BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code 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


    Alleged Damage to Personal Property Does Not Revive Coverage for Construction Defects

    Michigan Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C-" Grade, Improving from "D+" Grade in 2018

    “You’re Out of Here!” -- CERCLA (Superfund) Federal Preemption of State Environmental Claims in State Courts

    Couple Claims Poor Installation of Home Caused Defects

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    Hunton Insurance Partner Syed Ahmad Named to Benchmark Litigation’s 2019 40 & Under Hot List

    Suing A Payment Bond Surety in Different Venue Than Set Forth in The Subcontract

    Schools Remain Top Priority in Carolinas as Cleanup From Storms Continues

    Thank You Once Again for the Legal Elite Election for 2022

    Third Circuit Vacates Judgment for Insurer on Alleged Construction Defect Claim

    The Hazards of Carrier-Specific Manuscript Language: Ohio Casualty's Off-Premises Property Damage and Contractors' E&O Endorsements

    Wall Street Is Buying Starter Homes to Quietly Become America’s Landlord

    Greystone on Remand Denies Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment To Bar Coverage For Construction Defects

    Labor Under the Miller Act And Estoppel of Statute of Limitations

    Insurance Attorney Gary Barrera Joins Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group

    Oregon Court of Appeals Rules That Negligent Construction (Construction Defect) Claims Are Subject to a Two-Year Statute of Limitations

    Certifying Claim Under Contract Disputes Act

    Examining Construction Defect as Occurrence in Recent Case Law and Litigation

    Measures Landlords and Property Managers Can Take in Response to a Reported COVID-19 Infection

    Fifth Circuit Rules that Settlements in Underlying Action Constitute "Other Insurance"

    Communicate with the Field to Nip Issues in the Bud

    West Virginia Wild: Crews Carve Out Corridor H Through the Appalachian Mountains

    Supreme Court Holds Arbitrator can Fully Decide Threshold Arbitrability Issue

    The Court-Side Seat: FERC Reviews, Panda Power Plaints and Sovereign Immunity

    Address 'Your Work' Exposure Within CPrL Policies With Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    Teaching An Old Dog New Tricks: The Spearin Doctrine and Design-Build Projects

    Blackstone to Buy Cosmopolitan Resort for $1.73 Billion

    New York Considers Amendments to Construction Industry Wage Laws that Would Impose Significant Burden Upon Contractors

    Flood Insurance Claim Filed in State Court Properly Dismissed

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

    Five Facts About Housing That Will Make People In New York City and San Francisco Depressed

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    Will COVID-19 Permanently Shift the Balance between Work from Home and the Workplace?

    Considerations in Obtaining a Mechanic’s Lien in Maryland (Don’t try this at home)

    Nevada Supreme Court Clarifies the Litigation Waiver of the One-Action Rule

    Will a Notice of Non-Responsibility Prevent Enforcement of a California Mechanics Lien?

    Insurer’s Optional Appeals Process Does Not Toll Statute of Limitations Following Unequivocal Written Denial

    New York Appeals Court Rekindles the Spark

    UK Construction Defect Suit Lost over One Word

    More Reminders that the Specific Contract Terms Matter

    Liability Insurer’s Duty To Defend Insured Is Broader Than Its Duty To Indemnify

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    Attorneys Fees Under California’s Prompt Payment Statutes. Contractor’s “Win” Fails the Sniff Test

    Gloria Gaynor Sues Contractor over Defective Deck Construction

    Workplace Safety–the Unpreventable Employee Misconduct Defense

    A Win for Policyholders: California Court of Appeals Applies Vertical Exhaustion for Continuous Injury Claims

    Changes to Pennsylvania Mechanic’s Lien Code

    Managing Narrative, Capturing Context, and Building Together: Talking VR and AEC with David Weir-McCall

    Hawaii Federal District Court Remands Coverage Dispute

    Maybe Supervising Qualifies as Labor After All
    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

    Affirmed: Nationwide Acted in Bad Faith by Failing to Settle Within Limits

    July 19, 2017 —
    The Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed that Nationwide acted in bad faith by refusing to settle a claim against its insured for the policy limits, exposing the policyholder to an excess verdict.1 The case arose out of a 2005 automobile accident where Seung Park, who was insured by Nationwide, struck and killed another driver, Stacey Camacho. Shortly after the accident, Ms. Camacho’s estate issued a time-limited demand for the full limits of the policy Nationwide issued to Mr. Park, $100,000, to settle the case. After the deadline to respond to the demand expired, Nationwide rejected the demand and made a counteroffer. A settlement could not be reached and a wrongful death suit was filed against Mr. Park, resulting in a massive jury verdict of $5.83 million. Following the jury verdict, Mr. Park assigned his rights against Nationwide to Ms. Camacho’s estate, which then filed claims for negligence and bad faith failure to settle against Nationwide. The case was tried to a jury, which found in favor of the estate. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bethany Barrese, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Barrese may be contacted at blb@sdvlaw.com

    Construction defect firm Angius & Terry moves office to Roseville

    January 09, 2013 —
    The law firm Angius & Terry LLP has closed its office on River Park Drive in Sacramento and opened a Roseville office that will allow for growth. The new office at 3001 Lava Ridge Court provides more usable space in a nice area for less money, said Brad Epstein, a local partner with the firm. Five attorneys and three staff moved to the new space in Roseville on Jan. 2. “It can house three additional attorneys — and we plan to grow,” Epstein said. The firm specializes in construction defect litigation and general corporate work for community associations. There are about 800 community associations in the Sacramento area and a handful of small firms that divvy up the work. “Condominium developments and homeowners’ associations never die and always have legal issues,” Epstein said. Angius & Terry has a total of 20 lawyers in six offices, four in California and two in Nevada. Besides Roseville, the firm has offices in Walnut Creek, Manteca, Newport Beach, Reno and Las Vegas. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nevada Provides Independant Counsel When Conflict Arises Between Insurer and Insured

    December 02, 2015 —
    The Nevada Supreme Court, responding to certified questions, determined that an insurer must provide independent counsel for its insured when a conflict of interest arises between the insurer and insured. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Hansen, 2015 Nev. LEXIS 86 (Nev. Sept. 24, 2015). The insured struck the vehicle of another driver, Hansen. Hansen sued the insured alleging both negligence and various intentional torts. State Farm agreed to defend under a reservation of rights. The reservation of rights letter reserved the right to deny coverage for liabiltiy resulting from intentional acts and punitive damages. 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

    Coronavirus and Contract Obligations

    March 30, 2020 —
    The Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a global disruption to businesses, causing many to temporarily close and lay off employees. As businesses assess the short– and long–term economic impact of COVID-19, they should also evaluate what contractual obligations and remedies are available under various agreements (e.g., leases, vendor agreements, and supply agreements). When performance may be delayed or may not occur altogether, businesses should consider their force majeure clauses, if any, and the doctrines of impossibility, impracticability, and frustration of purpose. Force Majeure Generally, unless a contract provides that performance will be suspended or relieved when certain events occur (e.g., “acts of God,” government regulation, acts of war or terror, strikes), each party is obligated to perform. However, when there is an express force majeure provision, certain events or acts may excuse non-performance or delayed performance. But depending on the jurisdiction, courts may construe force majeure provisions narrowly and excuse performance only for those events expressly listed in the clause. Nonetheless, if the force majeure provision includes pandemic, epidemic, quarantine, government act, disease, or similar terms, then the COVID-19 pandemic may excuse performance or allow delayed performance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook, Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    Construction Contract’s Scope of Work Should Be Written With Clarity

    March 06, 2023 —
    The scope of work section in your construction contract should never be overlooked. In numerous instances, it is overlooked which leads to a dispute as to the precise nature of the scope of work. This dispute could be the result of an ambiguity in the scope of work section. Or it could be the result of an omission. Or it could be the result of a lack of clarification. Or it could be the result of not properly reviewing and vetting the scope of work section. This is a section—whether included in the body of your contract or attached as an exhibit—you absolutely, positively want clarity. Otherwise, you are potentially setting yourself up for a future dispute that could include (i) an additional work / change order dispute, (ii) an incomplete work dispute, or (iii) a failure to properly perform your work dispute. These are all disputes you want to avoid, and many times can avoid, by going through and negotiating the scope of work section to bring clarity to this section. Remember, clarity is a positive. Ambiguity or uncertainty is a negative. An example of such an avoidable scope of work dispute can be found in All Year Cooling and Heating, Inc. v. Burkett Properties, Inc., 2023 WL 2000991 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023). Here, an air conditioning contractor was hired to install six new split air conditioning systems. The scope of work provided that there were currently “two split systems that are currently existing, working perfectly and are not to be replaced as part of this contract.” The property manager claimed the air conditioning contractor was required to bring these two existing split air conditioning systems up to code as the contract provided that notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the contractor “will certify and shall ensure that all split systems in the building, upon completion of all the work, will be fully compliant with all codes and regulations and shall be responsible for any costs relates to the implementation and/or remediation of same.” 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

    Insurer Defends Denial in Property Coverage Dispute Involving Marijuana Growing Operations

    March 14, 2018 —
    Last month, we reported on the ongoing insurance coverage dispute between commercial landlord KVP Properties, Inc. and its property insurer, Westfield Insurance Company. The dispute arises from an October 2015 DEA raid on KVG-owned rental units in Novi, Michigan, which uncovered damage to the units related to the tenants’ marijuana growing operations. The arguments raised by KVG on appeal highlight a number of important marijuana-related coverage issues, which Westfield has now addressed in opposition. Reprinted courtesy of Michael Levine, Hunton & Williams LLP and Geoffrey Fehling, Hunton & Williams LLP Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@hunton.com Mr. Fehling may be contacted at gfehling@hunton.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Court-Side Seat: An End-of-Year Environmental Update

    January 09, 2023 —
    As 2022 draws to a close, here is a brief description of recent environmental and regulatory law rulings, as well as new federal rulemaking proceedings. United States Tax Court
    Green Valley Investors, LLC et al, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue On November 9, 2022, the Tax Court agreed with the taxpayers that the IRS’s use of administrative Notice 2017-10 to impose substantial tax liabilities violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The notice was the agency’s response to a provision in the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 which increased the penalties for engaging in a reportable transaction understatement. Here, at issue was the value of charitable deductions generated by the creation of environmental easements made in connection with land transactions. These claimed deductions amounted to more than $60 million. The petitioners argued that IRS Notice 2017-10, which authorized such large penalties, was in fact a “legislative rule” whose promulgation should have complied with the notice and comment requirements of the APA. The agency contended that the Congress, by implication, absolved the IRS from the notice and comment requirements. The court agreed with the petitioners and set aside Notice 2017-10 and the imposition of penalties under Section 6662A of the Jobs Creation Act. On December 8, 2022, the IRS published a notice of proposed rulemaking that would correct the APA deficiencies noted by the courts. (See 87 FR 75185.)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Loose Bolts Led to Sagging Roof in Construction Defect Claim

    February 10, 2012 —

    Though the sagging roof is neither leaking nor a safety hazard, the town of Waynesville, North Carolina is suing the builder of its new fire station, as reported in the Smoky Mountain News. The engineers who examined the roof found a substantial number of loose bolts in the roof trusses. Additionally, the trusses themselves have become bent.

    Tom Galloway, Waynesville’s Town Manager said “it needs to be remedied and fixed.” He said that the builder, Construction Logic, “never indicated a willingness to fix the roof.” The town is seeking the cost of repair, which Galloway estimated could be $400,000, and an additional $30,000 in damages. The suit states that Construction Logic failed to follow the plan specifications for the roof.

    Read the full story…

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