BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineer
    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


    Eighth Circuit Rejects Retroactive Application of Construction Defect Legislation

    Consequential Damages Can Be Recovered Against Insurer In Breach Of Contract

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

    Hospital Settles Lawsuit over Construction Problems

    Sinking Buildings on the Rise?

    SFAA and Coalition of Partners Encourage Lawmakers to Require Essential Surety Bonding Protections on All Federally-Financed Projects Receiving WIFIA Funds

    Hong Kong Buyers Queue for New Homes After Prices Plunge

    Flood-Threat Assessment Finds Danger Goes Far Beyond U.S. Homes

    The Partial Building Collapse of the 12-Story Florida Condo

    Fixing That Mistake

    CLB Recommends Extensive Hawaii Contractor License Changes

    Power to the Office Worker

    Hunton Insurance Recovery Partner Michael Levine Quoted on Why Courts Must Consider the Science of COVID-19

    Serving Notice of Nonpayment Under Miller Act

    Traub Lieberman Partner Adam Joffe Named to 2022 Emerging Lawyers List

    Water Backup Payment Satisfies Insurer's Obligation to Cover for Rain Damage

    Constructive Notice Established as Obstacle to Relation Back Doctrine

    Stair Collapse Points to Need for Structural Inspections

    Housing Starts in U.S. Climb to an Almost Eight-Year High

    Construction Up in Northern Ohio

    City Development with Interactive 3D Models

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

    Changes to Judicial Selection in Mexico Create a New Case for Contractual ADR Provisions

    Insurer Able to Refuse Coverage for Failed Retaining Wall

    The Sky is Falling! – Or is it? Impacting Lives through Addressing the Fear of Environmental Liabilities

    Hawaii Supreme Court Reaffirms an "Accident" Includes Reckless Conduct, Finds Green House Gases are Pollutants

    Motion to Strike Insurer's Expert Opinion Granted

    Hawaii Federal District Rejects Another Construction Defect Claim

    Consider Short-Term Lease Workouts For Commercial Tenants

    Fifth Circuit Decision on Number of Occurrences Underscores Need to Carefully Tailor Your Insurance Program

    Documentation Important for Defending Construction Defect Claims

    4 Breakthrough Panama Canal Engineering Innovations

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 7: How to Successfully Prepare, Submit and Negotiate the Claim

    Fewer NYC Construction Deaths as Safety Law Awaits Governor's Signature

    Framework, Tallest Mass Timber Project in the U.S., Is On Hold

    Hennigh Law Corporation Wins Award Against Viracon, Inc In Defective Gray PIB Case

    When a Construction Lender Steps into the Shoes of the Developer, the Door is Open for Claims by the General Contractor

    Insurer Must Indemnify Additional Insured After Settlement

    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is Proud to Announce Jeannette Garcia Has Been Elected as Secretary of the Hispanic Bar Association of Orange County!

    Luxury Home Sales are on the Rise

    New York Restrictions on Flow Through Provision in Subcontracts

    Property Owner Entitled to Rely on Zoning Administrator Advice

    Contractors Admit Involvement in Kickbacks

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “It’s One, Two… Eight Strikes: You’re Out!”

    MTA’S New Debarment Powers Pose an Existential Risk

    What Makes Building Ventilation Good Enough to Withstand a Pandemic?

    How Mansions Can Intensify Wildfires

    The Heat Is On

    Boston-area Asbestos-Abatement Firms Face Wage and Safety Complaints

    Pay Inequities Are a Symptom of Broader Gender Biases, Studies Show
    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

    Congratulations to Haight’s 2021 Super Lawyers San Diego Rising Stars

    May 03, 2021 —
    Haight congratulates partners Michael Parme and Arezoo Jamshidi and associate Catherine Asuncion who were selected to the 2021 San Diego Super Lawyers Rising Stars list. Reprinted courtesy of Catherine M. Asuncion, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP, Arezoo Jamshidi, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Michael C. Parme, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Asuncion may be contacted at casuncion@hbblaw.com Ms. Jamshidi may be contacted at ajamshidi@hbblaw.com Mr. Parme may be contacted at mparme@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Certificates as Evidence of Additional Insured Coverage Are All the Rage, But You Deserve Better

    August 30, 2021 —
    Consider the following scenario: the construction project is ready to proceed. The deal is done. The agreements have all been carefully crafted, with detailed provisions on insurance dedicated to reducing risk. Those provisions require the downstream trade contractors to furnish certificates of insurance listing the owner and prime contractor as additional insureds on the downstream contractor’s policies of insurance. A provision in the prime contract further requires the prime contractor to provide the owner with a certificate of insurance showing the owner as an additional insured on the prime contractor’s policies. At the ceremonial ground-breaking and right before work commences, the downstream contractors deliver their insurance certificates to the prime contractor and the prime contractor delivers its certificate plus the downstream certificates to the owner. From there, each insurance certificate will begin its final destination to the project file (either electronic or physical) where, with any luck, it will serve the regular stint before being discarded after the project’s successful conclusion. Otherwise, it will be retrieved under much stress and heavy scrutiny. The acceptance of insurance certificates is often viewed as standard industry practice, but should it be? The answer is a resounding “no.” There are many form development and construction agreements in circulation that deem insurance certificates to be acceptable evidence of insurance. But, a certificate of insurance should not be relied upon because it does not mean that insurance has been placed. You deserve real evidence that the requisite additional insured coverage is in place (in the form of a policy endorsement), and here is why. Reprinted courtesy of Joseph L. Cohen, Fox Rothschild, W. Mason, Fox Rothschild and Sean Milani-nia, Fox Rothschild Mr. Cohen may be contacted at jlcohen@foxrothschild.com Mr. Mason may be contacted at wmason@foxrothschild.com Mr. Milani-nia may be contacted at smilani@foxrothschild.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Partner Jason Taylor and Senior Associate Danielle Kegley Successful in Appeal of Summary Disposition on Priority of Coverage Dispute in the Michigan Court of Appeals

    December 11, 2023 —
    In this appeal brought before the Michigan Court of Appeals, the appellate court ruled in favor of Traub Lieberman’s insurance carrier client (the “Carrier” or “Client”), affirming an award of summary disposition in favor of the Carrier in a coverage lawsuit. The coverage lawsuit involved a priority dispute between the Carrier and another insurer over which company’s policy had responsibility to cover the defense of their mutual insured, a heating and cooling contractor (the “Insured”) in an underlying lawsuit alleging carbon monoxide poisoning. The Carrier issued a contractor’s pollution liability policy and the other insurer issued a commercial general liability policy to the Insurer. Both the Carrier and the other insurer filed cross-motions for summary disposition in the trial court on the priority of coverage issue. The trial court granted the Client’s motion, holding that the CGL carrier was the primary insurer based on the language in the policies’ “other insurance” clauses. The trial court rejected the CGL carrier’s argument to apply the “total policy insuring intent” or “closest to the risk” tests—tests which Michigan courts have not adopted. Specifically, the court rejected the CGL carrier’s argument that the Client’s contractor’s pollution liability policy was more specifically tailored to the loss in the underlying lawsuit. The trial court also rejected CGL carrier’s alternative argument that the “other insurance” clauses in the policies were irreconcilable, requiring a pro rata allocation based on the respective limits of the policies. Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman and Danielle K. Kegley, Traub Lieberman Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com Ms. Kegley may be contacted at dkegley@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Architect Responds to Defect Lawsuit over Defects at Texas Courthouse

    October 08, 2013 —
    Lee County, Texas has sued the architect responsible for designing the drainage system at its historic courthouse. The suit seeks $1.7 million in damages to pay for replacing the defective system and repairing the building from damage sustained due to soil saturation. Dale A. Rabe responds that the county commissioners were more concerned with “beautifying the building” than on needed foundation repairs. Further, Mr. Rabe notes that “Lee County contracted directly with a civil engineering firm to design a drainage system.” But according to Mr. Rabe what they used instead was “a cheaper pump-based design to save money.” And even there, “Lee County failed to maintain the drainage system properly. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    17 Snell & Wilmer Attorneys Ranked In The 2019 Legal Elite Edition Of Nevada Business Magazine

    July 01, 2019 —
    Snell & Wilmer is pleased to announce that 17 of its attorneys in the Nevada offices have been ranked in Nevada Business Magazine’s 2019 Legal Elite edition, an annual list that highlights Nevada’s top attorneys as chosen by their peers. This year marks Legal Elite’s 12th year of presenting the Silver State’s top attorneys. Polling for Legal Elite 2019 began at the end of February and nearly 5,000 nominations were submitted by licensed attorneys in Nevada, according to Nevada Business Magazine. Each submission then went through an extensive verification process resulting in the top attorneys in the state, chosen by their peers. The Legal Elite list includes only the top 3 percent of attorneys in the state broken down by location. In addition, Legal Elite includes special lists ranking Nevada’s best “Up and Coming” and best government attorneys. Each nominee went through several levels of verification and scrutiny before being approved to appear on this list. Upon the nomination process closing, each ballot was individually reviewed for eligibility and every voting attorney was verified with the State Bar of Nevada. More information on the scoring can be viewed here. The following Snell & Wilmer attorneys have been named Legal Elite for 2019: The following Snell & Wilmer attorneys have been named Best Up and Coming for 2019: Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer

    When is Forum Selection in a Construction Contract Enforceable?

    September 29, 2021 —
    If there is one mantra that is repeated often here at Construction Law Musings, it is that your construction contract will be strictly construed and Virginia Courts will enforce the provisions as written. This rule includes forum selection clauses. For those that aren’t attorneys, this means that absent a statute to the contrary, the parties can pick the location of any litigation or arbitration by contract. However, the timing of signing that contract makes a difference as a relatively recent Eastern District of Virginia case points out. Marathon Res. Mgmt Grp v. C. Cornell, Inc. examined what happens when work is performed by one party to the contract prior to the execution of the written contract that contains the forum selection provision. In this case, the defendant C. Cornell, Inc. obtained a default judgment in Texas for non-payment by Marathon for painting and cleaning of rooms at Texas A & M University for work invoiced on August 22, 2017, and September 11, 2017. Upon receipt of the garnishment from the Texas Court, Marathon sued C. Cornell in Virginia state court and the defendant removed the case to federal court. Marathon alleged two separate breaches of contract, the first was that C. Cornell violated the forum selection clause of a Master Services Agreement (“MSA”) executed on September 23, 2017. The second was a violation of another clause of the MSA that barred direct communication with any of Marathon’s customers. The second breach was alleged to be by virtue of the garnishment summons to one of Marathon’s customers. 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

    Not Our Territory: 11th Circuit Dismisses Hurricane Damage Appraisal Order for Lack of Jurisdiction

    July 24, 2023 —
    The hurdles policyholders have faced with the appraisal process in Florida are far from over. In the past, many Florida courts have limited the scope for appraisal, strictly construing the policy provision against the policyholder. Yet, recently, in Positano Place at Naples I Condominium Association, Inc., et al. v. Empire Indemnity Insurance Company, the Eleventh Circuit dismissed an insurer’s appeal of the district court’s ruling compelling appraisal and a stay of a pending litigation. In Positano Place at Naples I Condominium Association, Inc., et al. v. Empire Indemnity Insurance Company, the policyholder Positano filed a claim for property insurance benefits under the policy as a result of damage to the property from Hurricane Irma in 2017. After investigating the claim, Empire found that there was damage to only three of the five properties covered under the policy and disputed the amount of loss. Reprinted courtesy of Veronica P. Adams, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Koorosh Talieh, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Adams may be contacted at vadams@HuntonAK.com Mr. Talieh may be contacted at ktalieh@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    In Appellate Division First, New York Appellate Team Successfully Invokes “Party Finality” Doctrine to Obtain Dismissal of Appeal for Commercial Guarantors

    December 23, 2024 —
    New York, N.Y. (November 20, 2024) - In Roc-Le Triomphe Associates, LLC v. DeSouza, 2024 NY Slip Op 05654 (1st Dep’t 2024), Associate Dean Pillarella, a member of the Appellate Practice, successfully invoked the party finality doctrine to obtain the dismissal of an appeal for the firm’s commercial guarantor clients. The action concerned rent allegedly due and owing under a commercial lease by the lease’s tenant and guarantors. Pursuant to a 2022 order, the guarantors were awarded summary judgment and dismissal of all claims against them, with the landlord’s claims against the tenant left intact. After the decision and order was served with notice of entry by the prevailing party, the landlord did not file a notice of appeal from the order but, instead, filed a notice of appeal from a later judgment months after the time to appeal the order had expired. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dean Pillarella, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Pillarella may be contacted at Dean.Pillarella@lewisbrisbois.com