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


    New Plan Submitted for Explosive Demolition of Old Tappan Zee Bridge

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: KATE GOLDEN

    U.S. Construction Value Flat at End of Summer

    Efficient Proximate Cause Applies to Policy's Collapse Provisions

    As Fracture Questions Remain, Team Raced to Save Mississippi River Bridge

    Risk Management and Contracting after Hurricane Irma: Suggestions to Avoid a Second Disaster

    California Appellate Court Rules That Mistakenly Grading the Wrong Land Is Not an Accident

    Wilke Fleury Attorney Featured in 2022 Best Lawyers in America and Best Lawyers: Ones To Watch!

    Vacation during a Project? Time for your Construction Documents to Shine!

    The First UK Hospital Being Built Using AI Technology

    Details Matter: The Importance of Strictly Following Public Bid Statutes

    Baltimore Project Pushes To Meet Federal Deadline

    New York’s Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act Imposes Increased Disclosure Requirements On Defendants at the Beginning of Lawsuits

    California Supreme Court Protects California Policyholders for Intentional Acts of Employees

    Leftover Equipment and Materials When a Contractor Is Abruptly Terminated

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “D’Oh!”

    Insuring Lease/Leaseback Projects

    Condo Board May Be Negligent for not Filing Construction Defect Suit in a Timely Fashion

    Changes To Commercial Item Contracting

    El Paso Increases Surety Bond Requirement on Contractors

    Brooklyn’s Industry City to Get $1 Billion Modernization

    Construction Demand Unsteady, Gains in Some Regions

    Los Angeles Seeks Speedier Way to Build New Affordable Homes

    When OSHA Cites You

    Happenings in and around the West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Surety's Settlement Without Principal's Consent Is Not Bad Faith

    Miami's Condo Craze Burns Out on Strong Dollar

    Insured's Complaint Against Flood Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Insurer's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings for Construction Defect Claim Rejected

    Developer Sues TVA After It Halts Nuke Site Sale

    He Turned Wall Street Offices Into Homes. Now He Vows to Remake New York

    California Court of Appeal Clarifies Intent of Faulty Workmanship Exclusions

    Insurance Litigation Roundup: “Post No Bills!”

    Doctrine of Avoidable Consequences as Affirmative Defense

    The Reptile Theory in Practice

    Third Circuit Court of Appeals Concludes “Soup to Nuts” Policy Does Not Include Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    Garlock Five Years Later: Recent Decisions Illustrate Ongoing Obstacles to Asbestos Trust Transparency

    “Incidental” Versus “Direct” Third Party Beneficiaries Under Insurance Policies in Which a Party is Not an Additional Insured

    Haight Welcomes Elizabeth Lawley

    The Business of Engineering: An Interview with Matthew Loos

    This New Indicator Shows There's No Bubble Forming in U.S. Housing

    Biden Unveils $2.3 Trillion American Jobs Plan

    A Lack of Sophistication With the Construction Contract Can Play Out In an Ugly Dispute

    Risk Protection: Force Majeure Agreements Take on Renewed Relevance

    Recent Amendments and Caselaw Affecting the Construction Industry in Texas

    Don MacGregor of Bert L. Howe & Associates Awarded Silver Star Award at WCC Construction Defect Seminar

    Misread of Other Insurance Clause Becomes Costly for Insurer

    Kahana Feld Partner Noelle Natoli Named President of Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles

    Traub Lieberman Partner Eric D. Suben and Associate Laura Puhala Win Summary Judgment in Favor of Insurer, Determining it has No Duty to Defend

    California Supreme Court Declares that Exclusionary Rule for Failing to Comply with Expert Witness Disclosures Applies at the Summary Judgment Stage
    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 Court Enforces Construction Management Exclusion

    March 14, 2018 —
    In its recent decision in Houston Cas. Co. v. Cavan Corp. of NY, Inc., 2018 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1138 (N.Y. 1st Dep’t Feb. 20, 2018), a New York appellate court had occasion to consider the application of a construction management exclusion in a general liability policy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP

    White and Williams LLP Acquires 6 Attorney Firm

    August 29, 2022 —
    White and Williams LLP has announced the acquisition of a six-attorney law firm nationally known for their work in the surety and construction space. Located in Towson, MD, Baltimore County, the attorneys of Pike & Gilliss LLC will join White and Williams, marking the opening of the firm’s 11th location and extending the firm’s presence to Maryland, Washington DC and Virginia. Attorneys joining White and Williams include David Gilliss, who will serve as Managing Partner of the Towson office, Patrick Pike and Eric Korphage as partners, Joel Williams as Counsel, and Anthony Kikendall and Robert Kline as associates. “We are excited to make this longtime informal partnership official by joining forces,” said Gilliss. “Attorneys from White and Williams and Pike & Gilliss have had clients in common for over a decade and we often collaborate. This official coming together creates one of the leading surety practices in the country, offering clients a broader and more cohesive experience and extensive legal expertise.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    Federal Magistrate Judge Recommends Rescission of Policies

    February 12, 2024 —
    In the recent case of Union Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. 142 Driggs LLC, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220393, Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York recommended granting the insurer's default judgment and holding that of three policies issued to 142 Driggs LLC ("Driggs") be rescinded ab initio. Driggs had represented on its insurance applications that it did not provide parking to anyone other than itself, tenants, and its guests at the subject insured premises. However, Union Mutual learned that Driggs had been renting out three garages to non-tenants. Second, Driggs represented that the mercantile square footage was around 1,000 square feet, when in actuality, it was larger than allowed under the policies. Union Mutual provided underwriting guidelines in connection with its default motion, which state that "parking provided for anyone other than the insured, tenants and their guests," presents an "unacceptable risk." The guidelines also state that answering yes to any "preliminary application questions (which presumably included those regarding mercantile square footage and parking) is an "unacceptable risk." The court held that these guidelines supported a finding that Driggs made material misrepresentation and that Union Mutual relied on these misrepresentations in issuing the policies. The court, as such, recommended that the policies at issue be rescinded from inception. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com

    New Rule Prohibits Use of Funds For Certain DoD Construction and Infrastructure Programs and Projects

    May 30, 2018 —
    Recently, our colleagues Glenn Sweatt and Alex Ginsberg published their Client Alert titled DFARS Clause Blocks Funding for Unsafe Projects in Afghanistan, Recently published regulation implements the FY17 NDAA to prohibit use of funds for DoD construction and infrastructure programs and projects in Afghanistan that cannot be safely accessed by U.S. Government personnel. Takeaways include:
    New rule prevents Government contracting officers from funding projects that are not able to be safely accessed by Government civilian or military personnel, as these may pose an increased risk of fraud, corruption or waste, or lack efficient oversight.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Arizona Court of Appeals Awards Attorneys’ Fees in Quiet-Title Action

    September 20, 2017 —
    In Arizona, a party successfully quieting title to property may recover its attorneys’ fees if it satisfies three requirements: (1) the party requests a quitclaim deed from the party adversely claiming title twenty days before bringing the quiet-title action; (2) the party tenders five dollars for the execution and delivery of the deed; and (3) the adverse party fails to comply. Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-1103(B). Recently, in McCleary v. Tripodi, No. 2 CA-CV 2016-0145, 2017 WL 3723472 (Ariz. Ct. App. Aug. 29, 2017), the Arizona Court of Appeals awarded attorneys’ fees to the prevailing party under this statute. In McCleary v. Tripodi, Mrs. Tripodi, who became the administrator of her husband’s estate upon his death, wrongfully recorded three deeds purporting to transfer property to herself. After unsuccessfully attempting to get Mrs. Tripodi to quitclaim the property, the plaintiffs filed a quiet-title action. The trial court agreed that the plaintiffs were the legal and rightful owners, granted summary judgment in plaintiffs’ favor, and awarded attorneys’ fees to the plaintiffs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kevin Walton, Snell & Wilmer

    Homebuilding in Las Vegas Slows but Doesn’t Fall

    October 15, 2013 —
    There was an 18 percent drop in the sale of new homes in September, as compared to the prior month, but that was still 6 percent higher than the home sales of the previous September. So far, August was the briskest month for homes sales in Las Vegas for 2013. Through September, builders have sold 5,653 homes, which is a fifty-three percent increase over the first nine months of 2012. Dennis Smith, the president of Home Builders Research said “that is a very strong annual change that clearly suggests new housing has revered from the recessionary doldrums of the past four years.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Can a Lease Force a Tenant's Insurer to Defend the Landlord?

    October 10, 2022 —
    Can an indemnification clause in a commercial lease obligate a tenant’s insurer to defend a landlord? Recently, the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York said, “Yes!” On August 9, 2022, the district court issued a decision in ConMed Corp. vs. Federal Insurance Company, holding that the indemnification clause in a policyholder’s lease triggered the insurer’s duty to defend the landlord in an action arising out of the tenant’s negligence. Facts of the Case ConMed is a medical technology company that leases warehouse space in Georgia from Breit Industrial Canyon (“the Landlord”) to sterilize its medical equipment. ConMed’s employees filed suit against ConMed and a contractor that performed the sterilization, alleging injuries caused by exposure to excessive amounts of chemicals used in the sterilization process (the “ConMed Action”). Thereafter, ConMed’s employees filed a separate lawsuit against the Landlord, alleging that the Landlord permitted storage of unsafe levels of the chemicals at the warehouse without adequate ventilation (the “Landlord Action”). The lease agreement required ConMed to indemnify the Landlord “except in the event of, and to the extent of, Landlord’s negligence or willful misconduct.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kerianne Kane Luckett, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Luckett may be contacted at KKane@sdvlaw.com

    Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Faulty Work By Subcontractor Constitutes "Occurrence"

    July 31, 2013 —
    The U.S. District Court in Alabama certified a question to the Connecticut Supreme Court: Is damage to a project caused by faulty workmanship "property damage" resulting from an "occurrence"? With some qualification, the Connecticut Supreme Court answered in the affirmative. Capstone Building Corp. v. Am. Motorists Ins. Co., SC 18886 (Conn. June 11, 2013). Captsone Development agreed to coordinate and supervise construction on a building at the University of Conneticut. Capstone Building was the general contractor. UConn secured an OCIP policy from American Motorist Insurance Company ("AMICO"). More than three years after completion, UConn notified the insureds of alleged defects in the project, including elevated levels of carbon monoxide. The source of the leak was the individual hot water heaters in residential units and insufficient draft of exhaust from the heater.Other defects were found during an investigation. The insureds tendered to AMICO. Coverage was denied because the liability arose out of the insureds' own work.The insureds settled with UConn, paying $1 million each. The insureds then sued AMICO in Alabama and the question was certified to the Connecticut Supreme Court. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com