BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofing
    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


    Insured's Complaint Against Flood Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Liquidating Agreements—Bridging the Privity Gap for Subcontractors

    NY Pay-to-Play Charges Dropped Against LPCiminelli Executive As Another Pleads Guilty

    A Trivial Case

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    Negligent Inspection Claim Against Supervising Design Professional / Consultant

    The Expansion of Potential Liability of Construction Managers and Consultants

    Monitoring Building Moisture with RFID – Interview with Jarmo Tuppurainen

    Keeping Detailed Records: The Best Defense to Constructive Eviction

    Connecticut District Court to Review Proposed Class Action in Defective Concrete Suit

    CGL Policy Covering Attorney’s Fees in Property Damage Claims

    Want to Make Your Jobsite Safer? Look to the Skies.

    Everybody Is Going to End Up Paying for Texas' Climate Crisis

    California Court of Appeal Vacates $30M Non-Economic Damages Award Due to Failure to Properly Apportion Liability and Attorney Misconduct During Closing Argument

    Safety Versus a False Sense of Security: Challenges to the Use of Construction Cranes

    Engineering, Architecture, and Modern Technology – An Interview with Dr. Jakob Strømann-Andersen

    Design-build Trends, Challenges and Risk Mitigation

    Avoid Drowning in Data: Keep Afloat with ESI in Construction Litigation

    Lawmakers Strike Deal on New $38B WRDA

    Blog Completes Seventeenth Year

    Granting Stay, Federal Court Reviews Construction Defect Coverage in Hawaii

    Excess-Escape Other Insurance Provision Unenforceable to Avoid Defense Cost Contribution Despite Placement in Policy’s Coverage Grant

    Court Grants Motion to Dismiss Negligence Claim Against Flood Insurer

    U.S. Department of Defense Institutes New Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification

    Bidders Shortlisted as Oroville Dam Work Schedule is Set

    Condemnation Actions: How Valuable Is Your Evidence of Property Value?

    Henderson Engineers Tests AI for Building Systems Design with Torch.AI

    Engineers Found ‘Hundreds’ of Cracks in California Bridge

    Neighbor Allowed to Remove Tree Roots on Her Property That Supported Adjoining Landowners’ Two Large Trees With Legal Immunity

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “I Never Had a Chance”

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

    Connecticut Supreme Court Rules Matching of Materials Decided by Appraisers

    Georgia Federal Court Holds That Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage Under Liability Policy for Claims Arising From Discharge of PFAS Into Waterways

    Policy Reformed to Add New Building Owner as Additional Insured

    The First UK Hospital Being Built Using AI Technology

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    Seattle Developer Defaults on Renovated Office Buildings

    Uniformity in Florida’s Construction Bond Laws Brings About Fairness for the Industry

    Value In Being Deemed “Statutory Employer” Under Workers Compensation Law

    “Based On”… What Exactly? NJ Appellate Division Examines Phrase and Estops Insurer From Disclaiming Coverage for 20-Month Delay

    Spotting Problem Projects

    Manhattan Home Prices Top Pre-Crisis Record on Luxury Deals

    How to Drop a New Building on Top of an Old One

    Quick Note: Third-Party Can Bring Common Law Bad Faith Claim

    Firm Offers Tips on Construction Defects in Colorado

    The Problem With Building a New City From Scratch

    Insurer’s Attempt to Shift Cost of Defense to Another Insurer Found Void as to Public Policy

    A Court-Side Seat: Environmental Developments on the Ninth Circuit

    Quick Note: Steps to Protect and Avoid the “Misappropriation” of a “Trade Secret”

    Does Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code Impact Your Construction Project?
    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

    Panthers Withdraw City, County Deal Over Abandoned Facility

    September 19, 2022 —
    Columbia, S.C. (AP) -- Carolina Panthers owner David Tepper’s real estate company wants to revoke a bankruptcy settlement it negotiated with the city and county where its abandoned South Carolina practice facility was supposed to be built because it says the governments are making exorbitant and unreasonable demands. GT Real Estate Holdings had offered $21 million to York County. It suggested giving the proceeds from selling part of its site in Rock Hill so the city would get at least $20 million. But the county and city have filed separate lawsuits and court papers. York County said it is entitled to more than $80 million in part to get back money from a special penny sales tax that was supposed to expand a road but Tepper’s company used for the proposed practice facility. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg

    Newmeyer & Dillion Gets Top-Tier Practice Area Rankings on U.S. News – Best Lawyers List

    November 03, 2016 —
    Prominent business and real estate law firm Newmeyer & Dillion LLP is pleased to announce that U.S. News–Best Lawyers® recognized six practice areas from its Orange County office for inclusion in its Best Law Firms rankings for 2017. Five of the six areas were ranked as tier 1, the highest ranking available, including commercial litigation, construction law, insurance law, litigation- construction and litigation- real estate. Real estate law as also recognized as tier 3. Jeff Dennis, Newmeyer & Dillion’s Managing Partner, believes these rankings reflect the quality of work Newmeyer & Dillion offers. “Our firm was built on the culture of excellent personalized service and achieving the best results possible. This is a great honor for our firm knowing that our clients and peers value the offerings we provide.” About Newmeyer & Dillion For more than 30 years, Newmeyer & Dillion has delivered creative and outstanding legal solutions and trial results for a wide array of clients. With over 70 attorneys practicing in all aspects of business, employment, real estate, construction and insurance law, Newmeyer & Dillion delivers legal services tailored to meet each client’s needs. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, with offices in Walnut Creek, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, Newmeyer & Dillion attorneys are recognized by The Best Lawyers in America©, and Super Lawyers as top tier and some of the best lawyers in California, and have been given Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review's AV Preeminent® highest rating. For additional information, call 949-854-7000 or visit www.ndlf.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Reaches Half-Way Point on San Diego's $2.1 Billion Mid-Coast Trolley

    May 06, 2019 —
    Project officials for the $2.1-billion Mid-Coast Trolley in San Diego recently celebrated the halfway point of construction. The event was held at the construction staging yard near the Voigt Drive Trolley station, where workers gather for their morning briefings. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Greg Aragon, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Are Construction Defect Claims Covered Under CGL Policies?

    January 27, 2014 —
    Courts have ruled differently as to whether a construction defect is or is not an “occurrence,” according to the publication Business Insurance. Four states—Colorado, Arkansas, Hawaii and South Carolina—have sought to remove ambiguity by passing statutes that define construction defect claims as occurrences. Colorado, the first state to create such a statue, passed H. B. 10-1394 in May 2010. The state legislature passed the statute “because of the complex and lengthy endorsements and exclusions facing construction professionals, according to the bill” reported Business Insurance. The article stated that “incongruous court decisions over whether construction defect claims are covered under CGL policies continue to drive uncertainty in coverage and increase litigation costs.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York Appellate Division: Second Department Contradicts First Department, Denying Insurer's Recoupment of Defense Costs for Uncovered Claims

    March 01, 2021 —
    New York law has historically allowed insurers to recoup defense costs paid on behalf of an insured if there is ultimately no coverage for the underlying action, provided that the insurer reserved its rights to seek reimbursement. On December 30, 2020, the New York Appellate Division, Second Department declined to follow this longstanding principle in American Western Home Insurance Co. v. Gjonaj Realty & Mgt. Co.,1 by holding that the insurer was not entitled to recoup defense costs, even where it was determined that the claim was not covered under the insurance policy. In American W. Home Ins. Co., the insureds were named as defendants in an underlying personal injury action. More than four years after the accident, and a $900,000 default judgment against the insureds, they tendered the lawsuit to their commercial general liability insurer, American Western Home Insurance Company (“American”). American denied coverage based on untimely notice, but after the default judgment was subsequently vacated, it agreed to defend the underlying action subject to a reservation of rights. The reservation of rights specifically reserved American’s right to deny coverage if the vacatur of the default judgment against the insureds was reversed. Further, American reserved its right to recover the costs of defending the underlying litigation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jasjeet K. Sahani, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Sahani may be contacted at JSahani@sdvlaw.com

    Montana Supreme Court Tackles Decade-Old Coverage Dispute Concerning Asbestos Mineworker Claims

    December 20, 2021 —
    On November 23, 2021, the Montana Supreme Court issued an almost unanimous decision in National Indemnity Company v. State of Montana, a ten-year-old coverage dispute arising from claims against the State of Montana alleging it had failed to warn of asbestos dust conditions at vermiculite mining and milling operations in and around Libby, Montana (the Libby Mine) run by W.R. Grace & Company and its predecessors. Affirming in part and reversing in part rulings by the trial court that culminated in a $98 million judgment against the State’s CGL insurer from 1973 to 1975, the court addressed issues including the duty to defend/estoppel, the number of occurrences, “trigger of coverage,” and, in a case of first impression, allocation under Montana law. Whether the Insurer Breached the Duty to Defend Depended Upon the Timeframe The court looked at whether (1) the insured provided sufficient information to bring the claims within the possibility of coverage under the subject policy and (2) the insurer gave “the necessary substance to” fulfilling its duty to defend at four points in the relevant timeframe:
    1. The insurer did not breach its duty at the time the State initially tendered the Libby Mine claims because the State defended the claims through its self-insurance program, hired its own counsel, managed the litigation, made its own defense decisions, and took the position with the insurer that the matter was “under control” and “nothing was left to be done[.]”
    Reprinted courtesy of Patricia B. Santelle, White and Williams and Paul A. Briganti, White and Williams Ms. Santelle may be contacted at santellep@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Briganti may be contacted at brigantip@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Lessons Learned from Implementing Infrastructure BIM in Helsinki

    February 07, 2018 —
    Finland’s capital is currently experiencing a construction boom. Old industrial citadels are turning into residential areas with new commercial centers. Consequently, Helsinki needs to build new infrastructure. To improve the efficiency and quality of infrastructure construction, the city has started using BIM, and is now learning how to get the most value from it. Ville Alajoki, Team Leader in Helsinki’s Urban Development Division, is a keen proponent of BIM. “Infrastructure construction is still in its early stages when it comes to using BIM. For the most part, BIM implementation has not been systematic in our city yet. We tend to use it in our own structural design and often in building construction. However, in infrastructure project management, its active individuals who have set the pace,” Ville admits. He believes that the city’s strategy for 2017–2021 will spur the use of new technologies, including BIM. “Helsinki aims to be the city in the world that makes the best use of digitalization,” Mayor Jan Vapaavuori has declared. A good start, but there’s room for improvement. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business Blog
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at info@aepartners.fi

    Montana Federal District Court Finds for Insurer in Pollution Coverage Dispute

    October 24, 2021 —
    Applying Louisiana law, a recent federal court decision exemplifies why policyholders should thoroughly read claims-made policies to understand when notice is due to insurers and truthfully complete policy applications. In Admiral Insurance Company v. Dual Trucking, Inc.,1 the Court determined the insurer, Admiral Insurance Company (“AIC”), owed no duty to defend or indemnify Dual Trucking and Transport, LLC (“DTT”), Dual Trucking of Montana, LLC (“DTM”), and Dual Trucking, Inc. (“DTI”) (collectively, the “Dual Entities”) under two Environmental Impairment Liability Policies (“EIL Policies”) and four Contractor Pollution Liability Policies (“CPL Policies”). The Court justified its decision because the Dual Entities: 1) did not give notice during the 2012-2013 EIL Policy period; 2) had discovered or knew of, but did not disclose, potential pollution conditions before the inception of the 2013-2014 EIL Policy and before the expiration of the extended reporting period of the 2012-2013 EIL Policy; 3) failed to provide AIC with notice during the extended reporting period of the 2013-2014 EIL Policy of claims for which the Dual Entities were seeking coverage; and 4) materially misrepresented known facts on the CPL Policy applications. I. Factual Background. The Dual Entities were Louisiana-based companies that provided oilfield equipment rental services. In 2011, the Dual Entities leased land in Montana under three leases, collectively referred to as “the Bainville site.” Shortly afterward, the Dual Entities applied for, and AIC issued, an EIL Policy and two CPL Policies with a policy period of October 1, 2012, to October 1, 2013. AIC renewed all three policies for the October 1, 2013, to October 1, 2014, policy period. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melanie A. McDonald, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Ms. McDonald may be contacted at MMcDonald@sdvlaw.com