BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration 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


    The Texas Storm – Guidance for Contractors

    Seattle’s Tallest Tower Said Readying to Go On the Market

    2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar – Recap

    Another Way a Mechanic’s Lien Protects You

    What Cal/OSHA’s “Permanent” COVID Standards Mean for Employers

    Colorado Rejects Bill to Shorten Statute of Repose

    Storm Eunice Damage in U.K. Could Top £300 Million

    Illinois Appellate Court Addresses Professional Services Exclusion in Homeowners Policy

    Home Improvement in U.S. Slowing or Still Intact -- Which Is It?

    Bill to Include Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Introduced in New Jersey

    4 Ways the PRO Act Would Impact the Construction Industry

    New Nafta Could Settle Canada-U.S. Lumber War, Resolute CEO Says

    2023 Executive Insights From Leaders in Construction Law

    Traub Lieberman Partners Ryan Jones and Scot Samis Obtain Affirmation of Final Summary Judgment

    Fraud and Construction Contracts- Like Oil and Water?

    Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Harmon Towers

    Haight Proudly Supports JDC's 11th Annual Bike-A-Thon Benefitting Pro Bono Legal Services

    Illinois Favors Finding Construction Defects as an Occurrence

    Fourth Circuit Questions EPA 2020 Clean Water Act 401 Certification Rule Tolling Prohibition

    Final Furnishing Date is a Question of Fact

    Insurer's Withheld Discovery Must be Produced in Bad Faith Case

    Toronto Skyscraper With $1.2 Billion of Debt Has Been Put in Receivership

    Kansas City Airport Terminal Project Faces Delays, Rising Costs

    The Three L’s of Real Estate Have New, Urgent Meaning

    New York's New Gateway: The Overhaul of John F. Kennedy International Airport

    Landmark Contractor Licensing Case Limits Disgorgement Remedy in California

    What Makes Building Ventilation Good Enough to Withstand a Pandemic?

    Appellate Court of Maryland Construes Notice Conditions of A312 Performance Bond in Favor of Surety

    Repeated Use of Defective Fireplace Triggers Duty to Defend Even if Active Fire Does Not Break Out Until After End of Policy Period

    Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion on Business Risk Exclusions Fails

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

    Granting of Lodestar Multiplier in Coverage Case Affirmed

    Filling Out the Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud

    New York Bars Developers from Selling Condos due to CD Fraud Case

    Arbitration—No Opportunity for Appeal

    The Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Trial to Begin

    California Supreme Court Holds that Design Immunity Does Not Protect a Public Entity for Failure to Warn of Dangerous Conditions

    Association Bound by Arbitration Provision in Purchase-And-Sale Contracts and Deeds

    Commercial Construction Heating Up

    Bert L. Howe & Associates to Join All-Star Panel at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    No Rest for the Weary: Project Completion Is the Beginning of Litigation

    Compliance with Building Code Included in Property Damage

    Should I Stay or Should I Go? The Supreme Court Says “Stay”

    Five LEED and Green Construction Trends to Watch in 2020

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/17/24) – Housing Inflation to Remain High, Proptech Investment to Fall and Office Vacancy Rates to Reach Peak in 2025

    Measure of Damages for a Chattel Including Loss of Use

    Guilty Pleas Draw Renewed Interest In Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws

    Corps, State Agencies Prep for Flood Risks From California Snowmelt Runoff

    Get Construction Defects in Writing
    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

    Flood Insurance Claim Filed in State Court Properly Dismissed

    October 28, 2015 —
    The insureds' claim for flood coverage filed in state court was properly dismissed by the trial court. Rodriguez-Roble v. Am. Nat'l Prop. & Cas. Co., 2015 La. App LEXIS 1810 (La. Ct. App. Sept. 23, 2015). The insureds' home was damaged by wind, rain and flood water during Hurricane Isac. The insureds provided to American National what they contended was satisfactory proof of their claim. American National failed to make any offers to resolve the claim. The insureds sued in state court, seeking damages under the policy and penalties for American National's alleged bad faith in failing to settle or pay the claim. American National moved to dismiss, arguing that the state court did not have subject matter jurisdiction. American National further argued that under the National Flood Insurance Program, the federal courts had exclusive jurisdiction over the denial and adjustment of flood insurance claims. The trial court agreed that the flood insurance policy was governed by federal law. 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

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    November 18, 2011 —

    Vertex Pharmaceuticals is poised to become the holder of Boston’s biggest commercial lease, paying $72.5 million for 1.1 million square feet on Boston’s waterfront. Vertex’s new buildings are still under construction, but the plans have spurred other development in the Fan Pier area, according to the New York Times. The Times quotes Mary A. Burke, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston that the Vertex project gives “a big push” to the “momentum for economic growth.”

    The Fallon Company is building Vertex’s new laboratory and office space. They are separately planning to build a high-rise with 150 luxury condominium units. According to Joseph Fallon, the chief executive and president of the Fallon Company, there is already a waiting list of 50 buyers for the condominiums.

    Across the street from the Vertex site, a group including Morgan Stanley and Boston Global Investors is planning a 23-block mixed use project that would include 1.2 million square feet of retail space. Additionally, the New England Development and the Hanover Group is building a 356-unit apartment building at the adjacent Pier 4.

    Read the full story…

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

    Be Careful in Contracting and Business

    May 06, 2019 —
    After an hour long phone conference with a client, I have had several thoughts, only a few of which I can share here (grin). The first is that my friends and clients in the construction industry are hurting, but need to work with an attorney to assure that the pain is lessened. The second is that more, not less, precision is needed in construction contracting these days. The reason for the first thought is that the construction industry has taken a hit lately. The news is fraught with stories of the economic downturn and its impact on construction. While the money may be hard to part with, all construction professionals should get their contracts and business practices audited regularly to avoid risk and assure, as best as is possible, that they are protected. One place to get such triage is at my firm. If you don’t use me, please use someone else. On the second point, clients need attorney fees provisions, indemnity clauses and to assure that a scope of work is very specifically defined. Wiggle room is not available. In tough economic times. Owners will look for something closer to perfection when money is tight than when money is not. Contractors should also. Your contract is the first line of defense. While no contract can possibly cover every contingency and contracts are only as good as those who sign them when it comes right down to it, a good base contract is the best shield. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Less Than Perfectly Drafted Endorsement Bars Flood Coverage

    January 21, 2015 —
    The court decided that the policy's flood exclusion, despite being poorly located within the policy, barred coverage for loss caused by flood. Great Lakes Int'l Trading Inc. v. Travelers Prop. Cas. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165378 (D. Conn. Nov. 26, 2014). Hurricane Sandy caused flood waters from the Hackensack River in New Jersey to inundate a warehouse where the insured had imported food products stored for sale in the United States. High winds also sheared open parts of the warehouse's roof, allowing extensive rainwater to enter 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

    Montana Federal District Court Finds for Insurer in Pollution Coverage Dispute

    October 24, 2021 —
    Applying Louisiana law, a recent federal court decision exemplifies why policyholders should thoroughly read claims-made policies to understand when notice is due to insurers and truthfully complete policy applications. In Admiral Insurance Company v. Dual Trucking, Inc.,1 the Court determined the insurer, Admiral Insurance Company (“AIC”), owed no duty to defend or indemnify Dual Trucking and Transport, LLC (“DTT”), Dual Trucking of Montana, LLC (“DTM”), and Dual Trucking, Inc. (“DTI”) (collectively, the “Dual Entities”) under two Environmental Impairment Liability Policies (“EIL Policies”) and four Contractor Pollution Liability Policies (“CPL Policies”). The Court justified its decision because the Dual Entities: 1) did not give notice during the 2012-2013 EIL Policy period; 2) had discovered or knew of, but did not disclose, potential pollution conditions before the inception of the 2013-2014 EIL Policy and before the expiration of the extended reporting period of the 2012-2013 EIL Policy; 3) failed to provide AIC with notice during the extended reporting period of the 2013-2014 EIL Policy of claims for which the Dual Entities were seeking coverage; and 4) materially misrepresented known facts on the CPL Policy applications. I. Factual Background. The Dual Entities were Louisiana-based companies that provided oilfield equipment rental services. In 2011, the Dual Entities leased land in Montana under three leases, collectively referred to as “the Bainville site.” Shortly afterward, the Dual Entities applied for, and AIC issued, an EIL Policy and two CPL Policies with a policy period of October 1, 2012, to October 1, 2013. AIC renewed all three policies for the October 1, 2013, to October 1, 2014, policy period. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melanie A. McDonald, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Ms. McDonald may be contacted at MMcDonald@sdvlaw.com

    Be Careful with “Green” Construction

    March 18, 2019 —
    As readers of Construction Law Musings can attest, I am an enthusiastic (if at times skeptical) supporter of sustainable (or “green”) building. I am solidly behind the environmental and other benefits of this type of construction. However, I have likened myself to that loveable donkey Eeyore on more than one occasion when discussing the headlong charge to a sustainable future. While I see the great benefits of a privately built and privately driven marketplace for sustainable (I prefer this term to “green” because I find it less ambiguous) building stock and retrofits of existing construction, I have felt for a while that the glory of the goal has blinded us somewhat to the risks and the need to consider these risks as we move forward. Another example reared it’s ugly head recently and was pointed out by my pal Doug Reiser (@douglasreiser) at his Builders Counsel Blog (a great read by the way). Doug describes a project that I mentioned previously here at Musings and that is well described in his blog and in a recent newsletter from Stuart Kaplow (@stuartkaplow), namely, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Philip Merrill Environmental Center project. I commend Doug’s post for a great description of the issues, but suffice it to say that the Chesapeake Bay Foundation sued Weyerhauser over some issues with a sustainable wood product that failed. While the case was dismissed on statute of limitations grounds, the case illustrates issues that arise in the “new” sustainable building world. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 – Expert Testimony

    October 30, 2023 —
    In April, the Supreme Court sent a list of proposed amendments to Congress that amend the Federal Rules of Evidence. Absent action by Congress, the rules go into effect December 1, 2023. The proposed amendments affect Rules 106, 615 and, relevant to this article, 702. Rule 702 addresses testimony by an expert witness. The proposed rule reads as follows (new material is underlined; matters omitted are lined through): A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if the proponent demonstrates to the court that it is more likely than not that:
    1. the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;
    2. the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;
    3. the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and
    4. the expert has reliably applied expert’s opinion reflects a reliable application of the principles and methods to the facts of the case.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    Fraudster Sells 24-Bedroom ‘King’s Speech’ London Mansion

    May 20, 2015 —
    Edward Davenport, jailed for fraud for his role in a fake lender, sold a 24-bedroom mansion in London’s Marylebone district that was featured in the film “The King’s Speech.” The money raised from the sale will be used to repay 13 million pounds ($20 million) from a confiscation order by Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service, the Serious Fraud Office said in a statement Wednesday. Davenport was jailed for more than seven years in October 2011 for his role in Gresham Ltd., a company that said it offered to provide commercial funding in return for advance fees, the SFO said. After securing the payments, employees would make deceptive assertions to extract further fees, the SFO said in 2011. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Neil Callanan, Bloomberg