BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering 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


    White and Williams Elects Four Lawyers to Partnership, Promotes Six Associates to Counsel

    Consultant Says It's Time to Overhaul Construction Defect Laws in Nevada

    Safeguarding the U.S. Construction Industry from Unfair Competition Abroad

    Big Bertha Lawsuits—Hitachi Zosen Weighs In

    Another Guilty Plea In Nevada Construction Defect Fraud Case

    House Committee Kills Colorado's 2015 Attainable Housing Bill

    Colorado Supreme Court Weighs in on Timeliness of Claims Against Subcontractors in Construction Defect Actions

    Arbitration—No Opportunity for Appeal

    California Court of Appeals Says, “We Like Eich(leay)!”

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Named 2019 Super Lawyers

    Only Two Weeks Until BHA’s Texas MCLE Seminar in San Antonio

    Contractor Sues Yelp Reviewer for Defamation

    Charges in Kansas Water Park Death

    New-Home Sales in U.S. Unexpectedly Fall to Four-Month Low

    Arbitrator May Use Own Discretion in Consolidating Construction Defect Cases

    Unwrapped Pipes Lead to Flooding and Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Wilke Fleury and Attorneys Recognized as ‘Best Law Firm’ and ‘Best Lawyers’ by U.S. News!

    Construction Law Firm Welin, O'Shaughnessy + Scheaf Merging with McDonald Hopkins LLC

    Walmart Seeks Silicon Valley Vibe for New Arkansas Headquarters

    Disruption: When Did It Start and Where Will It End?

    How AI Can Become a Design Adviser

    Re-Entering the Workplace: California's Guideline for Employers

    ASCE Statement on Passing of Senator Dianne Feinstein

    New York Appellate Court Affirms 1966 Insurance Policy Continues to Cover WTC Asbestos Claims

    A Riveting (or at Least Insightful) Explanation of the Privette Doctrine

    Three lawyers from Haight were recognized in The Best Lawyers in America© 2020 Edition

    Extreme Rainfall Is Becoming More Frequent and Deadly

    Let’s Talk About a Statutory First-Party Bad Faith Claim Against an Insurer

    Michigan Lawmakers Pass $4.7B Infrastructure Spending Bill

    Hawaii Federal District Court Compels Appraisal

    New Jersey Traffic Circle to be Eliminated after 12 Years of Discussion

    Flood Policy Does Not Cover Debris Removal from Property

    Foreclosure Deficiency: Construction Loan vs. Home Improvement Loan

    Colorado’s Three-Bill Approach to Alleged Construction Defect Issues

    Hunton Andrews Kurth Promotes Insurance Recovery Lawyer Andrea (Andi) DeField to Partner

    The Multigenerational Housing Trend

    Firm Offers Tips on Construction Defects in Colorado

    Hawaii Supreme Court Construes Designated Premises Endorsement In Insured's Favor

    A Lawyer's Perspective on Current Issues Dominating the Construction Industry

    Shimmick Gets Nod for Second Pilot Pile at Settling Millennium Tower

    California Condo Architects Not Liable for Construction Defects?

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

    AEM Pursuing ISO Standard for Earthmoving Grade-Control Data

    Damp Weather Not Good for Wood

    Hawaii Building Codes to Stay in State Control

    Be Mindful Accepting Payment When Amounts Owed Are In Dispute

    Court of Appeal Holds That Higher-Tiered Party on Construction Project Can be Held Liable for Intentional Interference with Contract

    Factual Issues Prevent Summary Judgment Determination on Coverage for Additional Insured

    Florida’s “Groundbreaking” Property Insurance Reform Law

    Plehat Brings Natural Environments into Design Tools
    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

    Court Holds That Insurance Producer Cannot Be Liable for Denial of COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim

    November 23, 2020 —
    After an insurance carrier denied a lawyer and her law firm’s claim for lost business income due to the COVID-19-related shutdown, she sued both her carrier and the insurance producer that procured the policy. See Wilson v. Hartford Casualty Company, No. 20-3384 (E.D.Pa. Sep. 30, 2020). In one of the first cases to consider producer liability in COVID-19 cases, Judge Eduardo Robreno dismissed the lawsuit against the producer and the carrier. USI procured the Policy from Hartford for Rhonda Hill Wilson and her law firm. The Policy included coverage for lost business income and extra expense caused by direct physical loss of, or damage to property. Similarly, the Policy covered lost business income if a nearby property experienced a direct physical loss that caused a civil authority to issue an order that prohibited access to the law firm’s property. The Policy also included a virus exclusion “for loss or damage caused directly or indirectly by . . . [p]resence, growth, proliferation, spread or any activity of . . . virus.” Judge Robreno did not decide whether the Policy afforded any coverage to Wilson and her law firm for their COVID-19 losses. Rather, he found that even if they could, the virus exclusion unambiguously barred any coverage they could possibly claim. For that reason, Judge Robreno dismissed the claims against Hartford. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher P. Leise, White and Williams LLP and Marc L. Penchansky, White and Williams LLP Mr. Leise may be contacted at leisec@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Penchansky may be contacted at penchanskym@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court of Appeals Discusses the Difference Between “Claims-Made” and “Occurrence-Based” Insurance Policies

    May 31, 2021 —
    As most contractors know, scope, price and time are the “big” three in any construction contract. Nearly as important, however, are the insurance provisions. Patricularly, when things go bad on a construction project. As the next case, Guastello v. AIG Specialty Insurance Company 61 Cal.App.5th 97 (2021) discusses, the difference between “claims-made” versus “occurrence-based” coverage can be extremely important. The Guastello Case In 2003 and 2004, subcontractor C.W. Poss Inc. built retaining walls in the Pointe Monarch housing development in Dana Point, California. Poss performed all related excavation, ground and grading work. In 2006, Thomas Guastello purchased a home in the development, and in January 2010, a retaining wall close to his lot suffered a massive failure that causing over $700,000 in damages. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Saudi Arabia Awards Contracts for Megacity Neom’s Worker Housing

    September 16, 2019 —
    Saudi Arabia has awarded to two Saudi firms contracts to build worker housing for its futuristic mega-city called Neom, as plans for the $500 billion project move forward despite skepticism from investors. Tamimi Group and Saudi Arabian Trading & Construction Co. won contracts to finance, build and operate three residential areas with capacity to house 30,000 people, Neom said in a statement on Sunday. The areas will be part of a so-called “Construction Village,” which Neom later plans to expand to accommodate more than 100,000 residents, it said. Neom did not say how much the contracts were worth. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Vivian Nereim, Bloomberg

    New York Supreme Court Building Opening Delayed Again

    September 24, 2014 —
    SI Live reported that the opening of the new state Supreme Court building in St. George, New York is delayed again due to problems with the air-conditioning and elevator systems. Delay, however, is not new to this project, which was originally expected to be completed over a decade ago. Initial delay was introduced “with the finding of remains from a 19th-century burial ground at the site, a former municipal parking lot, and more recently, with construction set-backs and other tie-ups,” according to SI Live. When completed, the new “building will boast 14 courtrooms, jury assembly, hearing and deliberation rooms, judges' chambers and court offices. There will also be holding cells for prisoners.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Sierra Pacific v. Bradbury Goes Unchallenged: Colorado’s Six-Year Statute of Repose Begins When a Subcontractor’s Scope of Work Ends

    November 03, 2016 —
    It’s official: the October 20, 2016 deadline to petition for certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals on its decision in Sierra Pacific Industries, Inc. v. Bradbury has passed, so it appears that decision will stand. In Sierra Pacific, the Court of Appeals held as a matter of first impression that the statute of repose for a general contractor to sue a subcontractor begins to run when a subcontractor’s scope of work is substantially complete, regardless of the status of the overall project. Sierra Pac. Indus., Inc. v. Bradbury, 2016 COA 132, ¶ 28, ___ P.3d ___. The Court of Appeals interpreted the statute of repose in C.R.S. section 13-80-104, which requires that “all actions against any architect, contractor, builder or builder vendor, engineer, or inspector performing or furnishing the design, planning, supervision, inspection, construction, or observation of any improvement to real property” must be brought within six years of substantial completion of that improvement. C.R.S. § 13-80-104(1)(a). Recognizing that “an improvement may be [to] a discrete component of an entire project” under Shaw Construction, LLC v. United Builder Services, Inc., 296 P.3d 145 (Colo. App. 2012), the Court of Appeals determined that “a subcontractor has substantially completed its role in the improvement at issue when it finishes working on the improvement.” Sierra Pac., 2016 COA at ¶¶ 20, 28. In doing so, it rejected Sierra Pacific’s argument that the statute could be tolled under the repair doctrine “while others worked to repair [the subcontractor’s] ‘improper installation work and flawed repair work.’” Id. at ¶ 29. Because six years had undisputedly passed since the subcontractor completed its scope of work when Sierra Pacific filed suit against it, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s order granting the subcontractor’s motion for summary judgment under Section 13-80-104(1)(a). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer Real Estate Litigation Blog
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    Colorado Governor Polis’s Executive Order D 2020 101: Keeping Up with Colorado’s Shifting Eviction Landscape during COVID-19

    July 27, 2020 —
    On March 5, 2020, Colorado Governor Polis issues executive order D 2020 012, which among other things imposed temporary limitations on evictions, foreclosures, and public utility disconnections. After being amended and extended three times (through April 30, 2020 via D 2020-0131, then for an additional 30 days via D 2020 051, and finally for an additional 15 days from May 29, 2020 via D 2020 088), this executive order expired on Saturday, June 13, 2020. In its stead, the Governor issued a more limited Executive Order—D 2020 101 (the “Order”)—which is effective through July 13, 2020. Most significantly, this current Order requires landlords to “provide tenants with thirty (30) days’ notice of any default for non payment” before they can initiate or file an eviction action (known as an “action for forcible entry and detainer,” or “FED”) and clarifies that tenants shall have the opportunity to cure any default for nonpayment during this period. The current Order also prohibits landlords and lenders “from charging any late fees or penalties for any breach of the terms of a lease or rental agreement due to non-payment” if the fees were incurred between May 1, 2020 and June 13, 2020. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    Subcontractors Eye 2022 with Guarded Optimism

    October 11, 2021 —
    While work continues to be plentiful for specialty contractors across the five-state region of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma and Texas, concerns remain for how the project landscape will continue to evolve as the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to weigh on the world. Reprinted courtesy of Louise Poirier, Engineering News-Record Ms. Poirier may be contacted at poirierl@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The End of Eroding Limits Policies in Nevada is Just the Beginning

    August 28, 2023 —
    On June 3, 2023, Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo signed into law AB 398 (the Act) which modifies the Nevada insurance code by restricting the types of liability policies that can be offered in the state. The End of Eroding Limits Policies in Nevada First, the Act prohibits liability insurers from issuing “eroding limits” or “burning limits” policies. These are insurance policies under which defense costs decrease policy limits. Most professional liability policies are eroding limits policies. As of Oct. 1, 2023, insurers in Nevada may no longer issue or renew any policy where policy limits are eroded by defense costs. This change may result in higher premiums on these types of policies to compensate for the higher payouts they will now have to provide in Nevada. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Payne & Fears LLP