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


    “License and Registration, Please.” The Big Risk of Getting Busted for Working without a Proper Contractor’s License

    Contractor Gets Benched After Failing to Pay Jury Fees

    Difficulty in Defending Rental Supplier’s Claim Under Credit Application

    Eleventh Circuit Set to Hear Challenge to Florida Law Barring Foreign Citizens From Buying Real Property

    ISO Proposes New Designated Premises Endorsement in Response to Hawaii Decision

    2019 Legislative Session

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: World Class Shopping Experiences

    New England Construction Defect Law Groups to Combine

    Court Affirms Duty to Defend Additional Insured Contractor

    Alexander Moore Promoted to Managing Partner of Kahana Feld’s Oakland Office

    Orchestrating Bias: Arbitrator’s Undisclosed Membership in Philharmonic Group with Pauly Shore’s Attorney Not Grounds to Reverse Award in Real Estate Dispute

    Address 'Your Work' Exposure Within CPrL Policies With Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    Update: Lawyers Can Be Bound to Confidentiality Provision in Settlement Agreement

    California Supreme Court Shifts Gears on “Reverse CEQA”

    Video: Contractors’ Update on New Regulations Governing Commercial Use of Drones

    Checking the Status of your Contractor License During Contract Work is a Necessity: The Expanded “Substantial Compliance” under B&P 7031 is Here

    Chinese Drywall Manufacturer Claims Product Was Not for American Market

    No Coverage for Alleged Misrepresentation Claim

    Tips for Contractors Who Want to Help Rebuild After the California Wildfires

    Maine Court Allows $1B Hydropower Transmission Project to Proceed

    Actual Cost Value Includes Depreciation of Repair Labor Costs

    AAA Revises Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Weslaco, Texas Investigating Possible Fraudulent Contractor Invoices

    Irvine Partner Cinnamon J. Carr and Associate Brittney H. Aquino Prevail on Summary Judgment

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC Recognized Among The Top 50 Construction Law FirmsTM of 2023 by Construction Executive

    Mitigating Mold Exposure in Manufacturing and Multifamily Buildings

    The EPA and the Corps of Engineers Propose Another Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States”

    Is the Manhattan Bank of America Tower a Green Success or Failure?

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

    Mediation Clause Can Stay a Miller Act Claim, Just Not Forever

    South Dakota Supreme Court Holds That Faulty Workmanship Constitutes an “Occurrence”

    The Cross-Party Exclusion: The Hazards of Additional Named Insured Provisions

    Modified Plan Unveiled for Chicago's Sixth-Tallest Tower

    Liebherr Claims Crane Not Cause of Brazil Stadium Construction Accident

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    Indiana Court of Appeals Holds That Lease Terms Bar Landlord’s Carrier From Subrogating Against Commercial Tenant

    Three Reasons Lean Construction Principles Are Still Valid

    Reminder: Your MLA Notice Must Have Your License Number

    Skyline Cockpit’s Game-Changing Tower Crane Teleoperation

    Flint Water Crisis Prompts Call for More Federal Oversight

    Relief Bill's Highway Funds Could Help Construction Projects

    Everyone's Moving to Seattle, and It's Stressing Out Sushi Lovers

    LA Metro To Pay Kiewit $297.8M Settlement on Freeway Job

    Home Building on the Upswing in Bakersfield

    Constructive Change Directives / Directed Changes

    Ben L. Aderholt Joins Coats Rose Construction Litigation Group

    Conn. Appellate Court Overturns Jury Verdict, Holding Plaintiff’s Sole Remedy for Injuries Arising From Open Manhole Was State’s Highway Defect Statute

    4 Ways to Mitigate Construction Disputes

    Former UN General Assembly President Charged in Bribe Scheme

    Does Your U.S. Company Pull Data From European Citizens? Fall In Line With GDPR by May 2018 or Suffer Substantial Fines
    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

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Denies Bad Faith Claim in HO Policy Dispute

    September 24, 2014 —
    According to Patrick Nugent of Saul Ewing LLP’s article in JD Supra Business Advisor, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entered a summary judgment for the insurer on a statutory bad faith claim in a coverage dispute under a homeowner’s policy. The coverage dispute was over “the collapse of a wall in the plaintiffs’ home.” The Plaintiffs alleged that “the collapse resulted from excessive rainfall during a storm in March 2011.” However, Metropolitan Direct Property and Casualty Insurance Company’s engineer concluded that the collapse “resulted from long-term and on-going water infiltration attributable to poor maintenance.” Water damage had occurred a year prior to the collapse, but had not been repaired. In response, “Plaintiffs filed a complaint in Pennsylvania state court alleging breach of contract and statutory bad faith.” The court “determined that Metropolitan’s denial of benefits ‘was not only reasonable, but correct under the Policy language,’” and “ruled that the plaintiffs could not demonstrate that Metropolitan lacked a reasonable basis for denying their claim and entered summary judgment for Metropolitan on the plaintiffs’ bad faith claim.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Flint Water Suits Against Engineers Will Go to Trial, Judge Says

    March 14, 2022 —
    A federal judge in Michigan declined on Feb. 7 to accept the contention of engineer Lockwood, Andrews and Newnam Inc. that claims against it for professional negligence in its advisory role to Flint, Mich. ahead of the city's drinking water crisis should not go to trial. The civil case, set for trial on Feb. 15, was brought on behalf of four children who say they suffered neurocognitive harm from exposure to lead in the water supply. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    French President Vows to Rebuild Fire-Collapsed Notre Dame Roof and Iconic Spire

    June 03, 2019 —
    Two British masonry experts familiar with centuries-old stone structures voiced concern that the catastrophic fire that collapsed the roof and spire of Notre Dame on April 15 could also have damaged stonework of the iconic Paris cathedral that may affect its stability. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Blair, ENR and Peter Reina, ENR Mr. Blair may be contacted at blairs@enr.com Mr. Reina may be contacted at reina@btinternet.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Surviving a Tornado – How to Navigate Insurance Claims in the Wake of the Recent Connecticut Storm

    May 24, 2018 —
    Five minutes after I parked my car, a tree fell on it. On Tuesday, May 15th I pulled into my driveway, in my small Connecticut neighborhood, under a grey sky. As soon as I walked in the house, the lights flickered. And then suddenly there was a loud “Crack!” and “Crash!” and the sound of breaking glass. I looked out the window and trees were bent 90 degrees, then snapping, and then flying up instead of falling down. As quickly as it came, it passed. When I stepped outside, my first thought was that my car has seen better days. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Geoffrey Miller, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Miller may be contacted at gjm@sdvlaw.com

    New York Appellate Court Restores Insurer’s Right to Seek Pro Rata Allocation of Settlements Between Insured and Uninsured Periods

    March 28, 2022 —
    In Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Jenkins Bros., 2022 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1846 (App.Div. 1st Dept. March 22, 2022), the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, issued a ruling reversing the trial court and holding that an insurer was entitled to allocate a portion of asbestos claim settlements it negotiated to time periods when its dissolved insured was without coverage. The decision overturns a trial court ruling that the insurer was barred from denying liability for the full amount of the settlements because the insurer had become the “real party in interest” as a result of a prior court order directing it to accept service of process on behalf of a dissolved insured. The trial court held that the insurer stood in the shoes of the insured for all purposes by accepting service and negotiating settlements, and was therefore estopped from denying liability for the full amount of the settlements. Reprinted courtesy of Patricia B. Santelle, White and Williams LLP and Frank J. Perch, III, White and Williams LLP Ms. Santelle may be contacted at santellep@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Perch may be contacted at perchf@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Los Angeles Tower Halted Over Earthquake and other Concerns

    December 04, 2013 —
    Plans to build the Millennium Hollywood project have been halted over lawsuits alleging that the Hollywood fault line runs under the site and would render it unsafe. Additional claims are that the buildings would block views of the Hollywood sign. But Robert Silverstein alleges in his suit that the buildings would endanger lives. The Millennium claims that the project would create about 3,000 construction jobs, and that after the building were complete, they would create 1,000 jobs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Recap of the Supreme Court’s 2019 Summer Slate

    September 16, 2019 —
    As usual, the last month of the Supreme Court’s term generated significant rulings on all manner of cases, possibly presaging the new directions the Court will be taking in administrative and regulatory law. Here’s a brief roundup: An Offshore Dispute, Resolve – Parker Drilling Management v. Newton On June 10, 2019, the Court held, in a unanimous ruling, that, under federal law, California wage and hour laws do not apply to offshore operations conducted on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). Newton, the plaintiff, worked on drilling platforms off the coast of California, and alleged that he was not paid for his “standby time” which is contrary to California law if not federal law. He filed a class action in state court, which was removed to federal court, where it was dismissed on the basis of a 1969 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which held that state law applies on the OCS only to the extent that it is necessary to use state law to fill a significant gap or void in federal law, and this is not the case here. On appeal to the Ninth Circuit, that court disagreed with the Fifth Circuit, and ruled that state law is applicable on the OCS whenever it applies to the matter at hand. The Supreme Court, in an opinion written by Justice Thomas, conceded that “this is a close question of statutory interpretation,” but in the end the Court agreed with the argument that if there was not a gap to fill, that ended the dispute over which law applies on the Outer continental Shelf. This ruling, recognizing the preeminent role that federal law plays on the OCS, may affect the resolution of other offshore disputes affecting other federal statutes. Preemption Prevention – Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. Warren. et al. On June 17, 2019 the Court decided important cases involving federal preemption and First Amendment issues. In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court held that the Atomic Energy Act does not preempt a Virginia law that “flatly prohibits uranium mining in Virginia”—or more precisely—mining on non-federal land in Virginia. Virginia Uranium planned to mine raw uranium from a site near Coles, Virginia, but acknowledging that Virginia law forbade such an operation, challenged the state law on federal preemption grounds, arguing that the Atomic Energy Act, as implemented by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, preempts the ability of the state to regulate this activity. However, the majority, in an opinion written by Justice Gorsuch, notes that the “best reading of the AEA does not require us to hold the state law before us preempted,” and that the1983 precedent that Virginia Uranium cites, Pacific Gas & Electric Company v. State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, can easily be distinguished. Justice Gorsuch rejected arguments that the intent of the Virginia legislators in passing the state law should be consulted, that the Court’s ruling should normally be governed by the exact text of the statute at hand. However, both the concurring and dissenting opinions suggest that the what the legislators intended to do is important in a preemption context. 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

    Summary Judgment for Insurer on Construction Defect Claim Reversed

    January 07, 2025 —
    The Fifth Circuit reversed the district court's granting of summary judgment to the insurer on a construction defect claim asserted against the insured. TIG Ins. Co. v. Woodsboro Farmers Cooperative, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 24003 (5th Cir. Sept. 20, 2024). In March 2013, Woodsboro Farmers Cooperative contracted with E.F. Erwin, Inc. to construct two Brock 105' diameter grain silos. Erwin hired subcontract AJ Constructors, Inc. (AJC) to construct the silos. Erwin was responsible for supervising the work. Brock silos were kits shipped by the manufacturer and then assembled according to the manufacturer's manuals and specifications. The silos are constructed section by section. AJC began erecting the silos in May 2013 and completed its work in June or early July. Erwin occasionally inspected the work and found the silos were structurally sound and not defective. AJC left the job site after completing the assembly. 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