BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut 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


    Massachusetts Pulls Phased Trigger On Its Statute of Repose

    Reminder: A Little Pain Now Can Save a Lot of Pain Later

    Texas Construction Firm Officials Sentenced in Contract-Fraud Case

    Risky Business: Contractual Versus Equitable Rights of Subrogation

    Defend Trade Secret Act of 2016–-Federalizing Trade Secret Law

    US Civil Rights Tools Are Failing the Most Polluted Black Communities

    School Blown Down by Wind Still Set to Open on Schedule

    Former Sponsor of the Lenox Facing Suit in Supreme Court

    New York Bridge to Be Largest Infrastructure Project in North America

    Emerging World Needs $1.5 Trillion for Green Buildings, IFC Says

    No Entitlement to Reimbursement of Pre-Tender Fees

    Five "Boilerplate" Terms to Negotiate in Your Next Subcontract

    No Coverage for Building's First Collapse, But Disputed Facts on Second Collapse

    Google, Environmentalists and University Push Methane-Leak Detection

    With No Evidence of COVID-19 Being Present, DC Trial Court Finds No Claim for Business Interruption

    A Quick Virginia Mechanic’s Lien Timing Refresher

    Pre-Covid Construction Contracts Unworkable as Costs Surge, Webuild Says

    Richest NJ Neighborhood Fights Plan for Low-Cost Homes on Toxic Dump

    Checking the Status of your Contractor License During Contract Work is a Necessity: The Expanded “Substantial Compliance” under B&P 7031 is Here

    Texas res judicata and co-insurer defense costs contribution

    Lakewood First City in Colorado to Pass Ordinance Limiting State Construction Defect Law

    Solutions To 4 Common Law Firm Diversity Challenges

    Fifth Circuit Confirms: Insurer Must Defend Despite Your Work/Your Product Exclusion

    Blackstone Suffers Court Setback in Irish Real Estate Drama

    SB 939 Proposes Moratorium On Unlawful Detainer Actions For Commercial Tenants And Allows Tenants Who Can't Renegotiate Their Lease In Good Faith To Terminate Their Lease Without Liability

    The Pandemic of Litigation Sure to Follow the Coronavirus

    Bad Faith Claim for Inadequate Investigation Does Not Survive Summary Judgment

    William Doerler Recognized by JD Supra 2022 Readers’ Choice Awards

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Awarded Sacramento Business Journal’s Best of the Bar

    Court Sharpens The “Sword” And Strengthens The “Shield” Of Contractors’ License Law

    Texas Mechanic’s Lien Law Update: New Law Brings a Little Relief for Subcontractors and a Lot of Relief for Design Professionals

    Insurer Not Required to Show Prejudice from an Insured’s Late Notice When the Parties Contract for a Specific Reporting Period

    Safer Schools Rendered Unsafe Due to Construction Defects

    The “Unavailability Exception” is Unavailable to Policyholders, According to New York Court of Appeals

    Giant Floating Solar Flowers Offer Hope for Coal-Addicted Korea

    Aarow Equipment v. Travelers- An Update

    Union THUGS Plead Guilty

    Louisiana Court Holds That Application of Pollution Exclusion Would Lead to Absurd Results

    Texas Court of Appeals Conditionally Grant Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Anderson

    Wall Enclosing Georgia Neighborhood Built for Walking Dead TV Show

    Insurance Client Alert: Denial of Summary Judgment Does Not Automatically Establish Duty to Defend

    Subcontract Requiring Arbitration Outside of Florida

    French Government Fines National Architects' Group $1.6M Over Fee-Fixing

    Waive Not, Want Not: Waivers and Releases on California Construction Projects

    Trends and Issues which Can Affect Workers' Compensation Coverage for Construction Companies

    What Every Project Participant Needs to Know About Delay Claims

    Congratulations to Nicholas Rodriguez on His Promotion to Partner

    No Coverage For Construction Defects Under Alabama Law

    South Carolina School District Investigated by IRS and FBI

    Coverage Found For Cleanup of Superfund Site Despite Pollution Exclusion
    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

    Injured Construction Worker Settles for Five Hundred Thousand

    October 28, 2011 —

    An upstate New York man who was injured when an unsecured truss fell off the railings of a scissor lift has settled for $500,000. As the accident happened at the building site for a casino for the Seneca Nation, attorneys for the construction firm had argued that New York labor laws were inapplicable as the injury happened on Seneca Nation land. The state appeals court ruled that as none of the parties involved were Native Americans, it was not internal to the affairs of the Seneca Nation.

    Read the full story...

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

    New York Labor Laws and Action Over Exclusions

    February 01, 2021 —
    One of the most important methods for shifting risk in the construction context is insurance coverage. Upstream parties such as owner/developers and general contractors typically require that their downstream subcontractors who perform work on their properties or projects bring specific insurance to the table. These insurance requirements have a twofold purpose: protect the upstream parties, through additional insured coverage, from liabilities caused by the subcontractor; and protect the downstream parties by ensuring that they have adequate insurance for their own potential liabilities. In New York, subcontractor insurance coverage can have some surprising terms which frustrate risk transfer. Numerous policies contain “Action Over” exclusions, which bar coverage for one of the most significant exposures faced by owner-developers and general contractors: bodily injury lawsuits brought by subcontractor employees. It is critical that upstream parties understand the unique impact of New York’s labor laws on the insurance market and be prepared to identify and request removal of Action Over exclusions on subcontractor insurance policies. Reprinted courtesy of Theresa A. Guertin, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Ashley McWilliams, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Guertin may be contacted at TGuertin@sdvlaw.com Ms. McWilliams may be contacted at AMcWilliams@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas contractual liability exclusion

    May 18, 2011 —

    In Ewing Construction Co., Inc. v. Amerisure Ins. Co., No. C-10-256 (S.D. Tex. April 28, 2011), insured Ewing was the general contractor for an athletic facility constructed for a school district. The school district sued Ewing alleging defective construction of the project. The underlying complaint included contract and negligence causes of action, and sought damages for the repair of the damages and loss of the use of the project. The complaint did not allege damage to any property other than the project itself. Ewing tendered its defense to its CGL insurer Amerisure. Amerisure denied a defense and Ewing filed suit against Amerisure. The federal district trial court entered summary judgment for Amerisure. Applying Texas law, the court held that all of the damages fell within the “contractual liability” exclusion precluding any duty to defend or indemnify.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

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

    Insurance Agent Sued for Lapse in Coverage after House Collapses

    October 29, 2014 —
    Property Casualty 360 reported a Hawaii case where the court ruled that an “insurance brokerage firm is responsible for the wrongful conduct of its employees, agents and independent contractors as long as they give the public the appearance that the individual is working as an agent of the brokerage.” The case involved a home that collapsed “during an attempted structural renovation.” The original insurance policy had lapsed, and the “application used to procure the second policy stated that there was no renovation work underway on the property, and thus contained a material misrepresentation which voided the second policy, the [homeowners] were left without insurance on the house.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    More Construction Defects for San Francisco’s Eastern Bay Bridge Expansion

    October 01, 2014 —
    According to SF Gate, almost “every one of the 423 steel rods that anchor the tower of the new Bay Bridge eastern span to its base has been sitting in potentially corrosive water, Caltrans officials said Tuesday — one of the most serious construction defects found yet on the $6.4 billion project.” About a year ago, “steel rods crucial to seismic-stabilizing structures on the bridge snapped when they were tensioned.” Fixing those rods cost $25 million, while an additional $20 million had been spent determing if “additional rods and bolts are at risk of failing.” In regards to the latest construction defects discovered, Caltrans’ chief engineer on the project, Brian Maroney, stated, “It’s not acceptable, and we’re going to fix it.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Speeding up Infrastructure Projects with the Cloud

    July 28, 2018 —
    Infrakit, a cloud service developed by a Finnish startup company, is accelerating infrastructure projects both in Finland and, increasingly, abroad. Automatic transfer of information among parties involved in a project saves time, reduces paperwork, and facilitates the work of land surveyors. In addition to excavators, rock drills can now also be viewed on the map. The CEO and founder of DSC Finland, the supplier of Infrakit, is Teemu Kivimäki. He states that despite the name of the company changing over the years, its principles have stayed the same. Kivimäki describes the functions of the service: “The digital site plans are added to Infrakit, and they can then be viewed on a map and in a 3D view with a browser. When the working machines are also linked to the service, the user can see if the work has been executed according to plan.” 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

    California Supreme Court Clarifies Deadline to File Anti-SLAPP Motions in Light of Amended Pleadings

    July 02, 2018 —
    California’s “anti-SLAPP” (“SLAPP” is an acronym for strategic lawsuit against public participation) statute—codified at California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 et seq.—is the primary vehicle for defending against any action involving petitioning or free speech. The statute was designed to provide an early and fast summary judgment-like procedure to allow defendants and cross-defendants to file a motion to dismiss either an entire complaint, specific causes of action, or even just portions of a cause of action, and to require the plaintiff to respond before conducting discovery. By facilitating an early challenge to a plaintiff or cross-complainant’s claims, the anti-SLAPP statute allows the responding party to avoid the costs and delay that chill the exercise of constitutionally protected rights. Under California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(f), an anti-SLAPP motion must be filed “within 60 days of the service of the complaint . . . .” But what if the plaintiff files an ameded complaint? In Newport Harbor Ventures, LLC v. Morris Cerullo World Evangelism (2018) 4 Cal.5th 637, the California Supreme Court held that the 60-day timeline runs from the date a complaint is filed with the cause(s) of action challenged in the anti-SLAPP motion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tony Carucci, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Carucci may be contacted at acarucci@swlaw.com

    Real Protection for Real Estate Assets: Court Ruling Reinforces Importance of D&O Insurance

    October 01, 2024 —
    Earlier this month, an Illinois federal district court held that a liability insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify a property management company or its owner in lawsuits that included allegations of intentional conduct. The suits accused the owner of concealing financial information from and engaging in a scheme to increase tax liability and decrease profit distributions to a minority owner. This case reinforces the importance of maintaining D&O insurance as part of a comprehensive liability insurance program to protect against potential gaps in coverage that could result from allegations of intentional or knowing acts. Background The court in Old Guard Insurance Company v. Riverway Property Management, LLC et al., No. 1:23-cv-01098 (C.D. Ill. Sep. 6, 2024) was asked to determine whether Old Guard Insurance Co. was required to defend or indemnify Riverway Property Management LLC or its owner under two commercial general liability policies in relation to state court lawsuits. The lawsuits alleged that Riverway’s owner intentionally and improperly misappropriated funds and that the property management company knowingly and substantially assisted with this wrongful scheme. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP