BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimony
    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


    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/13/22

    Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co.

    Generally, What Constitutes A Trade Secret Is A Question of Fact

    Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Holds that Nearly All Project Labor Agreements are Illegal

    Subsurface Water Exclusion Found Unambiguous

    Pa. Contractor Pleads No Contest to Prevailing-Wage Charges, Pays Workers $20.7M

    Subsidence Exclusion Bars Coverage for Damage Caused by Landslide

    Power to the Office Worker

    Burden of Proof Under All-Risk Property Insurance Policy

    Tariffs, Supply Snarls Spur Search for Factories Closer to U.S.

    Buffett Says ‘No-Brainer’ to Get a Mortgage to Short Rates

    Southern California Lost $8 Billion in Construction Wages

    Ruling Finds Builder and Owners at Fault in Construction Defect Case

    COVID-19 Response: Key Legal Considerations for Event Cancellations

    Mind The Appeal Or: A Lesson From Auto-Owners Insurance Co. V. Bolt Factory Lofts Owners Association, Inc. On Timing Insurance Bad Faith And Declaratory Judgment Insurance Claims Following A Nunn-Agreement

    Little Known Florida Venue Statue Benefitting Resident Contractors

    Reasons to Be Skeptical About a Millennial Homebuying Boom in 2016

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: Known Loss Doctrine & Interpretation of “Occurrence”

    While You Were Getting Worked Up Over Oil Prices, This Just Happened to Solar

    Tick Tock: Don’t Let the Statute of Repose or Limitations Time Periods Run on Your Construction Claims

    The Godfather of Solar Predicts Its Future

    Study Finds Construction Cranes Vulnerable to Hacking

    Time to Repair Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws?

    OSHA Again Pushes Back Record-Keeping Rule Deadline

    Connecticut Federal District Court Keeps Busy With Collapse Cases

    Arizona Court Determines Statute of Limitations Applicable to a Claim for Reformation of a Deed of Trust (and a Related Claim for Declaratory Judgment)

    Lewis Brisbois Listed on Leopard Solutions Top 10 Law Firm Index

    Illinois Non-Profit Sues over Defective Roof

    Preliminary Notice Is More Important Than Ever During COVID-19

    North Carolina Exclusion j(6) “That Particular Part”

    Natural Hydrogen May Seem New in Town, but It’s Been Here All Along

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Just Hanging Around”

    Connecticut District Court to Review Proposed Class Action in Defective Concrete Suit

    Limitations: There is a Point of No Return

    Duty to Defend Bodily Injury Evolving Over Many Policy Periods Prorated in Louisiana

    What Counts as Adequate Opportunity to Cure?

    Heathrow Tempts Runway Opponents With $1,200 Christmas Sweetener

    Demonstrating A Fraudulent Inducement Claim Or Defense

    12 Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2022 U.S. News Best Lawyers in Multiple Practice Areas

    Design & Construction Case Expands Florida’s Slavin Doctrine

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation

    Cherokee Nation Wins Summary Judgment in COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim

    California Case Is a Reminder That Not All Insurance Policies Are Alike Regarding COVID-19 Losses

    The Fifth Circuit, Applying Texas Law, Strikes Down Auto Exclusion

    Corporate Transparency Act’s Impact on Real Estate: Reporting Companies, Exemptions and Beneficial Ownership Reporting (webinar)

    In Contracts, One Word Makes All the Difference

    Another Las Vegas Tower at the Center of Construction Defect Claims

    Amos Rex – A Museum for the Digital Age

    Storm Breaches California River's Levee, Thousands Evacuate

    Job Gains a Positive for Housing
    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

    Faulty Workmanship Causing Damage to Other Property Covered as Construction Defect

    September 30, 2011 —

    In yet another recent construction defect case, the Illinois Court of Appeal found for coverage. See Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co. v. J.P. Larsen, Inc., 2011 Ill. App. Ct. LEXIS 872 (Ill. Ct. App. Aug. 15, 2011).

    Weather-Tite, Inc. hired Larson as a subcontractor to apply sealant to windows installed by Weather-Tite in a condominium building. The windows subsequently leaked and caused water damage. The homeowner’s association sued Weather-Tite for breach of express and implied warranties. Weather-Tite filed a third-party complaint against Larsen alleging that, if it was liable to the association for breach of warranty, Larsen was liable for contribution as a joint tortfeasor. Weather-Tite and Larsen both tendered defenses to Milwaukee Insurance. The tenders were denied and Milwaukee Insurance filed suit to determine rights under the policy.

    Cross-motions for summary judgment were filed by all parties. The trial court granted Milwaukee Insurance’s summary judgment motion as to Weather-Tite, but granted Larsen’s cross-motion against Milwaukee Insurance.

    On appeal, the appellate court considered whether the underlying pleadings alleged facts demonstrating "property damage" resulting from an "occurrence" within the terms of the policy.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    Home Building Up in Kansas City

    November 20, 2013 —
    It’s been a good year for home builders in Kansas City, Missouri. In fact, it’s the best year since 2007. The total number of home permits issued through October exceeds the number issued in 2012 by 164, having reached 3,463. Sara Corless, executive vice president of the Builders Association, focused more on the growth, though she noted that some builders were hoping the year’s total would exceed 4,000, which she described as “a psychological victory at a minimum.” The Kansas City metropolitan area lead the state in the number of building permits issued. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Harvey's Aftermath Will Rattle Construction Supply Chain, Economists Say

    September 07, 2017 —
    Hurricane Harvey’s immediate impact on the construction sector will be a disruption in the supply chain for key materials, along with scheduling problems for projects that were under construction. As the cleanup and eventual rebuilding proceed, increased demand for materials and labor will push costs upward and contractors will be scrambling to secure supplies and workers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tim Grogan, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    United States Supreme Court Backtracks on Recent Trajectory Away from Assertions of General Jurisdiction in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern

    August 01, 2023 —
    Washington, D.C. (June 28, 2023) – On June 27, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a sharply divided opinion that appears to backtrack on the Court’s steady trajectory away from assertions of general jurisdiction in recent years, e.g. Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, 564 U.S. 915, 919 (2011), Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S. Ct. 746 (2014), BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell, 2017, 137 S. Ct. 1549 (2017). Relying on a case from 1917, Pennsylvania Fire Ins. Co. of Philadelphia v. Gold Issue Mining & Milling Co., 243 U. S. 93 (1917), Justice Gorsuch, writing on behalf of the plurality, (Justices Gorsuch, Thomas, Sotomayor, and Jackson) (Justice Alito concurring) found that Norfolk Southern “consented” to jurisdiction in Mallory via 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. §5301(a)(2)(i),(b) by registering to do business in Pennsylvania. This statute, 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. §5301, specifically permits jurisdiction over a corporation “incorporat[ed] under or qualifi[ed]as a foreign corporation under the laws of this Commonwealth … for any cause of action that may asserted against him, whether or not arising from acts enumerated in this section.” In Pennsylvania Fire, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution in connection with a Missouri law that required an out-of-state insurance company desiring to transact any business in the state to file paperwork agreeing to (1) appoint a state official to serve as the company’s agent for service of process and (2) accept service on that official as valid in any suit. After more than a decade of complying with the law, Pennsylvania Fire was served with process and argued that the Missouri law violated due process. The Court unanimously found that there was “no doubt” that Pennsylvania Fire could be sued in Missouri because it had agreed to accept service of process in Missouri on any suit as a condition of doing business there. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Charles S. Anderson, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Anderson may be contacted at Charles.Anderson@lewisbrisbois.com

    Construction Defect Claim Survives Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion Due to Lack of Evidence

    December 23, 2024 —
    The court denied the insurer's motion for summary judgment on a construction defect claim due to lack of evidence. Statesboro Erectors, Inc. v. Owners Ins. Co., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176555 (N.D. Ga. Sept. 30, 2024). Griffco was the general contractor for a construction project. King Steel was hired as the "steel fabricator." King Steel subcontracted with Statesboro Erectors to complete certain construction work at the site. Statesboro agreed to the complete, proper and safe erection of the structural steel. A steel collapse occurred at the construction site. According to King Steel, the collapse "appeared to have occurred due to lack of temporary cables or bracing for steel columns." Because of the collapse, King Steel was required to supply additional materials to replace the structural damage caused by the collapse. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Ongoing Operations Exclusion Bars Coverage

    December 09, 2019 —
    The insurer denied the insured contractor's claim seeking a defense for faulty workmanship based upon the ongoing operations exclusion. PJR Constr. of N.J. v. Valley Forge Ins. Co., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127973 (D. N. J. July 31, 2019). PJR Construction was the general contractor to build a swim club and pavilion building for Cambridge Real Property, LLC. PJR began construction on May 29, 2012, and was to complete the construction by March 1, 2013. The project took much longer than anticipated. PJR was denied access to the site on November 13, 2014. Cambridge contended PJR tolerated shoddy workmanship and breached the terms of the contract documents. Cambridge estimated that the project was between 55% and 74.3% complete. PJR and Cambridge went to arbitration. PJR sought a defense from the insurers. Coverage was denied based upon exclusions j (5) and j (6). Exclusion j (5), which the court referred to as the "Ongoing Operations Exclusion," provided the policy did not apply to,
    Property Damage to . . . [t]hat particular part of real property on which you or any contractors or subcontractors working directly or indirectly on your behalf are performing operations, if the property damage arises out of those operations.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Insurer Must Cover Portions of Arbitration Award

    October 14, 2019 —
    The court determined that there was coverage in a construction defect case for portions of an arbitration award. Liberty Surplus Ins. Corp. v. Century Sur. Co., 2019 U.S. DIst. LEXIS 116093 (S.D. Texas July 12, 2019). Descon Construction contracted with the City of Edinburg, Texas, to build a library. Descon subcontracted with McAllen Steel Erectors to install the library metal roof. The roof began to leak within two months of occupancy. The leaks continued for seven years. Edinburg sued Descon. The matter was arbitrated. The arbitration panel found that the library roof was defective, the exterior stucco system was defectively installed and certain work, including fire-caulking, had not been performed. The panel concluded that Descon was liable for breach of contract and breach of warranty. The panel determined that Edinburg was entitled to replacement of the existing roof. Further, McAllen was found to have breached its subcontract with Descon by defectively installing the roof, entitling Descon to recover $762,537 from McAllen. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    If You Can’t Dazzle Em’ With Brilliance, Baffle Em’ With BS: Apprentices on Public Works Projects

    October 24, 2023 —
    The “Big Four” when it comes to public works contracting on state and local projects in California are:
    1. Registration with the California Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”);
    2. Payment of prevailing of wages and maintenance and submission of certified payroll;
    3. Compliance with the “skilled and trained workforce” requirements on certain projects; and
    4. Hiring apprentices on state and local public works projects with a value of $30,000 or more.
    The next case, GRFCO, Inc. v. Superior Court, 89 Cal.App.5th 1295 (2023), discusses the last of these requirements. The case also reminded me of W.C. Field’s old saying – “If you can’t dazzle em’ with brilliance, baffle em’ with bullshit” – and which ended with expected results. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com