BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction experts
    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


    Acord Certificates of Liability Insurance: What They Don’t Tell You Can Hurt You

    LA’s $1.2 Billion Graffiti Towers Put on Sale After Bankruptcy

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

    Corps Issues Draft EIS for Controversial Alaskan Copper Mine

    Coverage Denied for Faulty Blasting and Improper Fill

    Condo Association Settles with Pulte Homes over Construction Defect Claims

    Accident/Occurrence Requirement Does not Preclude Coverage for Vicarious Liability or Negligent Supervision

    More (and Simpler) Options Under New Oregon Retention Law

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    Negligence Against a Construction Manager Agent

    Property Owner’s Defense Goes Up in Smoke in Careless Smoking Case

    Use of Dispute Review Boards in the Construction Process

    Key Amendments to Insurance Claims-Handling Regulations in Puerto Rico

    Jury Awards 20 Million Verdict Against Bishop Abbey Homes

    Two More Lawsuits Filed Over COVID-19 Business Interruption Losses

    Flooded Courtroom May be Due to Construction Defect

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    Guidance for Construction Leaders: How Is the Americans With Disabilities Act Applied During the Pandemic?

    Home Building on the Upswing in Bakersfield

    So a Lawsuit Is on the Horizon…

    “Wait! Do You Have All Your Ducks in a Row?” Filing of a Certificate of Merit in Conjunction With a Complaint

    Housing Markets Continue to Improve

    Renters Who Bought Cannot Sue for Construction Defects

    Harrisburg Sought Support Before Ruinous Incinerator Retrofit

    How Mushrooms Can Be Used To Make Particle Board Less Toxic

    Ensuring Arbitration in Construction Defect Claims

    Buyers Are Flocking to NYC’s Suburbs. Too Bad There Aren’t Many Homes to Sell.

    Explore Legal Immigration Options for Construction Companies

    Client Alert: Court of Appeal Applies Common Interest Privilege Doctrine to HOA Litigation Meetings

    U.K. Construction Unexpectedly Strengthens for a Second Month

    Remand of Bad Faith Claim Evidences Split Among Florida District Courts

    AB 1701 – General Contractor Liability for Subcontractors’ Unpaid Wages

    Unfair Risk Allocation on Design-Build Projects

    Draft Federal Legislation Reinforces Advice to Promptly Notify Insurers of COVID-19 Losses

    Alleging Property Damage in Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Chicago Developer and Trade Group Sue City Over Affordable Housing Requirements

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition

    2017 Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure

    Communications between Counsel and PR Firm Hired by Counsel Held Discoverable

    The Sounds of Silence: Pennsylvania’s Sutton Rule

    OSHA Launches Program to Combat Trenching Accidents

    Two Years, Too Late: Time-Barred Hurricane Loss is Timely Reminder to Insureds

    OSHA’s COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standard Is in Flux

    Ohio Supreme Court Case to Decide Whether or Not to Expand Insurance Coverage Under GC’s CGL Insurance Policies

    Detroit Showed What ‘Build Back Better’ Can Look Like

    California Assembly Passes Expedited Dam Safety for Silicon Valley Act

    An Increase of US Metro Areas’ with Normal Housing & Economic Health

    SkenarioLabs Uses AI for Property Benchmarking

    Latosha Ellis Joins The National Black Lawyers Top 40 Under 40

    Turmoil Slows Rebuilding of Puerto Rico's Power Grid
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    NYC Hires Engineer LERA for Parking Garage Collapse Probe

    January 29, 2024 —
    The investigation into the collapse of a Lower Manhattan parking garage last April is still underway. A Jan. 2 notice published in The City Record identified LERA Consulting Structural Engineers RLLP as the engineering firm assisting with the probe. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York Appellate Court Holds Insurers May Suffer Consequences of Delayed Payment of Energy Company Property and Business Interruption Claims

    March 16, 2020 —
    A New York appellate court recently held that renewable bio-diesel fuel manufacturer BioEnergy Development Group LLC may pursue tens of millions of dollars in damages from its insurers under two all-risk insurance policies, including amounts in excess of the policy limits, where the insurers refused to pay claims in a timely manner. BioEnergy purchased two all-risk property policies from Lloyd’s to provide coverage for its manufacturing plant in Memphis, Tennessee. A fire destroyed the Memphis plant in March 2016, eliminating BioEnergy’s production capacity and sole source of revenue. BioEnergy made claims under the policies and sought to rebuild its plant. The insurers acknowledged coverage and eventually made approximately $8 million in interim payments, but the parties disagreed over the value of the total property damage claim, which BioEnergy contended was in excess of $24 million. The disputed claim was submitted to appraisal, which resulted in the insurers agreeing to pay the full business interruption limit of $15.1 million. The insurers filed a declaratory judgment lawsuit, however, seeking to limit BioEnergy’s recovery to the policy limits of $15.1 million. BioEnergy alleged that the insurers failed to make interim payments in a timely manner after the fire and, as a result, the company suffered increased losses because it could not rebuild without the insurance proceeds. BioEnergy sought actual and consequential damages, plus attorneys’ fees, arising from the delayed payments, including payment of its business interruption losses in excess of the policy limits. Reprinted courtesy of Syed S. Ahmad, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Geoffrey B. Fehling, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Ahmad may be contacted at sahmad@HuntonAK.com Mr. Fehling may be contacted at gfehling@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Appraisal Process Analyzed

    August 19, 2015 —
    The California Court of Appeal offered a primer in the appraisal process in reversing the trial court's confirmation of the appraisal award. Lee v. California Capital Ins. Co., 2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 530 (Cal. Ct. App. June 18, 2015). A fire damaged an apartment building owned by the insured. The fire started in unit 3 on the ground floor. The insurer argued the fire did not extend beyond unit 3. The insured claimed that the fire damaged six of the 12 apartments with fire or smoke. The insured's public adjuster submitted a claim to the insurer that exceeded $800,000. The statement of loss included costs for cleaning, asbestos abatement, reconstruction of affected apartments, and loss of rent. The public adjuster said the loss consisted of burn damage to unit 3 and some damage to the "common" walls located between the apartments on the two floors above unit 3. All of the interior rooms of five apartments other than unit 3 would need to be completely dismantled and then replaced. 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

    In Pennsylvania, Contractors Can Be Liable to Third Parties for Obvious Defects in Completed Work

    July 10, 2023 —
    In Brown v. City of Oil City, No. 6 WAP 2022, 2023 Pa. LEXIS 681 (2023), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (Supreme Court) recently held that a contractor can be liable for dangerous conditions it creates even if the hazard is obvious or known by the property owner. In City of Oil City, the City of Oil City (Oil City) contracted with Harold Best and Struxures, LLC and Fred Burns, Inc. (collectively Contractors) to reconstruct the concrete stairs to the city library. Contractors completed their work at the end of 2011. In early 2012, Oil City received reports of issues with the stairs. Oil City notified Contractors that it considered the stairs dangerous and that Contractors’ defective workmanship created the condition. Neither Oil City or Contractors took any action to fix the stairs or warn of the danger and the stairs’ condition worsened with time. On November 23, 2015, David and Kathryn Brown exited the library. Kathryn Brown tripped on one of the deteriorated steps, falling and striking her head. Kathryn suffered a traumatic head injury and passed away six days later. The Estate of Kathryn Brown and David Brown, individually (collectively, the Browns), sued Oil City as the owner of the library and Contractors. With respect to Contractors, the Browns asserted that Contractors’ work on the stairs created a dangerous condition that presented an unreasonable risk of harm to those using the steps. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael L. DeBona, White and Williams
    Mr. DeBona may be contacted at debonam@whiteandwilliams.com

    General Liability Alert: A Mixed Cause of Action with Protected and Non-Protected Activity Not Subject to Anti-SLAPP Motion

    February 18, 2015 —
    In Baral v. Schnitt (filed 2/5/2015, No. B253620), the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, held that California’s anti-SLAPP statute does not authorize the striking of allegations of protected activity in a cause of action that also contains meritorious allegations of non-protected activity not within the purview of the statute. In so holding, the court attempted to resolve, or at least add its voice to, the growing conflict among appellate districts on the issue. A SLAPP lawsuit (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) seeks to chill or punish the exercise of constitutional rights to free speech and to petition the government for redress of grievances. California’s Legislature enacted the anti-SLAPP statute to permit a defendant to file a special motion to strike as to any cause of action that arises out of an act in furtherance of such rights. In Baral, the plaintiff alleged that his business partner had violated fiduciary duties in usurping the plaintiff’s ownership and management interests in their jointly owned company, so that the defendant could benefit from a secret sale of the company. The complaint alleged that the defendant hired a public accounting firm and prevented the plaintiff from participating in its investigation in order to force the plaintiff's cooperation of the sale of the company. The defendant filed an anti-SLAPP motion, seeking to strike all references to the accounting firm's audit. The trial court denied the motion, on the ground that the anti-SLAPP statute applies to causes of action, not allegations. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys Valerie A. Moore, Lawrence S. Zucker II and Blythe Golay Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com. Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com. Ms. Golay may be contacted at bgolay@hbblaw.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    2014 WCC Panel: Working Smarter with Technology

    May 13, 2014 —
    Don MacGregor, Project Manager and General Contractor with Bert L. Howe & Associates, will be joining Brian Kahn, Esq. of Chapman, Glucksman, Dean, Roeb & Barger, Paul R. Kiesel, Esq. of Kiesel Law, Hon. Peter Lichtmen (ret), Hon. Nancy Wieben Stock (ret), and Peter S. Curry of Curry Stenger Engineering as a panelist in the break-out session Working Smarter With Technology at the 2014 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar being held May 15th and 16th at the Disneyland Hotel in Anaheim, California. With a strong focus on the topic of this year’s seminar, Back to Business . . . Working Smarter, Not Harder, the panel will discuss ways that technology can assist our industry in working more efficiently, saving money and providing a better product. Conversely, the panel will also acknowledge the limitations of technology and areas where the use of advanced technology may not be appropriate. The information provided will be of benefit to the construction defect litigator but equally valuable to other types of complex litigation. Accordingly, this panel will appeal to those whose scope of work goes beyond the bounds of construction defect. A brief outline of topics that will be addressed by each panelist include remote virtual appearance and deposition attendances, document management software, how to create, manage and edit documents using remote technology, technological tools that allow for easier communications, transfer of information and flexibility, expert technology, and technology in mediation and trial. The panel discussion will go beyond past seminar discussions in that they will discuss and demonstrate tools that are just coming into use now as well as new tools which are being released prior to the seminar. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Companies Must Prepare for a Surge of Third-Party Contractors

    February 08, 2021 —
    Economists agree that the trajectory of the current recession has been different from any other. Looking back at the 2008 economic crisis, there are noticeable trends in the construction space that indicate a surge in third-party contractor hiring could be coming in 2021. The demand for more contract work will come as no surprise for seasoned construction executives—the share of contractors at U.S. businesses has increased by 15% in the last decade. Contractors are a valuable asset in the construction industry, but organizations will need to prepare for the coming influx to ensure third-party contractors and full-time employees are set up for success to keep operations running smoothly. THE CONTRACTOR SURGE BLUEPRINT Managing a substantial influx of contractors on construction worksites can be an overwhelming task. However, with guiding principles in place, construction executives can successfully incorporate more contractors into their operations and effectively manage associated risks. Reprinted courtesy of Kim Holly, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Continuous Injury Trigger Applied to Property Loss

    January 07, 2015 —
    The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals predicted that the Wisconsin appellate courts would apply the continuous injury trigger to find coverage after the policy expired for damage caused by water infiltration. Strauss v. Chubb Indem. Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. App LEXIS 21794 (7th Cir. Nov. 18, 2014). The insureds built their home in 1994. They purchased coverage for their home from Chubb. Coverage was in place from October 1994 through October 2005. The policy stated that coverage was limited "only to occurrences that take place while this policy is in effect." "Occurrence" was defined as "a loss or accident to which this insurance applies occurring within the policy period. Continuous or repeated exposure to substantially the same general conditions unless excluded is considered to be one occurrence." In October 2010, the insureds discovered that water infiltration had been causing damage within the building envelope of the home. The infiltration was ongoing, beginning around the time of original construction and continuously occurring with each subsequent rainfall. Chubb denied coverage because the damage was not discovered during any of their policy periods. 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