BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction 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


    There is No Presumptive Resumption!

    So a Lawsuit Is on the Horizon…

    Planned Everglades Reservoir at Center of Spat Between Fla.'s Gov.-Elect, Water Management District

    Janeen Thomas Installed as State Director of WWBA, Receives First Ever President’s Award

    Subsequent Owners of Homes Again Have Right to Sue Builders for Construction Defects

    Hilary Soaks California With Flooding Rain and Snarls Flights

    Gordon & Rees Ranks #5 in Top 50 Construction Law Firms in the Nation

    Florida Project Could Help Address Runoff, Algae Blooms

    Crime Lab Beset by Ventilation Issues

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Selected To The Best Lawyers In America© And Orange County "Lawyer Of The Year" 2020

    No Retrofit without Repurposing in Los Angeles

    Digital Twins for a Safer Built Environment

    Dump Site Provider Has Valid Little Miller Act Claim

    Judgment Proof: Reducing Litigation Exposure with Litigation Risk Insurance

    Work to Solve the Mental Health Crisis in Construction

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Win Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings In Favor of Insurer

    Professional Services Exclusion Bars Coverage After Carbon Monoxide Leak

    Mediation v. Arbitration, Both Private Dispute Resolution but Very Different Sorts

    Attorneys' Fees Awarded as Part of "Damages Because of Property Damage"

    Price Escalation Impacts

    Know Whether Your Course of Business Operations Are Covered Or Excluded By Your Insurance

    Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Owner’s Claims Based on Contractual One-Year Claims Limitations Period

    Pending Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Rise Most in Four Years

    $109-Million Renovation Begins on LA's Willowbrook/Rosa Parks Station

    Cal/OSHA’s Toolbox Has Significantly Expanded: A Look At Senate Bill 606

    Understanding the California Consumer Privacy Act

    Assignment of Insured's Policy Ineffective

    Connecticut Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C" Grade

    Construction Defect Claim Did Not Harm Homeowner, Court Rules

    The One New Year’s Resolution You’ll Want to Keep if You’re Involved in Public Works Projects

    A Bill for an Act Concerning Workers’ Compensation – 2014 Edition

    Traub Lieberman Partner Katie Keller and Associate Steven Hollis Obtain Summary Judgment Based on Plaintiff’s Failure to Comply with Policy Conditions

    Enforceability of Contract Provisions Extending Liquidated Damages Beyond Substantial Completion

    What Should Be in Every Construction Agreement

    Construction Defect Journal Seeks Article Submissions Regarding SB800 and Other Builders Right to Repair Laws

    Court Rejects Insurer's Argument That Two Triggers Required

    Failure to Timely File Suit in Federal Court for Flood Loss is Fatal

    Resolve to Say “No” This Year

    Lawsuit Decries Environmental Assessment for Buffalo, NY, Expressway Cap Project

    Court Calls Lease-Leaseback Project What it is: A Design-Bid-Build Project

    A Court-Side Seat: May Brings Federal Appellate Courts Rulings and Executive Orders

    Contractor Definition Central to Coverage Dispute

    Consumer Product Safety Commission Recalls

    Fires, Hurricanes, Dangerous Heat: The US Is Reeling From a String of Disasters

    Solar Energy Isn’t Always Green

    Manhattan Gets First Crowdfunded Condos

    Gordie Howe Bridge Project Team Looks for a Third Period Comeback

    The Future of Airport Infrastructure in a Post-Pandemic World

    Florida Self-Insured Retention Satisfaction and Made Whole Doctrine

    Denver Passed the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
    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

    Los Angeles Could Be Devastated by the Next Big Earthquake

    October 15, 2013 —
    A group of scientists have made a list of about 1,500 concrete buildings in Los Angeles which could potentially collapse in an earthquake. They have offered to make the list available to Los Angeles officials, although the city has yet to take them up on the offer. In response, a group of Times reporters combed through records to identify which buildings were of the sort most likely to collapse in an earthquake. The group found more than 1,000 concrete buildings built before 1976 when Los Angeles increased the requirements for steel rebar. Experts estimate that in a major earthquake, five percent of these buildings could collapse, which for Los Angeles would mean about 50 buildings. Many of these buildings could be seismically retrofitted, but the article notes that a retrofit starts with a $100,000 structural study. Carol Schatz of the Central City Association notes that the cost of retrofitting “would be greater than the value of the building.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York Court Holds Insurer Can Rely on Exclusions After Incorrectly Denying Defense

    March 26, 2014 —
    Reversing its prior decision, the New York Court of Appeals held that the insurer could raise policy exclusions regarding its duty to indemnify after it incorrectly denied its duty to defend. K2 Invest. Group, LLC v. Am. Guar. & Liab. Co., 2014 N.Y. LEXIS 201 (N.Y. Ct. App. Feb. 18, 2014). The insured was sued for legal malpractice. His insurer, American Guarantee, refused to defend and a default judgment was entered. The insured assigned his rights against American Guarantee to the plaintiffs. When the underlying plaintiffs sued, American Guarantee said coverage was barred by two exclusions. In a previous decision, K2 Inv. Group, LLC v. Am Guar. & Liab. Ins. Co., 21 NY 3d 284, the court held that American Guarantee's breach of its duty to defend prevented it from relying on policy exclusions. This, however, contradicted another case issued by the court, Servidone Const. Corp. v. Security Ins. Co. of Hartford, 64 N.Y 2d 419 (1985). 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

    Retroactive Application of a Construction Subcontract Containing a Merger Clause? Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal Answers in the Affirmative

    September 07, 2017 —
    Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal recently addressed the issue of retroactive application of a construction subcontract on the basis of a merger clause in Don Facciobene, Inc. v. Hough Roofing, Inc.[1] In the case, in late 2010, Don Facciobene, Inc. (“DFI”), a licensed general contractor, contracted with Digiacinto Holdings, LLC, an owner of a home built in 1905 in Melbourne, Florida, known as the Nannie Lee House or the Strawberry Mansion, to perform various renovations in preparation for a restaurant to be opened on the premises. One of the renovations included a new roof. DFI subcontracted the roofing work to Hough Roofing, Inc. (“HRI”), a licensed roofing subcontractor. In mid-March 2011, HRI submitted an estimate and proposed statement of work to DFI. DFI’s project manager signed HRI’s proposal on April 5, 2011, as well as an additional expanded proposal six days later. According to the proposals, payment was due on completion. HRI began work on the roof on April 15, 2011, without a signed subcontract. However, DFI and HRI ultimately executed a subcontract on June 8, 2011, even though HRI had mostly finished its work by the end of May. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sanjo S. Shatley, Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.
    Mr. Shatley may be contacted at sanjo.shatley@csklegal.com

    The Ghosts of Tariffs Past May Help Us in the Future

    January 07, 2025 —
    The havoc material tariffs have caused the construction industry is nothing new. President-Elect Donald Trump imposed heavy tariffs on steel and aluminum in his first administration in 2016. While the tariffs themselves were not wholly unexpected, the ripple effect of those tariffs (coupled with the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic) caused unexpected challenges for the construction industry. Those included allocating the risk of the additional costs caused by tariffs, supply and demand issues, grappling with escalation clauses, and navigating fixed price projects. The industry must now utilize the lessons learned from the rear-view mirror to strategically prepare for what was promised to be a second round of tariffs come January 2025. Tariffs’ Impacts on Material Prices Everywhere New or increased tariffs have the potential to raise prices for a wide range of construction inputs. Based on simple supply and demand principles, this includes inputs produced domestically that compete with foreign imports. For example, if a 20% tariff is imposed on Chinese steel, contractors may look to procure Brazil or U.S. steel in an effort to cut their costs. Such a rush to those less-costly alternatives may result in a supply shortage or an increase in prices in the marketplace across the globe. This occurred in 2016 when material prices indirectly related to the inputs on which the tariffs were imposed even increased. Contractors may be well served to get ahead of anticipated price increases and purchase materials now or take other actions in negotiating contracts to protect themselves. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kellie Ros, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Ms. Ros may be contacted at kros@pecklaw.com

    Second Circuit Denies Petitions for Review of EPA’s Final Regulations to Establish Requirements for Cooling Water Intake Structures

    August 20, 2018 —
    On July 23, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decided the case of Cooling Water Intake Structure Coalition v. EPA. Environmental conservation groups and industry associations petitioned for review of a final rule promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), establishing requirements for cooling water intake structures at existing facilities. Denying the petitions for review, the Court of Appeals summarized:
    “Because we conclude, among other things, that both the Rule and the biological opinion are based on reasonable interpretations of the applicable statutes and sufficiently supported by the factual record, and because the EPA 3 gave adequate notice of its rulemaking, we DENY the petitions for review.”
    This is a significant CWA and Endangered Species Act (ESA) decision involving the operation of major industrial facilities requiring the daily use of large amounts of water taken from adjacent bodies of water. 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

    Corps Proposes $4.6B Plan to Steel Miami for Storm Surge

    June 22, 2020 —
    A $4.6-billion U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposal to protect Miami from future storm surge, largely by building massive sea walls and elevating infrastructure systems, is the latest of such plans the agency has developed for East Coast communities. Pam Radtke Russell, Engineering News-Record Ms. Russell may be contacted at Russellp@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Indemnity After Insured Settles Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability Claims

    June 09, 2016 —
    Applying Illinois law, the federal district court ruled that there was no coverage for the insured's settlement of claims based upon breach of the implied warranty of habitability. Allied Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Metro North Condo. Ass'n, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43452 (E.D. Ill. March 31, 2016). Metro North sued the developer of its condominium and a number of its contractors and subcontractors for defective construction that caused various problems, including water infiltration. One subcontractor, CSC, was to provide window and glazing services. After a rainstorm, water infiltrated the project due to CSC's work. Metro North claimed that CSC was liable for breach of the implied warranty of habitability. 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

    Intricacies of Business Interruption Claim Considered

    January 07, 2015 —
    Reaching into the weeds to analyze a business interruption claim, the Massachusetts Court of Appeals determined the cost of ordinary payroll could be included in the calculation of net profit or loss in determining business loss income when business is resumed quickly after a fire. Verrill Farms, LLC v. Farm Family Cas. Ins. Co., 2014 Mass. App. LEXIS 145 (Mass. App. Ct. Nov. 4, 2014). The insured suffered a fire loss at its farm store. Within two days, the business was reopened at alternate locations at reduced capacity. Within a month, the business had resumed nearly full capacity in temporary locations. No employees were laid off. This allowed the insured to maintain its business and generate income. The insured submitted a claim for loss of business income, based on its loss of net income in the year after the fire. The insurer paid a sum considerably less than the claim based upon its interpretation of what expenses could be included in a calculation of net profit or loss in order to determine loss of business income. The trial court held that the insurer did not have to pay the cost of ordinary payroll beyond the sixty-day limit, and granted summary judgment in the insurer's favor. 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