BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projects
    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


    Fire Raging North of Los Angeles Is Getting Fuel From Dry Winds

    Apartment Projects Fuel 13% Jump in U.S. Housing Starts

    Balancing Cybersecurity Threats in Smart Cities: Is the Potential Convenience of “Smart” Intersections Worth the Risk?

    What Types of “Damages Claims” Survive a Trustee’s Sale?

    Spencer Mayer Receives Miami-Dade Bar Association's '40 Under 40' Award

    Nevada Assembly Bill Proposes Changes to Construction Defect Litigation

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Named to Hudson Valley Magazine’s 2022 Top Lawyers List

    Just Because I May Be An “Expert” Does Not Mean I Am Giving Expert Testimony

    Thank You to Virginia Super Lawyers

    New Jersey Federal Court Examines And Applies The “j.(5)” Ongoing Operations Exclusion

    What Should Business Owners Do If a Customer Won’t Pay

    Chambers USA 2020 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives First Tier Ranking

    Illinois Court Assesses Factual Nature of Term “Reside” in Determining Duty to Defend

    Appraisal Panel Can Determine Causation of Loss under Ohio Law

    Congratulations to Partner Nicole Whyte on Receiving the Marcus M. Kaufman Jurisprudence Award

    Reversing Itself, West Virginia Supreme Court Holds Construction Defects Are Covered

    Insurer Must Defend Claims of Alleged Willful Coal Removal

    Five Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers in America© 2021

    6,500 Bridges in Ohio Allegedly Functionally Obsolete or Structurally Deficient

    Engineer TRC Fends Off Lawsuits After Merger

    Cameron Pledges to Double Starter Homes to Boost Supply

    "Is the Defective Work Covered by Insurance?"

    New Report Reveals Heavy Civil Construction Less Impacted by COVID-19 Than Commercial Construction

    New Certification Requirements for Veteran-Owned Small Business Concerns and Service-Disabled Veteran-owned Small Business Concerns Seeking Public Procurement Contracts

    New Case Alert: California Federal Court Allows Policy Stacking to Cover Continuous Injury

    Alaska District Court Sets Aside Rulings Under New Administration’s EO 13795

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2021 New York – Metro Super Lawyers®

    John Boyden, Alison Kertis Named “Top Rank Attorneys” by Nevada Business Magazine

    Never, Ever, Ever Assume! (Or, How a Stuck Shoe is Like a Construction Project Assumption)

    Improper Means Exception and Tortious Interference Claims

    Congratulations to Nine Gibbs Giden Partners Selected to the 2023 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    Newport Beach Partners Jeremy Johnson, Courtney Serrato, and Associate Joseph Real Prevailed on a Demurrer in a Highly Publicized Shooting Case!

    Occurrence Found, Business Risk Exclusions Do Not Bar Coverage for Construction Defects

    Illinois Supreme Court Announces Time Standards for Closing Out Cases

    South Carolina “occurrence” and allocation

    Top Talked-About Tech at the 2023 ABC Joint Tech Summit

    COVID-19 Response: Recent Executive Orders Present Opportunities for Businesses Seeking Regulatory and Enforcement Relief and Expedited Project Development

    New York Developers Facing Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Liability Insurer’s Duty To Defend Insured Is Broader Than Its Duty To Indemnify

    Insurer's Appeal of Jury Verdict Rejected by Tenth Circuit

    Home-Sales Fall in 2014 Has U.S. Waiting for 2015: Economy

    Prior Occurrence Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defects

    U.S. Supreme Court Weighs in on Construction Case

    When Do You Call Your Lawyer?

    New England Construction Defect Law Groups to Combine

    Policyholders' Coverage Checklist in Times of Coronavirus

    Construction Defect Claim Not Timely Filed

    Court Grants Partial Summary Judgment on Conversion Claim Against Insurer

    Jersey Shore Town Trying Not to Lose the Man vs. Nature Fight on its Eroded Beaches
    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

    Late Notice Kills Insured's Claim for Damage Due to Hurricane

    December 27, 2021 —
    The insurer's motion for summary judgment was granted based upon the insured's late notice nearly two years after a hurricane caused property damage. Ramirez v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 209716 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 29, 2021). Plaintiff alleged he suffered property loss due to wind and water damage from Hurricane Irma on September 10, 2017. The roof, exterior, and interior of the home were damaged. On May 20, 2019, twenty months after the hurricane, plaintiff first notified Scottsdale of his claim for damages. An adjuster inspected and observed wind, wear and tear, and deterioration damage to the roof tile, as well as interior water damage to portions of the home. The claim was denied based upon wind, wear and tear, and deterioration exclusions in the policy. 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

    Federal Court Dismisses Coverage Action in Favor of Pending State Proceeding

    October 12, 2020 —
    The federal district court declined to exercise jurisdiction over the coverage action that was parallel to a case pending in state court involving the same parties and same issues pending. Navigators Ins, Co. v. Chriso's Tree Trimming, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129711 (E.D. Calif. July 22, 2020). Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) entered into a tree, brush and wood removal contract with Mount F Enterprises, Inc. Mountain F subsequently entered into a subcontractor agreement with Chriso Tree Trimming, Inc. for work to be performed for PG&E. In August 2017, Chriso attempted to remove a tree, but the tree accidentally fell in the wrong direction and knocked down nearby powerlines. The powerlines came into contact with surrounding brush and started the "Railroad Fire." The fire was eventually contained on September 15, 2017, after 12, 407 acres were burned and 7 structures and 7 homes were destroyed. Five subrogation lawsuits were filed in state court against Chriso and Mountain F by various insurance companies that paid for the damage caused by the Railroad Fire. A policy limits demand to settle all claims against Chriso and Mountain F was made. Navigators insured Chriso for $9 million through a Commercial Excess Liability Policy, payable once all other insurance was exhausted. The policy included a "Professional Services Endorsement" (PSE Exclusion) that excluded coverage of "professional services." "Professional services" was defined through a list of 12 non-exclusive professions and services that generally referred to activities involving specialized knowledge or skill that was predominantly mental or intellectual in nature rather than physical or manual. 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

    Time to Repair Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws?

    February 10, 2012 —

    The Builders Magazine writes that during the previous session of the Nevada legislature, reforms sought by the building industry were stopped by the Speaker of the Nevada Assembly. The new session brings a new speaker and new hope for construction defect reform in Nevada.

    Pat Hickey, a member of the Assembly and a small business owner told The Builders Magazine that “we need to apply pressure on the legislators to fix the law.” He also recommended that people “go to Governor Sandoval and ask for his help.” Builders seeks legislation that will include right to repair and it should “define construction defect in such a way that it allows for a fair process.”

    Read the full story…

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

    Florida’s Supreme Court Resolves Conflicting Appellate Court Decisions on Concurrent Causation

    December 21, 2016 —
    The Supreme Court of Florida kicked off December with an opinion that determined which theory of recovery applies when multiple perils combine to create a loss, and at least one of those perils is excluded by the terms of a policy. In Sebo v. American Home Assurance Company, Inc.,1 the court resolved the conflict between the Florida Appellate Courts for the Second District and the Third District and declared the concurrent cause doctrine (CCD) as the more applicable theory of recovery over the efficient proximate cause doctrine (EPC). The underlying dispute concerned damage to a home Sebo purchased in Naples, Florida in April 2005. The American Home Assurance Company (AHAC) insured the home under a manuscript policy specifically created for the property with limits of over eight million dollars. In May 2005, Sebo discovered major water leaks in the main foyer, master bathroom, exercise room, piano room, and living room of the home. In August, paint fell off the walls after it rained, and it became clear that the house suffered from major design and construction defects. When Hurricane Wilma struck in October, the house was further damaged by rain water and high winds, and was eventually demolished. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Afua S. Akoto, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Akoto may be contacted at asa@sdvlaw.com

    Alert: AAA Construction Industry Rules Update

    June 07, 2021 —
    The American Arbitration Association has made some needed updates to their Construction Industry Arbitration and Mediation Rules, effective July 1, 2015. Among the changes listed at their website are:
    • A mediation step for all cases with claims of $100,000 or more (subject to the ability of any party to opt out).
    • Consolidation and joinder time frames and filing requirements to streamline these increasingly involved issues in construction arbitrations.
    • New preliminary hearing rules to provide more structure and organization to get the arbitration process on the right track from the beginning.
    • Information exchange measures to give arbitrators a greater degree of control to limit the exchange of information, including electronic documents.
    • Availability of emergency measures of protection in contracts that have been entered into on or after July 1, 2015.
    • Enforcement power of the arbitrator to issue orders to parties that refuse to comply with the Rules or the arbitrator’s orders.
    • Permissibility of dispositive motions to dispose of all or part of a claim or to narrow the issue in a claim.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Topic 606: A Retrospective Review of Revenue from Contracts with Customers

    October 12, 2020 —
    The anticipation has been building regarding implementation of the new revenue recognition standard, known as Topic 606, by private companies. Public companies have reported under Topic 606 since the beginning of 2019. For private companies, the time is now. As of January 2020, private companies became subject to Topic 606 for all entities with a year-end of Dec. 31, 2019, or subsequent. However, with the COVID-19 pandemic affecting businesses across the board, this year any company with a year-end financial statement not yet issued can defer implementation of Topic 606 until the contractors’ next year end that falls after Dec. 15, 2020. What have we learned about the impact of Topic 606, if any, on construction contractors’ financial statements? The most significant impact relates to the presentation of contract assets and contract liabilities, and the disclosures associated with Topic 606. The recording of what is known as “the cost to fulfill a contract” is another area that has been affected. PRESENTATION OF CONTRACT ASSET AND CONTRACT LIABILITY A contract asset is defined in Topic 606 as an entity’s right to consideration in exchange for goods or services the entity has transferred to a customer, conditional on something other than the passage of time. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Sisk & Robert Mercado, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Sisk may be contacted at Christopher.sisk@marcumllp.com Mr. Mercado may be contacted at Robert.mercado@marcumllp.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Homeowner's Claim for Collapse Survives Summary Judgment

    September 20, 2017 —
    The insurer failed to present adequate evidence on summary judgment that damage caused by the collapse of a swimming pool was not covered. Klein v. State Farm Ins. Co., 2017 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3030 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. July 11, 2017). Klein notified State Farm that his in-ground pool collapsed on February 5, 2014, with a side wall falling into the pool, causing damage to brick, borders and the patio around the pool. Upon inspection, State Farm's agent found that the cover of the pool had partially fallen into the pool, and that the vinyl pool liner had a tear. State Farm covered the damage to the pool liner, but denied coverage for the in-ground swimming pool walls, the brick border and the patio surrounding the pool. State Farm maintained that the loss was due to a "collapse," which was excluded under the homeowner's policy. 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

    Ohio Supreme Court Rules That Wrongful Death Claims Are Subject to the Four-Year Statute of Repose for Medical Claims

    January 16, 2024 —
    Cleveland, Ohio (January 2, 2024) - In a landmark 4-3 ruling, the Supreme Court of Ohio ruled on December 28 that wrongful death claims are subject to the four-year statute of repose contained in O.R.C. 2305.113(C) (“Medical Claim Statute of Repose”). Everhart v. Coshocton County Memorial Hospital, Slip No. 2023-Ohio-4670. Statutes of repose create an absolute bar to filing a lawsuit. When applicable, they bar plaintiffs from filing claims outside a specified time frame. The Medical Claim Statute of Repose creates a four-year window for commencing medical claims, which begins to run from “the occurrence of the act or omission constituting the alleged basis of the medical…claim.” O.R.C. 2305.113(C)(1). Medical claims commenced after the four-year period are barred. The primary question before the Court was whether a wrongful death claim, which is separate and distinct from a medical negligence claim, can qualify as a “medical claim” within the context of the Medical Claim Statute of Repose. The Court answered in the affirmative. A wrongful death claim can qualify as a medical claim if the wrongful death claim “…arises out the medical diagnosis, care, or treatment, of any person.” O.R.C. 2305.113(E)(3). According to the majority, a wrongful death claim can fall within the broad definition of “medical claim” and, if it does, is subject to the Medical Claim Statute of Repose. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois