BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut building envelope 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


    Disjointed Proof of Loss Sufficient

    Quick Note: Insurer’s Denial of Coverage Waives Right to Enforce Post-Loss Policy Conditions

    Colorado Court of Appeals Decides the Triple Crown Case

    Faulty Workmanship an Occurrence in Iowa – as Long as Other Property Damage is Involved

    The Great London Property Exodus Is in Reverse as Tenants Return

    The “Unavailability Exception” is Unavailable to Policyholders, According to New York Court of Appeals

    Recent Opinions Clarify Enforceability of Pay-if-Paid Provisions in Construction Contracts

    White and Williams LLP Secures Affirmation of Denial to Change Trial Settings Based on Plaintiffs’ Failure to Meet the Texas Causation Standard for Asbestos Cases

    Attorney's Erroneous Conclusion that Limitations Period Had Not Expired Was Not Grounds For Relief Under C.C.P. § 473(b)

    In UK, 16th Century Abbey Modernizes Heating System by Going Back to Roman Times

    New Jersey Appeals Court Ruled Suits Stand Despite HOA Bypassing Bylaw

    Formal Request for Time Extension Not Always Required to Support Constructive Acceleration

    Know When Your Claim “Accrues” or Risk Losing It

    A Look at Trending Legislative Changes Impacting Workers' Comp

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

    Colorado Adopts Twombly-Iqbal “Plausibility” Standard

    CSLB’s Military Application Assistance Program

    Bertha – The Tunnel is Finished, but Her Legacy Continues

    World’s Biggest Crane Lifts Huge Steel Ring at U.K. Nuclear Site

    Good Ole Duty to Defend

    Congratulations 2016 DE, NJ, and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Watchdog Opens Cartel Probe Into Eight British Homebuilders

    BHA’s Next MCLE Seminar in San Diego on July 25th

    Update Relating to SB891 and Bond Claim Waivers

    Modified Plan Unveiled for Chicago's Sixth-Tallest Tower

    Toll Brothers Honored at the Shore Builders Association of Central New Jersey Awards

    Brooklyn Atlantic Yards Yields Dueling Suits on Tower

    Breath of Fresh Air

    Construction Firm Settles Suit Over 2012 Calif. Wildfire

    Witt Named to 2017 Super Lawyers

    Illinois Court Determines Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims

    Recent Amendments and Caselaw Affecting the Construction Industry in Texas

    Can Your Small Business Afford to Risk the Imminent Threat of a Cyber Incident?

    State of Texas’ Claims Time Barred by 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act

    Purse Tycoon Aims at Ultra-Rich With $85 Million Home

    The Choice Is Yours – Or Is It? Anti-Choice-of-Laws Statutes Applicable to Construction Contracts

    Gordie Howe Bridge Project Team Looks for a Third Period Comeback

    OSHA Issues Final Rule on Electronic Submission of Injury and Illness Data

    Maryland Finally set to Diagnose an Allocation Method for Progressive Injuries

    Recovering Attorney’s Fees and Treble Damages in Washington DC Condominium Construction Defect Cases

    U.S. Building Permits Soared to Their Highest Level in Nearly Eight Years

    First-Time Buyers Shut Out of Expanding U.S. Home Supply

    A Property Boom Is Coming to China's Smaller Cities

    Product Defect Allegations Trigger Duty To Defend in Pennsylvania

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    Agile Project Management in the Construction Industry

    Architect Named Grand Custom Home Winner for Triangular Design

    The Importance of the Recent Amendment to Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence

    No Coverage For Construction Defects Under Alabama Law

    Plans Go High Tech
    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

    Federal Court Again Confirms No Coverage For Construction Defects in Hawaii

    July 28, 2016 —
    The Hawaii federal district court confirmed its prior holdings that there is no duty to defend or indemnify for property damage caused by faulty workmanship. State Farm Fire & Cas Co. v. GP West, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74240 (D. Haw. Jun 7, 2016). (Full disclosure - our office represents GP West in this matter). GP West, the contractor, and Air Conditioning of Maui, Inc. (AC Maui), the subcontractor, were sued by the owner of a veterinary clinic for installation of an alleged defective HVAC system. GP West contracted with the owner to build the clinic. AC Maui was the HVAC subcontractor and designed, sized and priced a HVAC system for the clinic. The underlying complaint alleged that after the building was substantially complete, the HVAC system experienced multiple equipment defects and mechanical breakdowns, and did not properly dehumidify 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

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

    March 09, 2020 —
    Construing an all-risk Businessowners Policy, the court found that the policy language did not required replacement of undamaged material match materials that were damaged. Pleasure Creek Townhomes Homeowners' Ass'n v. Am. Family Ins. Co., 2019 Minn. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1095 (Minn. Ct. App. Nov. 25, 2019). The policy covered the Association's 14 townhome buildings. In June 2017, a hail storm damaged siding on all 14 buildings. An appraisal panel included the cost to replace the undamaged, faded siding in its appraisal award so that it would match the new siding. American Family refused to pay this component - which was appraised at about $211,382 - of the award. An exclusion in the policy provided,
    We will not pay to repair or replace undamaged material due to mismatch between undamaged material and new material used to repair or replace damaged material.
    We do not cover the loss in value to an property due to mismatch between undamaged material and new material used to repair or replace damaged material.
    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

    Dallas Home Being Built of Shipping Containers

    October 22, 2013 —
    Some people wonder what it is. Others think it’s an eyesore. A Dallas architect is constructing a home using shipping containers for the upper story. Matt Mooney is using fourteen in all, with seven running across the front of the building. Mr. Mooney intends to have glass doors at the front back. Most of the home’s living area will be constructed in the shipping containers. The bottom floor will be for storage and garage. Mr. Mooney says that “30 or 40 times a day” people are stopping to look at the house. He also said that the delivery of the shipping containers brought some attention. “People call these things shipping containers, but technically they are prefabricated steel modules.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Will Maryland Beltway Developer's Exit Doom $7.6B P3 Project?

    March 13, 2023 —
    Maryland’s controversial $7.6-billion plan to build tolled express lanes along two Washington, DC-area interstates has suffered a potentially fatal blow with the departure of the private development consortium from the project. Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, 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

    BWB&O Attorneys are Selected to 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars

    July 22, 2024 —
    BWB&O is proud to announce Senior Family Law Associate Pamchal Deylami, Newport Beach Partner Kyle Riddles, Newport Beach Partner Courtney Serrato, Newport Beach Associate Kevin Moore, Woodland Hills Associate Brian Taylor have been selected to the 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers list as Rising Stars for their work in Family Law, Civil Litigation, Business Litigation, and Personal Injury.
    SELECTED AS RISING STARS Pamchal Deylami: 2020-2024 Kyle Riddles: 2024 Courtney Serrato: 2023-2024 Kevin Moore: 2021-2024 Brian Taylor: 2023-2024
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Whose Employee is it Anyway?: Federal Court Finds No Coverage for Injured Subcontractor's Claim Based on Modified Employer's Liability Exclusion

    September 28, 2020 —
    In Nagog Real Estate Consulting Corp. v. Nautilus Insurance Co.,1 the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts held that an insurer had no duty to defend its insureds against claims brought by an injured subcontractor, based on an overbroad employer’s liability exclusion in the policy. Nautilus Insurance Company issued a commercial general liability policy to developer Nagog Homes LLC and its related construction company, Nagog Real Estate. The policy was endorsed with an Employer’s Liability Exclusion (the L205 Endorsement) that expanded the scope of the standard exclusion in the coverage form to include bodily injury claims of employees of “any” insured and their contractors or subcontractors, as opposed to simply the employees of the named insured. Nagog Homes was the developer, and Nagog Real Estate was the general contractor for a residential construction project. An employee of the framing subcontractor hired by Nagog Real Estate was injured while working on the project and sued both Nagog entities for his injuries. Nautilus, relying on the modified employer’s liability exclusion, denied coverage for the lawsuit based on allegations that the Nagog entities hired the framing subcontractor to perform work, which effectively made the plaintiff an employee of one or both of the Nagog entities. Reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey J. Vita , Saxe Doernberger & Vita and Kerianne E. Kane, Saxe Doernberger & Vita Mr. Vita may be contacted at jjv@sdvlaw.com Ms. Kane may be contacted at kek@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Newmeyer Dillion Secures Victory For Crown Castle In Years-Long Litigation With City Council Of Piedmont Over Small Cell Wireless Telecommunications Sites

    December 30, 2019 —
    Newmeyer Dillion, a prominent business and real estate law firm, is pleased to announce that, on November 18, 2019, the City Council of the City of Piedmont unanimously voted to approve the installation of 17 small cell wireless telecommunications sites by Newmeyer Dillion client Crown Castle NG West LLC, the leading provider of shared communications infrastructure in the United States. This victory ends a long-running legal dispute over Crown Castle's small cell wireless network, which was vehemently opposed by Piedmont residents and previously rejected by the City Council, prompting Newmeyer Dillion to bring a lawsuit against the city in 2017. The dispute began in 2016 when Crown Castle filed an application with the City Council of the City of Piedmont to build nine small cell wireless sites designed to provide critical wireless telecommunications coverage in Piedmont. In October 2017, the Council denied the network, rejecting some of the proposed sites or approving others with onerous conditions. Newmeyer Dillion's Government, Land Use and Environmental practice group filed a lawsuit on behalf of Crown Castle in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in November 2017, challenging the Council's decision. Drawing from the language established in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the lawsuit alleged that Piedmont's ordinances established an unreasonably high bar of approval, unlawfully prohibiting telecommunications services in the city. The city quickly requested a court-supervised settlement, which was approved by the City Council in December 2018 and allowed Crown Castle to reapply to build 17 small cell wireless telecommunications facilities. The unanimous City Council approval came after extensive mediation work between the two parties. "We are excited that our years-long efforts have culminated in this major win for Crown Castle, allowing them to build out critical telecommunications infrastructure in the City of Piedmont," said Michael Shonafelt, partner at Newmeyer Dillion. "With the growing national need for robust telecommunications networks that can handle voice communication and modern data demands, approvals such as this are significant, not just for the community the network serves, but for the viability of the national telecommunications network as a whole. Our team is proud to be using our multidisciplinary, business-oriented approach to successfully advise clients navigating these issues." About Newmeyer Dillion For 35 years, Newmeyer Dillion has delivered creative and outstanding legal solutions and trial results for a wide array of clients. With over 70 attorneys practicing in all aspects of corporate, privacy & data security, employment, real estate, construction, insurance law and trial work, Newmeyer Dillion delivers legal services tailored to meet each client's needs. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, with offices in Walnut Creek, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, Newmeyer Dillion attorneys are recognized by The Best Lawyers in America©, and Super Lawyers as top tier and some of the best lawyers in California, and have been given Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review's AV Preeminent® highest rating. For additional information, call 949.854.7000 or visit www.newmeyerdillion.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Supreme Court Declines to Waive Sovereign Immunity in Premises Defect Case

    April 10, 2023 —
    Houston, Texas (March 30, 2023) – The Supreme Court of Texas recently upheld a Thirteenth Court of Appeals’ judgment finding that the plaintiffs in a premises defect case brought against the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) had failed to raise a fact issue regarding the creation of a dangerous condition and, consequently, failed to establish waiver of the defendant’s sovereign immunity. Daniel K. Christ and Nicole D. Salinas v. Tex. DOT, et al., No. 21-0728, 66 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 306, 2023 Tex. LEXIS 128, at *1 (Feb 10, 2023). Background Plaintiffs Daniel Christ and his wife, Nicole Salinas (the Christs), were riding their motorcycle through a construction zone when they collided with a vehicle that crossed into their lane. TxDOT’s traffic control plan for the related construction project called for the placement of concrete barriers between opposing travel lanes; however, once construction on the project began, TxDOT’s contractor determined there was not enough space for the concrete barriers and revised the traffic control plan to substitute yellow stripes and buttons for the concrete barriers. TxDOT never approved the revised traffic control plan in writing; however, TxDOT’s contractor contended TxDOT orally approved of the change. The Christs sued the driver of the other vehicle, TxDOT, and TxDOT’s contractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Starr M. Forster, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Forster may be contacted at Starr.Forster@lewisbrisbois.com