BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness construction
    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


    When is a Residential Subcontractor not Subject to the VCPA? Read to Find Out

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Highlighted | 2019 Northern California Super Lawyers

    Witt Named to 2017 Super Lawyers

    A Court-Side Seat: Clean Air, Clean Water, Citizen Suits and the Summer of 2022

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

    New Zealand Using Plywood Banned Elsewhere

    Employees Versus Independent Contractors

    Zero-Net Energy Homes Costly Everywhere but at the Electric Meter

    Improperly Installed Flanges Are Impaired Property

    California Supreme Court Holds that Prevailing Wages are Not Required for Mobilization Work, for Now

    Building 47 Bridges in Two Years

    Important Information Regarding Colorado Mechanic’s Lien Rights.

    Subcontractor Not Estopped from Enforcing Lien Not Listed In Bankruptcy Petition

    How the Science of Infection Can Make Cities Stronger

    COVID-19 Case Remanded for Failure to Meet Amount in Controversy

    Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case Triggered by Complaint's Allegations

    Coverage Found For Cleanup of Superfund Site Despite Pollution Exclusion

    Housing Starts Surge 23% in Comeback for Canadian Builders

    Implications for Industry as Supreme Court Curbs EPA's Authority

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    Mind Over Matter: Court Finds Expert Opinion Based on NFPA 921 Reliable Despite Absence of Physical Testing

    Not Everything is a Pollutant: A Summary of Recent Cases Supporting a Common Sense and Narrow Interpretation of the CGL's Pollution Exclusion

    Court of Appeal Holds That Higher-Tiered Party on Construction Project Can be Held Liable for Intentional Interference with Contract

    Bill Proposes First-Ever Federal Workforce Housing Tax Credit for Middle-Class Housing

    Chimney Collapses at South African Utility’s Unfinished $13 Billion Power Plant

    Monitoring Building Moisture with RFID – Interview with Jarmo Tuppurainen

    Will The New U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Deal Calm Industry Jitters?

    Construction Defects through the Years

    Sinking Floor Does Not Meet Strict Definition of Collapse

    "Is the Defective Work Covered by Insurance?"

    Mechanics Lien Release Bond – What Happens Now? What exactly is a Mechanics Lien and Why Might it Need to be Released?

    Exclusion for Construction of Condominiums Includes Faulty Construction of Retaining Wall

    Allocating Covered and Uncovered Damages in Jury Verdict

    The Risk of A Fixed Price Contract Is The Market

    ASCE Statement on Devastating Impacts of Hurricane Helene

    Firm Announces Remediation of Defective Drywall

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

    Federal Court Rejects Insurer's Argument that Wisconsin Has Adopted the Manifestation Trigger for Property Policy

    Appetite for Deconstruction

    Crime Lab Beset by Ventilation Issues

    Lessee Deemed Statutory Employer, Immune from Tort Liability by Pennsylvania Court

    Blockbuster Breakwater: Alternative Construction Method Put to the Test in Tampa Bay

    Lake Texoma, Texas Condo Case may go to Trial

    Contractual Impartiality Requires an Appraiser to be Unbiased, Disinterested, and Unswayed by Personal Interest

    Courts Will Not Second-Guess Public Entities When it Comes to Design Immunity

    Construction Case Alert: Appellate Court Confirms Engineer’s Duty to Defend Developer Arises Upon Tender of Indemnity Claim

    Study May Come Too Late for Construction Defect Bill

    Top Five Legal Mistakes in Construction

    U.K. Construction Growth Unexpectedly Accelerated in January

    Balancing Cybersecurity Threats in Smart Cities: Is the Potential Convenience of “Smart” Intersections Worth the Risk?
    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

    Baltimore Project Pushes To Meet Federal Deadline

    July 22, 2019 —
    Two giant anaerobic digesters shaped like Faberge eggs have for years served as landmarks for commuters traveling on Interstate-695 east of downtown Baltimore. And cranes, recently removed, signaled the location of one of the latest projects in a years-long, $1.6-billion construction program to upgrade the 100-year-old Back River Wastewater Treatment Plant. “You probably won’t see a collection of this many ‘sticks’ anywhere else in the city,” Shane Lippert noted back in October. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Justin Rice, ENR
    Mr. Rice may be contacted at ricej@enr.com

    John Aho: Engineer Pushed for Seismic Safety in Alaska Ahead of 2018 Earthquake

    February 06, 2019 —
    The son of a pioneer bush pilot in Alaska, structural engineer John Aho spent decades working toward earthquake preparedness. He helped found a key seismic safety commission in the state, and serves on the City of Anchorage’s geotechnical advisory group. The fruits of his labor were clearly demonstrated on the morning of Nov. 30, when the magnitudes 7.0 and 5.7 earthquakes that struck the city caused limited structural damage, partly due to stringent building requirements. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christine Kilpatrick - ENR
    Ms. Kilpatrick may be contacted at kilpatrickc@enr.com

    Rhode Island Examines a Property Owner’s Intended Beneficiary Status and the Economic Loss Doctrine in the Context of a Construction Contract

    March 18, 2019 —
    In Hexagon Holdings Inc. v. Carlisle Syntec, Inc. No. 2017-175-Appeal, 2019 R.I. Lexis 14 (January 17, 2019), the Supreme Court of Rhode Island, discussing claims associated with allegedly defective construction, addressed issues involving intended beneficiaries to contracts and the application of the economic loss doctrine. The court held that, based on the evidence presented, the building owner, Hexagon Holdings, Inc. (Hexagon) was not an intended third-party beneficiary of the subcontract between the general contractor (A/Z Corporation) and the subcontractor, defendant McKenna Roofing and Construction, Inc. (McKenna). In addition, the court held that, in the context of this commercial construction contract, the economic loss doctrine applied and barred Hexagon’s negligence claims against McKenna. Approximately nine years after Hexagon entered into a contract with A/Z Corporation for the construction of a building, Hexagon filed suit against A/Z Corporation’s roofing installation subcontractor, McKenna, and the manufacturer of the roofing system. Hexagon alleged that the roof began to leak shortly after McKenna installed it. Notably, Hexagon did not sue A/Z Corporation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shannon M. Warren, White and Williams
    Ms. Warren may be contacted at warrens@whiteandwilliams.com

    Court Holds That Insurance Producer Cannot Be Liable for Denial of COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim

    November 23, 2020 —
    After an insurance carrier denied a lawyer and her law firm’s claim for lost business income due to the COVID-19-related shutdown, she sued both her carrier and the insurance producer that procured the policy. See Wilson v. Hartford Casualty Company, No. 20-3384 (E.D.Pa. Sep. 30, 2020). In one of the first cases to consider producer liability in COVID-19 cases, Judge Eduardo Robreno dismissed the lawsuit against the producer and the carrier. USI procured the Policy from Hartford for Rhonda Hill Wilson and her law firm. The Policy included coverage for lost business income and extra expense caused by direct physical loss of, or damage to property. Similarly, the Policy covered lost business income if a nearby property experienced a direct physical loss that caused a civil authority to issue an order that prohibited access to the law firm’s property. The Policy also included a virus exclusion “for loss or damage caused directly or indirectly by . . . [p]resence, growth, proliferation, spread or any activity of . . . virus.” Judge Robreno did not decide whether the Policy afforded any coverage to Wilson and her law firm for their COVID-19 losses. Rather, he found that even if they could, the virus exclusion unambiguously barred any coverage they could possibly claim. For that reason, Judge Robreno dismissed the claims against Hartford. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher P. Leise, White and Williams LLP and Marc L. Penchansky, White and Williams LLP Mr. Leise may be contacted at leisec@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Penchansky may be contacted at penchanskym@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Justin Clark Joins Newmeyer & Dillion’s Walnut Creek Branch as its Newest Associate

    May 03, 2017 —
    WALNUT CREEK, Calif. – APR. 28, 2017 – Up and coming associate and insurance attorney Justin Clark is the newest associate to join the ever-growing litigation practice at Newmeyer & Dillion LLP’s Walnut Creek office. Clark brings experience in the areas of insurance litigation, construction defect litigation, and business transactions. Walnut Creek’s managing partner Brian Morrow explained why he is so excited by the addition of Clark: “We are thrilled to have Clark on board, as his emphasis on insurance coverage will assist in a key area for our clients, and further expand our capabilities in our northern California office.” Clark has a background in a variety of practice areas, including insurance coverage, products liability, and asbestos litigation. He advocates for manufacturers, suppliers, distributers, and contractors in all phases of litigation. Clark represents developers, builders, and general contractors in construction and insurance disputes. He also helps small business clients draft commercial contracts to better serve their growing business needs. Clark can be reached at justin.clark@ndlf.com or 925-988-3263. About Newmeyer & Dillion For more than 30 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 business, employment, real estate, construction and insurance law, 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.ndlf.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Jersey Supreme Court Ruled Condo Association Can’t Reset Clock on Construction Defect Claim

    September 20, 2017 —
    The New Jersey Law Journal reported that New Jersey Supreme Court “justices reversed an Appellate Division ruling that found three suits filed against contractors by the Palisades at Fort Lee Condominium Association on various dates in March and April 2009 and September 2010 were within the six-year limit because the association received notice of construction defects in the building in an engineer's report issued in June 2007.” The justices stated that the statute of limitations is not reset when property changes hands: "An owner of a building cannot convey greater property rights to a purchaser than the owner possessed. If the building's owner knew or reasonably should have known of construction defects at the time of the sale of the property, the purchaser takes title subject to the original owner's right—and any limitation on that right—to file a claim against the architect and contractors." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Noteworthy Construction Defect Cases for 1st Qtr 2014

    April 30, 2014 —
    John A. Husmann and Jocelyn F. Cornbleet of BatesCareyLLP analyzed several noteworthy construction defect cases that have already occurred in 2014, as published in Law360. The cases involved “the ‘occurrence’ requirement, contractual liability exclusion and ‘other insurance’ clauses.” Husmann and Cornbleet summarized Owners Insurance Co. v Jim Carr Homebuilder LLC (Alabama), Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Co. v. Snider (also Alabama), Woodward LLC v. Acceptance Indemnification Insurance Co. (Mississippi), and others. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Judicial Panel Denies Nationwide Consolidation of COVID-19 Business Interruption Cases

    October 05, 2020 —
    The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation denied motions to centralize pretrial proceedings in pending COVID-19 business interruption claims. In re COVID-19 Business interruption Protection Insurance Litigation, 2020 U.S. District. LEXIS 144446 (Aug. 12, 2020). Plaintiff policy holders sought consolidation, contending their policies provided coverage for business interruption losses caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the related government orders suspending, or severely curtailing, operations of non-essential businesses. The Panel considered 15 actions on the pending motions, but had notice of 263 related actions. Some plaintiffs opposed centralization or sought to be excluded from any MDL. Some argued the Panel should centralize the coverage actions on a state-by-state, regional, or insurer-by-insurer basis. The Panel did not accept consolidation of all cases. There was little potential for common discovery across the litigation because there was no common defendant as the actions involved either a single insurer or insurer-group. The various cases involved different insurance policies with different coverages, conditions, exclusions, and policy language, purchased by different businesses in different industries located in different states. 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