BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing 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


    Elyria, Ohio, to Invest $250M to Halt Illegal Sewage into Black River

    OSHA Set to Tag More Firms as Severe Violators Under New Criteria

    US Court Questions 102-Mile Transmission Project Over River Crossing

    Formal Opinion No. 2020-203: How A Lawyer Is to Handle Access to Client Confidential Information and Anticipation of Potential Security Issues

    Cameron Pledges to Double Starter Homes to Boost Supply

    Balcony Collapses Killing Six People

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in 2021 Best Lawyers in America and Best Lawyers: Ones To Watch!

    Brookfield to Start Manhattan Tower After Signing Skadden

    ConsensusDOCS Hits the Cloud

    Top 10 Construction Contract Provisions – Changes and Claims

    Illinois Appellate Court Finds That Damages in Excess of Policy Limits Do Not Trigger Right to Independent Counsel

    Condo Owners Suing Bank for Failing to Disclose Defects

    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

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 37 White And Williams Lawyers

    Delays Caused When Government (Owner) Pushes Contractor’s Work Into Rainy / Adverse Weather Season

    The Importance of Providing Notice to a Surety

    Wearable Ways to Work in Extreme Heat

    Second Circuit Clarifies What Must Be Alleged to Establish “Joint Employer” Liability in the Context of Federal Employment Discrimination Claims

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Indemnity Coverage For Damage Caused by Named Insured

    Gen Xers Choose to Rent rather than Buy

    Cracked Girders Trigger Scrutiny of Salesforce Transit Center's Entire Structure

    Creeping Incrementalism in Downstream Insurance: Carriers are Stretching Standard CGL Concepts to Untenable Limits

    “You Can’t Climb a Tile Wall”

    Additional Insured Coverage Confirmed

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    Staying the Course, Texas Supreme Court Rejects Insurer’s Argument for Exception to Eight-Corners Rule in Determining Duty to Defend

    Reasons to Be Skeptical About a Millennial Homebuying Boom in 2016

    90 and 150: Two Numbers You Must Know

    Zero-Net Energy Homes Costly Everywhere but at the Electric Meter

    Bert L. Howe & Associates Brings Professional Development Series to Their San Antonio Office

    Key Legal Issues to Consider Before and After Natural Disasters

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/17/24) – Housing Inflation to Remain High, Proptech Investment to Fall and Office Vacancy Rates to Reach Peak in 2025

    Appellate Court of Maryland Construes Notice Conditions of A312 Performance Bond in Favor of Surety

    Acord Certificates of Liability Insurance: What They Don’t Tell You Can Hurt You

    In Florida, Exculpatory Clauses Do Not Need Express Language Referring to the Exculpated Party's Negligence

    London Office Builders Aren’t Scared of Brexit Anymore

    Insurance Measures Passed by 2015 Hawaii Legislature

    Brooklyn Atlantic Yards Yields Dueling Suits on Tower

    Should CGL Insurer have Duty to Defend Insured During Chapter 558 Notice of Construction Defects Process???

    No Coverage for Tenant's Breach of Contract Claims

    Legislative Update on Bills of Note (Updated Post-Adjournment)

    MDL Panel Grants Consolidation for One Group of COVID-19 Claims

    Facebook Posts “Not Relevant” Rules Florida Appeals Court

    Naughty or Nice. Contractor Receives Two Lumps of Coal in Administrative Dispute

    Montreal Bridge Builders Sue Canada Over New Restrictions

    PCL Sues Big Bank for $30M in Claimed NJ Mall Unpaid Work

    Insurance Agent Sued for Lapse in Coverage after House Collapses

    Boston Team Obtains Complete Defense Verdict for Engineering Firm in Professional Liability Matter

    Selected Environmental Actions Posted on the Fall 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulator Actions

    Construction and Contract Issues Blamed for Problems at Anchorage Port
    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

    One More Thing Moving From California to Texas: Wildfire Risk

    June 19, 2023 —
    In early January, Keith Elwell was doing one of the things he does best, swinging chainsaws to help save forests from wildfire. Amid groves of junipers and white oak trees, Elwell led a team of a half-dozen volunteers, clearing brush and dead limbs in Twin Springs Preserve in Williamson County, Texas, a 170-acre county preserve a 40-minute drive north of downtown Austin. Set on the northeastern edge of Hill Country, a rolling, rocky landscape of natural springs and wild grasses, it’s also adjacent to Georgetown, the fastest-growing city in the United States according to US Census Bureau data. Once a small farming town, it’s now an Austin suburb of more than 75,000 people with 60 subdivisions under construction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Sisson, Bloomberg

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    January 05, 2017 —
    A performance bond is a valuable tool designed to guarantee the performance of the principal of the contract made part of the bond. But, it is only a valuable tool if the obligee (entity the bond is designed to benefit) understands that it needs to properly trigger the performance bond if it is looking to the bond (surety) to remedy and pay for a contractual default. If the performance bond is not properly triggered and a suit is brought upon the bond then the obligee could be the one materially breaching the terms of the bond. This means the obligee has no recourse under the performance bond. This is a huge downside when the obligee wanted the security of the performance bond, and reimbursed the bond principal for the premium of the bond, in order to address and remediate a default under the underlying contract. A recent example of this downside can be found in the Southern District of Florida’s decision in Arch Ins. Co. v. John Moriarty & Associates of Florida, Inc., 2016 WL 7324144 (S.D.Fla. 2016). Here, a general contractor sued a subcontractor’s performance bond surety for an approximate $1M cost overrun associated with the performance of the subcontractor’s subcontract (the contract made part of the subcontractor’s performance bond). The surety moved for summary judgment arguing that the general contractor failed to property trigger the performance bond and, therefore, materially breached the bond. The trial court granted the summary judgment in favor of the performance bond surety. Why? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@katzbarron.com

    Federal Arbitration Act Preempts Pennsylvania Payment Act

    June 15, 2020 —
    I am back. It feels like an entirety since I last posted. But a hellacious trial schedule got me off the blogosphere for some time. Plus, there was nothing to write about. But I am back with a bang thanks to a decision from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania concerning the interplay of a forum selection clause appearing in an arbitration clause in a construction contract and the Pennsylvania Contractor and Subcontractor Payment Act. In Bauguess Electrical Services, Inc. v. Hospitality Builders, Inc., the federal court (Judge Joyner) ruled that the federal arbitration act preempted the Payment Act’s prohibition on forum selection clauses and held that an arbitration must proceed in South Dakota even though the construction project were the work was performed was located in Pennsylvania. The Payment Act applies to all commercial construction projects performed in Pennsylvania. As some you might know, Section 514 of the Payment Act, 73 P.S. 514, prohibits choice of law and forum selection clauses. It states “[m]aking a contract subject to the laws of another state or requiring that any litigation, arbitration or other dispute resolution process on the contract occur in another state, shall be unenforceable.” Therefore, if a construction contract is for a project located in Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania law must apply and all disputes must be adjudicated in Pennsylvania. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    Empire State Building Owners Sue Photographer for Topless Photo Shoot

    January 22, 2014 —
    USA Today reports that the owners of New York’s Empire State Building are suing photographer Allen Henson for taking pictures of a topless woman on the sky scraper’s observation deck. “The owners claim Henson damaged the building's reputation as a safe, family-friendly attraction when he took photos of the model in August,” according to USA Today. Henson allegedly did not ask the owners for permission prior to the shoot. Henson retorted that he took the photos when children were not present, and the pictures do not have any “commercial value; he just posted them on social media.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Skanska Will Work With Florida on Barge-Caused Damage to Pensacola Bay Bridge

    October 19, 2020 —
    Florida Dept. of Transportation investigators continue to assess damage to the Pensacola Bay Bridge, which sustained multiple impacts from two construction barges unmoored by Hurricane Sally’s storm-driven waves on Sept. 15. Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Professional Liability and Attorney-Client Privilege Bulletin: Intra-Law Firm Communications

    January 07, 2015 —
    Attorney-Client Privilege Protects Confidential Communications Between Law Firm Attorney Representing Current Client and Firm’s General Counsel Regarding Disputes with Client Who Later Files Malpractice Suit In a case of first impression in California, Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP v. Superior Court (No. B255182 - filed November 25, 2014), Division Three of the Second District Court of Appeal addressed the question of whether the attorney-client privilege applies to intrafirm communications between law firm attorneys concerning disputes with a current client, when that client later sues the firm for malpractice and seeks to compel production of such communications. The court concluded that when an attorney representing a current client seeks legal advice from the law firm’s designated in-house “general counsel” concerning disputes with the client, the attorney-client privilege applies to their confidential communications. The court held that adoption of the so-called “fiduciary” or “current client” exceptions to the attorney-client privilege is contrary to California law because California courts are precluded from creating implied exceptions to the statutorily created attorney-client privilege. Reprinted courtesy of David W. Evans, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Stephen J. Squillario, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Evans may be contacted at devans@hbblaw.com; Mr. Squillario may be contacted at ssquillario@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal Secured by Lewis Brisbois in Coverage Dispute Involving San Francisco 49ers’ Levi Stadium

    May 31, 2021 —
    Fort Lauderdale Partner and Vice Chair of Lewis Brisbois’ Insurance Coverage & Bad Faith Litigation Practices Kristen D. Perkins and Los Angeles Partner Jordon E. Harriman had their district court victory confirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit when it affirmed the lower court’s ruling that Lewis Brisbois’ client, an excess insurer, had no duty to defend or indemnify a construction joint venture in a lawsuit filed by San Francisco 49ers fans. Underlying Case and Lewis Brisbois’ Successful Motion to Dismiss In the underlying matter, 49ers fans filed a proposed class action against the team, alleging that the team’s home venue, Levi Stadium, violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and the state's Unruh Civil Rights Act because it contained physical barriers that hindered access for disabled people. The 49ers subsequently filed a third-party complaint against the construction joint venture that built the stadium, contending that the joint venture’s negligence caused the inaccessibility, and that if the team was held liable for the fans' claims, the joint venture should be obligated to indemnify the team under the terms of the stadium contract. Reprinted courtesy of Kristen Perkins, Lewis Brisbois and Jordon Harriman, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Perkins may be contacted at Kristen.Perkins@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Harriman may be contacted at Jordon.Harriman@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Pay Loss Provision Does Not Preclude Assignment of Post-Loss Claim

    July 30, 2015 —
    The court determined that a policy's loss payment provision did not bar a post-loss assignment. One Call Prop. Servs. v. Sec. First Ins. Co., 2015 Fl. App. LEXIS 7643 (Fla. Ct. App. May 20, 2015). After One Cell performed emergency water removal for the insured, the insured assigned his rights to policy proceeds as payment. One Cell alleged that Security First refused to reimburse the insured adequately for the services provided. One Cell filed suit, and Security First moved to dismiss. The trial court granted the motion based upon the policy's non-assignment provision. One Cell appealed. One Cell argued post-loss assignments were valid under Florida law even when the policy contained an anti-assignment provision, and the right to payment accrued on the date of the loss. 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