BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineers
    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


    California’s Fifth Appellate District Declares the “Right to Repair Act” the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    Another Smart Home Innovation: Remote HVAC Diagnostics

    Watchdog Opens Cartel Probe Into Eight British Homebuilders

    Latosha Ellis Joins The National Black Lawyers Top 40 Under 40

    3D Printing Innovations Enhance Building Safety

    Staying the Course, Texas Supreme Court Rejects Insurer’s Argument for Exception to Eight-Corners Rule in Determining Duty to Defend

    Hawaii Court of Appeals Finds Insured AOAO Not Liable for Securing Inadequate Insurance

    Florida Condo Collapse Shows Town’s Rich, Middle-Class Divide

    Updates to Residential Landlord Tenant Law

    Beam Cracks Cause Closure of San Francisco’s New $2B Transit Center

    The New Jersey Theme Park Where Kids’ Backhoe Dreams Come True

    2018 Update to EPA’s “Superfund Task Force Report”

    Waive Your Claim Goodbye: Louisiana Court Holds That AIA Subrogation Waiver Did Not Violate Anti-Indemnification Statute and Applied to Subcontractors

    When Can a General Contractor’s Knowledge be Imputed to a Developer?

    Chapman Glucksman Press Release

    Subcontractors Have a Duty to Clarify Ambiguities in Bid Documents

    It’s Time for a Net Zero Building Boom

    Former NJ Army Base $2B Makeover is 'Buzzsaw' of Activity

    Infrared Photography Illuminates Construction Defects and Patent Trolling

    Crowdfunding Comes to Manhattan’s World Trade Center

    Big Builder’s Analysis of the Top Ten Richest Counties

    Full Extent of Damage From Turkey Quakes Takes Shape

    Eight Things You Need to Know About the AAA’s New Construction Arbitration Rules

    Savera Sandhu Joins Newmeyer Dillion As Partner

    Environmental and Regulatory Law Update: New Federal and State Rulings

    Flood Coverage Denied Based on Failure to Submit Proof of Loss

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

    Crime Lab Beset by Ventilation Issues

    Case-Shiller Redo Shows Less Severe U.S. Home-Price Slump

    The Future of Construction Work with Mark Ehrlich

    Washington Trial Court Narrows Definition of First Party Claimant, Clarifies Available Causes of Action in Commercial Property Loss Context

    Tips for Drafting Construction Contracts

    Study May Come Too Late for Construction Defect Bill

    New FAR Rule Mandates the Use of PLAs on Large Construction Projects

    BHA’s Next MCLE Seminar in San Diego on July 25th

    New Tariffs Could Shorten Construction Expansion Cycle

    Design-Build Contracting: Is the Shine Off the Apple?

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

    Lake Texoma, Texas Condo Case may go to Trial

    Ohio: Are Construction Defects Covered in Insurance Policies?

    Condo Owners Suing Bank for Failing to Disclose Defects

    The Partial Building Collapse of the 12-Story Florida Condo

    The “Unavailability Exception” is Unavailable to Policyholders, According to New York Court of Appeals

    Learning from Production Homes of the Past

    Five Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers in America© 2021

    State of Texas’ Claims Time Barred by 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act

    State Supreme Court Cases Highlight Importance of Wording in Earth Movement Exclusions

    The Vallagio HOA Appeals the Decision from the Colorado Court of Appeals

    Arizona Rooftop Safety: Is it Adequate or Substandard?

    Insurance Law Alert: Incorporation of Defective Work Does Not Result in Covered Property Damage in California Construction Claims
    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

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

    June 10, 2019 —
    The worst natural gas leak in U.S. history, which broke out at a Sempra Energy storage field near Los Angeles almost four years ago, was caused by corrosion, according to a report commissioned by California regulators. The rupture of a 7-inch (18-centimeter) well casing at Sempra Energy’s Aliso Canyon storage complex was due to “microbial corrosion” brought on by contact with groundwater, an independent analysis conducted by Blade Energy Partners and commissioned by two state agencies found. The report also concluded there had been more than 60 leaks in the field dating back to the 1970s, and Sempra didn’t carry out detailed inspections after they occurred, the California Public Utilities Commission and Department of Conservation said in a joint statement. The company’s Southern California Gas lacked “any form of risk assessment” to manage the integrity of its wells and hadn’t established systematic practices to protect against corrosion and monitor well pressure, the agencies said. Reprinted courtesy of Mark Chediak, Bloomberg and Edvard Pettersson, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Fifth Circuit Asks Texas Supreme Court to Clarify Construction Defect Decision

    November 07, 2012 —
    The Fifth Circuit Court has withdrawn its decision in Ewing Construction Company v. Amerisure Insurance Company, pending clarification from the Texas Supreme Court of its decision in Gilbert Texas Construction, L.P. v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s London. The Fifth Circuit had applied the Gilbert case in determining that a contractual liability exclusion barred coverage for faulty workmanship. The Insurance Journal reports that this decision was both applauded and criticized, with a concern noted that “an insurer would now have its pick of either the ‘your work’ exclusion or the contractual liability exclusion without the exception for subcontracted work.” The Fifth Circuit is now asking the Texas Supreme Court two questions to clarify Gilbert, which Brian S. Martin and Suzanne M. Patrick see as a sign that the Court has realized that it overly expanded the scope of the earlier ruling. A response is expected from the Texas Supreme Court by spring 2013. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    CGL Policies and the Professional Liabilities Exclusion

    August 14, 2018 —
    Commercial general liability (CGL) policies for contractors traditionally contain a professional liabilities exclusion. This exclusion is generally added through a specific endorsement to eliminate coverage for professional services. Read the endorsement The point of the exclusion, in a nutshell, is simply to eliminate a CGL policy for a contractor serving as a professional liability policy. Contractors need to appreciate a professional liabilities exclusion added through endorsement because oftentimes there are delegated design components they are responsible for. Perhaps the contractor value engineered a system and is responsible for engineering and signing and sealing the engineered documents (through its subcontractor) associated with that system. Perhaps there is a performance specification that requires the contractor to engineer a system. Perhaps there is a design-build component. Regardless of the circumstance, this professional liabilities exclusion can certainly come into play, particularly if a defect is raised with the design or professional services associated with the engineered system. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Prevailing Payment Bond Surety Entitled to Statutory Attorneys’ Fees Even if Defended by Principal

    January 09, 2023 —
    For contractors involved in California public works projects the scenario is not uncommon: The general contractor awarded the public works project is required to obtain a payment bond for the benefit of subcontractors and suppliers and the payment bond surety issuing the payment bond requires the general contractor to defend and indemnify the surety from and against any claims against the payment bond. In Cell-Crete Corporation v. Federal Insurance Company, 82 Cal.App.5th 1090 (2022), the 4th District Court of Appeal examined whether a payment bond surety, who prevails in a claim against the payment bond, is entitled to statutory attorneys’ fees when the party actually incurring the attorneys’ fees was the general contractor, pursuant to its defense and indemnity obligations, as opposed to the surety itself. The Cell-Crete Case General contractor Granite Construction Company was awarded a public works contract issued by the City of Thermal known as the Airport Boulevard at Grapefruit Boulevard and Union Pacific Railroad Grade Separation Project. We’ll just call it the “Project.” Subcontractor Cell-Crete Corporation entered into a subcontract with Granite for lightweight concrete and related work. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Wisconsin High Court Rejects Insurer’s Misuse of “Other Insurance” Provision

    March 04, 2019 —
    The Wisconsin Supreme Court held last week in Steadfast Ins. Co. v. Greenwich Ins. Co. that two insurers must contribute proportionally to the defense of an additional insured under their comprehensive liability policies. In 2008, torrential rainstorms battered the Milwaukee area for two days. The downpour overwhelmed the city’s sewer system, causing significant flooding in homes throughout the region. Out of those floods sprang several lawsuits against the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (“MMSD”) for negligent inspection, maintenance, repair, and operation of Milwaukee’s sewage system. MMSD was an additional insured under liability policies covering two other water service providers responsible for the city’s sewer systems. The first policy was issued by Greenwich Insurance Company for United Water Services Milwaukee, LLC, and the second was issued by Steadfast Insurance Company for Veolia Water Milwaukee, LLC. After learning of the lawsuits, MMSD tendered its defense of the sewage suits to both insurers. Steadfast accepted the defense; but Greenwich refused, claiming that its policy was excess to Steadfast’s based on an “other insurance” clause in Greenwich’s policy. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and David Costello, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Costello may be contacted at dcostello@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Significant Ruling in PFAS Litigation Could Impact Insurance Coverage

    October 10, 2022 —
    Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, commonly known as PFAS, have served as a key component in numerous industrial and consumer products for decades. These “forever chemicals,” which have been associated with environmental contamination and adverse health outcomes, have garnered steadily-growing attention from regulatory authorities, the plaintiffs’ bar, and, by extension, the insurance industry. The current “case to watch” regarding PFAS is the multidistrict litigation (“MDL”) in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, Judge Gergel presiding. The MDL is comprised of well over 2,000 cases brought by both individual plaintiffs and state and local governments arising out of the manufacturing and/or use of aqueous film forming foam, also known as AFFF. The use of AFFF, which was historically employed in firefighting operations, including those undertaken by the United States military, allegedly causes the release of two types of PFAS into the environment – PFOS and PFOA. On September 16, 2022, Judge Gergel denied a motion for partial summary judgment filed by defendant 3M Company and other AFFF defendant manufacturers on the government contractor immunity defense. Although not an insurance coverage decision, the ruling is significant in the context of PFAS litigation and could have insurance coverage implications. Reprinted courtesy of Sara C. Tilitz, White and Williams LLP and Lynndon K. Groff, White and Williams LLP Ms. Tilitz may be contacted at tilitzs@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Groff may be contacted at groffl@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Jersey Legislation Would Bar Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause in Homeowners' Policies

    June 08, 2020 —
    A bill prohibiting the use of anti-concurrent causation clauses in homeowners' insurance policies has been introduced before the New Jersey legislature. The bill is here. Under an anti-concurrent causation clause, the policy bars coverage if two perils (i.e., wind and water damage) contribute to a loss and one peril is excluded from coverage. For example, wind damage alone may be covered, while water damage is excluded. If both wind and water contribute to the loss, regardless of the degree to which each peril contributes, the anti-concurrent causation clause would bar coverage. New Jersey S 217 states,
    An insurer authorized to transact the business of homeowners insurance in this state shall not exclude coverage in a homeowners insurance policy for loss or damage caused by a peril insured against under the terms of the policy on the grounds that the loss or damage occurred concurrently or in any sequence with a peril not insured against under the terms of the policy. Any such provision to exclude coverage shall be void and unenforceable.
    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

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Las Vegas Team on Obtaining Summary Judgment for the Firm’s Landowner Client!

    August 03, 2022 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is proud to announce Partner Anthony Garasi, Senior Associate Madeline Arcellana, and Associate Laura Rios successfully won a Motion for Summary Judgment (“MSJ”), while also defeating two competing MSJs filed by Plaintiff, and ultimately obtaining a full dismissal of their landowner client against claims of premises liability. Plaintiff, who sued both BWB&O’s client (the landowner) and its tenant, alleged injury when he slipped and fell, while utilizing a temporary wooden board as a ramp that was placed on the subject property by the tenant, who was occupying the property subject to a lease-to-own arrangement with BWB&O’s client. In this Motion practice, the BWB&O team successfully obtained a ruling from the Court to find that BWB&O’s client had effectively contracted to delegate its maintenance responsibilities to its tenant, and also that the tenant owed BWB&O’s client full indemnity for Plaintiff’s alleged losses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP