BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction 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


    Treble Damages Awarded After Insurer Denies Coverage for Collapse

    2018 Spending Plan Boosts Funding for Affordable Housing

    Contractor Sentenced to Seven Years for Embezzling $3 Million

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2020

    Are Defense Costs In Addition to Policy Limits?

    Plaintiff’s Mere Presence in Area Where Asbestos is Present Insufficient to Establish Bystander Exposure

    A Tuesday With Lisa Colon

    Mountain States Super Lawyers 2019 Recognizes 21 Nevada Snell & Wilmer Attorneys

    Newmeyer Dillion Named One of "The Best Places To Work In Orange County" by Orange County Business Journal

    Legislative Update – The CSLB’s Study Under SB465

    Limiting Liability: Three Clauses to Consider in your Next Construction Contract

    New Jersey’s Proposed Construction Defect Law May Not Cover Everything

    Can You Really Be Liable For a Product You Didn’t Make? In New Jersey, the Answer is Yes

    Risk Protection: Force Majeure Agreements Take on Renewed Relevance

    How to Make the Construction Dispute Resolution Process More Efficient and Less Expensive

    Lien Attaches To Landlord’s Interest When Landlord Is Party To Tenant Improvement Construction Contract

    Suing a Local Government in Land Use Cases – Part 2 – Procedural Due Process

    SkenarioLabs Uses AI for Property Benchmarking

    Tighter Requirements and a New Penalty for Owners of Vacant or Abandoned Storefronts in San Francisco

    North Carolina Federal Court Holds “Hazardous Materials” Exclusion Does Not Bar Duty to Defend Under CGL Policy for Bodily Injury Claims Arising Out of Direct Exposure to PFAs

    Housing Prices Up through Most of Country

    Failure to Timely File Suit in Federal Court for Flood Loss is Fatal

    Claims for Breach of Express Indemnity Clauses Subject to 10-Year Statute of Limitations

    Federal Regulatory Recap: A Summary of Recent Rulemaking Actions Taken or Proposed Affecting the Energy Industry

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute Stage 3- The Last Straw

    Residential Mortgage Lenders and Servicers Beware of Changes to Rule 3002.1

    Avoid a Derailed Settlement in Construction

    Additional Insured Obligations and the Underlying Lawsuit

    Colombia's $15 Billion Road Plan Bounces Back From Bribe Scandal

    Mediation Clause Can Stay a Miller Act Claim, Just Not Forever

    Aarow Equipment v. Travelers- An Update

    The BUILDCHAIN Project Enhances Data Exchange and Transparency in the EU Construction Industry

    Appraisal Award for Damaged Roof Tiles Challenged

    Seattle Crane Strike Heads Into Labor Day Weekend After Some Contractors Sign Agreements

    Contractors and Force Majeure: Contractual Protection from Hurricanes and Severe Weather

    COVID-19 Likely No Longer Covered Under Force Majeure

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    How Fort Lauderdale Recovered a Phished $1.2M Police HQ Project Payment

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    Bar to Raise on Green Standard

    A Networked World of Buildings

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    Has Hydrogen's Time Finally Come?

    Rather Than Limit Decision to "That Particular Part" of Developer's Policy Necessary to Bar Coverage, 10th Circuit Renders Questionable Decision on Exclusion j(6)

    Crowdfunding Comes to Manhattan’s World Trade Center

    Construction Law Alert: Builder’s Alternative Pre-litigation Procedures Upheld Over Strong Opposition

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (07/13/22)

    Jet Crash Blamed on Runway Construction Defect

    Burden Supporting Termination for Default

    Senior Housing Surplus Seen as Boomers Spur Building Boom
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Fairfield's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Coronavirus Is Starting to Slow the Solar Energy Revolution

    March 09, 2020 —
    The coronavirus outbreak is threatening to slow the global solar-energy revolution as it cuts the supply of key equipment for solar and wind farms in China and beyond. As cases of the disease mounted over the past week, manufacturers including Trina Solar Ltd. sounded the alarm over production delays while developers like Manila Electric Co. in the Philippines said projects would be held up. “If the virus outbreak lasts beyond the first quarter and spreads to more geographies, as is currently happening in Korea and Italy, then it may very well slow down global renewable energy deployment,” said Ali Izadi-Najafabadi, head of analysis in Asia for BloombergNEF which has downgraded its outlook for installations this year. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg

    Supreme Judicial Court of Maine Addresses Earth Movement Exclusion

    March 01, 2021 —
    In Bibeau v. Concord Gen. Mut. Ins. Co., 2021 WL 243867, 2021 ME 4, the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine addressed an earth movement exclusion contained in a residential homeowners policy. In 2017, the insured submitted a claim to Concord for damage to the insured’s home which included foundation cracks and settlement resulting in interior damage to the home. The insured contended that the damage was the result of a 2006 water line leak. Concord denied the claim based on the Earth Movement exclusion contained in it’s policy which precluded coverage for losses caused by earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, mudflow, subsidence, sinkholes or “[a]ny other earth movement including earth sinking, rising or shifting; caused by or resulting from human or animal forces or any act of nature”. The insured filed suit asserting a breach of the policy and unfair claims settlement practices. According to the insured’s expert, the damage was caused by a 2006 water line leak -- which in turn caused the foundation to settle. Concord's expert, however, concluded that the settling was caused by the house being built on “unprepared or uncontrolled fill” which allowed the house to settle at different rates. Despite the disagreement regarding the cause of the settling, the parties ultimately agreed that the damage was the result of earth moving under the house's foundation. Concord moved for summary judgment and the trial court entered summary judgment for Concord, reasoning that because there was no genuine dispute that the losses were caused by “subsurface soils being undermined and earth movement,” the Earth Movement exclusion precluded coverage. The trial court further concluded that the disagreement over the cause of the settlement was not material because regardless of the cause of the earth movement, the losses were clearly excluded by the policy's Earth Movement exclusion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James M. Eastham, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Eastham may be contacted at jeastham@tlsslaw.com

    San Francisco Airport’s Terminal 1 Aims Sky High

    January 06, 2020 —
    Each night, a prancing robotic dog roves the site of Terminal 1 at San Francisco International Airport (SFO), taking photographs of construction on the new terminal, which replaces a 1960s-era building with nearly 900,000 sq ft of state-of-the-art space. The $2.6-billion Harvey Milk terminal is the highlight of a $7.2-billion capital plan. “We are about halfway through,” says Geoff Neumayr, chief development officer for SFO. The program includes a 3,600-space parking garage, a consolidated office campus, a new hotel, a waste treatment plant, improvements to Terminal 2 and the international terminal, and a new on-airport train station. This summer the first nine gates opened at Terminal 1, with nine more slated to open next year and a completion date of 2023 with 25 total gates, including two that will accommodate Airbus A380s double-decker planes. Aileen Cho, Engineering News-Record Ms. Cho may be contacted at choa@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurance Company Must Show that Lead Came from Building Materials

    August 17, 2011 —

    The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals for Louisiana has reversed the summary judgment of a lower court in the case of Widder v. Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Company. Judge Roland L. Belsome wrote the opinion for the panel of three judges. Ms. Widder discovered that her home and its content were contaminated by lead. She applied to her insurer, Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance, which denied her claim.

    In response to Ms. Widder’s suit, LCPIC applied for a summary judgment on the grounds that there was no physical loss and that the policy did not cover defective material, latents defects, and pollution damage.

    The appeals court found that the lead contamination of Widder’s home did meet the standards of a direct physical loss, citing a recent Chinese Drywall case. There, it was found, “when a home has been rendered unusable or uninhabitable, physical damage is not necessary.”

    The lower court addressed only one of LCPIC’s exclusions, addressing only the exclusion on basis of “faulty, inadequate or defective material.” The appeals court noted that the evidence offered at trial does not show that the building materials were the source of the lead. This provided the appeals court with a matter of fact to remand to the lower court.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Housing Woes Worse in L.A. Than New York, San Francisco

    September 03, 2014 —
    Jeanette Cross took out a payday loan to cover her May rent of $1,600 in South Los Angeles. She skipped car and insurance payments to keep a roof over her head. “I’m further and further behind,” Cross, a 34-year-old single mother of four, said in a telephone interview. “I make a payment on one thing and don’t pay others.” She isn’t alone. Angelenos use a bigger slice of their paychecks on shelter than people in New York, San Francisco or Miami, studies show. Surging property prices in the second-largest U.S. city are driving up costs in once-impoverished areas while pushing lower-income households into converted garages or to distant suburbs, where the tradeoff is hours stuck in traffic each day. Reprinted courtesy of Nadja Brandt, Bloomberg and John Gittelsohn, Bloomberg Ms. Brandt may be contacted at nbrandt@bloomberg.net; Mr. Gittelsohn may be contacted at johngitt@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    4 Ways the PRO Act Would Impact the Construction Industry

    October 24, 2021 —
    The Protecting the Right to Organize Act (the “PRO Act”) is a proposed law that would dramatically rewrite the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). Breathtakingly broad in scope, the PRO Act targets several longstanding features of existing law perceived by unions and labor activists to be unfair to labor and too favorable to employers. The proposed legislation is essentially a grab-bag of grievances that the labor movement has compiled over decades and sought to change through legislation and before the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) without success in the past. While the PRO Act would affect virtually all private sector employers, it would alter the labor dynamic in the construction industry in four major ways: 1. Removing the current prohibitions on secondary, jurisdictional, and other forms of picketing. Current law attempts to balance the rights of employers to operate their businesses without unnecessary interference with the rights of unions to protest concerning wages and working conditions. As part of this balancing act, the NLRA prohibits unions from picketing under certain conditions or with certain aims. These restrictions include the prohibition on “secondary” picketing by unions of neutral employers, which are employers with which the union does not have a direct labor dispute, and “jurisdictional” picketing by unions to force an employer to assign certain work to a specific trade or group of employees. The elimination of these restrictions in the PRO Act would have a significant impact on the construction industry. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Andrew M. MacDonald, Fox Rothschild LLP
    Mr. MacDonald may be contacted at amacdonald@foxrothschild.com

    New Homes in Palo Alto to Be Electric-Car Ready

    October 01, 2013 —
    Electric cars are still fairly rare, but if you buy a new home in Palo Alto, you’ll have a place to charge it. The Palo Alto City Council has been enthusiastic about a measure that would require new homes to come wired for car chargers. The hope of the council is that the measure will make owning an electric car “convenient, easy and economical.” If added to the construction process, the wiring adds about $200 to the cost of the home, far less than the cost of adding it to an existing home. In addition to considering changes in the building code, the city also considered measures that would allow for the operation of public charging stations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California’s One-Action Rule May Apply to Federal Lenders

    June 09, 2016 —
    California’s one-action rule provides that “[t]here can be but one form of action for the recovery of any debt or the enforcement of any right secured by mortgage upon real property or an estate for years therein . . . .” Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 726(a). In other words, the one-action rule prescribes that the only process for recovery of a debt secured by a mortgage or deed of trust is to foreclose on the lien. The rule aims to prevent a multiplicity of actions and vexatious litigation, and to force a beneficiary to look to all of the security as the primary fund for payment of a debt before looking to the trustor’s other assets. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony J. Carucci, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Carucci may be contacted at acarucci@swlaw.com