BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut construction claims 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


    Construction Workers Face Dangers on the Job

    Zetlin & De Chiara Ranked in the Top Tier for Construction Law by Legal 500 USA

    There Is No Sympathy If You Fail to Read Closely the Final Negotiated Construction Contract

    Virtual Reality for Construction

    Corrective Action Protest Grounds for GSA Schedule Federal Construction Contractors

    OSHA Finalizes Rule on Crane Operator Qualification and Certification

    Dorian’s Wrath: How Event Cancellation Insurance Helps Businesses Recoup Losses from Severe Weather

    Colorado statutory “property damage” caused by an “occurrence”

    When is an Indemnification Provision Unenforceable?

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/1/24) – IMF’s Data on Housing, REITs Versus Private Real Estate, and Suburban Versus Urban Office Property Market

    Quick Note: Insurer Must Comply with Florida’s Claims Administration Act

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

    Liquidating Agreements—Bridging the Privity Gap for Subcontractors

    Will a Notice of Non-Responsibility Prevent Enforcement of a California Mechanics Lien?

    Eleven WSHB Lawyers Honored on List of 2016 Rising Stars

    From the Ashes: Reconstructing After the Maui Wildfire

    Chicago Aldermen Tell Casino Bidders: This Is a Union Town

    No Concrete Answers on Whether Construction Defects Are Occurrences

    Welcome to SubTropolis: The Massive Business Complex Buried Under Kansas City

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increased 5% in Year to June

    Florida Court Gives Parties Assigned a Subrogation Claim a Math Lesson

    Alabama Limits Duty to Defend for Construction Defects

    High-Rise Condominium Construction Design Defects, A Maryland Construction Lawyer’s Perspective

    New Rule Prohibits Use of Funds For Certain DoD Construction and Infrastructure Programs and Projects

    Homebuilding Down in North Dakota

    Don MacGregor To Speak at 2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    Unpaid Subcontractor Walks Off the Job and Wins

    What ENR.com Construction News Gained the Most Views

    Supreme Court Set to Alter Law on Key Project, Workforce Issues

    No Global MDL for COVID Business Interruption Claims, but Panel Will Consider Separate Consolidated Proceedings for Lloyds, Cincinnati, Hartford, Society

    EEOC Builds on Best Practice Guidance Regarding Harassment Within the Construction Industry

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    Join: Computer Science Meets Construction

    Wage Theft Investigations and Citations in the Construction Industry

    Scope of Alaska’s Dump Lien Statute Substantially Reduced For Natural Gas Contractors

    Courts Will Not Rewrite Your Post-Loss Property Insurance Obligations

    Homeowner Sues Brick Manufacturer for Spalling Bricks

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2020 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Extreme Weather Events Show Why the Construction Supply Chain Needs a Risk-Management Transformation

    The Legal Landscape

    Business Interruption Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    Parking Reform Takes Off on the West Coast

    Insurance Policy Language Really Does Matter

    Pinnacle Controls in Verano

    Deadlines Count for Construction Defects in Florida

    Miorelli Doctrine’s Sovereign Immunity in Public Construction Contracts — Not the Be-All and End-All

    The Partial Building Collapse of the 12-Story Florida Condo

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

    New California Construction Law for 2019

    Contractor Haunted by “Demonized” Flooring
    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

    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    September 09, 2011 —

    The cost of removing and replacing cracked flanges to prevent future leakage was not covered as an ensuing loss under a builder’s risk policy in RK Mechanical, Inc. v. Travelers Prop. Casualty Co. of Am., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83958 (D. Colo. Aug. 1, 2011).

    The insured, RK Mechanical Inc., was a subcontractor hired to install plumbing for a residential construction project. RK was an additional insured on the general contractor’s policy with Travelers. RK installed approximately 170 CPVC flanges on the project. Subsequently, two of the flanges cracked, allowing water to overflow and causing water damage to the project. Travelers was notified of the flange failure and resulting water damage.

    RK subsequently removed and replaced the two cracked flanges and began water remediation. Travelers paid for the cost of the water damage due to the cracked flanges.

    RK then examined all of the flanges installed in the project and discovered many were cracked and/or showed signs of potential failure. RK removed and replaced the cracked flanges. RK tendered a claim and demand for indemnity to Travelers for these repair costs. Travelers denied the claim. RK then sued for breach of contract and declaratory relief. The parties filed cross motions for summary judgment.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    No Entitlement to Reimbursement of Pre-Tender Fees

    April 28, 2016 —
    The Federal District Court for the District of Hawaii determined that the insured was not entitled to pre-tender defense fees. The Hanover Ins. Co. v. Anova Food, LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38947 (D. Haw. March 24, 2016). Anova sold and marketed fish. It was insured under policies issued by Hanover that covered claims of "personal and advertising injury." A patent infringement and false advertising case was filed against Anova in the District Court for the District of Hawaii.The underlying complaint alleged Anova falsely, misleadingly, and deceptively advertised, promoted, and sold fish. The allegations covered a period of time between 1999 and 2012, a portion of which time Anova was covered by the Hanover policies. 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

    Why Metro Atlanta Is the Poster Child for the US Housing Crisis

    January 04, 2023 —
    Last year, the Federal Reserve declared that not one of the 13 counties that make up metro Atlanta qualified as an affordable housing market. In many places, monthly housing costs consume more than 40% of homeowners’ incomes, well beyond the 30% threshold that the Federal Reserve uses to monitor market affordability. Accelerating housing prices have been the narrative for virtually every major US metro lately, but Atlanta is somewhat “paradigmatic” of the trend, according to Georgia State University urban studies professor Dan Immergluck. Since arriving in Atlanta in 2005, Immergluck has been tracking and documenting the direction of metro Atlanta’s housing conditions, focusing on segregation and gentrification patterns. His new book, Red Hot City: Housing, Race and Exclusion in 21st-Century Atlanta, released in October, is the culmination of much of that scholarship. What Red Hot City reveals is that while exorbitant house prices are typically the result of market forces, Atlanta can blame a lot of its own policy decisions over the last 20 years, particularly as it pertains to large civic projects like the BeltLine and Centennial Yards, a massive new development planned for south downtown Atlanta. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brentin Mock, Bloomberg

    Someone Who Hires an Independent Contractor May Still Be Liable, But Not in This Case

    April 18, 2023 —
    In Allstate Veh. & Prop. Ins. Co. v. Glitz Constr. Corp., 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1180, 2023 NY Slip Op 01171, the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department (Appellate Court), considered whether a contractor could be found liable for its subcontractor’s alleged negligence in causing injury to a homeowner’s property. The homeowner’s insurer, as subrogee of the homeowner, sought to recover damages from the contractor despite an allegation that the subcontractor – an independent contractor – caused the injury to the homeowner’s property. Finding that there was no evidence that any of the exceptions to the non-liability rule related to hiring independent contractors applied, the Appellate Court affirmed the lower court’s decision granting judgment in favor of the contractor. In this case, the homeowner hired the contractor (defendant) to convert her garage area into a bedroom and an office. The defendant later hired a subcontractor to perform the electrical rough-in work. At trial, the homeowner’s insurer (plaintiff) presented evidence that the subcontractor, who damaged an existing wire with a drill bit, caused an electrical failure that resulted in a fire. The defendant argued that it could not be held liable for the subcontractor’s alleged negligence because the subcontractor was an independent contractor and, on appeal, the Appellate Court agreed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Katherine Dempsey, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Dempsey may be contacted at dempseyk@whiteandwilliams.com

    CC&Rs Not the Place for Arbitration Agreement, Court Rules

    May 24, 2011 —

    In January, the California Court of Appeals ruled that an arbitration clause inserted in a development’s CC&Rs by the developer could not be enforced. The case, Villa Vicenza Homeowners Association v. Noble Court Development, involved a case in which, according to the opinion, “following the first sale Nobel controlled the board of directors of the Association and because the initial condominium buyers noticed defects in common areas and common facilities and did not believe Nobel had provided a reserve fund sufficient to repair the defects, the condominium owners brought a derivative action on behalf of the Association against Nobel.”

    The court concluded, “The use of CC&R's as a means of providing contractual rights to parties with no interest in or responsibility for a common interest development is also problematic from the standpoint of determining what if any consideration would support such third-party agreements. By their terms the CC&R's bind all successors, even those with whom a third party such as Nobel has never had any contractual relationship and to whom Nobel has not provided any consideration.” The court determined that “the trial court did not err in denying Nobel's motion to compel arbitration.”

    Read the court’s decision

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

    Governor Signs Permit Extension Bill Extending Permit Deadlines to One Year

    October 23, 2018 —
    It’s like that feeling you got when your teacher said you have another week to complete your group project. On September 21, 2018, Governor Brown signed AB 2913, which, for the first time, provides a uniform 12-month period across the state for work to commence before a building permit expires. Previously, the period was six months. In addition to doubling the expiration period, the statute includes a “justifiable cause” provision permitting local building departments to extend the time for one or more additional periods of not more than 180 days per extension upon written demonstration of “justifiable cause for the extension.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel, Rosen, Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Superintendent’s On-Site Supervision Compensable as Labor Under Miller Act

    March 13, 2023 —
    A recent Miller Act payment bond decision out of the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals, U.S. f/u/b/o Civil Construction, LLC v. Hirani Engineering & Land Surveying, PC, 58 F.4th 1250 (D.C. Circ. 2023), dealt with the issue of whether a subcontractor’s superintendent constitutes recoverable “labor” within the meaning of the Miller Act and compensable as a cost under the Miller Act that typically views labor as on-site physical labor. The issue is that the Miller Act covers “[e]very person that has furnished labor or material in carrying out work provided for in a contract.” Civil Construction, supra, at 1253 quoting 40 U.S.C. s. 3133(b)(1). The Miller Act does not define labor. The subcontractor claimed labor includes actual superintending at the job site. The surety disagreed that a superintendent’s presence on a job site constitutes labor as the superintendent has to actually perform physical labor on the job site to constitute compensable labor under the Miller Act. The subcontractor argued its subcontract and the government’s quality control standards required detailed daily reports that verified manpower, equipment, and work performed at the job site. It further claimed its superintendent had to continuously supervise and inspect construction activities on-site: “[the] superintendent had to be on-site to account for, among other things, hours worked by crew members, usage and standby hours for each piece of equipment, materials delivered, weather throughout the day, and all work performed. These on-site responsibilities reflected the government’s quality control standards, under which the superintendent as ‘the most senior site manager at the project, is responsible for the overall construction activities at the site…includ[ing] all quality, workmanship, and production of crews and equipment.” Civil Construction, supra, at 1253-54. 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

    2018 Construction Outlook: Mature Expansion, Deceleration in Some Sectors, Continued Growth in Others

    January 24, 2018 —
    U.S. construction starts are expected to increase 3 percent to $765 billion in 2018 according to Dodge Data & Analytics in its 2018 Dodge Construction Outlook. But we may be approaching the end of a construction boom, at least in certain industry segments. The construction industry as a whole is in a “mature stage of expansion,” indicates Robert Murray, Chief Economist for Dodge Data & Analytics. “After rising 11% to 13% per year from 2012 through 2015, total construction starts advanced a more subdued 5% in 2015. An important question entering 2017 was whether the construction industry had the potential for further expansion,” explained Murray. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel, Rosen, Black, Dean, LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com