BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer 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


    2011 Worst Year Ever for Home Sales

    Remote Trials Can Control Prejudgment Risk

    Busting Major Alternative-Lending Myths

    Stuck in Seattle: The Aggravating Adventures of a Gigantic Tunnel Drill

    Appreciate The Risks You Are Assuming In Your Contract

    Amid the Chaos, Trump Signs Executive Order Streamlining Environmental Permitting and Disbands Infrastructure Council

    Texas Approves Law Ensuring Fair and Open Competition

    GA Federal Court Holds That Jury, Not Judge, Generally Must Decide Whether Notice Was Given “As Soon as Practicable” Under First-Party Property Damage Policies

    Buffalo-Area Roof Collapses Threaten Lives, Businesses After Historic Snowfall

    Nevada OSHA Provides Additional Requirements for Construction Employers to Address Feasibility of Social Distancing at Construction Sites

    NYT Points to Foreign Minister and Carlos Slim for Collapse of Mexico City Metro

    Florida Enacts Sweeping Tort Reform Legislation, Raising Barriers to Insurance Coverage Claims

    Baltimore Project Pushes To Meet Federal Deadline

    NY State Appellate Court Holds That Pollution Exclusions Bar Duty to Defend Under Liability Policies for Claims Alleging Exposure to PFAS

    Deadline Nears for “Green Performance Bond” Implementation

    U.S. Stocks Fall as Small Shares Tumble Amid Home Sales

    Notice of Claim Sufficient to Invoke Coverage

    Developers Celebrate Arizona’s Opportunity Zones

    Insurance Law Client Alert: California FAIR Plan Limited to Coverage Provided by Statutory Fire Insurance Policy

    White and Williams Lawyers Recognized by Best Lawyers

    Ruling Closes the Loop on Restrictive Additional Insured Endorsement – Reasonable Expectations of Insured Builder Prevails Over Intent of Insurer

    Sun, Sand and Stir-Fry? Miami Woos Chinese for Property: Cities

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- The Claim

    Affirmed

    Arbitration is Waivable (Even If You Don’t Mean To)

    Lease-Leaseback Fight Continues

    Rio de Janeiro's Bursting Real-Estate Bubble

    Indemnitor Owes Indemnity Even Where Indemnitee is Actively Negligent, California Court Holds

    Construction Defect Leads to Death, Jury Awards $39 Million

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    Maximizing Contractual Indemnity Rights: Components of an Effective Provision

    Guidance for Structural Fire Engineering Making Its Debut

    Massive Fire Destroys Building, Firefighters Rescue Construction Worker

    Condo Association Settles with Pulte Homes over Construction Defect Claims

    Traub Lieberman Recognized in 2022 U.S. News – Best Lawyers “Best Law Firms”

    2022 Construction Outlook: Continuing Growth But at Slower Pace

    No Entitlement to Reimbursement of Pre-Tender Fees

    Critical Updates in Builders Risk Claim Recovery: Staying Ahead of the "Satisfactory State" Argument and Getting the Most Out of LEG 3

    Protect Your Right To Payment By Following Nedd

    New York Regulator Issues Cyber Insurance Guidelines

    Insurer Has No Obligation to Cover Arbitration Award in Construction Defect Case

    Walking the Tightrope of SB 35

    Moving Toward a Telework Future: A Checklist of Considerations for Employers

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    Taking Service Network Planning to the Next Level

    Recycled Water and New Construction. New Standards Being Considered

    Indemnity Clauses—What do they mean, and what should you be looking for?

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

    Defining Construction Defects
    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

    PFAS and the Challenge of Cleaning Up “Forever”

    July 31, 2023 —
    From a stream of legal challenges, to ever-expanding regulations on things like cosmetics and drinking water, PFAS are the “forever chemicals” keeping companies and consumers on high alert. While industries scramble to remove the synthetic compounds from products, scientists are researching new techniques for scrubbing PFAS from the environment. There is money to be had for those who can find a more streamlined method of purging the substances—the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has an $800 million contract on the table for the handling, destruction and replacement of PFAS-laden fire-fighting foam—leaving technology companies racing to create solutions. The three main PFAS cleaning techniques currently relied upon can be very effective but are also costly and may leave questionable byproducts in their wake. The established approaches include:
    • Granular Activated Carbon. As one of the most studied treatments for PFAS removal, granular activated carbon is often used in water treatment plants. Large beds of carbon essentially soak up the unwanted chemicals. After the Sweeney Water Plant in North Carolina, whose water source is downstream from a fluorochemical-producing Chemours plant, was found to be contaminated with PFAS, the plant invested around $46 million into upgraded activated carbon systems. Once installed, these systems cost roughly $2.9 million to operate yearly, as the carbon needs to be replaced each time it reaches capacity. Though pricey, the plant says that the process now clears close to 100% of PFAS.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of PFAS Team, Pillsbury

    In a Win for Design Professionals, California Court of Appeals Holds That Relation-Back Doctrine Does Not Apply to Certificate of Merit Law

    December 20, 2017 —
    The year was 1995. The old guard was still in power in Sacramento. “Button-Down” Pete Wilson was Governor. Willie Brown, the self-nicknamed “Ayatollah of the Assembly,” was Speaker of the Assembly. And Bill “Huggy” Lockyer was Senate Pro Tem. Names that, for many reasons as of late, seem . . . well . . . let’s just say, “quaint.” Their time, however, was coming to an end. Three years earlier, California voters approved Proposition 140, which instituted term limits for the first time in California. And by 1996, the first slate of legislators would be “termed out.” The immediate impact: It was the time for making deals because you didn’t know who would be keeping house next. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel, Rosen, Black, Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    An Insurance Policy Isn’t Ambiguous Just Because You Want It to Be

    December 20, 2021 —
    When it comes to insurance contracts, there is a rule of law that states, “where interpretation is required by ambiguity in insurance contracts[,] the insured will be favored.” Pride Clean Restoration, Inc. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London, 46 Fla. L. Weekly D2584a (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (citation and quotation omitted). Stated another way: ambiguities in insurance contracts will be interpreted in favor of the insured and against the insurer. With this rule of law in mind, insureds oftentimes try to argue ambiguity even when there is not one. This was the situation in Pride Clean Construction. In this case, the property insurance policy contained a mold exclusion that stated the policy did NOT insure for “a. loss caused by mold, mildew, fungus, spores or other microorganism of any type, nature, or description including but not limited to any substance whose presence poses an actual or potential threat to human health; or b. the cost or expense of monitoring, testing, removal, encapsulation, abatement, treatment or handling of mold, mildew, fungus, spores or other microorganism as referred to in a) above.” Not only did the policy not insure for loss caused by mold, it went further to state it was NOT insuring for any mold testing or abatement. 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

    While You Were Getting Worked Up Over Oil Prices, This Just Happened to Solar

    October 29, 2014 —
    Every time fossil fuels get cheaper, people lose interest in solar deployment. That may be about to change. After years of struggling against cheap natural gas prices and variable subsidies, solar electricity is on track to be as cheap or cheaper than average electricity-bill prices in 47 U.S. states -- in 2016, according to a Deutsche Bank report published this week. That’s assuming the U.S. maintains its 30 percent tax credit on system costs, which is set to expire that same year. Even if the tax credit drops to 10 percent, solar will soon reach price parity with conventional electricity in well over half the nation: 36 states. Gone are the days when solar panels were an exotic plaything of Earth-loving rich people. Solar is becoming mainstream, and prices will continue to drop as the technology improves and financing becomes more affordable, according to the report. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Randall, Bloomberg
    Mr. Randall may be contacted at trandall6@bloomberg.net

    Crisis Averted! Pennsylvania Supreme Court Joins Other Courts in Finding that Covid-19 Presents No Physical Loss or Damage for Businesses

    October 21, 2024 —
    Seeking to find some relief from business losses experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, many businesses turned to their property insurers for coverage for their lost income. A clear national trend emerged among courts deciding the issue, as most businesses could not establish coverage because they had not experienced a “direct physical loss of or damage to their covered property” as required by most policies. While this legal question may have become an afterthought for many attorneys, the question remained an open one in Pennsylvania while the Pennsylvania Supreme Court considered two contradictory holdings issued in the Superior Court on this topic. Compare Macmiles, LLC v. Erie Ins. Exch., 286 A.3d 331 (Pa. Super. 2022) (holding there was no coverage for loss of use of a commercial property unaccompanied by any physical alteration or other physical condition that rendered the property unusable or uninhabitable) with Ungarean v. CNA, 286 A.3d 353 (Pa. Super. 2022) (holding that the policy at issue was ambiguous and therefore the policy covered the insured for COVID-related business losses). Last week, the Supreme Court considered the Superior Court’s holdings in Macmiles and Ungarean and held, at long last, that COVID-19 did not cause a direct physical loss of or damage to covered property. Reprinted courtesy of Edward M. Koch, White and Williams LLP and Marc L. Penchansky, White and Williams LLP Mr. Koch may be contacted at koche@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Penchansky may be contacted at penchanskym@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Staten Island Villa Was Home to Nabisco 'Nilla' Wafer Inventor

    July 09, 2014 —
    The imposing and historic Staten Island mansion that once belonged to Gustav A. Mayer — the 19th century inventor who cooked up the recipe for the Nabisco “Nilla” wafer — has been listed for sale for $1.79 million. Although the estate has been rumored to be haunted, listing broker Jungho Kim of the Level Group confirmed, “This is not a haunted house.” In fact, the only spirits that have inhabited this mansion are the models and photographers who have used portions of the Gustav Mayer House as a spectacular setting for photo shoots. The mansion rents out about 3,000 square feet of the 7,700-square-foot home for photo shoots that wind up in the pages of Vogue, Harper’s Bazaar, W, Elle and New York Magazine. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Laura Vecsey, Bloomberg

    Haight has been named by Best Law Firms® as a Tier 1, 2 and 3 National Firm in Three Practice Areas in 2024

    November 27, 2023 —
    Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP is listed in the Best Law Firms® (2024 Edition) with metro rankings in the following areas: Los Angeles
    • Metropolitan Tier 1
      • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    • Metropolitan Tier 2
      • Insurance Law
    • Metropolitan Tier 3
      • Workers’ Compensation Law – Claimants
    Orange County
    • Metropolitan Tier 1
      • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hawaii Court Looks at Changes to Construction Defect Coverage after Changes in Law

    November 06, 2013 —
    A construction defect case lead at the U.S. District Court for Hawaii involved the insurer’s changed views on what was covered based on court decisions that came after the policy was written. John R. Casciano and Jessica L. Urban of Steptoe & Johnson LLP discuss the case on their firm’s website. They note that in Illinois National Insurance Company v. Nordic PCL Construction, Inc., Nordic built a retail building which soon afterwards had water leaks and property damage, due to alleged defects in the roof construction. Nordic had purchased comprehensive general liability and umbrella polices, with coverage that included property damage. Mr. Casciano and Ms. Urban note that “at the time of contracting, the Ninth Circuit had predicted that, ‘if the Hawaii Supreme Court examined the matter, it would rule that, for purposes of insurance coverage, construction defects were “not occurrences.”’” After the policy was written, the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals did rule that “construction defect claims do not constitute an ‘occurrence’ under a CGL policy.” On the basis of this, Illinois National determined that they had no duty to defend or indemnify their client. Nordic made a claim of bad faith, but the court determined that “an insurer that denies coverage based on an open question of law does not act in bad faith, an insurer that actually relies on governing law, even if the insurer only belatedly learns of the law, cannot be said to thereby act in bad faith.” However, the court denied a summary judgment of Nordic’s claim of negligent misrepresentation, determining that there was “a question of fact as to whether the Policies covered [or were represented as covering] only damage to third parties caused by subcontractors’ defective work.” Finally, the court found that “a reasonable jury could infer that, at the time the Polices were issued, the insurers meant to cover claims arising out of the defective work” of Nordic’s subcontractors. They conclude that the Nordic decision “recognizes the varying consequences for coverage claims when post-contracting changes to the law may not coincide with the expectations of at least one of the parties at the time of contracting.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of