BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut concrete 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


    Architect Searches for Lost Identity in a City Ravaged by War

    Am I Still Covered Under the Title Insurance Policy?

    Court Grants Motion to Dismiss Negligence Claim Against Flood Insurer

    U.S. Supreme Court Halts Enforcement of the OSHA Vaccine or Test Mandate

    Insurance Company’s Reservation of Rights Letter Negates its Interest in the Litigation

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

    Despite Health Concerns, Judge Reaffirms Sentence for Disbarred Las Vegas Attorney

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/10/23) – Wobbling Real Estate, Booming (and Busting) Construction, and Eye-Watering Insurance Premiums

    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss "Redundant Claims" Denied

    Home Repair Firms Sued for Fraud

    Remediation Work Caused by Installation of Defective Tiles Not Covered

    Texas Supreme Court: Breach of Contract Not Required to Prevail on Statutory Bad Faith Claim

    Judge Dismisses Suit to Block Construction of Obama Center

    Colorado Senate Bill 15-177: This Year’s Attempt at Reasonable Construction Defect Reform

    New Home Sales Slip, but Still Strong

    A Community Constantly on the Brink of Disaster

    Crisis Averted! Pennsylvania Supreme Court Joins Other Courts in Finding that Covid-19 Presents No Physical Loss or Damage for Businesses

    ASBCA Validates New Type of Claim Related to Unfavorable CPARS Review [i]

    Montana Supreme Court Tackles Decade-Old Coverage Dispute Concerning Asbestos Mineworker Claims

    Claims Against Broker Dismissed

    Counsel Investigating Coverage Can be Sued for Invasion of Privacy

    Hotel Claims Construction Defect Could Have Caused Collapse

    Chicago Debt Document Says $8.5B O'Hare Revamp May Be Delayed

    Hunton Insurance Lawyer, Jae Lynn Huckaba, Awarded Miami-Dade Bar Association Young Lawyer Section’s Rookie of the Year Award

    Resulting Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Separation of Insureds Provision in CGL Policies

    National Coalition to Provide Boost for Building Performance Standards

    Should I Stay or Should I Go? The Supreme Court Says “Stay”

    Drone Use On Construction Projects

    Condo Board May Be Negligent for not Filing Construction Defect Suit in a Timely Fashion

    The Contract Disputes Act: What Every Federal Government Contractor Should Know

    Hong Kong Property Tycoon Makes $533 Million Bet on Solar

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/31/24) – International Homebuying Shrinks Commercial Real Estate Focus on Sustainability, and U.S. Banks Boost Provisions for Credit Losses

    Ten Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to the Best Lawyers in America© 2019

    Sacramento Water Works Recognized as a Historic Civil Engineering Landmark

    Endorsements Preclude Coverage for Alleged Faulty Workmanship

    Women Make Their Mark on Construction Leadership

    White and Williams Earns National "Best Law Firm" Rankings from US News

    Does a Broker Forfeit His or Her Commission for Technical Non-Compliance with Department of Real Estate Statutory Requirements?

    Discussion of the Discovery Rule and Tolling Statute of Limitations

    A DC Office Building Offers a Lesson in Glass and Sculpture

    68 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 5th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    “A No-Lose Proposition?”

    Owner’s Obligation Giving Notice to Cure to Contractor and Analyzing Repair Protocol

    Ninth Circuit Affirms Duty to Defend CERCLA Section 104 (e) Letter

    Indiana Federal Court Holds No Coverage for $50M Default Judgment for Lack of Timely Notice of Class Action

    Claim for Collapse After Demolition of Building Fails

    Couple Claims Poor Installation of Home Caused Defects

    On the Ten Year Anniversary of the JOBS Act A Look-Back at the Development of Crowdfunding
    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

    Will Future Megacities Be a Marvel or a Mess? Look at New Delhi

    November 14, 2018 —
    The effects of unbridled urbanization are inescapable in India’s capital city. Smog blankets landmarks like India Gate in winter, delaying flights at the airport due to poor visibility. Traffic jams are part of the daily routine and slums abut New Delhi’s luxury hotels and private mansions, testifying to a growing wealth divide and chronic housing shortage. And every day, the problem gets bigger. More than 27 million people live in and around Delhi with about 700,000 more joining them each year, according to research firm Demographia. The United Nations forecasts that by 2028 the population could outstrip Tokyo’s to make Delhi the world’s biggest megacity. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jill Ward, Bloomberg

    CDJ’s Year-End Review: The Top 10 CD Topics of 2014

    December 31, 2014 —
    Construction Defect Journal’s year-end review presents the top ten most popular topics featured in the journal in 2014. Some of the topics involved analysis of important construction defect cases, while others covered current events such as proposed state legislation. Most issues were heavily discussed on CDJ as well as in board rooms and during teleconferences. We hope you enjoy the look-back at 2014 interspersed throughout the issue, and we wish you and yours a prosperous 2015! CDJ’s #1 Topic of the Year: Indalex Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, 2013 Pa. Super 311 (Dec. 3, 2013) According to Darrin J. McMullen of Anderson Kill, “[t]he Indalex decision reverses a nearly decade-long trend of Pennsylvania decisions narrowing the scope of insurance coverage for construction and defect-related claims under commercial general liability insurance policies. Equally important, the Indalex ruling dealt a blow to the insurance industry’s continual efforts to win overbroad expansion of the rulings in Kvaerner Metals Div. of Kvaerner U.S., Inc. v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., Millers Capital Ins. Co. v. Gambone Bros. Dev. Co., and Erie Ins. Exchange v. Abbott Furnace Co., which found that claims of faulty workmanship in some circumstances may not constitute coverage-triggering ‘occurrences.’” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Filing Motion to Increase Lien Transfer Bond (Before Trial Court Loses Jurisdiction Over Final Judgment)

    May 15, 2023 —
    If a construction lien is recorded against real property, the lien can be transferred to a lien transfer bond. This transfers the security or collateral of the construction lien from the real property to the lien transfer bond. The lien transfer bond can be a bond posted by a surety company or it can be cash. This is governed by Florida Statute s. 713.24. The amount of the lien does not dictate the amount of the lien transfer bond. Rather, the lien transfer bond needs to be in the amount of the lien, plus interest on that amount for three years, plus $1,000 or 25% of the amount of the lien (whichever is greater so factor in the 25%) to cover attorney’s fees. Fla. Stat. 713.24(1). If you are looking to transfer a construction lien to a lien transfer bond, make sure to consult with counsel. Keep in mind there is a statutory mechanism for a lienor to increase the lien transfer bond to cover attorney’s fees and costs and notice the word “must” in the statute below. Pursuant to Florida Statute s. 713.24(3):
    Any party having an interest in such security or the property from which the lien was transferred may at any time, and any number of times, file a complaint in chancery in the circuit court of the county where such security is deposited, or file a motion in a pending action to enforce a lien, for an order to require additional security, reduction of security, change or substitution of sureties, payment of discharge thereof, or any other matter affecting said security. If the court finds that the amount of the deposit or bond in excess of the amount claimed in the claim of lien is insufficient to pay the lienor’s attorney’s fees and court costs incurred in the action to enforce the lien, the court must increase the amount of the cash deposit or lien transfer bond. Nothing in this section shall be construed to vest exclusive jurisdiction in the circuit courts over transfer bond claims for nonpayment of an amount within the monetary jurisdiction of the county courts.
    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

    White and Williams LLP Secures Affirmation of Denial to Change Trial Settings Based on Plaintiffs’ Failure to Meet the Texas Causation Standard for Asbestos Cases

    July 06, 2020 —
    The Delaware Supreme Court, in a rare split opinion, affirmed the trial court’s denial of Plaintiffs’ Request to Change Trial Settings in favor of all defendants, including a major automotive manufacturer represented by White and Williams LLP, in a mesothelioma case with a young decedent who had an alleged economic loss claim exceeding $9,000,000, in Shaw v. American Friction, Inc. et al., No. 86, 2019. This decision operates to dismiss all of Plaintiffs’ claims based on their failure to meet Delaware’s strict expert deadlines and establish a prima facie case under Texas law. Plaintiffs’ Complaint invoked the application of Texas substantive law and alleged that multiple manufacturers were negligent and strictly liable for failing to warn the decedent of the alleged dangers posed by the use of asbestos-containing products. Plaintiffs’ alleged asbestos exposures from defendants’ products caused Mr. Shaw’s disease and subsequent death. In 2007, Texas instituted its now well-known causation requirement, which requires the “dose” of asbestos exposure from each defendant’s products to be quantified by an expert. Borg-Warner Corp. v. Flores, 232 S.W.3d 765, 773 (Tex. 2007). Prior to decedent’s death, Plaintiffs’ counsel deposed decedent and his father for product identification purposes. During the depositions, Plaintiffs’ counsel failed to obtain the necessary factual information from his clients for an expert to be able to opine as to alleged exposure doses from any defendant’s product. Despite lacking the requisite information for a prima facie case under Texas law, Plaintiffs sought and were given placement in an expedited trial setting, which had strict, defined deadlines. Reprinted courtesy of Christian Singewald, White and Williams LLP and Rochelle Gumapac, White and Williams LLP Mr. Singewald may be contacted at singewaldc@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Gumapac may be contacted at gumapacr@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insured Survives Motion for Summary Judgment in Collapse Case

    May 30, 2022 —
    The insurer's motion to exclude expert testimony and for summary judgment in a cases involving collapse was denied. Firehouse Church Ministries v. Church Mut. Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53959 (D. Miss. March 25, 2022). A roof truss, a framework supporting the roof, collapsed in the church. The cause was either deterioration over time or a nearby tornado. The Church claimed that before the tornado passed, the church was clean and in orderly condition. When inspected after the tornado, there was debris and wreckage, including tin, insulation dust, plaster, and ceiling tile, on the floor. The Church had a contractor, Gregory Blanchard, inspect. He added posts to support the truss and made other repairs, but informed the Church that the damage was worse than expected and it could not be easily repaired. 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

    Labor Shortage Confirmed Through AGC Poll

    November 26, 2014 —
    Over 1,000 contractors participated in Associated General Contractors’ (“AGC”) survey asking whether they were facing a labor shortage. AGC crunched the numbers and provided an Analysis of its survey. The survey revealed that 83% of construction firms were having trouble finding qualified workers. This survey certainly confirmed comments from construction firms in and around Omaha. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    ACS Recognized by Construction Executive Magazine in the Top 50 Construction Law Firms of 2021

    September 06, 2021 —
    ACS is pleased to announce that the firm has been recognized by Construction Executive magazine in The Top 50 Construction Law Firms™ for 2021. Construction Executive ranked ACS number 31 among the top 50 construction practices in the country. ACS is known for our depth of knowledge of the construction industry and experience in construction law. Our lawyers hold leadership positions within state and national industry organizations. Two of our lawyers are past chairs of the Washington State Bar Association’s Construction Law Section and the current chair, five of our lawyers have served as the Chair of the Associated General Contractors of Washington’s Legal Affairs Committee, and the majority of our lawyers are recognized as Super Lawyers and Rising Stars in Super Lawyers Magazine/Thomson Reuters. Since it was first published in 2003, Construction Executive has become the leading trade magazine for news, market developments, and business issues impacting the construction industry. The magazine reaches more than 55,000 commercial, industrial, and institutional contractors and construction-related business owners. Each issue of Construction Executive includes articles designed to help owners and top managers run a more profitable and productive construction business. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC

    Louisiana District Court Declines to Apply Total Pollution Exclusion

    December 15, 2016 —
    The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana recently decided that a broad total pollution exclusion in a marine general liability policy did not bar coverage. The insurer could not unambiguously establish, based on the facts of the underlying case, that waste from a shipyard’s sandblasting activities met the requirements of the exclusion. The court found that the insurer could not meet Louisiana’s three-part test to determine whether the policy’s total pollution exclusion applied. The Doerr test requires an insurer to refer to the allegations in the underlying complaint to prove 1) the insured is a “polluter”, 2) the injury-causing substance is a “pollutant,” and 3) there was a “discharge, dispersal, seepage, migration, release or escape” of the pollutant. Total pollution exclusions are extremely prohibitive for policyholders because they eliminate coverage for virtually all pollution incidents, but this decision reinforces that policyholders may still have a path to coverage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William S. Bennett, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Bennett may be contacted at wsb@sdvlaw.com