BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating 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


    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    Reasonable Expectations – Pennsylvania’s Case by Case Approach to the Sutton Rule

    Super Lawyers Recognized Five Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

    Implied Warranty Claims–Not Just a Seller’s Risk: Builders Beware!

    Using Lien and Bond Claims to Secure Project Payments

    Delaware Supreme Court Allows Shareholders Access to Corporation’s Attorney-Client Privileged Documents

    Amazon Hits Pause on $2.5B HQ2 Project in Arlington, Va.

    Examining Best Practices for Fire Protection of Critical Systems in Buildings

    Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Damage Caused by Tar Escaping From Roof

    Quick Note: Independent Third-Party Spoliation Of Evidence Claim

    Contractor Gets Benched After Failing to Pay Jury Fees

    Teaming Agreements- A Contract to Pursue a Solicitation and Negotiate

    Homeowner's Claim for Collapse Survives Summary Judgment

    Insureds Survive Motion to Dismiss Civil Authority Claim

    Alarm Cries Wolf in California Case Involving Privette Doctrine

    California Limits Indemnification Obligations of Design Professionals

    Megaproject Savings Opportunities

    Boston Team Secures Summary Judgment Dismissal on Client’s Behalf in Serious Personal Injury Case

    Subcontractors Essential to Home Building Industry

    SDNY Vacates Arbitration Award for Party-Arbitrator’s Nondisclosures

    Rather Than Limit Decision to "That Particular Part" of Developer's Policy Necessary to Bar Coverage, 10th Circuit Renders Questionable Decision on Exclusion j(6)

    Insurer Fails to Establish Prejudice Due to Late Notice

    Florida Federal Court Reinforces Principle That Precise Policy Language Is Required Before An Insurer Can Deny Coverage Based On An Exclusion

    Sometimes You Just Need to Call it a Day: Court Finds That Contractor Not Entitled to Recover Costs After Public Works Contract is Invalidated

    Largest US Dam Removal Stirs Debate Over Coveted West Water

    Allegations That COVID-19 Was Physically Present and Altered Property are Sufficient to Sustain COVID-19 Business Interruption Suit

    Terminator’s Trench Rehab Drives L.A. Land Prices Crazy

    The Top 3 Trends That Will Impact the Construction Industry in 2024

    Read Before You Sign: Claim Waivers in Project Documents

    In Personal Injury Actions, Prejudgment Interest on Costs Not Recoverable

    Insureds' Summary Judgment Motion on Mold Limitation Denied

    Fire Tests Inspire More Robust Timber Product Standard

    Terms of Your Teaming Agreement Matter

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    Keeping Your Workers Safe When Air Quality Isn't

    Architect Sues School District

    It’s Time to Change the Way You Think About Case Complexity

    What Happens When a Secured Creditor Files a Late Claim in an Equity Receivership?

    Colorado Senate Revives Construction Defects Reform Bill

    A Deep Dive Into an Undervalued Urban Marvel

    Skipping Depositions does not Constitute Failure to Cooperate in New York

    Employees Versus Independent Contractors

    Appetite for Deconstruction

    Colorado Abandons the “Completed and Accepted Rule” in Favor of the “Foreseeability Rule” in Determining a Contractor’s Duty to a Third Party After Work Has Been Completed

    Inability to Confirm Coverage Supports Setting Aside Insured’s Default Judgment on Grounds of Extrinsic Mistake

    New Insurance Case: Owners'​ Insurance Barred in Reimbursement Action against Tenant

    Tightest Credit Market in 16 Years Rejects Bernanke’s Bid

    Whitney Stefko Named to ENR’s Top Young Professionals, formerly ENR’s Top 20 Under 40, in California

    Blackouts Require a New Look at Backup Power

    Don’t Kick the Claim Until the End of the Project: Timely Give Notice and Preserve Your Claims on Construction Projects
    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

    EPA Seeks Comment on Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification Rule

    July 19, 2021 —
    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it will revise a 2020 final rule clarifying requirements for water quality certification under the Clean Water Act (CWA). 85 Fed. Reg. 42210 (June 2, 2021). CWA Section 401 requires states and tribes to certify that any discharges associated with a federal permit will comply with applicable state or tribal water quality requirements. In an effort to eliminate 401 certification being used as a tool for delaying or imposing conditions unrelated to protecting water quality on federal permits, the 2020 rule established limits on the scope and timeline for review and required any conditions on certification to be water-quality related. State and Tribal governments and environmental groups challenged the rule, arguing it constrained state and tribal decision-making authority by limiting the term “other appropriate requirements of State law” in CWA Section 401(d) to “water quality requirements” and “point source discharges.” With EPA’s decision to revise the rule, many believe these same scope and timing limitations will be targets for change. Clients with experience, positive or negative, under the 2020 rule should consider submitting comments by the August 2, 2021 deadline. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Karen Bennett, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Bennett may be contacted at Karen.Bennett@lewisbrisbois.com

    Viewpoint: Firms Should Begin to Analyze Lessons Learned in 2020

    January 04, 2021 —
    If there’s one phrase that describes 2020, it was not “business as usual.” How AEC firms fared last year depended upon their strategies for navigating an uncertain landscape. While we talk about finding a new normal, company leaders in 2021 will have to think more expansively about what they want that “normal” to look like. Reprinted courtesy of Rich Friedman, 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

    Hail Damage Requires Replacement of Even Undamaged Siding

    February 05, 2015 —
    In a dispute over the property policy's requirement that lost or damaged property be repaired or replaced, the Minnesota Supreme Court held that the policy language called for replacement of undamaged siding panels to obtain a color match. Cedar Bluff Townhome Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co., 2014 Minn. LEXIS 661 (Minn. Dec. 17, 2014). During a hail storm, all 20 of Cedar Bluff's buildings sustained some damage. The roofs on all of the buildings needed to be replaced, and at least one siding panel on each building sustained damage. Eleven of the 20 buildings had three or fewer damaged panels. At the time of the hail storm, the siding was approximately 11 years old, and the color of the panels had faded. Replacement panels were available, but not in the same color. Cedar Bluff submitted a claim under its business owners' policy to American Family. The policy obligated the insurer to pay for "direct physical loss of or damage to Covered Property at the premises . . . caused by or resulting from any Covered Cause of Loss." "Covered Property" was broadly defined in the policy to include buildings at the premises. 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

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Confident about Construction Defect Bill

    February 21, 2013 —
    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson told the Las Vegas Review Journal that he was confident that his bill to reform construction defect legislation in Nevada would not meet the same fate as the bill he introduced in 2009, which made it through the Senate only to die in the Assembly. Senate Bill 161 would end the guarantee on legal fees for lawyers bringing construction defect suits. Further, the bill limits construction defects to those that include “an unreasonable risk of injury to a person or property.” According to the article, construction defect claims in Nevada are 38 times above the national average. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa Rolle and Christopher Acosta Win Summary Judgment in Favor of Property Owner

    February 20, 2023 —
    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa Rolle and Christopher Acosta obtained summary judgment in favor of Defendant, the owner of a premises located in Bronx, New York, in a personal injury case brought before the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Bronx County. The Plaintiff alleged that while leaving the Defendant’s premises, she unexpectedly fell. It is undisputed that the Plaintiff does not know why she fell or identify any defect that may have caused her fall. The Defendant’s witness testified that the route taken by the Plaintiff was free of any defect prior to and on the date of the incident. The witness further testified that the site was also subject to routine inspection leading up to the incident, in which no tripping hazards were observed. Reprinted courtesy of Lisa M. Rolle, Traub Lieberman and Christopher D. Acosta, Traub Lieberman Ms. Rolle may be contacted at lrolle@tlsslaw.com Mr. Acosta may be contacted at cacosta@tlsslaw.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Housing Gains Not Leading to Hiring

    October 25, 2013 —
    Although construction spending has been rising steadily, the Labor Department noted that most of the 20,000 jobs added by the construction industry in September were for nonresidential construction. In a year that saw an 18% gain in residential construction spending, there was only an increase of 4.8% in employment. The lack of hiring seems to indicate a lingering lack of confidence in the homebuilding market. Employers are having workers do overtime, rather than employ additional people. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    IRMI Expert Commentary: Managing Insurance Coverage from Multiple Insurers

    May 11, 2020 —
    What do you do when less is more? In many loss scenarios, triggering coverage under multiple policies can be a critical and effective strategy. However, doing so has the potential to complicate the insurance recovery proceedings immensely, and possibly even undermine those overall goals. The relation of "other insurance" clauses, allocation schemes, and the practical impacts of interacting with multiple insurers can all leave the insured with some difficult questions. We present here several scenarios that illustrate how these concerns can arise and how they should be addressed to avoid running into what The Notorious B.I.G.—had he been a coverage lawyer—would have called "The More Coverage We Come Across, the More Problems We See." The "Other Insurance" Issue This first scenario is where a single-year loss implicates multiple lines of coverage. Consider the following: a general contractor (GC) faces a property damage liability claim from an owner. As a prudent insured, the GC notifies its customary first line of defense, its commercial general liability (CGL) insurer, to provide a defense. As knowledge of the claim evolves, it appears an element of pollution may be involved. The GC also places its pollution insurer on notice. Later, it's determined that the GC may have a professional liability exposure, so it tenders a claim to its professional liability insurer. Now assume that each insurer accepts coverage. Reprinted courtesy of Saxe Doernberger & Vita attorneys Gregory D. Podolak, Philip B. Wilusz and Ashley McWilliams Mr. Podolak may be contacted at gdp@sdvlaw.com Mr. Wilusz may be contacted at pbw@sdvlaw.com Ms. McWilliams may be contacted at amw@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Anti-Concurrent, Anti-Sequential Causation Clause Precludes Coverage

    February 26, 2015 —
    Where the building was damaged by both a covered cause and a non-covered cause, the policy's anti-concurrent/anti-sequential causation clause barred coverage for a collapsed building. Ashrit Realty LLC v. Tower Nat'l Ins. Co., 2015 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 107 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Jan. 20, 2015). The property sustained moderate damage during a storm on August 14, 2011. More extensive damage was caused by Hurricane Irene two weeks later. After the hurricane, a large hole formed due to the collapse of a pipe which ran underneath the property. Once the pipe collapsed, leaking water caused substantial soil erosion, which led to the collapse of the rear portion of the building. 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