BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums 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 institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineer
    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


    A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules

    New Hampshire Applies Crete/Sutton Doctrine to Bar Subrogation Against College Dormitory Residents

    Drones Used Despite Uncertain Legal Consequences

    Connecticut Grapples With Failing Concrete Foundations

    A Vision and Strategy for the Adoption of Open International Standards

    Circumstances In Which Design Professional Has Construction Lien Rights

    Claim Against Broker for Failure to Procure Adequate Coverage Survives Summary Judgment

    Housing to Top Capital Spending in Next U.S. Growth Leg: Economy

    What is the Implied Warranty of Habitability?

    Attorneys Fees Under California’s Prompt Payment Statutes. Contractor’s “Win” Fails the Sniff Test

    In Florida, Component Parts of an Improvement to Real Property are Subject to the Statute of Repose for Products Liability Claims

    Mechanic’s Liens- Big Exception

    South Dakota Supreme Court Holds That Faulty Workmanship Constitutes an “Occurrence”

    Relief Bill's Highway Funds Could Help Construction Projects

    Supreme Court of Washington State Upholds SFAA Position on Spearin Doctrine

    South Carolina’s New Insurance Data Security Act: Pebbles Before a Landslide?

    Irene May Benefit Construction Industry

    Construction Professionals Could Face More Liability Exposure Following California Appellate Ruling

    New York Philharmonic Will Open Geffen Hall Two Years Ahead of Schedule

    Filing Lien Foreclosure Lawsuit After Serving Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    California Appellate Court Holds “Minimal Causal Connection” Satisfies Causation Requirement in All Risk Policies

    WSHB Ranks No.10 in Law360’s Best of Law Firms for Women

    Here's Proof Homebuilders are Betting on a Pickup in the Housing Market

    West Coast Casualty’s Quarter Century of Service

    Indiana Court of Appeals Rules Against Contractor and Performance Bond Surety on Contractor's Differing Site Conditions Claim

    How U.S. Design and Architecture Firms Can Profit from the Chinese Market and Avoid Pitfalls

    UCF Sues Architects and Contractors Over Stadium Construction Defects

    COVID-19 Information and Resources

    2018 Legislative Changes Affecting the Construction Industry

    Fact of Settlement Communications in Underlying Lawsuits is Not Ground for Anti-SLAPP Motion in Subsequent Bad Faith Lawsuit

    Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion to Reject Claim for Construction Defects Upheld

    Fourth Circuit Finds Insurer Reservation of Rights Letters Inadequate to Preserve Coverage Defenses Under South Carolina Law

    Sinking S.F. Tower Prompts More Lawsuits

    US Attorney Alleges ADA Violations in Chicago Cubs Stadium Renovation

    Supreme Court Overrules Longstanding Decision Supporting Collection of Union Agency Fees

    Equities Favor Subrogating Insurer Over Subcontractor That Performed Defective Work

    Daily Reports – The Swiss Army Knife of Project Documentation

    Former Mayor Arrested for Violating Stop Work Order

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

    Are Millennials Finally Moving Out On Their Own?

    Construction Legislation Likely to Take Effect July 1, 2020

    Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal Secured by Lewis Brisbois in Coverage Dispute Involving San Francisco 49ers’ Levi Stadium

    Conn. Appellate Court Overturns Jury Verdict, Holding Plaintiff’s Sole Remedy for Injuries Arising From Open Manhole Was State’s Highway Defect Statute

    Insurer Sued for Altering Policies after Claim

    CDJ’s #10 Topic of the Year: Transport Insurance Company v. Superior Court (2014) 222 Cal.App.4th 1216.

    Record Keeping—the Devil’s in the Details

    Waiver of Subrogation and Lack of Contractual Privity Bars Commercial Tenants’ Claims

    Thank You to Virginia Super Lawyers

    House of the Week: Spanish Dream Home on California's Riviera

    U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments: Maritime Charters and the Specter of a New Permitting Regime
    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. Drawing 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

    Mortgage Firms Face Foreclosure Ban Until 2022 Under CFPB Plan

    April 05, 2021 —
    Millions of homeowners who’ve fallen behind on mortgage payments due to the pandemic would have more time before facing foreclosure under rules proposed Monday by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The revamp would generally prohibit mortgage servicers from starting foreclosures until after Dec. 31, the CFPB said in a statement. The goal is to give the nearly 3 million borrowers who’ve delayed or stopped making payments a chance to resume them before lenders initiate forced home sales. A key reason why the CFPB said the change is necessary is because an estimated 1.7 million consumers will exit U.S. forbearance relief programs in September and the ensuing months, meaning they will have to start making payments again. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Alex Wittenberg, Bloomberg

    Warning! Danger Ahead for Public Entities

    July 30, 2019 —
    Public entities are known to assert False Claims actions “to up the ante” to intimidate and aggressively address contractor construction claims. This strategy in the case of John Ross of Industrial Sheet Metal, Inc. (JRI) V. City of Los Angeles Department of Airports (LAWA), 29 Cal. App. 5th 378 (2018), backfired on the public entity, LAWA, in a big way and should serve as a warning to public entities about expanding claims to include False Claim actions. In this case, LAWA was awarded $1 in contract damages, its California False Claims Act (CFCA) claim was rejected by the jury as were JRI’s claims against LAWA. Despite losing on the substantive contract claims, the trial court found that JRI “prevailed in the action” under the relevant CFCA fee provision, Government Code 12652, subd. (g)(9)(B), regardless of JRI’s failure to prevail in the action as a whole. The California Appellate Court (hereinafter “Court”) affirmed the trial court’s finding. The CFCA is analogous to the federal False Claims Act (FFCA; 31 U.S.C. 3729 et seq.). Since the CFCA is patterned on similar federal legislation, it was appropriate for the Court to look to precedent construing this similar federal act in interpreting the CFCA provisions. Accordingly, the Court looked at the False Claims Act cases for guidance in upholding the trial court’s decision in its determination that JRI was the “prevailing party” for determining an attorney’s fees award against LAWA. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael J. Baker, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Baker may be contacted at mjbaker@swlaw.com

    The Comcast Project is Not Likely to Be Shut Down Too Long

    July 13, 2017 —
    Jan Von Bergen at the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that work on Comcast’s new tower came to a halt this morning when striking members of Local 542 picketed the Comcast tower project and other union trades refused to cross the picket line. However, this show of solidarity (during the afternoon on the Friday before the Fourth of July) is unlikely to last past the long weekend. Why? Because any conduct by Local 542 aimed at encouraging a work stoppage by other union members is illegal and the companies that employ the sympathetic union members are in breach of contract if they do not work on Tuesday. Any actions by Local 542 to encourage members of a different trade unions to honor their picket line is a secondary boycott. The National Labor Relations Act prohibits secondary boycotts. Specifically, the NLRA prohibits a union for inducing employees of an employer not subject to a labor dispute to refuse to work. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    MBS’s $500 Billion Desert Dream Just Keeps Getting Weirder

    August 29, 2022 —
    One day last September, a curious email arrived in Chris Hables Gray’s inbox. An author and self-described anarchist, feminist, and revolutionary, Gray fits right into Santa Cruz, Calif., where he lives. He’s written extensively about genetic engineering and the inevitable rise of cyborgs, attending protests in between for causes such as Black Lives Matter. While Gray had taken some consulting gigs over the years, he’d never received an offer like this one. The first shock was the money: significantly more than he’d earned from all but one of his books. The second was the task: researching the aesthetics of seminal works of science fiction such as Blade Runner. The biggest surprise, however, was the ultimate client: Mohammed bin Salman, the 36-year-old crown prince of Saudi Arabia. MBS, as he’s known abroad, was in the early stages of one of the largest and most difficult construction projects in history, which involves turning an expanse of desert the size of Belgium into a high-tech city-region called Neom. Starting with a budget of $500 billion, MBS bills Neom as a showpiece that will transform Saudi Arabia’s economy and serve as a testbed for technologies that could revolutionize daily life. And as Gray’s proposed assignment suggested, the crown prince’s vision bears little resemblance to the cities of today. Intrigued, Gray took the job. “If I can be honest with how I see the world, I’ll pretty much put my work out to anyone,” he says. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Vivian Nereim, Bloomberg

    Two Architecturally Prized Buildings May be Demolished

    January 17, 2014 —
    The historic Portland Public Services Building, designed by Michael Graves, may be demolished after a report showed that “the 32-year-old building needs more than $95 million worth of repairs,” Dezeen Magazine reported. The Portland, Oregon building “is credited with being one of the first major buildings of postmodernism.” According to The Oregonian, the Portland city commissioners have differing opinions as to how to proceed. Council member Amanda Fritz commented that she “doesn’t think the problems at The Portland Building are all that bad compared to other city facilities,” while council member Nick Fish stated, “There’s got to be a better option than putting another $100 million into a white elephant.” Dezeen Magazine also reported that the former American Folk Art Museum in New York is scheduled to be demolished to make room to extend the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA). Glenn Lowry, the MoMA director, stated that the decision came after a six-month study: “The analysis that we undertook was lengthy and rigorous, and ultimately led us to the determination that creating a new building on the site of the former American Folk Art Museum is the only way to achieve a fully integrated campus.” The decision is being criticized by “architects, conservationists, and critics” reported Dezeen Magazine. Architects Tod Williams and Billie Tsien designed the former American Folk Art Museum. Williams and Tsien stated, “Demolishing this human-scaled, uniquely crafted building is a loss to the city of New York in terms of respecting the size, diversity and texture of buildings in a midtown neighborhood that is at risk of becoming increasingly homogenized." Read the full story at Dezeen Magazine re The Portland Building... Read the full story at The Oregonian re The Portland Building... Read the full story at Dezeen Magazine re American Folk Art Museum... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    NTSB Sheds Light on Fatal Baltimore Work Zone Crash

    April 25, 2023 —
    The National Transportation Safety Board recently released conclusions of a preliminary investigation into a March 22 crash that killed six construction workers when an errant car sped through a work zone along the Interstate-695 Beltway in Baltimore. Reprinted courtesy of Justin Rice, Engineering News-Record Mr. Rice may be contacted at ricej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Supreme Court Rules on Contractual Liability Exclusion in Construction Cases

    January 22, 2014 —
    The Texas Supreme Court ruled on Ewing v. Amerisure Ins. Co. on January 17th, a “much-anticipated” decision according to Carl A. Salisbury of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP. “Construction projects are always the subject of contracts among owners and contractors” Salisbury stated in his article on Lexology.com. The recent decision demonstrates that “an exclusion in the standard Comprehensive Liability Insurance policy that precludes coverage for ‘liabilities assumed under contract’” does not usually “apply to construction contracts.” In 2008, Ewing Construction Company built a set of tennis courts in Corpus Christi, according to Salisbury. “Shortly after construction was complete, according to the school district, ‘the courts started flaking, crumbling, and cracking, rendering them unusable for their intended purpose of hosting competitive tennis events.’” After the school district sued Ewing in state court, Ewing “turned the suit over to Amerisure, its CGL insurer, seeking a defense and indemnity. Amerisure denied all coverage, citing the contractual liability exclusion in its policy. This inspired Ewing to sue the carrier in federal district court for the Southern District of Texas.” After several rulings and appeals, the case eventually reached the Texas Supreme Court: “According to the Ewing court, the contract claims that Ewing failed to perform in a good and workmanlike manner ‘are substantively the same as its claims that Ewing negligently performed under the contract because they contain the same factual allegations and alleged misconduct.’ Failure to perform in a ‘good and workmanlike manner’ is functionally and substantively the same as performing negligently. ‘Accordingly,’ the Ewing court said, ‘we conclude that a general contractor who agrees to perform its construction work in a good and workmanlike manner, without more, does not enlarge its duty to exercise ordinary care in fulfilling its contract, thus it does not ‘assume liability’ for damages arising out of its defective work so as to trigger the Contractual Liability Exclusion.’” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    First Circuit Limits Insurers’ Right to Recoup Defense Costs or Settlement Payments

    April 02, 2024 —
    Weighing in on an issue that has divided courts nationwide, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has ruled that an insurer under Massachusetts law has no right to recoup defense costs, or amounts the insurer pays in settlement – even if the insurer reserves rights prior to payment and obtains a ruling, after the fact, that no defense or indemnity was owed. Berkley Natl. Ins. Co. v. Atlantic-Newport Realty LLC, No. 22-1959, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 4115 (1st Cir. Feb 22, 2024) (“Granite Telecomm"). However, the First Circuit rested its ruling on narrow procedural grounds, which may prolong the controversy rather than resolve it. The insureds in Granite Telecomm owned a company cafeteria. They were sued by a food service worker who suffered a foot infection after being exposed to bacteria during a sewage backup. They sought coverage from their insurer, Berkley. Berkley argued that coverage was barred by a fungus and bacteria exclusion in the policy. The insureds disagreed. They threatened suit under M.G.L. ch. 93A, and demanded that Berkley defend the case. Reprinted courtesy of Eric Hermanson, White and Williams LLP, Austin Moody, White and Williams LLP and Victoria Ranieri, White and Williams LLP Mr. Hermanson may be contacted at hermansone@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Moody may be contacted at moodya@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Ranieri may be contacted atranieriv@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of