BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestration
    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


    Colorado Court of Appeals’ Ruling Highlights Dangers of Excessive Public Works Claims

    Oregon Condo Owners Make Construction Defect Claim

    The Looming Housing Crisis and Limited Government Relief—An Examination of the CDC Eviction Moratorium Two Months In

    Surplus Lines Carrier Can Force Arbitration in Louisiana Despite Statute Limiting Arbitration

    Quick Note: Steps to Protect and Avoid the “Misappropriation” of a “Trade Secret”

    It’s Time to Start Planning for Implementation of OSHA’s Silica Rule

    Claim for Consequential Damages Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Like Water For Chocolate: Insurer Prevails Over Chocolatier In Hurricane Sandy Claim

    Court Holds That One-Year SOL Applies to Disgorgement Claims Under B&P Section 7031

    Roadway Contractor Owed Duty of Care to Driver Injured Outside of Construction Zone

    New York’s 2022 Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act: Significant Amendments to the C.P.L.R.

    #11 CDJ Topic: Cortez Blu Community Association, Inc. v. K. Hovnanian at Cortez Hill, LLC, et al.

    DIR Public Works Registration System Down, Public Works Contractors Not to be Penalized

    Dust Obscures Eleventh Circuit’s Ruling on “Direct Physical Loss”

    NYC Landlord Accused of Skirting Law With Rent-Free Months Offer

    What Are The Most Commonly Claimed Issues In Construction Defect Litigation?

    California Complex Civil Litigation Superior Court Panels

    California Indemnity and Defense Construction Law Changes for 2013

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

    "Occurrence" May Include Intentional Acts In Montana

    More Broad-Based Expansion for Construction Industry Expected in 2015

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Florida’s New Civil Remedies Act – Bulletpoints As to How It Impacts Construction

    Pile Test Likely for Settling Millennium Tower

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

    Voluntary Payments Affirmative Defense Does Not Apply in Contract Cases

    What You Need to Know About the Recently Enacted Infrastructure Bill

    Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Holds that Nearly All Project Labor Agreements are Illegal

    Shifting the Risk of Delay by Having Float Go Your Way

    Should a Subcontractor provide bonds to a GC who is not himself bonded? (Bonding Agent Perspective)

    New Orleans Reviews System After Storm Swamps Pumps

    The Impact of Nuclear Verdicts on Construction Businesses

    California’s One-Action Rule May Apply to Federal Lenders

    Late Notice Kills Insured's Claim for Damage Due to Hurricane

    Providing Notice of Claims Under Your Construction Contract

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Failure to Cover Collapse Fails

    Rhode Island Closes One Bridge and May Have Burned Others with Ensuing Lawsuit

    Randy Okland Honored as 2019 Intermountain Legacy Award Winner

    Supreme Judicial Court of Maine Addresses Earth Movement Exclusion

    Designers George Yabu and Glenn Pushelberg Discuss One57’s Ultra-Luxury Park Hyatt

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in “The Best Lawyers in America” & “Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch” 2025 Editions

    Implications for Industry as Supreme Court Curbs EPA's Authority

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twenty White and Williams Lawyers

    SB 721 – California Multi-Family Buildings New Require Inspections of “EEEs”

    Summary Judgment in Favor of General Contractor Under Privette Doctrine Overturned: Lessons Learned

    Don’t Believe Everything You Hear: Liability of Asbestos Pipe Manufacturer Upheld Despite Exculpatory Testimony of Plaintiff

    Year and a Half Old Las Vegas VA Emergency Room Gets Rebuilt

    Spotting Problem Projects

    Consumer Protection Act Whacks Seattle Roofing Contractor

    Are You Ready For 2015?
    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

    Association Insurance Company v. Carbondale Glen Lot E-8, LLC: Federal Court Reaffirms That There Is No Duty to Defend or Indemnify A Builder For Defective Construction Work

    December 20, 2017 —
    In a case that squarely confronts the juxtaposition of an insurer’s duty to defend or indemnify its insured for construction related defects, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado recently granted an insurer’s motion for summary judgment on both matters against a construction subrogee, in Ass’n Ins. Co. v. Carbondale Glen Lot E-8, LLC, No. 15-cv-02025-RPM, 2016 WL 9735743, at *1 (D. Colo. Oct. 10. 2017). Mountainview Construction Services, LLC (“MCS”) served as the general contractor for the construction of a residence on a lot owned by Glen Lot E-8, LLC (“E-8”). MCS took out a Commercial General Liability Policy (“Policy”) with Association Insurance Company (“AIC”) that provided coverage to MCS for the relevant time period for the construction of the residence. E-8 then asserted a series of claims against MCS, based on the allegation that MCS and its subcontractors defectively constructed the home by, among other things, building the residence two feet too high in violation of applicable codes. E-8 also argued that MCS and its subcontractors made significant alterations and/or deviations from the original project specifications without obtaining E-8’s consent or approval from relevant authorities. MCS tendered the claim to AIC for defense and indemnity. In turn, AIC declined coverage on the argument that the Policy precluded any coverage for defective work MCS may have performed on the project, absent damage to person or other property. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case Triggered by Complaint's Allegations

    August 20, 2014 —
    The subcontractor's insurer could not escape contributing to defense costs of its insured when coverage was possible based upon the underlying complaint's allegations. Seneca Ins. Co. v. James River Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97156 (D. Ore. July 17, 2014). The underlying action alleged construction defects in a 60-unit complex located in Seaside, Oregon. S.D. Deacon Corp. was the general contractor and contracted with the owners association to reconstruct portions of the building, including the curtain wall. Deacon subcontracted with Superwall Design, LLP for work on the curtain wall renovation. At some point not specified in the underlying complaint, the Association notified Deacon of construction defects in the curtain wall renovation. Deacon investigated and concluded that the alleged property damage was the result of inadequate usage of materials, violations of state and local building codes, and violations of relevant industry standards relating to the work performed by Superwall. Deacon contended that the problems were caused by Superwall's faulty workmanship. 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

    PSA: Pay If Paid Ban Goes into Effect on January 1, 2023

    December 05, 2022 —
    I have written a couple of times here at Musings regarding the new pay-if-paid legislation passed by the General Assembly last session. While the statute has some inconsistencies and a working group has made some recommendations, the legislation as passed will go into effect on January 1, 2023, without any changes (at least until next session). As always, such action by our legislature here in Virginia will create work for construction attorneys assisting their clients to amend contracts to meet the new rules. Essentially (and with minor inconsistencies between public and private contracts), the bill requires that any construction contract entered into after January 1, 2023 have the following provisions:
    • On public projects: A payment clause that obligates a contractor on a construction contract to be liable for the entire amount owed to any subcontractor with which it contracts. Such contractor shall not be liable for amounts otherwise reducible due to the subcontractor’s noncompliance with the terms of the contract. However, in the event that the contractor withholds all or a part of the amount promised to the subcontractor under the contract, the contractor shall notify the subcontractor, in writing, of his intention to withhold all or a part of the subcontractor’s payment with the reason for nonpayment.
    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

    Blurred Lines: New York Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Privileged Documents in Connection with Pre-Denial Communications Prepared by Insurer's Coverage Counsel

    September 17, 2015 —
    In a recent decision, the New York Supreme Court clarified the scope of privileged documents with respect to communications prepared by an insurer’s counsel prior to issuing a denial of coverage letter. The coverage litigation at issue arose out of MF Global Inc.’s claims under fidelity bonds for losses incurred as a result of large trades made by former MF Global employee, Evan Dooley. The trades cost MF Global, Dooley’s former clearing firm, $141 million after it had to reimburse the CME Group, Inc. futures clearinghouse that handled the trade. The insurers that issued the fidelity bonds contested coverage and sued MF Global in 2009. The opinion underscores the fact that there is no “bright line” rule in New York with respect to disclosure of communications in the insurance context prior to the issuance of a coverage determination – the disclosure requirement will instead turn on what’s actually privileged. In addition, while retention of counsel may not serve as an automatic shield for all documents prepared prior to the coverage decision, insurers will not be required to disclose, among other things, communications which include an “indicia of the provision of legal services.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Greg Steinberg, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Steinberg may be contacted at steinbergg@whiteandwilliams.com

    Las Vegas, Back From the Bust, Revives Dead Projects

    June 11, 2014 —
    For almost five years, the desert plot at the western edge of the Las Vegas valley was home to hulking steel skeletons -- ghostly ruins of a construction project halted by the recession. Now the 106-acre (43-hectare) site bustles with hundreds of workers building the first phase of Downtown Summerlin, an office, entertainment and retail complex that’s scheduled to open in October. Howard Hughes Corp. (HHC) revived the development last year after the previous owner, General Growth Properties Inc., shut it down in 2008. The commercial real estate market in Las Vegas, littered with vacant buildings and abandoned construction sites by overreaching developers during the U.S. property crash, is coming back to life as the local economy improves and tourists return to the nation’s gambling capital. Blackstone Group LP’s deal to buy the Cosmopolitan resort and Genting Bhd. (GENT)’s proposed resurrection of an abandoned project on Las Vegas Boulevard are further signs of investor confidence in the nascent recovery. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Louis, Bloomberg
    Mr. Louis may be contacted at blouis1@bloomberg.net

    Congratulations 2016 DE, NJ, and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    June 02, 2016 —
    Twenty-one White and Williams lawyers have been named by Super Lawyers as a Delaware, New Jersey, or Pennsylvania "Super Lawyer" while ten received "Rising Star" designations. Each lawyer who received the distinction competed in a rigorous selection process which took into consideration peer recognition and professional achievement. The winners named to this year's Super Lawyer list represent a multitude of practices throughout the firm. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    The “Climate 21 Project” Prepared for the New Administration

    December 21, 2020 —
    This is a brief review of the recently released “Climate 21 Project” policy memo. It is the work of many former members of the Obama Administration who are deeply concerned about climate change and what steps the new administration can take in the first 100 days to confront a problem. Offering “actionable advice” rather than a policy agenda, the group recognizes that Congress must do its part by providing new statutory authorities within the early days of the new administration, and the President must be prepared to aggressively exercise the powers of his office. As the members of the Group see it, there are four interlocking crises facing the President: (a) the COVID-19 pandemic; (b) the economic devastation visited upon many people by the pandemic; (c) racial injustice; and (d) accelerating threats posed by climate change. Accordingly: 1. The Executive Office of the President must take stronger steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through domestic investment, rulemakings, policy changes, and international diplomacy. A new Special Assistant for Climate Change must be created to take charge of these climate change initiatives. There should also be established in the Executive Office of the President a National Climate Change Council. All agencies must be advised of the urgency of this problem. The paper seems to envision a substantial growth in the White Hose staff. 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

    Conn. Appellate Court Overturns Jury Verdict, Holding Plaintiff’s Sole Remedy for Injuries Arising From Open Manhole Was State’s Highway Defect Statute

    June 14, 2021 —
    Section 13a-149 of the Connecticut General Statutes, commonly known as Connecticut’s highway defect statute, provides that claims arising from injuries or damages to people or property resulting from a defective road or bridge can be asserted against a party responsible for maintaining that road or bridge. Conn. Gen. Stat. §13a-149. The statute also extends to sidewalks and further provides that written notice of an alleged injury must be given to a defendant municipality within ninety days of the injury. Recently, in Dobie v. City of New Haven, 2021 Conn. App. LEXIS 162 (App. Ct. May 1, 2021), the Connecticut Appellate Court overturned the trial court’s denial of a municipal defendant’s post-trial motion to dismiss. The court held that even though the plaintiff attempted to assert allegations of negligence against the defendant municipality, Connecticut’s highway defect statute was the plaintiff’s exclusive remedy. Since the plaintiff failed to meet the requisite notice requirements, pursuant to the statute, the Appellate Court held that the trial court erred in denying the municipality’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Underlying Case In February of 2013, Plaintiff William Dobie filed suit against the City of New Haven alleging injuries and damages as a result of the negligence of a City of New Haven snowplow operator. Dobie’s claims arose from an incident that occurred on January 21, 2011, in which he was driving behind the City snowplow driver, who was in the process of plowing snow from a municipal street located in New Haven, Connecticut. As the defendant employee was operating his snowplow, he knocked off a manhole cover, causing Dobie’s vehicle to drive over the open manhole. Dobie claimed personal injuries as a result of his vehicle dropping into the open manhole, including injuries to his jaw. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christy Jachimowski, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Jachimowski may be contacted at Christy.Jachimowski@lewisbrisbois.com