BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete 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


    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/20/22

    Renovation Contractors: Be Careful How You Disclose Your Projects

    The Firm Hits the 9 Year Mark!

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute Stage 2- Increase the Heat

    The California Legislature Passes SB 496 Limiting Design Professional Defense and Indemnity Obligations

    “Other Insurance” and Indemnity Provisions Determine Which Insurer Must Cover

    HOA Coalition Statement on Construction-Defects Transparency Legislation

    There’s the 5 Second Rule, But Have You Heard of the 5 Year Rule?

    Patti Santelle Honored by Rutgers School of Law with Arthur E. Armitage Sr. Distinguished Alumni Award

    Public Works Bid Protests – Who Is Responsible? Who Is Responsive?

    He Turned Wall Street Offices Into Homes. Now He Vows to Remake New York

    The Economic Loss Rule: From Where Does the Duty Arise?

    Potential Construction Liabilities Contractors Need to Know

    Challenging a Termination for Default

    Property Owner’s Defense Goes Up in Smoke in Careless Smoking Case

    Death, Taxes and Attorneys’ Fees in Construction Disputes

    Three Construction Workers Injured at Former GM Plant

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

    Loan Modifications Due to COVID-19 Pandemic: FDIC Answers CARES Act FAQs

    Repair Cost Exceeding Actual Cash Value Does Not Establish “Total Loss” Under Fire Insurance Policy

    The Ghosts of Projects Past

    Homebuilders Opposed to Potential Change to Interest on Construction Defect Expenses

    Let it Shine: California Mandates Rooftop Solar for New Residential Construction

    Business and Professions Code Section 7031, Demurrers, and Just How Much You Can Dance

    Construction Defects in Home a Breach of Contract

    New York Bridge to Be Largest Infrastructure Project in North America

    Insurance Litigation Roundup: “Post No Bills!”

    FEMA Fire Management Assistance Granted for the French Fire

    Construction Termination Issues for the Architect and Engineer: Part 1– Introduction to the Series

    DC Circuit Approves, with Some Misgivings, FERC’s Approval of the Atlantic Sunrise Natural Gas Pipeline Extension

    Client Alert: Expert Testimony in Indemnity Action Not Limited to Opinions Presented in Underlying Matter

    Differences in Types of Damages Matter

    43% of U.S. Homes in High Natural Disaster Risk Areas

    Christopher Leise Recognized by US News – Best Lawyers 2022 "Lawyer of the Year"

    Wake County Justice Center- a LEED Silver Project done right!

    Fourteen Years as a Solo!

    Has Hydrogen's Time Finally Come?

    Kushners Abandon Property Bid as Pressures Mount Over Conflicts

    DOI Aims to Modernize its “Inefficient and Inflexible” Type A Natural Resource Damages Assessment Regulations

    What You Need to Know About Notices of Completion, Cessation and Non-Responsibility

    Slowing Home Sales Show U.S. Market Lacks Momentum: Economy

    Unlocking the Hidden Power of Zoning, for Good or Bad

    South Carolina Homeowners May Finally Get Class Action for Stucco Defects

    New OSHA Regulations on Confined Spaces in Construction

    A WARNing for Companies

    Construction Contractors Must Understand Retainage In 2021

    Builders Can’t Rely on SB800

    Review of Recent Contractors State License Board Changes

    Risk Management for Condominium Conversions

    Homeowner Sues Brick Manufacturer for Spalling Bricks
    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

    No Concrete Answers on Whether Construction Defects Are Occurrences

    February 14, 2013 —
    Aaron Mandel and Stevi Raab of Sedgwick Law write Construction Defect Coverage Quarterly addressing the question of “whether defective construction constitutes an ‘occurrence’ (and therefore may be covered) under liability insurance policies.” They note that some courts have held that construction defects are not an occurrence but instead are the “natural consequence of performing substandard work.” Other courts conclude that while construction defects are not occurrences, “the resulting damage may be covered because it was fortuitous and unintended.” And, finally, other courts have concluded that “defective construction work itself is accidental and the inured rarely expects construction defects.” Mandel and Raab put forth that “these decisions essentially provide insured with huge, unintended and unfair windfalls – performance bonds for basically no premium.” Legislatures have also looked at this issue, passing laws that mandate that construction defects are occurrences. These are all fairly recent and the courts have yet to address these laws, and Mandel and Raab note that “it is unclear what their ultimate effect on the ‘occurrence’ issue will be.” They do not expect the laws to end litigation over whether construction defects are occurrences. Finally, they discuss what the ultimate results of these court decisions and laws will be. Insurers might write more policy exclusions, or increase premiums, or even cease insuring construction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Staffing Company Not Entitled to Make a Claim Against a Payment Bond and Attorneys’ Fees on State Public Works Payment Bonds

    August 12, 2024 —
    It’s not quite Baskin Robbin’s “31 Flavors” but the panoply of statutory construction payment remedies available to contractors, subcontractor and material suppliers in California, from mechanics liens to stop payment notices to payment bond claims, can be tempting to reach for when you are not paid. However, some flavors are more readily available than others, as a staffing agency discovered in K & S Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. The Western Surety Company, Case Nos. C096705 and C097987 (January 2, 2024). The K & S Staffing Case The California Department of Transportation awarded VSS International, Inc. two public works construction contracts for road maintenance. Each involved an expenditure of over $25,000 and VSSI obtained a payment bond from Western Surety Company. Titan DVBE Inc. was a subcontractor on both projects. For most years, Titan employed its own workers. However, when it learned that its insurance carrier would no longer be offering workers’ compensation insurance in California it switched to K & S Staffing Solutions, Inc. to fulfill its staffing needs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

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

    April 03, 2019 —
    In Youell v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 2018 Ind. App. LEXIS 497 (2018), the Court of Appeals of Indiana considered whether a landlord’s carrier could bring a subrogation claim against a commercial tenant for fire-related damages when the lease, which did not reference subrogation, explicitly required the landlord to maintain fire insurance coverage for the leased premises. The court held that subrogation was barred because the provision requiring the landlord to maintain fire insurance established an agreement to provide both parties with the benefits of insurance. The Youell case establishes that, in Indiana, if the lease explicitly states that the landlord will maintain fire casualty insurance for the building, the lease evidences an agreement by the parties to shift the risk of loss to the insurer. This agreement bars a landlord’s insurance carrier from subrogating against a commercial tenant in the event of a casualty. In 2013, the building owner, Greg Dotson, began leasing a commercial building to Robert Youell for his tire business, Best One Giant Tire, Inc. (collectively, Youell). The lease agreement required that the landlord maintain fire and extended coverage insurance on the building and the leased premises. The lease also required the tenant to purchase fire and extended coverage insurance for its personal property. The lease did not mention subrogation. Dotson obtained a property insurance policy through Cincinnati Insurance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Inspectors Hurry to Make Sure Welds Are Right before Bay Bridge Opening

    August 27, 2013 —
    Each of the 20 welds at the base of the tower of the Bay Bridge took more than four hours to complete, with the lengthy welds forming at one-and-a-half inches per minute. They’ve been finished for two years now, but inspectors are just now checking the welds for defects. Any defects found will have to be removed and repaired. Mazen Wahbeh, an engineer on the project, assumes that less than 5 percent of the total welded area will have to be repaired. According to Wahbeh, the bridge can open before the welds are thoroughly checked and repaired, and so “the contractor is prioritizing the remaining work.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Vinci Will Build $580M Calgary Project To Avoid Epic Flood Repeat

    June 20, 2022 —
    Vinci Construction has begun work on a giant flood control project in Alberta designed to prevent a repeat of one of the most devastating natural disasters in Canadian history. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Van Voorhis, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Court Holds No Coverage Under Pollution Policy for Structural Improvements

    October 02, 2018 —
    In its recent decision in Essex Walnut Owner L.P. v. Aspen Specialty Ins. Co., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138276 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 15, 2018), the United States District Court for the Northern District of California had occasion to consider the issue of a pollution liability insurer’s obligation to pay for the redesign of a structural support system necessitated by the alleged presence of soil contamination. Aspen’s insured, Essex, owned a parcel of property it was in the process of redeveloping for commercial and residential purposes. The project required excavation activities in order to construct an underground parking lot, and as part of this process, Essex designed a temporary shoring system comprising tied-in retaining walls in order to stabilize the area outside of the excavation. During the excavation work, construction debris was encountered requiring removal. Aspen agreed to pay for a portion of the costs to remove and dispose the debris under the pollution liability policy it issued to Essex. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Margolies, Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
    Mr. Margolies may be contacted at bmargolies@tlsslaw.com

    Candis Jones Named “On the Rise” by Daily Report's Georgia Law Awards

    September 29, 2021 —
    Atlanta Partner Candis Jones was named a lawyer “On the Rise” by the Daily Report (part of Law.com). Ms. Jones is one of 20 attorneys from Georgia to receive this distinction as part of the publication's 2021 Georgia Law Awards. The Daily Report’s “On the Rise” category recognizes outstanding attorneys under the age of 40 who have made an impression on their colleagues, their clients, and the larger legal community of Georgia. Winners are selected by the publication’s editorial staff. Ms. Jones is a member of Lewis Brisbois' General Liability Practice and has extensive experience with insurance defense, premises liability, personal injury, and medical malpractice cases. Her clients include Fortune 500 companies, numerous insurance carriers, and a major metropolitan transit authority. Outside her legal practice, Ms. Jones is an active member of her legal community and was recently installed as President of the Gate City Bar Association, the oldest African-American bar association in the State of Georgia. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Candis Jones, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Jones may be contacted at Candis.Jones@lewisbrisbois.com

    Florida trigger

    May 18, 2011 —

    In Johnson-Graham-Malone, Inc. v. Austwood Enterprises, Inc., No. 16-2009-CA-005750-XXXX-MA (Fla. 4th Cir. Ct. Duval County, April 29, 2011), insured JGM was the general contractor for an apartment project completed in 1998. In 2007, the project owner sued JGM seeking damages for defective construction resulting in moisture penetration property damage. JGM tendered its defense to Amerisure. Amerisure denied a defense. JGM defended and settled the underlying suit and then filed suit against Amerisure seeking recovery of defense and settlement costs. The trial court granted JGM’s motion for partial summary judgment. The court first addressed Amerisure’s duty to defend. Applying Florida law, the court held that, although the underlying complaint alleged that the property damage was not discovered until after expiration of the Amerisure policies

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of