BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut building envelope 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


    President Obama Vetoes Keystone Pipeline Bill

    Anti-Concurrent, Anti-Sequential Causation Clause Precludes Coverage

    Can We Compel Insurers To Cover Construction Defect in General Liability Policies?

    Top Five Legal Mistakes in Construction

    Court Finds That Limitation on Conditional Use Permit Results in Covered Property Damage Due to Loss of Use

    Extreme Heat, Smoke Should Get US Disaster Label, Groups Say

    Owners and Contractors are Liable for Injuries Caused by their Independent Contractors under the “Peculiar Risk Doctrine”

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twenty White and Williams Lawyers

    Nation’s Top Court Limits EPA's Authority in Clean Air Case

    IoT: Take Guessing Out of the Concrete Drying Process

    Buyer Beware: Insurance Agents May Have No Duty to Sell Construction Contractors an Insurance Policy Covering Likely Claims

    Revised Cause Identified for London's Wobbling Millennium Bridge After Two Decades

    Commerce City Enacts Reform to Increase For-Sale Multifamily Housing

    Failing to Adopt a Comprehensive Cyber Plan Can Lead to Disaster

    NJ Court Reaffirms Rule Against Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Claims and Finds Fraud Claims Inherently Intentional

    Court of Appeal: Privette Doctrine Does Not Apply to Landlord-Tenant Relationships

    ASCE Statement on House Passage of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    The Role of Code Officials in the Design-Build Process

    Indemnification Against Release/“Disposal” of Hazardous Materials

    Point Taken: The UK Supreme Court Finally Confirms the General Law of Liquidated Damages (LDs)

    Condo Building Hits Highest Share of Canada Market Since 1971

    Just Because I May Be An “Expert” Does Not Mean I Am Giving Expert Testimony

    Conflict of Interest Accusations may Spark Lawsuit Against City and City Manager

    Palm Beach Billionaires’ Fix for Sinking Megamansions: Build Bigger

    General Release of Contractor Upheld Despite Knowledge of Construction Defects

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

    Lewis Brisbois Ranks Among Top 25 Firms on NLJ’s 2021 Women in Law Scorecard

    Call to Conserve Power Raises Questions About Texas Grid Reliability

    Just Because You Record a Mechanic’s Lien Doesn’t Mean You Get Notice of Foreclosure

    Construction Jobs Expected to Rise in Post-Hurricane Rebuilding

    Construction defect firm Angius & Terry moves office to Roseville

    The Construction Industry Lost Jobs (No Surprise) but it Gained Some Too (Surprise)

    #6 CDJ Topic: Construction Defect Legislative Developments

    Contractor Given a Wake-Up Call for Using a "Sham" RMO/RME

    Attorneys' Fees Awarded "Because Of" Property Damage Are Covered by Policy

    Avoiding Disaster Due to Improper Licensing

    Hunton Insurance Recovery Partner Michael Levine Quoted on Why Courts Must Consider the Science of COVID-19

    Texas Supreme Court to Review Eight-Corners Duty-to-Defend Rule

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You Have No Class(ification)”

    Colorado Drillers Show Sensitive Side to Woo Fracking Foes

    Texas Supreme Court Declines to Waive Sovereign Immunity in Premises Defect Case

    Supreme Court Opens Door for Challenges to Older Federal Regulations

    Seattle Crane Strike Heads Into Labor Day Weekend After Some Contractors Sign Agreements

    Haight’s Kristian Moriarty Selected for Super Lawyers’ 2021 Southern California Rising Stars

    Mississippi Floods Prompt New Look at Controversial Dam Project

    Changes in the Law on Lien Waivers

    The 2021 Top 50 Construction Law Firms™

    Jersey Shore Town Trying Not to Lose the Man vs. Nature Fight on its Eroded Beaches

    Fourth Circuit Confirms Scope of “Witness Litigation Privilege”

    Collapse of Underground Storage Cave Not Covered
    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

    Builder’s Be Wary of Insurance Policies that Provide No Coverage for Building: Mt. Hawley Ins. Co v. Creek Side at Parker HOA

    May 01, 2014 —
    On the heels of a recent order regarding coverage under a Comprehensive General Insurance policy issued by Mt. Hawley Insurance Company (“Mt. Hawley”), builders should be very wary of CGL policies providing no coverage for property damage. On January 8, 2013, District Court Judge R. Brooke Jackson granted a motion for declaratory judgment filed by Mt. Hawley. The order states that the subject insurance policies issued by Mt. Hawley to Mountain View Homes II, LLC (“MV Homes”), the builder developer of the Creek Side at Parker development (the “Project”), did not provide coverage for any of the work performed by MV Homes or its subcontractors on the Project. MV Homes originally began construction on the Project in 2002 and completed construction in 2005. MV Homes was insured by National Fire and Marine Insurance Company (“National Fire”) and Mt. Hawley. In December 2008, Creek Side at Parker Homeowners Association, Inc. (“the HOA”) served notice on MV Homes. The HOA then instituted a construction defect lawsuit on June 1, 2009 against MV Homes and others. MV Homes initially demanded a defense and indemnity from National Fire, which provided a defense. Then, after two years, MV Homes demanded a defense and indemnity from Mt. Hawley in July 2011. Mt. Hawley denied coverage and did not provide a defense. The case was settled soon after, and National Fire reserved or assigned claims against Mt. Hawley. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Your Bad Faith Jury Instruction Against an Insurer is Important

    March 09, 2020 —
    A statutory bad faith claim against an insurer is derived from Florida Statute s. 624.155. A bad faith claim against a first party insurer, such as a property insurer, must be statutory. Check out the hyperlink of the statute, but a party must first file a Civil Remedy Notice identifying the statutory violations to preserve the statutory bad faith claim giving the insurer an opportunity to cure. In a noteworthy case, Cooper v. Federated National Insurance Company, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D2961a (Fla. 5th DCA 2019), the Fifth District Court of Appeal dealt with the jury instruction for an insured’s statutory bad faith claim against their property insurer. The insured filed a bad faith claim predicated on the property insurer violating the provisions of Florida Statute s. 626.9541(1)(i)3, which involves unfair claim settlement practices. The insured had a jury trial and submitted a proposed jury instruction regarding bad faith that tracked the very essence of their bad faith claim and was modeled after s. 626.9541(1)(i)(3). The trial court, however, denied this jury instruction, instead adopting a standard jury instruction for bad faith. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the property insurer and the insured appealed arguing it was reversible error for the trial court NOT to present to the jury their bad faith jury instruction. The Fifth District agreed and ordered a new trial finding that the trial court’s failure to present the jury instruction amounted to a miscarriage of justice. 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

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/06/21)

    October 18, 2021 —
    Real estate tokenization and smart home technology continue to grow, negotiations surrounding the bipartisan infrastructure bill stall its passing, artificial intelligence is poised to transform the construction industry, and more.
    • Contra Global leverages real estate tokenization, the process of creating tokens on the Blockchain and assigning them to real estate properties that already exist or are under construction, to remove traditionally high barriers to investment entry as well as intermediary fees in the industry. (Navid Ladani, Yahoo Finance)
    • Following the 2-week closure of the construction industry after protests turned violent over vaccine mandates, the Victorian government announced its reopening with up to 25 percent capacity of workers and new vaccination rules. (ABC News)
    • Though the construction industry has traditionally relied heavily on human experience and expertise to complete projects, the industry is rapidly adopting digital solutions to adapt to chronic labor shortages, the need for sustainable solutions, and supply-chain disruptions. (Tom Taulli, Forbes)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Indicted Union Representatives Try Again to Revive Enmons

    June 22, 2016 —
    The Boston Globe reports that the Massachusetts AFL-CIO has filed a friend of the court brief seeking to have the indictment of five members of the Teamsters Union in Boston dismissed. The Teamsters members are facing federal charges that they extorted non-union contractors and owners that employed non-union contractors. The Massachusetts AFL-CIO is arguing that under the Supreme Court’s 1972 decision in U.S. v. Enmons the Teamsters alleged conduct was in furtherance of a legitimate union objective and, therefore, no illegal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Supplemental Conditions
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    ASCE Statement on Senate Passage Of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    August 16, 2021 —
    WASHINGTON, DC. – The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) applauds the U.S. Senate for passing the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), proving once again that the strength and reliability of our nation's infrastructure systems is an issue that unites us all. With this legislation, the federal government will restore their critical partnership with cities and states to modernize our nation's infrastructure, including transit systems, drinking water pipes, school facilities, broadband, ports, airports and more. We commend the Senate for prioritizing American communities by passing this bipartisan infrastructure legislation and urge the U.S. House of Representatives to do the same. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 150,000 civil engineers worldwide and is America's oldest national engineering society. ASCE works to raise awareness of the need to maintain and modernize the nation's infrastructure using sustainable and resilient practices, advocates for increasing and optimizing investment in infrastructure, and improve engineering knowledge and competency. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Do We Really Want Courts Deciding if Our Construction Contracts are Fair?

    March 19, 2015 —
    As I posted recently, the Virginia General Assembly has passed, and I can see no reason why the governor won’t sign, a bill that would essentially invalidate preemptive contractual waivers of lien rights as they relate to subcontractors and material suppliers. It does not apply to General Contractors, but it is a step in what many (including those attorneys that represent subcontractors and suppliers) believe is the right direction. Of course, as soon as I posted last week, my friend and colleague Scott Wolfe (@scottwolfejr) commented on that post and then gave his two cents worth at his Zlien blog. The gist of the comments here at Musings and the post over at his blog was essentially that these contractual provisions were inherently unfair and therefore should be abolished because of both a relative disparity in leverage between the Owner or GC and the Subcontractor when it comes to negotiations and the fact that subcontractors often don’t read their contracts or discuss them with a construction attorney prior to signing them. I hear this first of his arguments often when I am reviewing a contract after the fact and a client or potential client acts surprised that a provision will be enforced and the courts of the Commonwealth of Virginia will actually enforce them. As to Scott’s second reason, I have always warned here at Musings that you should read your contracts carefully because they will be the law of your business relationship in the future. The first of his two points is more interesting and in some ways more easily supported. However, where we are speaking of contracts between businesses where both sides are bound by the terms of the contract, it begs the question of whether in seeking to make contracts more “fair” we could add a layer of uncertainty that could cause more problems than it solves. Do we really want courts stepping in after the fact to renegotiate the terms of a deal that was struck months or possibly years before because one judge believes that the deal was too one sided? Do we really need such “Monday morning quarterbacking?” Is one person’s idea of “fair” better than another’s when both parties to the contract had the full ability to read, negotiate and possibly reject the deal long ago? Personally, I think that the answer to these questions is, in all but the most egregious cases or where the legislatures have stepped in adding certainty (whether to the good or bad), “No.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    WCC and BHA Raised Thousands for Children’s Cancer Research at 25th West Coast Casualty CD Seminar

    May 24, 2018 —
    This year’s annual West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar was once again, a huge success. On May 16-18, 2018 attendees from the legal, insurance, builder, contractor, subcontractor and numerous other industries came from across the United States and several foreign countries to discuss current trends, learn about new laws and regulations affecting the construction defect industry, and meet up with colleagues. Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc.’s (BHA) Has a Nice Swing Golf Challenge raised $3,500.00 split evenly between the three deserving charities supported by West Coast Casualty: Hawaii’s Children’s Cancer Foundation , St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, and Shriners Hospital for Children. The West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar has been promoting charitable work for the past twenty-five years. Each year, they promote different charities, and provide multiple ways for individuals and companies to contribute. Whether it’s Buy a Banner, Tennis Shoe Thursday, or Flip Flop Friday, industry members are given opportunities to support worthwhile causes. WCC also supports charitable organizations through every award that they present each year. Donations are made in the winner’s name: For Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence awardees, Habitat for Humanity as well as a local California and Nevada charity; For Legend of an Era Award, the designated charity of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar; and for The Larry Syhre Commitment to Service Award, a donation to The Larry Syhre Foundation. BHA hopes to see you at the next West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar in 2019! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Idaho District Court Affirms Its Role as the Gatekeeper of Expert Testimony

    March 15, 2021 —
    Many subrogation claims involving fire losses rely heavily on expert testimony. Expert testimony is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 if it is both relevant and reliable. In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), whose standard has been incorporated into Federal Rule of Evidence 702, the Supreme Court instructed federal trial courts to act as a “gatekeeper” of expert testimony, giving them the power to exclude expert testimony that is not supported by sufficient evidence. In Maria Fernanda Elosu and Robert Luis Brace v. Middlefork Ranch Incorporated, Civil Case No. 1:19-cv-00267-DCN, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14449 (D. Idaho Jan. 22, 2021) (Brace), the United States District Court for the District of Idaho exercised its gatekeeper role when it granted in part and denied in part the defendant’s motion to exclude expert testimony pursuant to Daubert and Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Brace, involved a fire at a vacation cabin in McCall, Idaho. The cabin, owned by Maria Elosu (Elosu) and Robert Brace (Brace and collectively with Elosu, Plaintiffs) was part of a homeowner’s association called Middlefork Ranch, Incorporated (MFR). The cabin had a “wrap around” deck with a propane-fired refrigerator on the north side. On the day before the fire, Brace stained the deck using an oil-based stain. That night, Elosu smoked cigarettes on the deck. The next morning, Plaintiffs used rags to clean up excess oil from the deck and an MFR employee changed the propane on the refrigerator and relit the pilot light. At 4:00 p.m., a fire started in or around the cabin while no one was home. The fire was discovered by a group of contractors who testified that the fire was isolated to the east side of the cabin when they first arrived. Importantly, one witness testified that there was no fire and no flames around the propane-fired refrigerator. The fire destroyed the cabin and the contents within. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Kenney, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Kenney may be contacted at kenneyme@whiteandwilliams.com