BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projects
    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


    New York Appellate Court Expands Policyholders’ Ability to Plead and Seek Consequential Damages

    Fifth Circuit Requires Causal Distinction for Ensuing Loss Exception to Faulty Work Exclusion

    Hunton Insurance Lawyer, Adriana Perez, Selected to the National Association of Women Lawyers’ 2023 Rising List

    Will On-Site Robotics Become Feasible in Construction?

    Augmenting BIM Classifications – Interview with Eveliina Vesalainen of Granlund

    Schools Remain Top Priority in Carolinas as Cleanup From Storms Continues

    Recent Bribery and Anti-Corruption Enforcement Trends in Global Construction Industry

    ACS Recognized by Construction Executive Magazine in the Top 50 Construction Law Firms of 2021

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit with Additional Million

    Obama Asks for $302 Billion to Fix Bridges and Potholes

    Insurer's Daubert Challenge to Insured's Expert Partially Successful

    Michigan Court Waives Goodbye to Subrogation Claims, Except as to Gross Negligence

    Denver Airport's Renovator Uncovers Potential Snag

    Don’t Conspire to Build a Home…Wait…What?

    Policy Lanuage Expressly Prohibits Replacement of Undamaged Material to Match Damaged Material

    3 Common Cash Flow Issues That Plague The Construction Industry

    The Difference Between Routine Document Destruction and Spoliation

    Beware of Personal-Liability Clauses – Even When Signing in Your Representative Capacity

    Contractor May Be Barred Until Construction Lawsuit Settled

    Withdrawal of an Admission in California May Shift Costs—Including Attorneys’ Fees—Incurred in Connection with the Withdrawal

    Giving Insurance Carrier Prompt Notice of Claim to Avoid “Untimely Notice” Defense

    Michigan: Identifying and Exploiting the "Queen Exception" to No-Fault Subrogation

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Additional Insured in Construction Defect Case

    What to Look for in Subcontractor Warranty Endorsements

    Edison Utility Accused of Igniting LA Fire in Lawsuits

    New England Construction Defect Law Groups to Combine

    Ohio Supreme Court Holds No Occurence Arises from Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship

    Worker’s Compensation Exclusivity Rule Gets “Trumped” by Indemnity Provision

    Best Practices After Receiving Notice of a Construction Claim

    Judgment for Insurer Reversed Due to Failure to Establish Depreciation

    Philadelphia Proposed Best Value Procurement Bill

    The Fourth Circuit Applies a Consequential Damages Exclusionary Clause and the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Claims by a Subrogating Insurer Seeking to Recover Over $19 Million in Damages

    Insured Versus Insured Clause Does Not Bar Coverage

    That’s Common Knowledge! Failure to Designate an Expert Witness in a Professional Negligence Case is Not Fatal Where “Common Knowledge” Exception Applies

    CC&Rs Not the Place for Arbitration Agreement, Court Rules

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Rules General Contractors Can Contractually Subordinate Mechanics Lien Rights

    Why a Challenge to Philadelphia’s Project Labor Agreement Would Be Successful

    Ohio Condo Development Case Filed in 2011 is Scheduled for Trial

    Congratulations to Wilke Fleury’s 2023 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!!

    White and Williams Lawyers Recognized by Best Lawyers

    Chinese Hunt for Trophy Properties Boosts NYC, London Prices

    'Taylor Swift Is an Economic Phenomenon': CE's Q1 2024 Economic Update and Forecast

    The Privette Doctrine and Its Exceptions: Court of Appeal Grapples With the Easy and Not So Easy

    Insurers Subrogating in Arkansas Must Expend Energy to Prove That Their Insureds Have Been Made Whole

    Increase in Single-Family New Home Sales Year-Over-Year in January

    Nevada’s Changing Liability Insurance Landscape—State Insurance Regulator Issues Emergency Regulation and Guidance Addressing Controversial “Defense-Within-Limits” Legislation

    Florida Supreme Court Decision Limits Special Damages Presented to Juries

    Default Should Never Be An Option

    Another Colorado Construction Defect Reform Bill Dies

    Edward Beitz and William Taylor Recognized by US News – Best Lawyers as a "Lawyer of the Year"
    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

    Construction Termination Issues Part 5: What if You are the One that Wants to Quit?

    August 21, 2023 —
    Architects and Engineers are sometimes pleasantly surprised to find out that they, also, can terminate those crazy, hard to deal with Owners—at least, if the Owners fail to make payments as required. You can also terminate for Owner delays to the work, or where you think the contractor should be fired but the Owner disagrees. Again, the standard 7 days written notice is required. (See B101 §9.4). Do you have to walk off the job if they are not paying you? No—you could exercise the smaller remedy of suspending services (with 7 days written notice) until payments are caught up or the contract performance is corrected by the Owner. (See B101 §9.1). Suspension rather than outright termination is a softer approach when working with an owner you do not want to burn (too many) bridges with. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    South Carolina Supreme Court Asked Whether Attorney-Client Privilege Waived When Insurer Denies Bad Faith

    September 18, 2018 —
    The Fourth Circuit certified the following question to the South Carolina Supreme Court: Does South Carolina law support application of the "at issue" exception to the attorney-client privilege such that a party may waive the privilege by denying liability in its answer? In Re: Mt. Hawley Ins. Co., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 17910 (4th Cir. June 28, 2018). Mt. Hawley insured Contravest Construction Company under an excess commercial liability policy from July 21, 2003 to July 21, 2007. During this period, Contravest constructed a development in South Carolina. In 2011, the Owners Association sued Contravest for alleged defective construction. Mt. Hawley denied tenders to defend or indemnify. Contravest ultimately settled the case. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    In Appellate Division First, New York Appellate Team Successfully Invokes “Party Finality” Doctrine to Obtain Dismissal of Appeal for Commercial Guarantors

    December 23, 2024 —
    New York, N.Y. (November 20, 2024) - In Roc-Le Triomphe Associates, LLC v. DeSouza, 2024 NY Slip Op 05654 (1st Dep’t 2024), Associate Dean Pillarella, a member of the Appellate Practice, successfully invoked the party finality doctrine to obtain the dismissal of an appeal for the firm’s commercial guarantor clients. The action concerned rent allegedly due and owing under a commercial lease by the lease’s tenant and guarantors. Pursuant to a 2022 order, the guarantors were awarded summary judgment and dismissal of all claims against them, with the landlord’s claims against the tenant left intact. After the decision and order was served with notice of entry by the prevailing party, the landlord did not file a notice of appeal from the order but, instead, filed a notice of appeal from a later judgment months after the time to appeal the order had expired. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dean Pillarella, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Pillarella may be contacted at Dean.Pillarella@lewisbrisbois.com

    New York's Highest Court Says Asbestos Causation Requires Evidence Of Sufficient Exposure To Sustain Liability

    May 10, 2022 —
    On April 26, 2022, the New York Court of Appeals described that in toxic tort cases a plaintiff can only establish liability-creating causation for an adverse health effect with “expert testimony based on generally accepted methodologies.” See Francis Nemeth v. Brenntag North America (N.Y. Apr. 26, 2022). The suit involved alleged asbestos exposure from talc. The plaintiff alleged liability for talc contaminated with asbestos that was ultimately used in a commercial talcum powder, Desert Flower, which the decedent applied daily from 1960 to 1971. At trial, the plaintiff proffered two expert witnesses, a geologist, Sean Fitzgerald, who testified about the “glove box test” and a doctor of internal medicine, Dr. Jacqueline Moline. Fitzgerald’s glove box test consisted of agitating a sample of Desert Flower in a Plexiglas chamber. Fitzgerald concluded that the asbestos fibers in the sample of Desert Flower were “significantly releasable” and that the decedent was exposed to thousands to trillions of fibers through repeated use. Dr. Moline concluded Desert Flower was “a substantial contributing factor” to the decedent’s peritoneal mesothelioma. The jury returned a verdict in the plaintiff’s favor. Reprinted courtesy of Rafael Vergara, White and Williams and Jhonattan N. Gonzalez, White and Williams Mr. Vergara may be contacted at vergarar@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Gonzalez may be contacted at gonzalezj@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Las Vegas Team Obtains Complete Dismissal of a Traumatic Brain Injury Claim

    June 21, 2024 —
    Congratulations to Partner, Jeffrey W. Saab and Associate, Shanna B. Carter on their successful Motion to Dismiss! This personal injury claim arose from an incident whereby Plaintiff allegedly tripped and fell in front of the client’s business and sustained a traumatic brain injury. Initially, a default was entered against the client, and BWB&O was retained to unwind the same, and then defend against the claim. However, during the initial investigation, Shanna uncovered a defect in the service of the Complaint which invalidated not only the default, but more importantly service of the Complaint itself. Working as a team, Shanna performed the research and writing, and Jeff argued the Motion to Dismiss which was granted dispensing of the entire claim. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Building 47 Bridges in Two Years

    December 23, 2023 —
    Every construction project has its challenges, but some truly push the boundaries of what is achievable in the heavy civil industry. When the Indiana Department of Transportation sought to modernize its I-65/I-70 North Split Interchange in Indianapolis, Indiana, its request for proposals included building 47 new bridges and rehabilitating six additional bridges on an ambitious two-year timeline—905 days to substantial completion. “Three design-build teams responded to the RFQ, and the same three teams responded to the RFP,” according to INDOT Strategic Communications Director Natalie Garrett. “Proposals were scored and evaluated using the best-value evaluation process defined by INDOT. The score was a combination of a technical proposal score and a price score.” Reprinted courtesy of Dan Sopczak, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    CGL Insurer’s Duty To Defend Broader Than Duty To Indemnify And Based On Allegations In Underlying Complaint

    April 10, 2019 —
    The duty to defend an insured with respect to a third-party claim is broader than the duty to indemnify the insured for that claim. The duty to defend is triggered by allegations in the underlying complaint. However, an insurer is only required to indemnify its insured for damages covered under the policy. A recent case example demonstrating the duty to defend is broader than the duty to indemnify can be found in Southern Owners Ins. Co. v. Gallo Building Services, Inc., 2018 WL 6619987 (M.D.Fla. 2019). In this case, a homebuilder built a 270-unit condominium project where the units were included in 51-buildings. Upon turnover of the condominium association to the unit owners, the condominium association served a Florida Statutes Chapter 558 Notice of Construction Defects letter. There was numerous nonconforming work spread out among various subcontractor trades including nonconforming stucco work. The homebuilder incurred significant costs to repair defective work and resulting property damage, and relocated unit owners during repairs. The homebuilder then filed a lawsuit against implicated subcontractors. One of the implicated subcontractors was the stucco subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Noncumulation Clause Limits Coverage to One Occurrence

    January 07, 2015 —
    Injury suffered by children of different families living at different times in the same apartment was limited to one occurrence under the policy's noncumulation clause. Nesmith v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2014 N.Y. LEXIS 3350 (N.Y. Nov. 25, 2014). The landlord had a liability policy issued by Allstate. The declarations page stated there was a $500,000 limit for "each occurrence." The policy contained the following noncumulation clause:
    Regardless of the number of insured persons, injured persons, claims, claimants or policies involved, our total liability . . . for damages resulting from one accidental loss will not exceed the limit shown on the declarations page. All bodily injury . . . resulting from one accidental loss or from continuous or repeated exposure to the same general conditions is considered the result of one accidental 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