BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating 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


    Judgment for Insurer Reversed Due to Failure to Establish Depreciation

    No Duty to Indemnify Where No Duty to Defend

    Jobs Machine in U.S. Created More Than Burger Flippers Last Year

    California Judicial Council Votes to Rescind Prohibitions on Eviction and Foreclosure Proceedings

    Hunton Insurance Head Interviewed Concerning the Benefits and Hidden Dangers of Cyber Insurance

    Executing Documents with Powers of Attorney and Confessions of Judgment in PA Just Got Easier

    Narrow House Has Wide Opposition

    New York's New Gateway: The Overhaul of John F. Kennedy International Airport

    What is the Effect of an Untimely Challenge to the Timeliness of a Trustee’s Sale?

    Beyond Inverse Condemnation in Wildfire Litigation: An Oregon Jury Finds Utility Liable for Negligence, Trespass and Nuisance

    Insurer's Bad Faith is Actionable Tort for Purposes of Choice of Law Analysis

    Developer’s Fraudulent Statements Are His Responsibility Alone in Construction Defect Case

    Georgia Supreme Court Determines Damage to "Other Property" Not Necessary for Finding Occurrence

    Construction Warranties and the Statute of Repose – Southern States Chemical, Inc v. Tampa Tank & Welding Inc.

    Communications between Counsel and PR Firm Hired by Counsel Held Discoverable

    Be Careful with Good Faith Payments

    Pennsylvania Modernizes State Building Code

    2021 2Q Cost Report: Industry Execs Believe Recovery Is in Full Swing

    Note on First-Party and Third-Party Spoliation of Evidence Claims

    With VA Mechanic’s Liens Sometimes “Substantial Compliance” is Enough (but don’t count on it) [UPDATE]

    The Future of Airport Infrastructure in a Post-Pandemic World

    Renovation Contractors: Be Careful How You Disclose Your Projects

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    In Supreme Court Showdown, California Appeals Courts Choose Sides Regarding Whether Right to Repair Act is Exclusive Remedy for Homeowners

    Shea Homes CEO Receives Hearthstone Builder Humanitarian Award

    The Road to Rio 2016: Zika, Super Bacteria, and Construction Delays. Sounds Like Everything is Going as Planned

    Breach of an Oral Contract and Unjust Enrichment and Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

    Legal Implications of 3D Printing in Construction Loom

    S&P Suspended and Fined $80 Million in SEC, State Mortgage Bond Cases

    Congratulations to Woodland Hills Partner Patrick Au and Senior Associate Ava Vahdat on Their Successful Motion for Summary Judgment!

    Direct Contractors In California Should Take Steps Now To Reduce Exposure For Unpaid Wages By Subcontractors

    Big Changes and Trends in the Real Estate Industry

    Duty to Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    City of Pawtucket Considering Forensic Investigation of Tower

    What You Need to Know About Notices of Completion, Cessation and Non-Responsibility

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

    Pennsylvania Finds Policy Triggered When Property Damage Reasonably Apparent

    Fire Raging North of Los Angeles Is Getting Fuel From Dry Winds

    Federal Miller Act Payment Bond Claim: Who Gets Paid and Who Does Not? What Are the Deadlines?

    Injury to Employees Endorsement Eliminates Coverage for Insured Employer

    Two-Part Series on Condominium Construction Defect Issues

    Scientists Are Trying to Make California Forests More Fire Resilient

    Surfside Condo Collapse Investigators Uncover More Pool Deck Deviations

    Drone Use On Construction Projects

    Alarm Cries Wolf in California Case Involving Privette Doctrine

    Home Improvement in U.S. Slowing or Still Intact -- Which Is It?

    Remand of Bad Faith Claim Evidences Split Among Florida District Courts

    Slump in U.S. Housing Starts Led by Multifamily: Economy

    Homebuilders Leading U.S. Consumer Stocks: EcoPulse

    Virginia General Assembly Helps Construction Contractors
    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

    Notice of Claim Sufficient to Invoke Coverage

    August 06, 2014 —
    Indirect notice to the insurer was sufficient to trigger coverage for the additional insured under a liability policy. Spoleta Constr., LLC v. Aspen Ins. UK Ltd., 2014 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5174 (N.Y. App. Div. July 11, 2014). An employee of the subcontractor was injured at the construction project on October 20, 2008. The general contractor was named as an additional insured on the subcontractor's CGL policy with Aspen. Under the subcontract, the subcontractor also agreed to defend and indemnify the general contractor for all claims arising out of the subcontractor's work. The general contractor did not receive notice of the accident until late December 2009 in a letter from the injured employee's attorney. On January 27, 2010, the general contractor's liability carrier sent a letter to the subcontractor giving notice of the employee's claim and requesting that the subcontractor put its carrier on notice. On February 9, 2010, the subcontractor sent to Aspen a claim form with the January 2010 letter attached. 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

    Exclusions Bar Coverage for Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    July 05, 2011 —

    The insured homeowners were unsuccessful in arguing around the policy's exclusions when seeking coverage for damage caused by Chinese drywall. Ross v. C. Adams. Constr. & Design, L.L.C., 2011 La. App. LEXIS 769 (La. Ct. App. June 14, 2011).

    Before the insureds purchased and moved into their home, it was renovated. After moving in, the insures discovered foreign gypsum drywall, or Chinese drywall. The insureds submitted a claim to Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Company. In an investigation, the insurer confirmed the presence of Chinese drywall and damage to the metal surfaces caused by corrosion. Louisiana Citizens refused coverage and the insureds sued. The trial court denied the insured's motion for summary judgment and granted summary judgment to Louisiana Citizens.

    The court of appeal affirmed. Initially, the court determined the insureds sustained a direct physical loss. The inherent qualities of the Chinese drywall created a physical loss to the home and required that the drywall be removed and replaced.

    Four exclusions, however, barred coverage. First, damages due to faulty or defective materials were excluded from coverage. The Chinese drywall emitted high levels of sulfuric gas which caused the damage to the insured's plumbing, electrical wiring and metal components.

    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

    California Judicial Council Votes to Rescind Prohibitions on Eviction and Foreclosure Proceedings

    September 28, 2020 —
    The California Judicial Council’s emergency rules staying evictions and judicial foreclosures are coming to an end. On March 27, 2020, the Governor of California issued executive order N-38-20, giving the Judicial Council emergency authority to act in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. On April 6, 2020, the Judicial Council of California voted to approve temporary emergency rules of court. Rule 1 prohibited the issuance of a summons, or the entering of a default, in an eviction action for both residential and commercial properties except as necessary to protect public health and safety. Rule 1 also continued all pending unlawful detainer trials for at least 60 days, with no new trials being set until at least 60 days after a request was filed. Rule 2 stayed all pending judicial foreclosure actions, tolled the statute of limitations, and extended the deadlines for responding to such actions. Rule 1 and Rule 2 were to remain in effect until 90 days after the Governor declared the state of emergency resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic lifted, or until repealed by action of the Judicial Council. On August 13, 2020, the Judicial Council voted 19-1 to sunset Rule 1 and Rule 2 as of September 1, 2020. Beginning September 2, 2020, California state courts are authorized to issue summons on unlawful detainer actions, enter defaults, and set trial dates on request. Stays on pending judicial foreclosure actions will be lifted. Reprinted courtesy of David Rao, Snell & Wilmer and Lyndsey Torp, Snell & Wilmer Mr. Rao may be contacted at drao@swlaw.com Ms. Torp may be contacted at ltorp@swlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York Appellate Court Affirms 1966 Insurance Policy Continues to Cover WTC Asbestos Claims

    January 02, 2019 —
    In a prior post, we discussed a New York trial-court decision that found an insurance policy issued in 1966, to insure the construction of the World Trade Center, continues to cover modern-day asbestos claims, with each claim constituting an individual occurrence. Last week, in American Home Assurance Co. v. The Port Authority of N.Y. and N.J., 7628-7628A (1st Dep’t Nov. 15, 2018), an intermediate appellate court affirmed that decision, agreeing that coverage is triggered for claims tied to alleged asbestos exposure at the WTC site in the 1960s and ’70s. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Joshua S. Paster, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Paster may be contacted at jpaster@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Arkansas: Avoiding the "Made Whole" Doctrine Through Dépeçage

    April 09, 2014 —
    In Arkansas, a workers’ compensation carrier’s subrogated recovery is subject to a determination of whether the injured worker—or, as the case may be, the worker’s surviving beneficiaries—has been “made whole” by the worker’s recovery against the third party tortfeasor. See, e.g., Yancey v. B & B Supply, 213 S.W.3d 657, 659 (Ark. App. 2005) (“An insured’s right to be made whole takes precedence over an insurer’s right to subrogation, and an insured must be fully compensated before the insurer's right to subrogation arises.”) [1] More often than not, a “made whole” determination will completely eradicate the carrier’s lien. But under the right circumstances, a workers’ compensation carrier may be able to avoid the harsh outcome of “made whole” by intervening in a pending third party action and subsequently filing a motion for dépeçage—i.e., the conflict of laws principle requiring the court to conduct a separate choice of law analysis for discrete issues in a given case. A motion for dépeçage, in this sense, would demand that the court conduct a choice of law analysis to determine what state’s workers’ compensation subrogation law will apply on reimbursing a carrier’s lien. We recently exploited this often underutilized tactic—to avoid Arkansas’ made whole doctrine—in a case involving a fatal plane crash in Louisiana. In that case, the deceased worker and his beneficiaries were residents of Louisiana; the accident took place in Louisiana; the worker was officially employed in Louisiana; and the workers’ compensation insurance policy was governed by, and benefits were paid under, Louisiana law. The only “contact” with Arkansas [2], meanwhile, was that Arkansas was the defendant’s domicile. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert M. Caplan, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Caplan may be contacted at caplanr@whiteandwilliams.com

    Musings: Moving or Going into a New Service Area, There is More to It Than Just…

    July 16, 2023 —
    For this week’s Guest Post Friday here at Construction Law Musings, we would like to welcome back (again) Sean Lintow Sr. (@The_HTRC) Sean has over 20 years in the construction and project management fields. As many know he pulled up stakes and moved to the State of Illinois almost a year ago where he still focuses on the “green” / energy efficiency markets by helping builders & trade professionals to improve their methods not only locally but nationally. Currently he is RESNET Rater, AEE CEA (Certified Energy Auditor), ENERGY STAR partner & verifier, EPA Indoor airPLUS verifier, Level 2 Infrared Thermographer, Volunteer Energy Rater for Habitat for Humanity, and Builders Challenge Partner & Verifier. I would like to thank Chris for inviting me back as a guest poster. One item that struck a bell with me lately was his recent post for contractors considering work in another state is to check that states contractor licensing laws. Part of me was just saying – ahh if it were just that simple… With that in mind, here are some additional thoughts of mine along with advice picked up and given to others considering a move to greener pastures in another state, another town or maybe even taking that sweet little project outside of your current area that seems too good to pass up. Licensing: Yep this is a no-brainer – but unfortunately, as I pointed out in a 2012 piece it isn’t always that simple as in some cases the state may not require licensing and instead leave it to the towns which can be real fun to figure out. How long will it take to obtain? Ahh, but what about other licenses that a township may require? Working on a pre-78 house – is the state a self-managed one or is your current EPA certificate and training good enough? (Living in a self-managed state but working on an Indian Reservation? Well you will need to be EPA certified) Does the area require a specialty Storm Water Certificate or??? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Construction Defect Lawsuits May Follow Hawaii Condo Boom

    January 23, 2013 —
    Hawaii is having a bit of a building boom and with this, as Honolulu Civil Beat points out, comes a boom in construction defect litigation, noting that “if past experience is any indicator, the wave of construction will likely be followed by a surge in complex and, for attorneys at least, profitable litigation.” The article provides plenty of evidence to back up that assertion. Defect claims are already resulted in a settlement at Pinnacle Honolulu, a 37-unit luxury condominium project. The owners received a $2.4 million settlement after building code violations were discovered, including fire partitions that either were not fully extended or were breached in some fashion. Meanwhile, the owners of the Koolani Condominiums are still trying to collect on their $12 million arbitration award related to problems in the water system. Another luxury condominium project, the Hokua Condominiums, also has had problems with flooding from water pipes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Pallonji Mistry, Indian Billionaire Caught in Tata Feud, Dies at 93

    August 15, 2022 —
    Pallonji Mistry, the Indian-born billionaire whose engineering empire built luxury hotels, stadiums, palaces and factories across Asia and whose family’s epic showdown with the Tata Group sparked India’s biggest corporate feud, has passed away in Mumbai. He was 93. A company spokesperson confirmed the death of the Indian tycoon after social media posts on the news spread. Mistry and his family control the Shapoorji Pallonji Group, which started more than 150 years ago and today employs more than 50,000 people in over 50 countries, according to its website. Its landmark projects include the Reserve Bank of India and the Oberoi Hotel in Mumbai and the blue-and-gold Al Alam palace for the Sultan of Oman. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bhuma Shrivastava, Bloomberg