BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor 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


    “I Didn’t Sign That!” – Applicability of Waivers of Subrogation to Non-Signatory Third Parties

    Residential Interior Decorator Was Entitled to Lien and Was Not Engaging in Unlicensed Contracting

    Millennium’s Englander Buys $71.3 Million Manhattan Co-Op

    Hunton Insurance Practice, Partners Recognized by The Legal 500

    Thank You for 14 Consecutive Years of Legal Elite Elections

    Risk Spotter Searches Internal Data Lakes For Loaded Words

    Moving Toward a Telework Future: A Checklist of Considerations for Employers

    Stop by BHA’s Booth at WCC and Support the Susan G. Komen Foundation

    Aging-in-Place Features Becoming Essential for Many Home Buyers

    Todd Seelman Recognized as Fellow of Wisconsin Law Foundation

    The ‘Sole Option’ Arbitration Provision in Construction Contracts

    What To Do When the Government is Slow to Decide a Claim?

    U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments: Maritime Charters and the Specter of a New Permitting Regime

    Fire Tests Inspire More Robust Timber Product Standard

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine’s 2023 Top Lawyers!

    Florida Adopts Less Stringent Summary Judgment Standard

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2021

    Chapman Glucksman Press Release

    Snooze You Lose? Enforcement of Notice and Timing Provisions

    Safety Officials Investigating Death From Fall

    The Private Works: Preliminary Notice | Are You Using the Correct Form?

    Owners and Contractors Beware: Pennsylvania (Significantly) Strengthens Contractor Payment Act

    When Brad Pitt Tried to Save the Lower Ninth Ward

    Insured Fails to Provide Adequate Proof of Water Damage Through Roof

    Construction Jobs Keep Rising, with April Gain of 33,000

    Insurer Not Responsible for Insured's Assignment of Policy Benefits

    ASCE's Architectural Engineering Institute Announces Winners of 2021 AEI Professional Project Award

    Florida Condo Collapse Shows Town’s Rich, Middle-Class Divide

    The Biggest Change to the Mechanics Lien Law Since 1963

    Competent, Substantial Evidence Carries Day in Bench Trial

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap – Best Practices for Productive Rule 26(f) Conferences on Discovery Plans

    Montrose III: Vertical Exhaustion Applies in Upper Layers of Excess Coverage

    District Court Allows DBE False Claims Act Case to Proceed

    Associated Builders and Contractors Northern California Chapter Announces New President/CEO

    Eleventh Circuit Finds No “Property Damage” Where Defective Component Failed to Cause Damage to Other Non-Defective Components

    Prime Contractor & Surety’s Recovery of Attorney’s Fees in Miller Act Lawsuit

    New Jersey Court Washes Away Insurer’s Waiver of Subrogation Arguments

    California’s Labor Enforcement Task Force Continues to Set Fire to the Underground Economy

    Housing Starts Fall as U.S. Single-Family Projects Decline

    Three Recent Cases Strike Down Liquidated Damages Clauses In Settlement Agreements…A Trend Or An Aberration?

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Named to Hudson Valley Magazine’s 2022 Top Lawyers List

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

    Construction Defect Reform Dies in Nevada Senate

    Colorado Chamber of Commerce CEO Calls for Change to Condo Defect Law

    Oregon to Add 258,000 Jobs by 2022, State Data Shows

    'There Was No Fighting This Fire,' California Survivor Says

    Lewis Brisbois Successfully Concludes Privacy Dispute for Comedian Kathy Griffin Following Calif. Supreme Court Denial of Review

    Court of Appeals Discusses Implied Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Public Works Contracting

    Insurance and Your Roof

    Texas Central Wins Authority to Take Land for High-Speed Rail System
    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

    Texas Jury Finds Presence of SARS-CoV-2 Virus Causes “Physical Loss or Damage” to Property, Awards Over $48 Million to Baylor College of Medicine

    September 26, 2022 —
    A Texas jury has found that the presence of SARS-CoV-2 virus on the property of Baylor College of Medicine (BCM) caused “physical loss or damage” and resulting economic loss, triggering coverage under BCM’s commercial property insurance program. The jury awarded BCM over $48 million following a three-day trial; the award consisted of $42.8 million in business interruption, $3.3 million in extra expense, and $2.3 million in damage to research projects. The verdict came after the court denied the insurers’ pre-trial motion for summary judgment, rejecting the insurers’ contention that a virus cannot—as a matter of law—cause physical loss or damage to property. In denying the motion, the court held that whether the presence of the virus causes physical loss or damage presents a question of fact for the jury to resolve; a copy of the order rejecting the insurers’ summary judgment argument can be found here. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Kevin V. Small, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Small may be contacted at ksmall@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York’s Highest Court Gives Insurers “an Incentive to Defend”

    November 20, 2013 —
    The New York Court of Appeals, that state’s highest court, has ruled that when an insurer disclaims duty to defend, “if the disclaimer is found bad, the insurance company must indemnify its insured for the resulting judgment, even if policy exclusions would have otherwise negated the duty to indemnify.” The insurer who makes a failed claim that there was no duty to defend cannot thereafter claim exclusions. This recent New York decision is discussed by Allen R. Wolff and Eric R. Reed of Anderson Kill in their Policyholder Advisor. They note that the decision “confirms that the estoppel rule applies in New York , as it does in at least four other states.” But this may not be the last word. American Guarantee made a motion for reargument, which the court granted. The case will return to the court in January 2014. They note that “if paying defense costs is the only consequence an insurance company faces for breaching its duty to defend the insured, an insurance company has a financial incentive to ‘kick the can down the road.’” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado Senate Bill 13-052 Dies in Committee

    May 10, 2013 —
    On April 17, 2013, the Colorado Senate Judiciary Committee voted, along party lines, to postpone indefinitely SB 52. Here is a link to the Denver Business Journal's story regarding the bill and its untimely demise: "Lawmakers kill lawsuit limits on condo defects." Unfortunately, it will be at least another year before the legislature will have the ability to provide some much needed relief to the Colorado construction industry. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain
    Mr. McLain can be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    New Tariffs Could Shorten Construction Expansion Cycle

    March 22, 2018 —
    The Trump administration’s recent focus on tariffs on steel and aluminum has largely been in the context of potential trade wars, discordant views regarding globalism, renegotiating NAFTA, and exemptions for key allies and trading partners such as Canada and Mexico. But there is a broader context that implicates not only the construction industry and materials prices, but also the future trajectory of the U.S. economy. The tariffs come during the ninth year of U.S. economic expansion. The economy gained momentum for much of 2017 and enters 2018 with considerable strength. The broadening of the U.S. economic expansion from merely being consumer led to also being associated with surging manufacturing output, construction activity, rising exports and business investment is attributable to many factors, including elevated business confidence and recently enacted tax reform. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anirban Basu, Sage Policy Group
    Mr. Basu may be contacted at basu@abc.org

    Anti-Fracking Win in N.Y. Court May Deal Blow to Industry

    July 01, 2014 —
    New York’s cities and towns can block hydraulic fracturing within their borders, the state’s highest court ruled, dealing a blow to an industry awaiting Governor Andrew Cuomo’s decision on whether to lift a six-year-old statewide moratorium. The case, closely watched by the energy industry, may invigorate local challenges to fracking in other states and convince the industry to stay out of New York even if Cuomo allows drilling. Pennsylvania’s highest court issued a similar ruling last year, striking down portions of a state law limiting localities’ ability to regulate drillers. “This sends a really strong and clear message to the gas companies who have tried to buy their way into the state that these community concerns have to be addressed,” Katherine Nadeau, policy director for Environmental Advocates of New York, an anti-fracking group, said in a phone interview. “This will empower more communities nationwide.” Mr. Dolmetsch may be contacted at cdolmetsch@bloomberg.net; Mr. Klopott may be contacted at fklopott@bloomberg.net; and Mr. Efstathiou Jr. may be contacted at jefstathiou@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Chris Dolmetsch, Freeman Klopott and Jim Efstathiou Jr., Bloomberg

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

    February 07, 2014 —
    In St. Cyr v. California Fair Plan Association (No. B243159, filed 1/31/14), a California appeals court held that the state's high risk property insurance plan is not obligated to provide any greater coverage than that mandated for the state's statutory fire insurance policy. The plaintiff-policyholders lived in high fire risk areas and were insured under the California FAIR Plan, which provides property insurance to the otherwise uninsurable. Following loss of their homes and other property in wildfires, the policyholders were paid the full amount of their policy limits, but contended that they were entitled to additional payments. Specifically, the policyholders alleged that the FAIR plan provided less protection than statutorily mandated by Insurance Code sections 10090 through 10100.2, which spells out the "Basic Property Insurance Inspection and Placement Plan" of the FAIR program. The policyholders contended that FAIR was required to issue a policy not only in accordance with the standard form fire insurance policy set forth in Insurance Code section 2071, but also the "'Basic Property Insurance' written in the normal market . . . known as the 'HO-3'," referring to the copywrited homeowners policy form promulgated by the Insurance Services Office (ISO). Reprinted Courtesy of Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP and Chris Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com and Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Performance Bond Primer: Need to Knows and Need to Dos

    February 01, 2022 —
    If you are a construction contractor, you deal with performance bonds as part of your business and daily work. They are necessary for almost every project you are participating or will participate in, and, along with other sister bonds, constitute a basic tool to be able to work in construction. However, how much do you really know about this tool? Who in your organization knows how to use it? Are you relying on your insurance broker to procure the bonds? Can your broker competently review the terms of the bond? Are you, as a contractor, relying on the surety to explain and determine what you need for the project—a fox guarding the hen house? To understand how a performance bond works and how to effectively tailor it to your needs, we need to understand the basics. What is a performance bond? Who are the parties to a performance bond? What does performance bond not do? What should be covered under a performance bond? How does a performance bond fit in a company’s overall risk management processes? A clear understanding of these and other basic topics will facilitate operations and reduce the risk of claims. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rafael Boza, Pillsbury
    Mr. Boza may be contacted at rafael.boza@pillsburylaw.com

    Notice of Claim Sufficient to Invoke Coverage

    August 06, 2014 —
    Indirect notice to the insurer was sufficient to trigger coverage for the additional insured under a liability policy. Spoleta Constr., LLC v. Aspen Ins. UK Ltd., 2014 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5174 (N.Y. App. Div. July 11, 2014). An employee of the subcontractor was injured at the construction project on October 20, 2008. The general contractor was named as an additional insured on the subcontractor's CGL policy with Aspen. Under the subcontract, the subcontractor also agreed to defend and indemnify the general contractor for all claims arising out of the subcontractor's work. The general contractor did not receive notice of the accident until late December 2009 in a letter from the injured employee's attorney. On January 27, 2010, the general contractor's liability carrier sent a letter to the subcontractor giving notice of the employee's claim and requesting that the subcontractor put its carrier on notice. On February 9, 2010, the subcontractor sent to Aspen a claim form with the January 2010 letter attached. 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