BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil 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


    Home-Building Climate Warms in U.S. as Weather Funk Lifts

    The General Assembly Adds Some Clarity to Contracts and Unlicensed Contractors

    ADA Lawsuits Spur Renovation Work in Fresno Area

    Court Bars Licensed Contractor From Seeking Compensation for Work Performed by Unlicensed Sub

    Duty to Defend Bodily Injury Evolving Over Many Policy Periods Prorated in Louisiana

    General Contractor’s Ability to Supplement Subcontractor Per Subcontract

    Harmon Towers Duty to Defend Question Must Wait, Says Court

    Insurer Must Pay To Defend Product Defect Claims From Date Of Product Installation

    Choice of Laws Test Mandates Application of California’s Continuous and Progressive Trigger of Coverage to Asbestos Claims

    First-Party Statutory Bad Faith – 60 Days to Cure Means 60 Days to Cure

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Denies Review of Pro-Policy Decision

    Scaffolding Collapse Kills Workers at China Construction Site

    Construction Job Opening Rise in October

    Update to Washington State Covid-19 Guidance

    "Abrupt Falling Down of Building or Part of Building" as Definition of Collapse Found Ambiguous

    Construction Defects in Home a Breach of Contract

    Research Project Underway to Prepare Water Utilities for Wildfire Events

    UK Construction Defect Suit Lost over One Word

    Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Limits The Scope Of A Builder’s Implied Warranty Of Habitability

    Drafting or Negotiating A Subcontract–Questions To Consider

    Kumagai Drops Most in 4 Months on Building Defect: Tokyo Mover

    Indirect Benefit Does Not Support Unjust Enrichment Claim Against Prime Contractor

    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Gen Xers Choose to Rent rather than Buy

    Bad Faith and a Partial Summary Judgment in Seattle Construction Defect Case

    Call Me Maybe? . . . Don’t Waive Your Rights Under the Right to Repair Act’s Prelitigation Procedures

    Colorado Senate Committee Approves Construction Defect Bill

    Be Aware of Two New Statutes that Became Effective May 1, 2021

    Get Construction Defects in Writing

    "Ordinance or Law" Provision Mandates Coverage for Roof Repair

    California Supreme Court Rights the “Occurrence” Ship: Unintended Harm Resulting from Intentional Conduct Triggers Coverage Under Liability Insurance Policy

    Almost Half of Homes in New York and D.C. Are Now Losing Value

    Assessments Underway After Hurricane Milton Rips Off Stadium Roof, Snaps Crane Boom in Florida

    Turmoil Slows Rebuilding of Puerto Rico's Power Grid

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    Arizona Is Smart About Water. It Should Stay That Way.

    Brazil's Detained Industry Captain Says No Plea Deals Coming

    Expired Contract Not Revived Due to Sovereign Immunity and the Ex Contractu Clause

    Third Circuit Affirms Use of Eminent Domain by Natural Gas Pipeline

    California’s Labor Enforcement Task Force Continues to Set Fire to the Underground Economy

    Policy Lanuage Expressly Prohibits Replacement of Undamaged Material to Match Damaged Material

    Make Your Business Great Again: Steven Cvitanovic Authors Construction Today Article

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    Texas Supreme Court to Rehear Menchaca Bad Faith Case

    Look Up And Look Out: Increased Antitrust Enforcement Of Horizontal No-Poach Agreements Signals Heightened Scrutiny Of Vertical Agreements May Be Next

    Insurers May Not Be Required to Defend Contractors In a Florida §558 Proceeding

    Florida Property Bill Passes Economic Affairs Committee with Amendments

    Court Voids Settlement Agreement in Construction Defect Case

    Exclusions Bar Coverage for Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    NIST Florida Condo Collapse Probe Develops Dozens of Hypotheses

    June 13, 2022 —
    Federal investigators looking into the causes of the partial collapse of the 40-year-old Champlain Towers South residential condominium in Surfside, Fla., last year have developed about two-dozen hypotheses, and are working to prove or disprove each, using a growing collection of evidence. They aim to issue recommendations for changes to building codes and standards, in an effort to avoid a similar tragedy, by the end of 2024. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A “Flood” of Uncertainty; Massachusetts SJC Finds Policy Term Ambiguous

    August 26, 2024 —
    The highest court in Massachusetts recently held that term “Flood” and the associated phrase “surface waters,” as used in two all-risk insurance policies, is ambiguous in the context of water that accumulated on a parapet roof and rooftop courtyard, thereby negating the insurers’ attempt to limit coverage to a sublimited coverage for “Flood.” Background In June 2020, a severe storm caused damage to Norwood Hospital, owned by Medical Properties Trust, Inc. (“MPT”) and leased to Steward Health Care System (“Steward”), the policyholders. The relevant portion of the damage included damage from rain that accumulated on the rooftop courtyard and seeped into the interior of the building causing damage to the building and its contents. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Torrye Zullo, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Ms. Zullo may be contacted at tzullo@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The “Your Work” Exclusion—Is there a Trend against Coverage?

    September 10, 2014 —
    Two more courts have weighed in on the “your work” exclusion in commercial general liability (CGL) policies, finding that contractors did not have coverage for work performed improperly. These cases highlight that whether you have coverage for poor workmanship will depend on the state’s law applied. It now appears that if you are in South Carolina or Massachusetts, you will not have coverage. The South Carolina case, Precision Walls, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company, involved a subcontractor hired to tape insulation. After taping the insulation, a brick veneer was installed on the exterior. During the brick installation, the mason reported that the tape was losing its adhesion and the subcontractor was instructed to repair the problem. In order to access the tape, portions of the brick veneer had to be removed and re-installed. The subcontractor then sought coverage for the costs associated with repairing the tape. The insurer denied coverage and the subcontractor sued its insurer. The court ruled in favor of the insurer, finding that the defective tape was “your work” because it was “material furnished in connection” with the subcontractor’s work. The policy specifically excluded from coverage damage to property caused by “your work”. Thus, there was no coverage for the subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    Contract Change #9: Owner’s Right to Carry Out the Work (law note)

    March 28, 2018 —
    In prior versions of the General Conditions, if a contractor defaulted and the Owner (after giving notice) opted to cure by carrying out the work itself, an appropriate Change Order would be issued. However, a Change Order is a contract that requires an agreement by both the Owner and Contractor, and, obviously, Contractors were reluctant to agree that they were in default and responsible for a deductive change order. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Construction Law in North Carolina

    Corps Proposes $4.6B Plan to Steel Miami for Storm Surge

    June 22, 2020 —
    A $4.6-billion U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposal to protect Miami from future storm surge, largely by building massive sea walls and elevating infrastructure systems, is the latest of such plans the agency has developed for East Coast communities. Pam Radtke Russell, Engineering News-Record Ms. Russell may be contacted at Russellp@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado Court of Appeals Enforces Limitations of Liability In Pre-Homeowner Protection Act Contracts

    February 14, 2013 —
    Keirns Construction Co. (“Keirns”) hired Landmark Engineering, Ltd. (“Landmark”) to provide a geotechnical investigation and foundation designs for two duplexes Keirns built in Larimer County. Keirns and Landmark signed one contract in 2001 for the geotechnical work and two separate contracts in 2005 for the foundation design of the two duplexes. Each contract contained an identical “risk allocation clause,” which had language specifically limiting Landmark’s liability to Keirns. The risk allocation clause also had language specifically prohibiting claims against individuals and only allowing claims against a corporation. After the two duplexes were built, foundation problems developed, and Keirns filed suit against Landmark for breach of contract and negligence. Keirns also filed suit against two individual employees of Landmark, Wayne Thompson and Larry Miller, for negligence. Messrs. Thompson and Miller performed the geotechnical and design services pursuant to the contracts. Landmark and Messrs. Thompson and Miller filed a motion seeking to enforce the risk of allocation clauses in the contracts, thereby limiting Landmark’s liability. Messrs. Thompson and Miller also filed a summary judgment motion seeking their dismissal from the case based on the prohibition in the risk allocation clause against asserting claims against individuals. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Heidi Gassman
    Ms. Gassman can be contacted at gassman@hhmrlaw.com

    Federal Court Requires Auto Liability Carrier to Cover Suit Involving Independent Contractor Despite “Employee Exclusion”

    August 30, 2017 —
    A recent federal court decision rendered in July of 2017 highlights the importance of worker classification in the transportation industry and the potential insurance implications. In Spirit Commercial Auto Risk Retention Grp., Inc. v. Kailey, 1 the court determined that an “employee exclusion” in a motor carrier’s automobile liability insurance policy did not exclude coverage for liability resulting from the bodily injury of an independent contractor operating the motor carrier’s tractor-trailer. In April of 2014, a team of two drivers hired by the motor carrier, Kailey Trucking Line (KTL), were involved in a collision while operating KTL’s truck. The passenger in the truck, who was not operating the vehicle at the time, was killed in the accident. Subsequently, the spouse of the decedent filed suit against KTL as well as the driver of the truck. KTL sought coverage for the suit under its automobile liability insurance policy, issued by Spirit Commercial Auto Risk Retention Group, Incorporated (Spirit). However, Spirit took the position that it had no duty to defend or indemnify KTL, and ultimately filed a declaratory judgment action in United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The policy issued to KTL provided coverage for damages due to bodily injury or property damage caused by an accident resulting from the ownership, maintenance, or use of a covered auto. However, the policy excluded from coverage any bodily injury to an employee or fellow employee of the insured arising out of and in the course of employment of the insured. Accordingly, to the extent that the decedent qualified as an “employee” of KTL, Spirit had no duty to indemnify KTL in the litigation. Reprinted courtesy of H. Scott Williams, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Brendan C. Colt, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Holt may be contacted at bch@sdvlaw.com Mr. Williams may be contacted at hsw@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Road to Record $199 Million Award Began With Hunch on Guardrails

    June 17, 2015 —
    It started with a hunch about malfunctioning highway guardrails. It led to the biggest known whistle-blower award in U.S. history. Joshua Harman, a Virginian with two small highway safety companies, made a discovery in late 2011 that perhaps only a guardrail maker could: A big competitor had changed the dimensions of its roadside safety device by as much as an inch here and there, he said, without telling federal regulators. As designed, Trinity Industries Inc.’s ET-Plus system was meant to turn the end of a guardrail into a de facto shock absorber. The altered units, as Harman saw it, were locking up when hit, spearing cars and their occupants. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick G. Lee, Bloomberg