BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering 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


    Protecting Expert Opinions: Lessons Regarding Attorney-Client Privilege and Expert Retention in Construction Litigation

    Court Dismisses Cross Claims Against Utility Based on Construction Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Newmeyer Dillion Named 2021 Best Law Firm in Multiple Practice Areas by U.S. News-Best Lawyers

    Construction Defect Coverage Summary 2013: The Business Risks Shift To Insurers

    Forget Backyard Pools, Build a Swimming Pond Instead

    Expired Contract Not Revived Due to Sovereign Immunity and the Ex Contractu Clause

    New Jersey/New York “Occurrence”

    Another Reminder that Your Construction Contract Language Matters

    Pinnacle Controls in Verano

    Social Distancing and the Impact on Service of Process Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic

    Denver’s Proposed Solution to the Affordable Housing Crisis

    Human Eye Resolution Virtual Reality for AEC

    Preliminary Notice Is More Important Than Ever During COVID-19

    Colorado Springs may be Next Colorado City to Add Construction Defects Ordinance

    Changes to Pennsylvania Mechanic’s Lien Code

    Recent Statutory Changes Cap Retainage on Applicable Construction Projects

    Construction Law Job Opps and How to Create Them

    The Importance of the Subcontractor Exception to the “Your Work” Exclusion

    OSHA Begins Enforcement of its Respirable Crystalline Silica in Construction Standard. Try Saying That Five Times Real Fast

    Netherlands’ Developer Presents Modular Homes for Young Professionals

    The Benefits of Incorporating AI Into the Construction Lifecycle

    Spreading Cracks On FIU Bridge Failed to Alarm Project Team

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa Rolle and Christopher Acosta Win Motion to Dismiss in Bronx County Trip and Fall

    Settlement Reached on Troubled Harbor Bridge in Corpus Christi, Texas

    President Trump’s Infrastructure Plan Requires a Viable Statutory Framework (PPP Statutes)[i]

    NY State Appellate Court Holds That Pollution Exclusions Bar Duty to Defend Under Liability Policies for Claims Alleging Exposure to PFAS

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment in Collapse Case Denied

    Wheaton to Require Sprinklers in New Homes

    Not So Unambiguous: California Court of Appeal Finds Coverage for Additional Insured

    United States Supreme Court Limits Class Arbitration

    Legal Risks of Green Building

    The Risks and Rewards of Sustainable Building Design

    Cracked Girders Trigger Scrutiny of Salesforce Transit Center's Entire Structure

    Has Hydrogen's Time Finally Come?

    Insurer Beware: Failure to Defend Ends with Hefty Verdict

    How to Determine the Deadline for Recording a California Mechanics Lien

    Client Alert: Naming of Known and Unknown Defendants in Initial Complaints: A Cautionary Tale

    Manufacturer of Asbestos-Free Product May Still Be Liable for Asbestos Related Injuries

    Record-Setting Construction in Fargo

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Museums

    Insurance Broker Stole NY Contractor's Payment, Indictment Alleges

    Library to Open with Roof Defect Lawsuit Pending

    Weslaco, Texas Investigating Possible Fraudulent Contractor Invoices

    Colorado Rejects Bill to Shorten Statute of Repose

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    Supreme Court Rejects “Wholly Groundless” Exception to Question of Arbitrability

    Massive Fire Destroys Building, Firefighters Rescue Construction Worker

    As of July 1, 2024, California Will Require Most Employers to Have a Written Workplace Violence Prevention Program (WVPP) and Training. Is Your Company Compliant?

    Gatluak Ramdiet Named to The National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List

    Court Again Defines Extent of Contractor’s Insurance Coverage
    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

    #3 CDJ Topic: Underwriters of Interest Subscribing to Policy No. A15274001 v. ProBuilders Specialty Ins. Co., Case No. D066615

    December 30, 2015 —
    Michael R. Vellado and Nicole R. Kardassakis of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP analyzed the appeals case that “reversed the trial court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of ProBuilders Specialty Insurance Company (“ProBuilders”) and held that the ‘other insurance’ clause in the ProBuilders policy did not relieve it of its duty to participate in the defense of its insured, Pacific Trades Construction & Development, Inc. ('Pacific Trades')." Read the full story... Another discussion of the ProBuilders appeal ruling occurred on the California Construction Law Blog, written by Yas Omidi of Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP. Omidi explained the appeal’s court decision: “In reversing the trial court’s decision, the appellate court characterized ProBuilder’s ‘other insurance’ clause as an ‘escape clause’—i.e., a clause that attempts to have coverage, paid for with the insured’s premiums, evaporate in the presence of other insurance.” Furthermore, she noted that “California public policy disfavors such clauses.” Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is It Time to Revisit Construction Defects in Kentucky?

    December 11, 2013 —
    The Kentucky Supreme Court ruled in 2010 that faulty workmanship on a construction project could not be considered an accident under a commercial general liability policy. The first reason they cited, according to Carl A. Salisbury of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, was that a majority of states had concluded that “claims of faulty workmanship, standing alone, are not ‘occurrences’ under CGL policies.” Mr. Salisbury points out a problem with that: “an overwhelming majority of state Supreme Courts that have considered the question have held that faulty workmanship can be (and usually is) accidental and, therefore, is a covered ‘occurrence.’’ He also notes that in four states, the legislatures have passed laws confirming that faulty workmanship is an occurrence. The “majority viewpoint” cited by the Kansas Supreme Court is currently held by four other states, while twenty states hold the view that construction defects are accidents and thus occurrences. Since 2010, five states have reversed their stance, coming to what is now the clear majority view, including South Carolina. The Kansas court relied on a South Carolina decision that Mr. Salisbury described as “since repudiated” by “both the legislature and Supreme Court of that state.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Gaps in Insurance Created by Complex Risks

    January 22, 2024 —
    From slips, trips and falls to extreme weather and cyberattacks, businesses are regularly confronted with risks to operations and profitability. In 2023, elevated building costs, increased flooding, and growing ransomware attacks made it compelling for business owners to make sure they had adequate insurance to stay ahead of property and liability exposures. However, if left unchecked, these trends can lead to gaps in coverage. As 2024 approaches, now is the time to assess your risk and collaborate with the right resources to fill any potential voids in insurance. Economic inflation for example has changed property valuations, which can result in coverage gaps if policyholders have not examined their replacement costs recently. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Hartford Staff, The Hartford Insights

    Floating Crane on Job in NYC's East River Has a Storied Past of Cold War Intrigue

    January 04, 2018 —
    Originally Published by CDJ on March 22, 2017 The complex maneuver of lifting heavy prefabricated modules out of New York City's East River to build a university laboratory took careful planning and the work of one particular floating crane with a complicated past. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, ENR
    Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com

    CGL Insurer’s Duty to Defend Insured During Pre-Suit 558 Process: Maybe?

    December 20, 2017 —
    In earlier postings, I discussed the issue of whether Florida Statutes Chapter 558′s pre-suit construction defects process triggers a CGL insurer’s duty to defend. The issue was whether Florida’s 558 pre-suit notice of a construction defect and repair process met the definition of “suit” within a standard CGL policy. A standard CGL policy defines the term “suit” as: “Suit” means a civil proceeding in which damages because of “bodily injury,” “property damage” or “personal and advertising injury” to which this insurance applies are alleged. “Suit” includes: a. An arbitration proceeding in which such damages are claimed and to which the insured must submit or does submit with our consent; or b. Any other alternative dispute resolution proceeding in which such damages are claimed and to which the insured submits with our consent. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Quick Note: Charting Your Contractual Rights With Respect To The Coronavirus

    April 06, 2020 —
    As more and more information is being learned, and more and more industries are being impacted, it is likely that the construction industry will follow suit. And, while impacts with the global supply chain may not yet be realized, impacts could begin with labor supply and, frankly, employers’ safety protocols dealing with the coronavirus. One suggestion that should be implemented is a detailed chart, similar to the below, where you are charting rights and obligations under your contracts dealing with force majeure, notice, and project suspensions. This is step one to make sure you are making prudent decisions, preserving rights, and making sure contractual obligations are being met. Be proactive, not reactive. 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

    BIM Meets Reality on the Construction Site

    September 25, 2018 —
    BIM models are mostly used by foremen on construction sites. But what if they could be made available for workers at the press of a button? This question was what the Finnish government-funded KIRA pilot project set out to answer. As a by-product, the project also produced augmented reality (AR) solutions for construction sites. The research project was called ”Digitalization of a construction project based on role and location information” (RoPa). It was conducted by construction company Fira and engineering consultancy Sweco. 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

    DC Circuit Upholds EPA’s Latest RCRA Recycling Rule

    September 23, 2019 —
    On July 2, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decided the case of California Communities Against Toxics, et al. v. EPA. In this decision, the court rejected the latest petition to strike or vacate EPA’s 2018 revisions to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste recycling rules. In 1985, EPA promulgated a new regulatory definition of “solid waste,” which is the linchpin of the agency’s very stringent hazardous waste management rules. (See the rules located at 40 CFR Sections 260-268.) Unless a material is a “solid waste” as defined by the rules, it cannot also be a hazardous waste. The 1985 rules grappled with the challenges posed by recycling practices, and attempted to distinguish between legitimate recycling which is not subject to hazardous waste regulation, and other more suspect forms of recycling. The rules are complex and replete with nuance. In doing so, EPA was adhering to RCRA’s statutory mandate that it develop appropriate rules to govern the treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous waste, while also promoting “properly conducted recycling and reuse.” The DC Circuit reviewed the 1985 rules in the seminal case of American Mining Congress v EPA, 824 F.2d 1177 (1987), (AMC) and stressed that only those materials that were truly discarded could be regulated as solid waste; for instance, those materials that were destined for immediate recycling or recovery in an ongoing production process were not discarded and hence were not solid waste. Over the years, the court has struggled to clarify the basic holding of AMC in numerous cases while EPA has frequently revised and amended the RCRA rules, and in particular the definition of solid waste, in an attempt to balance the policies mandated by the statute. 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