BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut testifying construction 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


    Zinc in London Climbs for Second Day Before U.S. Housing Data

    No Jail Time for Disbarred Construction Defect Lawyer

    Faulty Workmanship Causing Damage to Other Property Covered as Construction Defect

    Potential Problems with Cases Involving One Owner and Multiple Contractors

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You Have No Class(ification)”

    Seabold Construction Ties Demise to Dispute with Real Estate Developer

    Resolve to Say “No” This Year

    Whether Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship Is an Occurrence Creates Ambiguity

    Los Angeles Tower Halted Over Earthquake and other Concerns

    New World to Demolish Luxury Hong Kong Towers in Major Setback

    Appellate Court reverses district court’s finding of alter ego in Sedgwick Properties Development Corporation v. Christopher Hinds (2019WL2865935)

    Newmeyer & Dillion Welcomes Three Associates to Newport Beach Office

    Visual Construction Diaries – Interview with Jeff Sassinsky of Fovea Aero

    Unlocking the Potential of AI and Chat GBT in Construction Management

    Construction Goes Green in Orange County

    Suing the Lowest Bidder on Public Construction Projects

    Multiple Construction Errors Contributed to Mexico Subway Collapse

    Are Construction Defect Laws a Factor in Millennials Home Buying Decisions?

    Slump in U.S. Housing Starts Led by Multifamily: Economy

    Rhode Island Sues 13 Industry Firms Over Flawed Interstate Bridge

    Despite Construction Gains, Cement Maker Sees Loss

    Alabama Court Upholds Late Notice Disclaimer

    California Supreme Court Finds that When it Comes to Intentional Interference Claims, Public Works Projects are Just Different, Special Even

    This New Indicator Shows There's No Bubble Forming in U.S. Housing

    Mitigating Mold Exposure in Manufacturing and Multifamily Buildings

    Uneven Code Enforcement Seen in Earthquake-Damaged Buildings in Turkey

    Biden Administration Issues Buy America Guidance for Federal Infrastructure Funds

    Perez Broke Records … But Should He Have Settled Earlier?

    Bank Sues over Defective Windows

    Buy a House or Pay Off College? $1.2 Trillion Student Debt Heats Up in Capital

    The OFCCP’s November 2019 Updated Technical Assistance Guide: What Every Federal Construction Contractor Should Know

    California’s Prompt Payment Laws: Just Because an Owner Has Changed Course Doesn’t Mean It’s Changed Course on Previous Payments

    Thirteen Payne & Fears Attorneys Honored by Best Lawyers

    Construction Defect Claim not Barred by Prior Arbitration

    The Evolution of Construction Defect Trends at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Insurer’s Discovery Requests Ruled to be Overbroad in Construction Defect Suit

    Unravel the Facts Before Asserting FDUTPA and Tortious Interference Claims

    Banks Loosening U.S. Mortgage Standards: Chart of the Day

    Specific Performance: Equitable Remedy to Enforce Affirmative Obligation

    Florida Court Puts the Claim of Landlord’s Insurer In The No-Fly Zone

    Homebuilders Go Green in Response to Homebuyer Demand

    Daniel Ferhat Receives Two Awards for Service to the Legal Community

    Insurance Policy Provides No Coverage For Slab Collapse in Vision One

    What Construction Contractors Should Know About the California Government Claims Act

    California Supreme Court Allows Claim Under Unfair Competition Statute To Proceed

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Brokers' MSJ on Duties Owed In Construction Defect Case

    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem

    Life After McMillin: Do Negligence and Strict Liability Causes of Action for Construction Defects Still Exist?

    California Beach Hotel to Get $185 Million Luxury Rebuild

    Vermont Supreme Court Finds COVID-19 May Damage Property
    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

    Insured's Complaint for Breach of Contract and Bad Faith Adequately Pleads Consequential Damages

    March 27, 2019 —
    The appellate court overturned the trial court's dismissal of the insured's complaint seeking consequential damages. D.K. Prop. Inc. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh v, Pa., 2019 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 329 (N.Y. App. Div. Jan. 17, 2019). The insured's building began to shift and exhibit structural damage, including cracks, after construction began in an adjoining building. The insured submitted a claim under its commercial insurance policy. The insurer did not pay the claim, nor did it disclaim coverage. The insured sued, alleging breach of contract for failure to pay covered losses under the policy. The second cause of action was for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The complaint also requested consequential damages in connection with each cause of action. The trial court granted the insurer's motion to dismiss the claim for consequential damages. 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

    Wreckage Removal Underway at Site of Collapsed Key Bridge in Baltimore, But Weather Slows Progress

    April 15, 2024 —
    Note: The text of this article was updated 4/3/24 to reflect new information. Weather and water conditions are hampering the piece-by-piece process of cutting and removing wreckage from the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, while officials consider potentially utilizing progressive design-build for a replacement bridge. Officials remain uncertain as to how long the meticulous effort to clear the key shipping channel will take. 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

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa M. Rolle and Justyn Verzillo Win Motion for Summary Judgment

    December 23, 2024 —
    In this subrogation action brought in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Dutchess County, Traub Lieberman attorneys Lisa M. Rolle and Justyn Verzillo successfully obtained dismissal of a third-party complaint against their client, a fire-system protection company. In the underlying case, a fire sprinkler system within a commercial building leaked water into multiple tenant spaces, causing damage. The tenants’ insurers alleged that they each paid several hundred thousand dollars to cover their insureds’ claims. The insurers then filed complaints against the company which originally installed the sprinkler (the “Installer”), asserting that the company breached its duty of care. The Installer commenced a third-party action against the property owner and two fire-system protection companies—including Traub Lieberman’s client—who had separately conducted annual inspections of the sprinkler system over the years. The property owner and the two fire-system protection companies each asserted cross-claims against each other. Reprinted courtesy of Lisa M. Rolle, Traub Lieberman and Justyn Verzillo, Traub Lieberman Ms. Rolle may be contacted at lrolle@tlsslaw.com Mr. Verzillo may be contacted at jverzillo@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Coverage for Property Damage That is Limited to Work Completed by Subcontractor

    April 25, 2012 —

    The issue before the 11th Circuit was whether, under Florida law, a general contractor had coverage for a property damage claim limited to the defective work performed by a subcontractor, and not affecting any other portion of the project. The court found no coverage in Amerisure Mut. Ins. Co. v. Auchter Co., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 5412 (11th Cir. March 15, 2012).

    Amelia Island Company contracted with Auchter Company, a general contractor, for construction of an inn and conference room. Auchter subcontracted with Register Contracting Company to install the Inn’s roof. Pursuant to the Florida Building Code, installation of the roof required that it be able to withstand 110 m.p.h. winds.

    Register completed installing the roof tiles in January 1998. Beginning in 2002, the tiles began dislodging from the roof. During the 2004 hurricane season, three hurricanes caused more tiles to come off the roof. Some of these tiles hit other tiles, cracking them.

    In 2006, the parties went to arbitration over the costs of repairs for the roof.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    Arbitration Provisions Are Challenging To Circumvent

    May 13, 2019 —
    Arbitration provisions are enforceable and they are becoming more challenging to circumvent, especially if one of the parties to the arbitration agreement wants to arbitrate a dispute versus litigate a dispute. Remember this when agreeing to an arbitration provision as the forum for dispute resolution in your contract. There is not a one-size-fits-all model when it comes to arbitration provisions and how they are drafted. But, there is a very strong public policy in favor of honoring a contractual arbitration provision because this is what the parties agreed to as the forum to resolve their disputes. By way of example, in Austin Commercial, L.P. v. L.M.C.C. Specialty Contractors, Inc., 44 Fla.L.Weekly D925a (Fla. 2d DCA 2019), a subcontractor and prime contactor entered into a consultant agreement that contained the following arbitration provision:
    Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof shall be subject to the dispute resolution procedures, if any, set out in the Prime Contract between [Prime Contractor] and the [Owner]. Should the Prime Contract contain no specific requirement for the resolution of disputes or should the [Owner] not be involved in the dispute, any such controversy or claim shall be resolved by arbitration pursuant to the Construction Industry Rules of the American Arbitration Association then prevailing, and judgment upon the award by the Arbitrator(s) shall be entered in any Court having jurisdiction thereof.
    The prime contract between the owner and prime contractor did not require arbitration. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    October 28, 2011 —

    The MetroWest Daily News reports that a demolition firm was told to leave the construction site at Natick High School since their failure to have workers compensation insurance makes them unable to work on the project. The contractor, Atlantic Dismantling and Site Construction, Inc. may have been working illegally since September.

    The equipment that Atlantic had rented for the job was repossessed in August. Brait Builders Corp, the general contractor for the site had rented equipment so Atlantic could continue their work.

    Their lack of insurance was discovered when a worker had a minor job-related injury. The state had issued a stop-work order for the firm and they could not legally bid on public projects. The school system did not receive any notice of this, and the school’s facilities director said of the general contractor, “chances are Brait never heard of anything either.”

    Read the full story...

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

    Insurer Cannot Abandon Defense Agreement on Underlying Asbestos Claims Against Insured

    June 12, 2023 —
    The court found that the insurer continued to be bound by a defense agreement entered with the insured who merged with another company. Continental Ins. Co. v. Neles-Jamesbury, Inc., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52521 (D. Mass. March 28, 2023). In 1990, Neles-Jamesbury became the sucessor by merger to the liabilities of Jamesbury Corp. and Neles, Inc. The companies were both in the business of manufacturing and selling valves. Continental issued two primary CGL policies to Neles, Inc. from 1986 to 1988. After the merger, Neles-Jamesbury was involved in numerous lawsuits that alleged bodily injury from asbestos exposure. Due to the continuing question of whether the policies created duties for Continental, the parties entered into a 2007 Cost Sharing Agreement, which served to clarify and define their respective obligations and coverage in the lawsuits. The agreement noted that Continental wanted to avoid the expense and uncertainties of litigation over defense obligations. 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

    Largest Per Unit Settlement Ever in California Construction Defect Case?

    October 28, 2011 —

    BusinessWire reports that the Chelsea Court Homeowners Association has settled their construction defect case for $5.4 million. That works out to $169,000 per unit, which BusinessWire describes as “California’s largest per-unit recovery known to be on record to date.”

    Most of the money in the settlement is coming from insurance companies for the builder and thirteen subcontractors. Issues included roof and window leaks, deck failures, and unsafe walkways.

    Read the full story...

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