BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design 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


    No Retrofit without Repurposing in Los Angeles

    Excess Policy Triggered Once Retention Paid, Even if Loss Not Covered By Excess

    Property Damage, Occurrences, Delays, Offsets and Fees. California Decision is a Smorgasbord of Construction Insurance Issues

    Eleven WSHB Lawyers Honored on List of 2016 Rising Stars

    Coverage for Construction Defects Barred by Business Risk Exclusions

    California Statutes Authorizing Public-Private Partnership Contracting

    Be Careful When Requiring Fitness for Duty Examinations

    Following California Law, Federal Court Adopts Horizontal Allocation For Asbestos Coverage

    Insurer Must Pay for Matching Siding of Insured's Buildings

    New York Developer’s Alleged Court Judgment Woes

    Amazon Feels the Heat From Hoverboard Fire Claims

    Duuers: Better Proposals with Less Work

    Indemnification Provisions Do Not Create Reciprocal Attorney’s Fees Provisions

    Search in Florida Collapse to Take Weeks; Deaths Reach 90

    Defective Concrete Blocks Spell Problems for Donegal Homeowners

    How to Determine the Deadline for Recording a California Mechanics Lien

    Legislation Update: S-865 Public-Private Partnerships in New Jersey Passed by Both Houses-Awaiting Governor’s Signature

    Affordable Global Housing Will Cost $11 Trillion

    Toronto Contractor Bondfield Wins Court Protection as Project Woes Mount

    Insurance Policy Language Really Does Matter

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    Arkansas Federal Court Fans the Product Liability Flames Utilizing the Malfunction Theory

    California Case That Reads Like Russian Novel Results in Less Than Satisfying Result for Both Project Owner and Contractors

    Purse Tycoon Aims at Ultra-Rich With $85 Million Home

    Before Celebrating the Market Rebound, Builders Need to Read the Fine Print: New Changes in Construction Law Coming Out of the Recession

    Colorado Homes Approved Despite being Too Close Together

    Construction Law: Unexpected, Fascinating, Bizarre

    Construction Job Opening Rise in October

    The Starter Apartment Is Nearly Extinct in San Francisco and New York

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

    Biggest U.S. Gas Leak Followed Years of Problems, State Says

    Am I Still Covered Under the Title Insurance Policy?

    Latest Updates On The Coronavirus Pandemic

    Bill Seeks to Protect Legitimate Contractors

    Continuing Breach Doctrine

    Potential Construction Liabilities Contractors Need to Know

    Fifth Circuit Requires Causal Distinction for Ensuing Loss Exception to Faulty Work Exclusion

    Patriarch Partners Decision Confirms Government Subpoenas May Constitute a “Claim” Under D&O Policy; Warns Policyholders to Think Broadly When Representing Facts and Circumstances to Insurers

    Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review Regarding Necessary Parties in Lien Foreclosure Actions

    Federal Court Opinion Has Huge Impact on the Construction Industry

    A Primer on Insurance for Construction Projects

    Continuity and Disaster Recovery Plans for Contractors: Lessons From the Past

    Renters ‘Sold Out’ by NYC Pensions Press Mayor on Housing

    Penalty for Failure to Release Expired Liens

    Clean Energy and Conservation Collide in California Coastal Waters

    Mediation Confidentiality Bars Malpractice Claim but for How Long?

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/13/22

    Housing Inventory Might be Distorted by Pocket Listings

    Carbon Sequestration Can Combat Global Warming, Sometimes in Unexpected Ways

    Making the Construction Dispute Resolution Process More Efficient and Less Expensive, Part 2
    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

    Legislation Update: S-865 Public-Private Partnerships in New Jersey Passed by Both Houses-Awaiting Governor’s Signature

    July 02, 2018 —
    New Jersey is finally close to being among the many states with broad authority to develop or improve public projects through a Public-Private Partnership (P3) delivery method. This contracting model has stimulated growth and improvements in other States and led to the delivery of projects that may not otherwise have happened. Senate Bill 865 (“S-865”), after undergoing some last-minute amendments in a frenzied legislature dealing with budget and other critical issues, has passed in both houses of the Legislature and is waiting for Governor Murphy’s signature, which is expected shortly. The law will be effective 180 days from formal enactment. The administrative framework is now in place to make Public-Private Partnerships a reality in New Jersey. Reprinted courtesy of Steven M. Charney, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Charles F. Kenny, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Charney may be contacted at scharney@pecklaw.com Mr. Kenny may be contacted at ckenny@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    November 18, 2011 —

    Vertex Pharmaceuticals is poised to become the holder of Boston’s biggest commercial lease, paying $72.5 million for 1.1 million square feet on Boston’s waterfront. Vertex’s new buildings are still under construction, but the plans have spurred other development in the Fan Pier area, according to the New York Times. The Times quotes Mary A. Burke, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston that the Vertex project gives “a big push” to the “momentum for economic growth.”

    The Fallon Company is building Vertex’s new laboratory and office space. They are separately planning to build a high-rise with 150 luxury condominium units. According to Joseph Fallon, the chief executive and president of the Fallon Company, there is already a waiting list of 50 buyers for the condominiums.

    Across the street from the Vertex site, a group including Morgan Stanley and Boston Global Investors is planning a 23-block mixed use project that would include 1.2 million square feet of retail space. Additionally, the New England Development and the Hanover Group is building a 356-unit apartment building at the adjacent Pier 4.

    Read the full story…

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

    No Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims under Kentucky Law

    March 25, 2024 —
    The federal district court determined that the insurer was not obligated to defend construction defect claims under Kentucky law. Westfield Ins. Co. v. Kentuckiana Commercial Concrete, LLC, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222674 (W.D. Ky. Dec. 14, 2023). HRB, the owner of an apartment complex, filed an arbitration demand against the general contractor, Doster Commercial Construction, for allegedly doing faulty concrete work in the construction of the apartments. Doster added its concrete subcontrator Kentuckiana Commercial Concrete - and 16 other subcontractors - to the arbitration. Kentuckiana tendered the claim to its insurer, Westfield. Wesfield defended. Doster claimed it was an additional insured under the Westfield policy and also sought coverage. Westfield refused the defend Doster. Westfield argued there was no "occurrence." Westfield then sued both Doster and Kentuckiana in federal court, seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend either. Westfield moved for a judgment on the pleadings. 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

    Surprising Dismissal of False Claims Act Case Based on Appointments Clause - What Does It Mean?

    October 15, 2024 —
    Atlanta, Ga. (October 1, 2024) - In a surprising turn of events, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida recently dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) lawsuit brought by relator Clarissa Zafirov against Florida Medical Associates, LLC, and other defendants. U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle ruled that the FCA’s qui tam provisions, which allow private individuals to bring lawsuits on behalf of the government, violate the Constitution’s Appointments Clause. This decision follows another unexpected ruling by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon in the Southern District of Florida, where the court similarly dismissed an indictment against former President Donald Trump based on the same constitutional clause. At the heart of these rulings is the argument that FCA relators - who decide whom to sue, which legal theories to pursue, and how to proceed - exercise significant executive authority. Because they are not appointed by the President, a department head, or a court, the judges concluded that these relators hold their positions unconstitutionally. As a result, Judge Mizelle dismissed the case entirely. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Steven H. Lee, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Lee may be contacted at Steven.Lee@lewisbrisbois.com

    Liquidating Agreements—Bridging the Privity Gap for Subcontractors

    September 03, 2015 —
    What is a subcontractor to do when the owner has demanded additional work, but has refused to pay for it? Typically, a subcontractor cannot sue the owner because the subcontractor doesn’t have a contract with the owner. Perhaps the subcontractor and general contractor should enter into a liquidating agreement through which the general contractor can pursue the claim on behalf of the subcontractor. Liquidating agreements bridge the privity gap between owners and subcontractors who sustain damages because of the others actions. Liquidating agreements or pass-through agreements grant the general contractor a release of its liability to the subcontractor after the general contractor prosecutes the subcontractor’s pass-through claim against the owner and gives the subcontractor any recovery. 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

    EO or Uh-Oh: Biden’s Executive Order Requiring Project Labor Agreements on Federal Construction Projects

    March 14, 2022 —
    On February 4, 2022, President Biden issued Executive Order (“EO”) 14063[1]. The EO requires that a Project Labor Agreement (“PLA”) be in place for any federal “large-scale construction projects” estimated at $35 million or more. To compete for or perform projects subject to the PLA requirement contractors must agree to be subject to the applicable PLA. For federal projects under $35 million or projects receiving federal financial assistance are not required by the EO to have PLA, but federal agencies will have discretion to require PLAs. The EO will not go into effect until after implementing regulations are finalized, probably after the beginning of June 2022. Requiring PLAs on federal construction projects is a substantial shift from even the Obama Administration’s policy in favor of PLAs. Biden’s PLA EO will have an impact on federal contractors and likely industry repercussions beyond federal procurement. Only time and experience will tell whether those impacts will all be positive as the Biden Administration insists or will drive up construction costs and give unions more leverage than they have in the market as the critics insist. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicole Stone, Jones Walker LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Ms. Stone may be contacted at nstone@joneswalker.com

    Alleged Negligent Misrepresentation on Condition of Home is Not an Occurrence Causing Property Damage

    December 17, 2024 —
    The court found that even if the insured's negligent misrepresentations constituted an accident, the disclosures did not cause physical damage to the property. Wood v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180624 (D. S.C. Sept. 12, 2024). The insured, Clinton Wood, purchased a townhome in January 2014. After the purchase, Wood experienced leaks and significant water intrusion, as did other townhome owners in the same development. Wood and the other owners retained an engineer to evaluate the cause of the water damage. The engineer determined that the water intrusion was caused by defects in the design and construction of the residence. The engineer told Wood that the proposed repairs would not adequately address and resolve the water intrusion and leaks, and that the problems would continue even if repairs were made. 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

    Fifth Circuit Holds Insurer Owes Duty to Defend Latent Condition Claim That Caused Fire Damage to Property Years After Construction Work

    October 05, 2020 —
    Most general liability policies only provide coverage for “property damage” that occurs during the policy period. Thus, when analyzing coverage for a construction defect claim, it is important to ascertain the date on which damage occurred. Of course, the plaintiffs’ bar crafts pleadings to be purposefully vague as to the date (or period) of damage to property. A recent Fifth Circuit decision applying Texas law addresses this coverage issue in the context of allegations of a condition created by an insured during the policy period that caused damage after the policy expired. In Gonzalez v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., 969 F.3d 554 (5th Cir. 2020), Gilbert Gonzales (the insured) was a siding contractor. In 2013, the underlying plaintiff hired Gonzales to install new siding on his house. In 2016, the underlying plaintiff’s house was damaged in a fire. The underlying plaintiff sued Gilbert in Texas state court alleging that when Gonzalez installed the siding in 2013, he hammered nails through electrical wiring and created a dangerous condition that caused a fire three years later in 2016. At the time Gilbert performed construction work, he was insured by Mid-Continent Casualty Company. Mid-Continent disclaimed coverage to Gonzales on the basis that the complaint unequivocally alleged that property was damaged in 2016 and there were no allegations that property damage occurred prior to 2016 or was continuing in nature. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy S. Macklin, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Macklin may be contacted at jmacklin@tlsslaw.com