BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnesses
    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


    History and Gentrification Clash in a Gilded Age Resort

    When Construction Contracts Go Sideways in Bankruptcy

    The Business of Engineering: An Interview with Matthew Loos

    S&P Suspended and Fined $80 Million in SEC, State Mortgage Bond Cases

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    Engineer at Flint Negligence Trial Details Government Water Errors

    Report to Congress Calls for Framework to Cut Post-Quake Recovery Time

    Ohio Rejects the Majority Trend and Finds No Liability Coverage for a Subcontractor’s Faulty Work

    The G2G Year in Review: 2019

    Singer Akon’s Multibillion-Dollar Futuristic City in Africa Gets Final Notice

    Idaho Supreme Court Address Water Exclusion in Commercial Property Exclusion

    Flint Water Crisis and America’s Clean Water Access Failings

    Hunton’s Geoffrey Fehling Confirmed to DC Bar Foundation’s Young Lawyers Network Leadership Council

    Insurer Unable to Declare its Coverage Excess In Construction Defect Case

    Nicholas A. Thede Joins Ball Janik LLP

    Partner John Toohey is Nominated for West Coast Casualty’s Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence!

    Additional Insured Is Covered Under On-Going Operations Endorsement Despite Subcontractor's Completion of Work

    No Signature? Potentially No Problem for Sureties Enforcing a Bond’s Forum Selection Clause

    GAO Sustains Unsupported Past Performance Evaluation and Unequal Discussion Bid Protest

    Case-Shiller Redo Shows Less Severe U.S. Home-Price Slump

    Navigating Complex Preliminary Notice Requirements

    Navigating Abandonment of a Construction Project

    Client Alert: Court of Appeal Applies Common Interest Privilege Doctrine to HOA Litigation Meetings

    Peckar & Abramson Once Again Recognized Among Construction Executive’s “Top 50 Construction Law Firms™”

    Let’s Talk About a Statutory First-Party Bad Faith Claim Against an Insurer

    How Construction Contracts are Made. Hint: It’s a Bit Like Making Sausage

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Best Lawyers®

    Georgia Supreme Court Says Construction Defects Can Be an “Occurrence”

    Challenging a Termination for Default

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

    When is a “Willful” Violation Willful (or Not) Under California’s Contractor Enforcement Statutes?

    Public-Employee Union Fees, Water Wars Are Key in High Court Rulings

    The Project “Completion” Paradox in California

    Construction Laborers Sue Contractors Over Wage Theft

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud

    Collapse of Underground Storage Cave Not Covered

    Athletic Trainers Help Workers Get Back to the Jobsite and Stay Healthy After Injury

    GOP, States, Industry Challenge EPA Project Water Impact Rule

    ASCE Statement on House Passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024

    Your “Independent Contractor” Clause Just Got a Little Less Relevant

    In Real Life the Bad Guy Sometimes Gets Away: Adding Judgment Debtors to a Judgment

    Watchdog Opens Cartel Probe Into Eight British Homebuilders

    Bad Faith Jury Verdict Upheld After Insurer's Failure to Settle Within Policy Limits

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    Brazil’s Former President Turns Himself In to Police

    How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6 Billion Embarrassment

    New York Appellate Team Obtains Affirmance of Dismissal of Would-Be Labor Law Action Against Municipal Entities

    LA Lakers Partially Survive Motion to Dismiss COVID-19 Claims

    Coverage Found for Faulty Workmanship Damaging Other Property

    West Coast Casualty’s 25th Construction Defect Seminar Has Begun
    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

    Additional Insured Is Covered Under On-Going Operations Endorsement Despite Subcontractor's Completion of Work

    December 20, 2017 —
    Although the homeowners did not own their homes when the subcontractors completed their work, the general contractor was still covered as an additional insured for the homeowners' suits based on the ongoing operations endorsement in the subcontractors' policies. McMillin Mgmt. Servs. v. Fin. Pac. Ins. Co., 2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 1000 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 14, 2017). McMillin was the developer and general contractor for the project. Among the subcontractors were Martinez Construction Concrete Contractor, Inc. and Rozema Corporation. Martinez performed concrete flatwork between 2003 and November 2005. Rozema performed lath and stucco work between March 2003 and October 2005. Lexington issued CGL policies to Martinez and Rozema. McMillin was an additional insured under both policies, "but only with respect to liability arising out of your [i.e., Martinez's or Rozema's] ongoing operations performed for [McMillin]." An exclusion provided that the insurance did not apply to property damage occurring after the insured subcontractor had completed operations on behalf of the additional insured. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    What Does It Mean When a House Sells for $50 Million?

    September 10, 2014 —
    One of the byproducts of the global financial crisis has been the creation of a new class of housing and buyers. Some of the strongest evidence is the rise in the number of residences sold for more than $50 million. A buyer recently paid a record $71.3 million for a Manhattan co-op, breaking the $70 million record set only a few months earlier. These sales seem modest compared with a $147 million sale in East Hampton, New York, and a $120 million sale in Greenwich, Connecticut, the two highest U.S. residential transactions in 2014. There have been six sales of more than $100 million in the past four years, with more likely to come. Wealthy investors have benefited from rising stock markets, while preserving capital by acquiring assets such as U.S. residential real estate. However, the high-end market isn't a proxy for the health of the broader U.S. housing market. Unlike the buyers in the market's upper strata, who often are foreign and all-cash purchasers, the majority of U.S. homebuyers remain dependent on access to credit. And today's tight lending conditions aren’t expected to ease anytime soon. According to the Federal Reserve, only a small number of banks have recently eased mortgage standards. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jonathan J. Miller, Bloomberg
    Mr. Miller may be contacted at jmiller@millersamuel.com

    Join: Computer Science Meets Construction

    August 20, 2018 —
    Increasingly, projects need to be optimized to create the most value for their clients and users. With the fragmented nature of project teams, decisions can be lost, communication sporadic, and information disjointed. In addition, the rapid pace of innovation means that it’s difficult – if not impossible – for architects and engineers to be aware of all the latest construction products and materials. It is these problems that inspired the creation of Join. Join is a smart platform that helps project teams collaborate more efficiently and effectively, whether as part of a project optimization process or throughout the entire project lifecycle. The platform connects construction teams, pulls together different types of project information, and integrates manufacturing into construction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Illinois Favors Finding Construction Defects as an Occurrence

    September 23, 2019 —
    A recent Illinois Appellate Court’s decision in, Acuity Ins. Co. v. 950 West Huron Condominium Owners Association, 2019 IL App (1st) 180743 (2019), strengthens Illinois’ precedent favoring construction defects as an occurrence under a Commercial General Liability (“CGL”) insurance policy. Acuity also broadens an insurance carrier’s obligation to defend its insured against construction defect allegations. In Acuity, the court determined whether claims for construction defect filed against a subcontractor, triggered a duty to defend under a CGL policy. To make its determination, the court focused on the subcontractor’s scope of work. The court notes that a subcontractor normally contracts for a discrete scope of work on a project. Unlike a general contractor, who has control over or contractual obligations for all aspects of the project, a subcontractor does not have those board responsibilities. The court explained that “[f]rom the eyes of the subcontractor, the ‘project’ is limited to the scope of its own work, and the precise nature of any damage that might occur to something outside of that scope is as unknown or unforeseeable as damage to something entirely outside of the construction project.” Accordingly, the court in Acuity held that when a complaint alleges that a subcontractor’s negligence caused damage to a part of the construction project outside of the subcontractor’s scope of work, the allegations are enough to trigger the insurer’s duty to defend the subcontractor under a CGL policy. The court’s decision in Acuity relied on a similar Illinois Appellate Court decision, Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co. v. J.P. Larsen, Inc., 956 N.E.2d 524 (Ill. App. 2011). In Larsen, the court reached a similar conclusion where a third-party complaint by a general contractor against a subcontractor alleged that the subcontractor’s improper window caulking caused water intrusion and property damage to other parts of the building. The court in Larsen held that because the complaint alleged not only construction defects, but also damage to other property outside the subcontractor’s scope of work, the insurer had a duty to defend the subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ashley L. Cooper, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Cooper may be contacted at alc@sdvlaw.com

    Lease-Leaseback Battle Continues as First District Court of Appeals Sides with Contractor and School District

    August 17, 2017 —
    Earlier, we wrote about Davis v. Fresno United School District (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 261, a Fifth District California Court of Appeals decision that sent shock waves through the school construction industry and raised questions regarding the use of California’s lease-leaseback method of project delivery (Education Code sections 17400 et seq.). California’s lease-leaseback method of project delivery provides an alternative project delivery method for public school districts than the usual design-bid-build method of project delivery. Under the lease-leaseback method of project delivery, a school district leases its property to a developer, who in turn builds a school facility on the property and leases it back to the school district. One of the benefits of the lease-leaseback method of project delivery is that school districts do not need to come up with construction funds to build school facilities since they pay for the construction over time through their lease payments to the developer. Critics, however, argue that because lease-leaseback projects do not need to be competitively bid, they are ripe for cronyism between developers and school districts. In Davis, a taxpayer successfully brought suit against the Fresno Unified School District challenging the propriety of a lease-leaseback project because the entirety of the District’s “lease payments” occurred while the project was being constructed and thus, successfully argued the taxpayer, there was no “true” lease of a facility since it was under construction. 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

    Hoboken Mayor Admits Defeat as Voters Reject $241 Million School

    February 21, 2022 —
    Hoboken Mayor Ravi Bhalla said late Tuesday that the city’s $241 million bond referendum to build a new high school won’t pass. “While the will of the voters has made it clear that the Board of Education’s current proposal for the new high school will not move forward, I sincerely believe that the effort to improve our public schools will continue,” Bhalla said in a statement. While the board of education put forth the proposal, the mayor was a big proponent. The vote in a special election Tuesday was one of the costliest school construction referendums in New Jersey history. The bond was failing 66% to 34%, with 35 out of 42 precincts reporting, according to unofficial results posted by Hudson County as of Wednesday morning. About 7,500 ballots had been cast, translating to a roughly 17% turnout, which is strong for a school bond vote. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nic Querolo, Bloomberg

    School Blown Down by Wind Still Set to Open on Schedule

    November 06, 2013 —
    The framing was going up for a new elementary school in Pasco, Ohio, when winds of about 60 miles per hour ripped the area. The winds brought down part of the structure. School district officials met with the contractor, Fowler Construction. John Morgan, the assistant director of operations for the Pasco School District, said that they did not “anticipate any delay in the opening of the new school.” Groundbreaking at the school happened in June and the school is scheduled to be open in the fall. The damage had not yet been determined. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Providing Your Insurer Prompt Notice

    May 20, 2024 —
    Sometimes, when it comes to insurance, you may hear the argument that you breached your insurance policy by failing to provide your insurer with prompt notice as the insurance policy requires. Well, this is not such an absolute issue. With that said, you should absolutely provide your insurer with prompt notice of a claim or loss. No legitimate reason not to. But, if you don’t, it is not an absolute get out of jail free card for your insurer, but it does give them a good argument, which you don’t really want to deal with. In Gulfpoint Construction Co., Inc. v. Westfield Ins. Co., 2024 WL 1759228 (11th Cir. 2024), an insured appealed a trial court’s ruling that found it did not provide prompt notice to its property insurer as the policy required. In this case, notice was provided two years after a loss from a hurricane. The insurer denied coverage and, in doing so, relied on the insured’s failure to provide prompt notice. Although the trial court agreed, the appellate court found this was a genuine issue of material fact. 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