BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut consulting engineers
    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


    Patriarch Partners Decision Confirms Government Subpoenas May Constitute a “Claim” Under D&O Policy; Warns Policyholders to Think Broadly When Representing Facts and Circumstances to Insurers

    Meet Orange County Bar Associations 2024 Leaders

    Know Your Obligations Under Both the Prime Contract and Subcontract

    Maryland Legislation Prohibits Condominium Developers from Shortening Statute of Limitations to Defeat Unit Owner Construction Defect Claims

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

    Renters Trading Size for Frills Fuel U.S. Apartment Boom

    U.S. Home Lending Set to Bounce Back in 2015 After Slump

    Suing A Payment Bond Surety in Different Venue Than Set Forth in The Subcontract

    Homeowners Sue Over Sinkholes, Use Cash for Other Things

    Construction Companies Must Prepare for a Surge of Third-Party Contractors

    Additional Insured Not Covered Where Injury Does Not Arise Out Of Insured's Work

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

    High Attendance Predicted for West Coast Casualty Seminar

    South Carolina Court of Appeals Diverges from Damico Opinion, Sending Recent Construction Defects Cases to Arbitration

    What Construction Contractors Should Know About the California Government Claims Act

    ASCE Statement on EPA Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan

    Negligent Failure to Respond to Settlement Offer Is Not Bad Faith

    Unpaid Subcontractor Walks Off the Job and Wins

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 3: Standard Form Policy Exclusions

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

    Panthers Withdraw City, County Deal Over Abandoned Facility

    Ahead of the Storm: Preparing for Irma

    Professional Liability Alert: Joint Client Can't Claim Privilege For Communications With Attorney Sued By Another Joint Client

    Navigating Construction Contracts in the Energy Sector – Insights from Sheppard Mullin’s Webinar Series

    Congress Passes, President Signs Sweeping Energy Measure In Spend Bill

    Coverage Issues: When You Need Your Own Lawyer in a Construction Defect Suit

    Banks Loosening U.S. Mortgage Standards: Chart of the Day

    The Utility of Arbitration Agreements in the Construction Industry

    Material Prices Climb…And Climb…Are You Considering A Material Escalation Provision?

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (06/06/23) – Housing Woes, EV Plants and the Debate over Public Financing

    D.C. Decision Finding No “Direct Physical Loss” for COVID-19 Closures Is Not Without Severe Limitations

    Court Says No to Additional Lawyer in Las Vegas Fraud Case

    Client Alert: Service Via Tag Jurisdiction Insufficient to Subject Corporation to General Personal Jurisdiction

    Hurricane Damage Not Covered for Home Owner Not Named in Policy

    Patti Santelle Honored by Rutgers School of Law with Arthur E. Armitage Sr. Distinguished Alumni Award

    Reaffirming the Importance of Appeal Deadlines Under the Contract Disputes Act

    Just Because You Allege There Was an Oral Contract Doesn’t Mean You’re Off the Hook for Attorneys’ Fees if you Lose

    The Biggest Change to the Mechanics Lien Law Since 1963

    Florida Condos Bet on Americans Making 50% Down Payments

    Evacuations in Santa Barbara County as more Mudslides are Predicted

    Florida’s Citizens Property Insurance May Be Immune From Bad Faith, But Is Not Immune From Consequential Damages

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    Hunton Insurance Head Interviewed Concerning the Benefits and Hidden Dangers of Cyber Insurance

    Solar and Wind Just Passed Another Big Turning Point

    Construction Companies Can Be Liable for “Secondary Exposure” of Asbestos to Household Members

    Diggerland, UK’s Construction Equipment Theme Park, is coming to the U.S.

    "Repair Work" Endorsements and Punch List Work

    Fannie-Freddie Elimination Model in Apartments: Mortgages

    Yet Another Reminder that Tort and Contract Don’t Mix

    The Relevance and Reasonableness of Destructive Testing
    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

    Rikus Locati Selected to 2024 Northern California Rising Stars!

    August 05, 2024 —
    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2024 Northern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars! BWB&O is proud to announce that Walnut Creek Associate Rikus Locati has been selected to the 2024 Northern California Super Lawyers list as Rising Stars for his work in Personal Injury. Super Lawyers is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The objective of Super Lawyers’ patented multiphase selection process is to create a credible, comprehensive, and diverse listing of outstanding attorneys that can be used as a resource for attorneys and consumers searching for legal counsel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Jury Awards Aluminum Company 35 Million in Time Element Losses

    September 23, 2019 —
    On July 3, 2019, a Delaware jury determined that fourteen property insurers for Noranda Aluminum Holding Corp., an aluminum producer that filed for bankruptcy and ceased operations three years ago, owe Noranda over $35 million in time element losses that Noranda sustained as a result of two separate catastrophic incidents that occurred at its aluminum facility in 2015 and 2016. In August 2015, an aluminum explosion occurred at Noranda’s facility, resulting in substantial property damage and bodily injuries. Though the insurers paid for Noranda’s property damage claim, the insurers only covered $5.64 million of Noranda’s $22 million time element claim. In January 2016, the same facility sustained significant damage as a result of equipment failure. The insurers again paid for Noranda’s property damage claim arising from the equipment failure but declined to pay any of its $22.8 million time element claim. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews & Kurth and Daniel Hentschel, Hunton Andrews & Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Hentschel may be contacted at dhentschel@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Denies Bad Faith Claim in HO Policy Dispute

    September 24, 2014 —
    According to Patrick Nugent of Saul Ewing LLP’s article in JD Supra Business Advisor, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entered a summary judgment for the insurer on a statutory bad faith claim in a coverage dispute under a homeowner’s policy. The coverage dispute was over “the collapse of a wall in the plaintiffs’ home.” The Plaintiffs alleged that “the collapse resulted from excessive rainfall during a storm in March 2011.” However, Metropolitan Direct Property and Casualty Insurance Company’s engineer concluded that the collapse “resulted from long-term and on-going water infiltration attributable to poor maintenance.” Water damage had occurred a year prior to the collapse, but had not been repaired. In response, “Plaintiffs filed a complaint in Pennsylvania state court alleging breach of contract and statutory bad faith.” The court “determined that Metropolitan’s denial of benefits ‘was not only reasonable, but correct under the Policy language,’” and “ruled that the plaintiffs could not demonstrate that Metropolitan lacked a reasonable basis for denying their claim and entered summary judgment for Metropolitan on the plaintiffs’ bad faith claim.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    FEMA Offers to Review Hurricane Sandy Claims

    May 20, 2015 —
    According to NJ, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will be sending 141,800 letters to homeowners offering to review their Hurricane Sandy claims to see if the homeowners had been shortchanged. Homeowners who do not wish to wait for their letter can call 866-337-4262 or download a form online, reported NJ. If after the initial FEMA review the homeowner remains unsatisfied, he or she can request an additional review by an independent party. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Michigan: Identifying and Exploiting the "Queen Exception" to No-Fault Subrogation

    May 13, 2014 —
    In Michigan, an employee’s entitlement to compensation for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident is governed by both the Workers’ Disability Compensation Act of 1969, MICH. COMP. LAWS ANN. § 418.801 et seq., and Chapter 31 of The Insurance Code of 1956, MICH. COMP. LAWS ANN. § 500.3101 et seq., commonly referred to as the “no-fault act.” Polkosnik v. United Canada Ins. Co., 421 N.W.2d 241, 242 (Mich. App. 1988). PIP1 benefits payable arising from a motor vehicle accident in Michigan include, principally, (1) medical benefits unlimited in amount and duration, and (2) 85% of lost wages for up to three years. See DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL SERVICES, Brief Explanation of Michigan No-Fault Insurance. As of October 2013, lost wages are capped at $5,282 per month. Id. Such benefits constitute an injured worker’s “economic loss.” See generally Wood v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 668 N.W.2d 353, 355 (Mich. 2003). Michigan’s no-fault legislation is no different than other no-fault legislation in regard to its purpose: The automobile insurer pays without any right of reimbursement out of any third party tort recovery. Sibley v. Detroit Auto. Inter-Ins. Exch., 427 N.W.2d 528, 530 (Mich. 1988). Moreover, just like in New York, for example, “where benefits are provided from other sources pursuant to state or federal law, the amount paid by the other source reduces the automobile insurer’s responsibility.” Id. at 530. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert M. Caplan, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Caplan may be contacted at caplanr@whiteandwilliams.com

    Quick Note: Discretion in Determining Prevailing Party for Purposes of Attorney’s Fees

    January 25, 2021 —
    In prior articles I have discussed that courts apply the significant issues test to determine the prevailing party for purposes of being entitled to attorney’s fees. A party that recovers an affirmative judgement is NOT the de facto prevailing party for purposes of an entitlement to attorney’s fees in a breach of contract action (or a construction lien foreclosure action). This was the issue in a recent appeal discussed here where the party that recovered an affirmative judgment on a breach of contract case was not deemed the prevailing party for purposes of attorney’s fees. While the party prevailed on one of its claims, it did not prevail on others, and it recovered less than half of the damages it originally sought. The appellate court, affirming the trial court, held that the trial court has discretion to determine that the party that recovered an affirmative judgement was not the prevailing party entitled to its attorney’s fees under the signifiant issues test. This was not what the party was expecting when the attorney’s fees it expended far exceeded the judgment it recovered. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Is Still in Trouble, Two Major Reviews Say

    November 07, 2022 —
    Two separate assessments of the health of the Chesapeake Bay indicate that most jurisdictions within its watershed are not on track to meet target goals to cut nitrogen and phosphorus discharge levels by 2025. But new plans and programs put in place in 2022 could improve the restoration trajectory, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Reprinted courtesy of Pam McFarland, Engineering News-Record Ms. McFarland may be contacted at mcfarlandp@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Illinois Earns C- on its 2022 Infrastructure Report Card while Making Strides on Roads and Transit

    May 02, 2022 —
    Chicago, Ill. – The Illinois Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) today revealed its 2022 Infrastructure Report Card, giving the state an overall grade of C-. Illinois' civil engineers studied eleven infrastructure categories. Of those eleven, six categories are in mediocre condition, and five categories are in poor condition. The committee representing more than 2,700 civil engineers across Illinois collected and analyzed data and based its grades on eight criteria, including condition, funding, public safety and resilience. As a major hub for our nation's infrastructure, Illinois has taken considerable steps to improving its transportation and infrastructure networks and several major categories showed improvements – notably transit and roads. To view the report card and all eleven categories evaluated, visit https://infrastructurereportcard.org/state-item/Illinois/. ABOUT THE ILLINOIS SECTION OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Civil engineering experts in their respective fields from the Illinois Section of ASCE, with assistance from the Central Illinois Section, Quad Cities Section, and the St. Louis Section, prepared The Report Card for Illinois' Infrastructure. The Report Card is created to educate and advise our elected officials and citizens on the condition of our State's infrastructure using sound engineering evaluation criteria and to provide recommendations on how to raise the grade. Since 1915, the Illinois Section has represented Civil Engineers in America's engineering hub and the organization recently celebrated its Centennial Anniversary. ASCE provides a platform for our members to mentor, learn and teach, which enables us to serve as stewards of infrastructure in our state, nation and throughout the world. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of