covered for the voluntary removal and replacement of a defective insulation product it had installed in hundreds of homes. Lennar Corp. v. Market Am. Ins. Co., 2013 Tex. LEXIS 597 (Tex. Sup. Ct. Aug. 23, 2013). Lennar built homes using an exterior insulation and finish system (EIFS). It was subsequently determined that EIFS trapped water inside homes with wood-frame walls, causing rot and structural damage, mildew and mold, and termite infestation. Lennar decided to contact all its homeowners and offer to remove the EIFS and replace it with conventional stucco. Lennar notified its insurers that it would seek indemnification for the costs. The insurers refused to participate in Lennar's proactive efforts, preferring to wait and respond to homeowners' claims one by one. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Quick Note: Lis Pendens Bond When Lis Pendens Not Founded On Recorded Instrument Or Statute

    May 20, 2019 —
    If a lis pendens is recorded and the lis pendens is NOT founded on a duly recorded instrument (e.g., mortgage) or a statute (e.g., construction lien), a lis pendens bond should be recorded. The lis pendens bond should cover prospective damages associated with the wrongful / unjustified recording of a lis pendens that were suffered by the property owner. The reason being is that the lis pendens has an effect on the title to the property as long as the lis pendens is recorded. Damages could stem from a decline in the market value of the property, continued upkeep and maintenance of the property, and there may also be (and, really, should be) consideration for loss of investment return associated with the equity in that property. 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

    Recent Developments with California’s Right to Repair Act

    June 11, 2014 —
    In Lexology, Amy Kuo Alexander of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP analyzed recent decisions involving California’s Right to Repair Act, SB 800. According to Alexander, “SB 800, applies to all new residential construction sold after January 1, 2003” and “[i]t establishes a process to resolve certain construction defect claims prior to the filing of any lawsuit by a homeowner of new residential construction.” Alexander’s three main discussion points include “SB 800 is Not the Exclusive Remedy,” “Notice Requirements to Builder Under SB 800,” and “Parties Can Opt Out of SB 800 to Adopt Their Own Prelitigation Procedure So Long as the Terms Are Not Unconscionable.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Skipping Depositions does not Constitute Failure to Cooperate in New York

    March 09, 2020 —
    Insurance policies typically impose, on the insured, a duty to cooperate with the insurer during investigation and litigation of a claim. Non-cooperation can be grounds for denying coverage. This begs the question: what constitutes non-cooperation? Recently, a New York appellate court affirmed a trial court’s decision that failure by an employee of the insured to show up for three court-ordered depositions did not rise to the level of “willful and avowed obstruction” and therefore, the insurer could not deny coverage on the basis of non-cooperation. See Foddrell v. Utica First Insurance Co., 178 A.D.3d 901 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019). In so holding, the Foddrell court applied the Thrasher test: “To effectively deny coverage based upon lack of cooperation, an insurance carrier must demonstrate (1) that it acted diligently in seeking to bring about the insured’s cooperation, (2) that the efforts employed by the insured were reasonably calculated to obtain the insured’s cooperation, and (3) that the attitude of the insured, after his or her cooperation was sought, was one of willful and avowed obstruction.” Id.; see Thrasher v. U. S. Liab. Ins. Co., 19 N.Y.2d 159, 167 (1967). Thomas Foddrell’s suit against Utica First Insurance Company (“Utica First”) stemmed from his personal injury suit against Janey & Rana Construction Corporation (“J&R” (Utica First’s insured). During that lawsuit, J&R’s principal, Gardeep Singh, failed to appear for two court-ordered depositions. After his failure to appear at those depositions, Utica First sent an investigator to inform Singh that he was scheduled for a third deposition. Singh responded to the investigator that he would speak with J&R’s attorneys about the matter. Ultimately, Singh did not appear for the third court-ordered deposition. In response to Singh’s repeated failure to appear for the depositions, Utica First sent Singh a letter advising him that because of his lack of cooperation, Utica would no longer agree to indemnify J&R. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryan G. Nelson, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Mr. Nelson may be contacted at rgn@sdvlaw.com

    Additional Insured Coverage Confirmed

    February 23, 2016 —
    The Texas Court of Appeals found that Exxon Mobil Corporation was an additional insured under the CGL policy for Exxon's service provider. Liberty Surplus Ins. Corp. v. Exxon Mobil Corporation, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 12757 (Tex. Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2015). Exxon contracted with Wyatt Field Service Company to perform "services" as set forth in various work orders from Exxon's affiliates. The contract also required Wyatt to maintain $5 million of commercial general liability insurance. The contract provided that the policies must cover Exxon and its affiliates "as additional insureds in connection with the performance of Services." In 2008, Wyatt was assigned to work on a flexicoker unit at Exxon's refinery. Wyatt was to reinstall dummy nozzles and chains. It completed this service in October 2008. Three years later, one of the dummy nozzles pulled free, and the escaping steam and coke burned three individuals who were working on the unit. After the accident, it was discovered that the safety chain had been installed in the wrong location so that it did not properly secure the dummy nozzle. 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

    Home Sales Going to Investors in Daytona Beach Area

    December 11, 2013 —
    Houses are selling quickly in the Daytona Beach, Florida area, but many of the buyers are investors who are buying up homes in hopes of selling them several years later. Maryke Guild, a real estate agent said that “in three, four years’ time, when the market has been resaturated, those guys are going to sell at a profit, there’s no doubt.” But while the housing market is good news for investors, it’s actually bad news for homebuilders. “Flips are not what’s going to sustain the market,” said John Adams the general manager of the Adams, Cameron & Co., a Daytona-area real estate firm. Contractors are building new homes in the Daytona area, but the number of homes built in Volusia County in 2013 is a little more than a fifth of what was built in 2005. In adjacent Flagler County, homebuilding is at less than a tenth of what it was in 2004. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of