BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture 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


    Business Risk Exclusion Dooms Coverage for Construction Defect Claim

    LA Wildfires Push California Insurance Market to Its Limit

    Additional Insured Coverage Confirmed

    California Superior Court Overrules Insurer's Demurrer on COVID-19 Claim

    Prospective Additional Insureds May Be Obligated to Arbitrate Coverage Disputes

    Drones Used Despite Uncertain Legal Consequences

    DEP Plan to Deal with Noxious Landfill Fumes Met with Criticism

    Wine without Cheese? (Why a construction contract needs an order of precedence clause)(Law Note)

    Palo Alto Proposes Time Limits on Building Permits

    Judge Gives Cintra Bid Protest of $9B Md. P3 Project Award New Life

    Breach of an Oral Contract and Unjust Enrichment and Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

    Potential Construction Liabilities Contractors Need to Know

    Virginia Decision Emphasizes Importance of Naming All Necessary Parties

    Sacramento Army Corps District Projects Get $2.1 Billion in Supplemental Appropriation

    Defense Owed for Product Liability Claims That Do Not Amount to Faulty Workmanship

    London Office Builders Aren’t Scared of Brexit Anymore

    With an Eye Already in the Sky, Crane Camera Goes Big Data

    Major Changes in Commercial Construction Since 2009

    Pennsylvania Federal Court Confirms: Construction Defect Claims Not Covered by CGL Policies

    Retainage on Pennsylvania Public Contracts

    Recession Graduates’ Six-Year Gap in Homeownership

    A Word to the Wise: The AIA Revised Contract Documents Could Lead to New and Unanticipated Risks - Part II

    Senator Ray Scott Introduced a Bill to Reduce Colorado’s Statute of Repose for Construction Defect Actions to Four Years

    Mexico Settles With Contractors for Canceled Airport Terminal

    The Construction Lawyer as Problem Solver

    Illinois Appellate Court Finds That Damages in Excess of Policy Limits Do Not Trigger Right to Independent Counsel

    Court Again Defines Extent of Contractor’s Insurance Coverage

    Social Distancing and the Impact on Service of Process Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic

    Nader Eghtesad v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    ABC, Via Construction Industry Safety Coalition, Comments on Silica Rule

    Thank You!

    Limited Number of Insurance-Related Bills Passed by 2014 Hawaii Legislature

    New York Establishes a Registration Requirement for Contractors and Subcontractors Performing Public Works and Covered Private Projects

    Parties to an Agreement to Arbitrate May be Compelled to Arbitrate with Non-Parties

    Court Slams the Privette Door on Independent Contractor’s Bodily Injury Claim

    Insurers' Motion to Determine Lack of Occurrence Fails

    Claimants’ Demand for Superfluous Wording In Release Does Not Excuse Insurer’s Failure to Accept Policy Limit Offer Within Time Specified

    Deterioration Known To Insured Forecloses Collapse Coverage

    Illinois Supreme Court Rules Labor Costs Not Depreciated to Determine Actual Cash Value

    Transplants Send Nashville Home Market Upwards

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

    Plaintiffs Not Barred from Proving Causation in Slip and Fall Case, Even With No Witnesses and No Memory of Fall Itself

    Iowa Tornado Flattens Homes, Businesses and Wind Turbines

    Contractor Jailed for Home Repair Fraud

    California Homeowners Can Release Future, Unknown Claims Against Builders

    Sometimes you Need to Consider the Coblentz Agreement

    Nashville Stadium Bond Deal Tests Future of Spectator Sports

    Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC Announces Leadership Changes and New Vision for Growth

    Kiewit-Turner Stops Work on VA Project—Now What?

    Housing-Related Spending Makes Up Significant Portion of GDP
    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

    State-Fed Fight Heats Up Over Building Private Nuclear Disposal Sites

    August 03, 2022 —
    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Interim Storage Partners, a joint venture that gained a federal license last year to build an interim storage facility for spent commercial nuclear fuel at a Texas site, have until Aug. 3 to answer a federal lawsuit claim by state officials that a new U.S. Supreme Court decision eliminates the federal agency’s licensing authority. Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, Engineering News-Record and Debra K. Rubin, Engineering News-Record Ms. Rubin may be contacted at rubind@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Federal Court Upholds Professional Services Exclusion to Preclude Duty to Defend

    March 16, 2020 —
    In Project Surveillance, Inc. v. The Travelers Indemnity Company, No. 4:19-CV-03324, 2020 WL 292247 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 21, 2020), a Texas federal court held that a professional services exclusion in a commercial general liability policy precluded Travelers’ duty to defend its insured. The underlying lawsuit was a wrongful death action brought by the family of a worker killed on a construction site. Project Surveillance was present at the construction site “to provide safety supervision or other services.” The underlying lawsuit alleged that Project Surveillance negligently failed to inspect or adequately inspect the project and failed to warn or adequately warn the decedent of a dangerous condition. The underlying lawsuit also alleged that Project Surveillance was negligent in failing to stop work. At the time of the incident, Project Surveillance had commercial general liability insurance through Travelers and professional liability insurance through RLI. RLI agreed to defend Project Surveillance in the underlying lawsuit. Travelers, however, denied owing a duty to defend or indemnify based on an exclusion for “bodily injury” arising out of the rendering or failure to render any “professional service.” The Traveler policy defined the term “professional services” to mean any service requiring specialized skill or training, including “failure to prepare [. . .] any warning,” “supervision,” “inspection,” “control,” “surveying activity or service,” “job site safety,” “construction administration,” and “monitoring [. . .] necessary to perform and of [those] services.” 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

    Woodbridge II and the Nuanced Meaning of “Adverse Use” in Hostile Property Rights Cases in Colorado

    November 23, 2020 —
    Earlier this year, the Colorado Court of Appeals issued an opinion addressing at length “whether the requirement that the use be ‘adverse’ in the adverse possession context is coextensive with adverse use in the prescriptive easement context.” See Woodbridge Condo. Ass’n, Inc. v. Lo Viento Blanco, LLC, 2020 COA 34 (Woodbridge II), ¶ 2, cert. granted, No. 20SC292, 2020 WL 5405376 (Colo. Sept. 8, 2020). As detailed below, the Woodbridge II court concluded that the meanings of “adverse” in these two contexts are not coextensive—while “hostility” in the adverse possession context requires a claim of exclusive ownership of the property, a party claiming a prescriptive easement is only required to “show a nonpermissive or otherwise unauthorized use of property that interfered with the owner’s property interests.” Thus, the Woodbridge II court reasoned a claimants’ acknowledgement or recognition of an owner’s title alone is insufficient to defeat “adverse use” in the prescriptive easement context. This significant ruling is at odds with a prior division’s broad statement, while considering a prescriptive easement claim, that “[i]n general, when an adverse occupier acknowledges or recognizes the title of the owner during the occupant’s claimed prescriptive period, the occupant interrupts the prescriptive use.” See Trask v. Nozisko, 134 P.3d 544, 553 (Colo. App. 2006). Perhaps for that reason, Woodbridge II is currently pending certiorari review before the Colorado Supreme Court in a case that should provide some much-needed clarity on what constitutes “adverse use” in the context of a prescriptive easement. As we await the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision, I thought it worthwhile to provide a brief analysis of the Woodbridge II court’s deep dive into the nuances of “adverse use” in this field of Colorado law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    Another Setback for the New Staten Island Courthouse

    January 13, 2014 —
    The new Staten Island Courthouse received another setback when James McDonough filed suit stating unsafe work conditions, according to Frank Donnelly writing for Silive. The completion date for the new multistory, $230 million complex has been rescheduled four times so far. Fifty-eight year old James McDonough, resident of Ridgewood Queens, became injured after a fall down a shaft, and he subsequently “sued the city, state Dormitory Authority, the state Office of Court Administration and various contractors,” Donnelly reported. A total of ten defendants have been named in the suit. According to Silive, the Office of Court Administration, Dormitory Authority and the Law Department would not comment on the pending litigation further except to say that papers have been filed and the case is under review. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Law Firm's Business Income, Civil Authority Claim Due to Hurricanes Survives Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    December 20, 2021 —
    The insurer was unsuccessful in moving for summary judgment on the insured's claim for loss of business income and civil authority coverage due to losses caused by two hurricanes. Townsley v. Ohio Security Ins. Co., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 202698 (W.D. La. Oct. 20, 2021). Hurricane Laura struck southeast Louisiana on August 27, 2020 and Hurricane Delta made landfall in the same area on October 9, 2020. Both hurricanes caused property damage and an interruption of business for the insured law firm. Power outages and mandatory evacuation orders caused by both storms created a loss of income for the law firm. Ohio Security denied coverage under the business income, extra expense, and civil authority provisions. The law firm sued and Ohio Security moved for summary judgment. From the undisputed facts, the court could not determine the law firm's entitlement to business income and extra expense coverage, so the motion was denied for these claims. 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

    Feds, County Seek Delay in Houston $7B Road Widening Over Community Impact

    March 15, 2021 —
    The Federal Highway Administration has asked Texas to delay issuing requests for proposals and pause ongoing contracting on a $7-billion, three-phased highway expansion project in metropolitan Houston as it evaluates complaints that up to 1,000 homes and multifamily buildings and 350 businesses would be condemned to build the project. Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Torrey Pines Court Receives Funding for Renovation

    August 06, 2014 —
    San Diego Source reported that “CIT Real Estate Finance provided…$60 million…to refinance existing debt and fund the renovations at Torrey Pines Court,” a five-building Class A office campus located in La Jolla, California. The 206,128 square foot complex, which resides on 9.24 acres, is adjacent to the Torrey Pines Golf Course. CIT has funded the project in partnership with Rockwood Capital and The Muller Company. "We are excited to begin renovations that will complete our repositioning of Torrey Pines Court with state-of-the-art office space and amenities,” David Streicher, Partner at Rockwood Capital, stated according to a press release in the Wall Street Journal. “We expect that the renovations, coupled with the project's picturesque setting, will solidify Torrey Pines Court's position as the preferred office destination in the submarket. We thank CIT for working with us to create a sound financing package that will take this project to the next level." Read the full story, San Diego Source... Read the full story, Wall Street Journal... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Wearable Ways to Work in Extreme Heat

    July 15, 2024 —
    Earth experienced its hottest months yet in summer 2023, and NASA scientists are expecting 2024 to be even hotter. Rising temperatures and high humidity aren’t just uncomfortable for those outside during the summer months: They can cause serious health consequences, including death. While employers are working to find ways to combat the heat, the extreme variability in weather conditions continues to pose threats to employees. Recently, company leaders have turned to new methods and technologies to help their teams stay safe while working both indoors and outdoors. A balance of methods and technology is necessary to keep everyone safe while they work. As summer approaches, is important to remember that the time to review and update current heat-stress safety plans is in the spring—or better yet, year-round—in order to prioritize employee safety and determine both proactive and reactive measures needed to withstand the hottest months of the year. TRIED AND TRUE While we are all navigating new ways of working safely in extreme temperatures, the tried-and-true measures are still extremely useful in preventing heat stress among employees. Employers can support their employees working outdoors by ensuring there are proper amenities available at all times, including shady areas, a water source and electrolyte drinks. Reprinted courtesy of Clare Epstein, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of