BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction experts
    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


    Insurer Incorrectly Relies Upon "Your Work" Exclusion to Deny Coverage

    Consumer Confidence in U.S. Increases More Than Forecast

    Navigating Threshold Arbitration Issues in Construction Contracts

    Firm Leadership – New Co-Chairs for the Construction Law Practice Group

    No Subrogation, Contribution Rights for Carrier Defending Construction Defect Claim

    Chinese Drywall Manufacturer Claims Product Was Not for American Market

    Fixing the Problem – Not the Blame

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Coverage Established for Property Damage Caused by Added Product

    Purse Tycoon Aims at Ultra-Rich With $85 Million Home

    Implied Warranty Claims–Not Just a Seller’s Risk: Builders Beware!

    Construction Contract Basics: Venue and Choice of Law

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

    OSHA: What to Expect in 2022

    Keep It Simple: Summarize (Voluminous Evidence, That Is...)

    Nuclear Energy Gets a Much-Needed Boost

    A Trio of Environmental Decisions from the Fourth Circuit

    Congratulations to Walnut Creek Partner Bryan Stofferahn and Associate Jeffrey Schilling for Winning a Motion for Summary Judgment on Behalf of Their Client, a Regional Grocery Store!

    Caterpillar Forecast Tops Estimates as Construction Recovers

    Commercial Real Estate in 2023: A Snapshot

    Architects Group Lowers U.S. Construction Forecast

    Stucco Contractor Trying to Limit Communication in Construction Defect Case

    Montana Significantly Revises Its Product Liability Laws

    You Need to be a Contractor for Workers’ Compensation Immunity to Apply

    Corps of Engineers to Prepare EIS for Permit to Construct Power Lines Over Historic James River

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Preserves Possibility of Coverage

    Economic Damages Cannot be Based On Speculation

    The Housing Market Is Softening, But Home Depot and Lowe's Are Crushing It

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

    When Can a General Contractor’s Knowledge be Imputed to a Developer?

    Study May Come Too Late for Construction Defect Bill

    Home Buyer May Be Third Party Beneficiary of Property Policy

    LEED Certified Courthouse Square Negotiating With Insurers, Mulling Over Demolition

    How New York City Plans to Soak Up the Rain

    Intellectual Property And Employment Law Best Practices: Are You Covering Your Bases In Protecting Construction-Related Trade Secrets?

    Commonwealth Court Holds That Award of Attorney's Fees and Penalties is Mandatory Under the Procurement Code Upon a Finding of Bad Faith

    Foundation Differences Across the U.S.

    A Word to the Wise about Construction Defects

    Drones, Googleplexes and Hyperloops

    New FAR Rule Mandates the Use of PLAs on Large Construction Projects

    California Committee Hosts a Hearing on Deadly Berkeley Balcony Collapse

    3M PFAS Water Settlement Could Reach $12.5B

    Lucky No. 7: Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Issues Pro-Policyholder Decision Regarding Additional Insured Coverage for Upstream Parties

    Expert's Opinions On Causation Leads Way To Summary Judgment For Insurer

    Buy America/Buy American, a Primer For Contractors

    Lasso Needed to Complete Vegas Hotel Implosion

    Fourth Circuit Issues New Ruling on Point Sources Under the CWA

    California Assembly Passes Expedited Dam Safety for Silicon Valley Act

    Designers Face Fatal Pedestrian Bridge Collapse Fallout

    Earth Movement Exclusion Bars Coverage
    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

    Houston Bond Issue Jump-Starts 237 Flood Control Projects

    September 10, 2018 —
    More than $3 billion in flood risk reduction and repair projects can move forward in Houston following a vote held on Hurricane Harvey's anniversary that authorized a $2.5-billion bond program. Reprinted courtesy of Louise Poirier, ENR and Pam Radtke Russell, ENR Ms. Poirier may be contacted at poirierl@enr.com Ms. Russell may be contacted at Russellp@bnpmedia.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Rights Afforded to Employees and Employers During Strikes

    October 16, 2018 —
    One of the most powerful weapons in labor’s arsenal is a strike. Like most powerful weapons there is a dichotomy in a strike. On one hand, it can bring about concessions from management that labor seeks. On the other hand, it can permanently change the relationship between management and labor. However, one thing is certain, strike are – to put it mildly – chaotic. During this chaotic period, employees and employers may wonder what rights they have during union-initiated strikes. We provide some brief explanations below, along with how union litigation can help enforce your rights. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    Traub Lieberman Elects New Partners for 2020

    February 24, 2020 —
    Traub Lieberman is pleased to announce that Adam P. Joffe and Heather Fleming have been elected to the partnership effective January 1, 2020. “Heather and Adam are terrific additions to our partnership and team. They are both effective, experienced and driven lawyers who work steadfastly on behalf of clients to meet their needs,” said Michael Knippen, firm chair. Adam joined the firm in 2019 and is based in the firm’s Chicago office, which now includes 10 partners. He counsels and represents insurers in complex first-party and third-party coverage litigation. Adam also advises insurers on their coverage obligations under primary and excess commercial lines policies, including commercial general liability, employment practices liability, professional liability, and commercial property policies. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Traub Lieberman

    U.S. Steel Invoking Carnegie’s Legacy in Revival Strategy

    July 23, 2014 —
    In March 2013, Mario Longhi lobbed an unexpected question into a roomful of 150 U.S. Steel Corp. managers: Who here would buy the company’s stock, tomorrow? He gave them three seconds, and “only a few reacted in that time frame positively,” Longhi said. Since that meeting, Longhi has been promoted to chief executive officer, and nine months into his tenure he’s closed one plant permanently, two more are temporarily idled and he’s planning to overhaul another. It’s all part of his plan to transform the 144-year-old company into a lean, modern steel producer. Investors are taking note, with the shares up 53 percent since he took over. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sonja Elmquist, Bloomberg
    Ms. Elmquist may be contacted at selmquist1@bloomberg.net

    Water Intrusion Judged Not Related to Construction

    October 09, 2013 —
    A Wisconsin couple has lost their lawsuit against the city of Stoughton. Jerry and Maxine King claimed that construction of the Stoughton Fire Station lead to flooding of their basement. The city conceded that in 2008, the contractor failed to “have in place some of the measures that could have prevented the water from running onto the King property.” The contractor’s insurance company compensated the Kings. Subsequently, the Kings complained of further water damage. But Matt Dregne, Stoughton’s attorney, said that the Kings “didn’t repair the basement.” The judge in the case dismissed the suit with prejudice, disallowing any further suits from the Kings on these circumstances. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Court of Appeal Finds Alleged Inadequate Defense by Insurer-Appointed Defense Counsel Does Not Trigger a Right to Independent Counsel

    January 11, 2022 —
    The California Second District Court of Appeal had occasion to examine an insurer’s duty to provide independent counsel (“Cumis counsel”) to its insured in a declaratory relief action entitled Nede Management, Inc. v. Aspen American Insurance Company. The action arose from a fire on a property covered by an insurance policy issued by Aspen American Ins. Co (“Aspen”). Aspen’s insureds were sued for wrongful death and negligence by tenants and squatters allegedly injured by the fire. Aspen defended three individual members of the family who owned the property and the family business, Nede Management, Inc. (“Nede”), which managed the property. The defense was subject to reservations of rights on the lack of an obligation to pay any judgment in excess of the $1 million policy limits and no coverage for punitive damages. Aspen appointed defense counsel to defend its insureds. The insureds sought independent counsel based on the assertion that defense counsel appointed by the insurer defended the action inadequately, failed to communicate an initial settlement demand within policy limits and failed to fully investigate the case. Aspen did provide Cumis counsel to Nede for a period but terminated the arrangement after revoking its reservation of rights to that entity. The underlying case eventually settled at no cost to the insureds. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert Dennison, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Dennison may be contacted at rdennison@tlsslaw.com

    Insurance Coverage for COVID-19? Two N.J. Courts Allow Litigation to Proceed

    March 06, 2022 —
    Courts across the nation have struggled to determine whether insurance policies that provide coverage for “direct physical loss or damage” insure losses stemming from COVID-19. Many courts have been applying an overly stringent pleading standard, inappropriately granting insurers’ motions to dismiss as a result of the insureds’ purported failure to allege that COVID-19 caused damages covered by their policies or because certain exclusions supposedly barred coverage. However, two New Jersey state courts recently decided these issues in favor of the insureds in well-reasoned opinions that give proper deference to procedural pleading standards and substantive insurance coverage law. A. COVID-19 causes “direct physical loss or damage” In AC Ocean Walk, LLC v. American Guarantee and Liability Ins. Co., the New Jersey Superior Court held that physical alteration to an insured’s property is not a prerequisite to coverage for losses due to COVID-19. The insured, Ocean Casino, sued multiple insurers for COVID-19 losses, alleging that the virus caused Ocean Casino to shut down and suffer a loss of use of its property. Looking at the language of the policies, the court explained that each policy’s insuring agreement substantially read the same:
    “This policy insures against direct physical loss of, or damage caused by, a covered cause of loss to covered property, at an insured location [the casino] … subject to the terms, conditions, and exclusions stated in this policy.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bethany L. Barrese, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Barrese may be contacted at BBarrese@sdvlaw.com

    To Sea or Not to Sea: Fifth Circuit Applies Maritime Law to Offshore Service Contract, Spares Indemnity Provision from Louisiana Oilfield Indemnity Act

    March 29, 2017 —
    Faced with the issue of whether maritime or state law should be applied to determine the validity of an indemnity clause in a Master Services Contract (MSC), the Fifth Circuit affirmed that where there is no historical treatment of the contract in question (1), it would consider six factors established in Davis (2). In Doiron, the Apache Corporation and STS (3) entered a broad-form blanket MSC, under which STS agreed to perform flow-back services, a process designed to dislodge solid objects from inside a well, on Apache’s well located off shore of Louisiana. The MSC also contained an indemnification provision, which required STS to defend and indemnify Apache and its company groups against all claims of property injury or bodily injury. During the flow-back operation, Larry Doiron Inc. (LDI), one of the Apache Company groups, supplied a crane barge for use by STS employees. Subsequently, the crane knocked over an STS employee, causing him to suffer severe injuries. LDI then made a formal demand to STS for defense and indemnification. STS rejected the demand and argued that the Louisiana Oilfield Indemnity Act applied to the MSC instead of maritime law. Pursuant to the Act, indemnity clauses in agreements pertaining to wells for oil, gas or water are void as against public policy. But, under maritime law, the enforcement of such provisions is not barred. Therefore, if the MSC was construed under the Act, STS had no duty to defend or indemnify LDI. Reprinted courtesy of Richard W. Brown, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Afua S. Akoto, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Brown may be contacted at rwb@sdvlaw.com Ms. Akoto may be contacted at asa@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of