BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management 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


    Fannie-Freddie Propose Liquidity Rules for Mortgage Insurers

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

    Mitigate Construction Risk Through Use of Contingency

    ASCE Statement on Passage of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2022

    Details of Sealed Whistleblower Charges Over Cuomo Bridge Bolts Burst Into Public View

    Florida Governor Signs COVID-19 Liability Shield

    Firm Offers Tips on Construction Defects in Colorado

    Professional Liability Client Alert: Law Firms Should Consider Hiring Outside Counsel Before Suing Clients For Unpaid Fees

    Century Communities Acquires Dunhill Homes Las Vegas Operations

    NYC Shuts 9 Pre-Kindergartens for Health, Safety Issues

    New York’s Lawsky Proposes Changes to Reduce Home Foreclosures

    Five Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Named “Top Rank Attorneys” by Nevada Business Magazine

    Additional Insured is Loss Payee after Hurricane Damage

    Modification: Exceptions to Privette Doctrine Do Not Apply Where There is No Evidence a General Contractor Affirmatively Contributed to the Injuries of an Independent Contractor’s Employee

    Corps Spells Out Billions in Infrastructure Act Allocations

    Safe Commercial Asbestos-Removal Practices

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules that Insurance Salesman had No Fiduciary Duty to Policyholders

    Licensing Reciprocity Comes to Virginia

    Your Construction Contract

    Virginia General Assembly Tweaks Pay-if-Paid Ban

    Updated 3/13/20: Coronavirus is Here: What Does That Mean for Your Project and Your Business?

    The Court of Appeals Holds That Indifference to Safety Satisfies the Standard for a Willful Violation Under WISHA

    Trial Victory in San Mateo County!

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Indemnity Coverage For Damage Caused by Named Insured

    May Heat Wave Deaths Prompt New Cooling Rules in Chicago

    Classify Workers Properly to Avoid Expensive Penalties

    Construction Litigation Group Listed in U.S. News Top Tier

    How to Build Climate Change-Resilient Infrastructure

    Eleventh Circuit Reverses Attorneys’ Fee Award to Performance Bond Sureties in Dispute with Contractor arising from Claim against Subcontractor Performance Bond

    In Hong Kong, You Can Find a Home Where the Buffalo Roam

    DC District Court Follows Ninth Circuit’s Lead Dismissing NABA’s Border Wall Case

    WSHB Ranks No.10 in Law360’s Best of Law Firms for Women

    Bankrupt Canada Contractor Execs Ordered to Repay $26 Million

    Performance Bond Primer: Need to Knows and Need to Dos

    Top 10 Lessons Learned from a Construction Attorney

    Narrow House Has Wide Opposition

    Appraiser Declarations Inadmissible When Offered to Challenge the Merits of an Appraisal Award

    The Final Frontier Opens Up New Business Opportunities for Private Contractors

    Building Codes Evolve With High Wind Events

    Relying Upon Improper Exclusion to Deny Coverage Allows Bad Faith Claim to Survive Summary Judgment

    Pine River’s Two Harbors Now Targets Non-Prime Mortgages

    For Smart Home Technology, the Contract Is Key

    Landlords, Brace Yourselves: New Law Now Limits Your Rental Increases & Terminations

    Craig Holden Named Top 100 Lawyer by Los Angeles Business Journal

    Is the Obsession With Recordable Injury Rates a Deadly Safety Distraction?

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap - The Mediator's Proposal

    Another Reason to Love Construction Mediation (Read: Why Mediation Works)

    Injury to Employees Endorsement Eliminates Coverage for Insured Employer

    Surfside Condo Collapse Investigators Have Nearly Finished Technical Work

    Homeowner Alleges Pool Construction Is Defective
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    New York Appellate Court Addresses “Trigger of Coverage” for Asbestos Claims and Other Coverage Issues

    November 30, 2020 —
    On October 9, 2020, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, decided an appeal from a trial court’s 2018 summary judgment ruling on a number of coverage issues arising out of asbestos-related bodily injury claims against plaintiffs Carrier Corporation (Carrier) and Elliott Company (Elliott). See Carrier Corp. v. Allstate Ins. Co., No. 396 CA 18-02292, Mem. & Order (N.Y. Sup. Ct. App. Div. 4th Dep’t Oct. 9, 2020). The Fourth Department reversed the trial court’s ruling that, under New York’s “injury in fact trigger of coverage,” injury occurs from the first date of exposure to asbestos through death or the filing of suit as a matter of law. The parties agreed that, because the policy language at issue required personal injury to take place “during the policy period,” “the applicable test in determining what event constitutes personal injury sufficient to trigger coverage is injury-in-fact, ‘which rests on when the injury, sickness, disease or disability actually began.’” Id. at 3 (quoting Cont’l Cas. Co. v. Rapid-American Corp., 609 N.E.2d 506, 511 (N.Y. 1993)). The Fourth Department concluded that, in resolving the issue, the trial court erred by relying on inapposite decisions in other cases where: (1) the parties had stipulated or otherwise not disputed that first exposure triggered coverage[1]; or (2) the issue had not been resolved on summary judgment, but rather at trial based on expert medical evidence[2]. The Fourth Department further explained that, even if plaintiffs here had met their initial burden on summary judgment by submitting admissible evidence that asbestos-related injury actually begins upon first exposure, the defendant-insurer’s opposition – which included affidavits of medical experts contradicting that evidence and averring instead that “harm occurs only when a threshold level of asbestos fiber or particle burden is reached that overtakes the body’s defense mechanisms” – raised a triable issue of fact. Id. at 4. The Fourth Department also rejected plaintiffs’ argument that the defendant-insurer was collaterally estopped on the “trigger” issue by a California appellate court’s decision in Armstrong World Industries, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 52 Cal. Rptr. 2d 690 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996). The Fourth Department reasoned that the issues litigated in the two cases were not identical because, among other things, California and New York “apply different substantive law in determining when asbestos-related injury occurs.” Carrier, Mem. & Order at 4. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Paul A. Briganti, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Briganti may be contacted at brigantip@whiteandwilliams.com

    Dealing with Hazardous Substances on the Construction Site

    July 10, 2018 —
    For this week’s Guest Post Friday here at Construction Law Musings, we welcome Vickie Lane. Vickie is the primary point of contact for Business Development with HAZMAT Plans & Programs, a consulting and training firm that also works under the name of HP&P Safety. Vickie’s functions with HP&P include extensive pre-project research and support though estimating, planning and cost administration. Vickie attended Ohio State University and now enjoys her role as a first time grandmother and spending free time up in the Colorado Rocky Mountains. Vickie can be reached at vlane@hppsafety.com or on Twitter @HAZMATPlans and @hpandpsafety. Most of us perceive hazards on a construction site to be those that can be readily visualized or perhaps easily imagined, like trench cave-ins or falls from heights. These are the obvious, but what about the nocuous, microscopic hazards that can’t be seen by the human eye, but can destroy the health of your workers? Welcome to the world of hazardous materials. The inherent danger associated with hazardous substances is workers might not be not aware of exposure. Think of a snake in the dark scenario. If it is a rattlesnake, you have warning before the bite. A cobra on the other hand gives no such warning and the bite can be fatal. So it can be with hazardous and toxic substances. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Pay-if-Paid Clauses, Nasty, but Enforceable

    March 12, 2015 —
    I am preparing for a presentation this week on Troublesome Contract Clauses to the Construction Specifications Institute (“CSI”), Nebraska Chapter. One of the clauses we will be discussing is the dreaded Pay-if-Paid clause, a particularly nasty provision that places the risk of owner’s solvency squarely on the subcontractor’s shoulders. While pay-if-paid clauses can create tremendous problems for subcontractors, they are enforceable. Pay-if-Paid clauses eliminate the obligation to pay the subcontractor until the general contractor is paid by the owner. Pay-if-paid clauses usually contain something akin to the following phrases:
    • payment to subcontractors are “expressly and unequivocally contingent upon receipt of payment from the Owner for the Subcontract Work.”
    • the subcontractor “expressly acknowledges that it relies on payment under the Subcontract on the creditworthiness of Owner, not that of the General Contractor.”
    • the owner’s acceptance of the work and payment to the General Contractor are “conditions precedent to any obligation of the General Contractor to pay the subcontractor.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Motion for Remand

    December 21, 2016 —
    The federal district court refused to remand the insureds' case after the insurer removed from state court. Maui Land & Pineapple Co. v. Liberty Ins. Underwriters, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15681 (D. Haw. Nov. 10, 2016). The underlying case was filed in state court on Maui. The underlying plaintiffs were condominium owners who brought claims against the insured, Maui Land and Pineapple Co., Inc. (MLP), and other defendants allegedly involved in the development of the project. Ryan Churchill, one of the named defendants, served as president of MLP and was on the board of the project's Association of Apartment Owners (AOAO). The underlying plaintiffs asserted claims for: breach of fiduciary duty; seeking access to books and records of the AOAO; and for injunctive/declaratory relief against MLP, Mr. Churchill, and all other defendants. 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

    Construction Down in Twin Cities Area

    October 30, 2013 —
    Although the year has been better for the Minneapolis/St. Paul area, with a 9% increase since last year, this September saw 25% less construction spending than last September. Non-residential construction dropped even further, losing 36%. Although September was a bad month, the year-to-date value of construction contracts is about $3.3 billion, exceeding last year’s $3.0 billion for the region. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    St Louis County Approves Settlement in Wrongful Death Suit

    August 13, 2014 —
    According to the StarTribune, the St Louis County Board agreed to pay $100,000 to settle with the family of a teenager who had been killed in a car crash. The family purported that “an improperly placed road construction sign contributed to the accident that caused her death.” Defendants in the suit included the county, Benchmark Engineering, and Jola & Sopp Excavating. The county board settled, but denied liability. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Occurrence-Based Insurance Policies and Claims-Made Insurance Policies – There’s a Crucial Difference

    April 13, 2017 —
    I’ve yet to find reading through an insurance policy on anyone’s “bucket list.” But read them you should. Or have your attorney read through them (wink, wink). Because when you need to tender a claim there’s probably no more important document in the world. In Tidwell Enterprises, Inc. v. Financial Pacific Insurance Company, Inc., Case No. C078665 (November 29, 2016), a client whose attorney did read the policy, bested the insurer of a policy it issued. Tidwell Enterprises, Inc. In 2006 or 2007, Tidwell Enterprises, Inc. installed a fireplace at a single-family home located in Copperopolis, California. At the time, Tidwell had a general commercial liability policy issued by Financial Pacific Insurance Company, Inc. which expired in March 2010. 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

    Pending Home Sales in U.S. Increase Less Than Forecast

    October 29, 2014 —
    The number of contracts to buy existing homes rose less than forecast in September, signaling demand will probably plateau heading into the end of 2014. The pending home sales index increased 0.3 percent after dropping 1 percent in August, the National Association of Realtors said today in Washington. The median projection in a Bloomberg survey of economists called for a 1 percent gain. Home resales have yet to regain last year’s peak as still-tight credit and low inventories remain hurdles for the industry, which means residential real estate will make a limited contribution to the expansion. The recent drop in mortgage rates and pickup in hiring will probably help underpin demand, even as first-time buyers struggle to enter the market. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michelle Jamrisko, Bloomberg
    Ms. Jamrisko may be contacted at mjamrisko@bloomberg.net