BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling 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


    Short on Labor, Israeli Builders Seek to Vaccinate Palestinians

    Is an Initial Decision Maker, Project Neutral, or Dispute Resolution Board Right for You?

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

    Green Investigations Are Here: U.S. Department of Justice Turns Towards Environmental Enforcement Actions, Deprioritizes Compliance Assistance

    Tom Newmeyer Elected Director At Large to the 2017 Orange County Bar Association Board of Directors

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increased 4.3% in November

    Newmeyer Dillion Secures Victory For Crown Castle In Years-Long Litigation With City Council Of Piedmont Over Small Cell Wireless Telecommunications Sites

    Emerging World Needs $1.5 Trillion for Green Buildings, IFC Says

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Give a Little Extra …”

    First-Time Buyers Home Sales Stagnates

    Pennsylvania Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Hacking Claim Under E&O Policy

    Heathrow Speeds New-Runway Spending Before Construction Approval

    Cracked Girders Trigger Scrutiny of Salesforce Transit Center's Entire Structure

    Responding to Ransomware Learning from Colonial Pipeline

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Property Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Turning Back the Clock: DOL Proposes Previous Davis-Bacon Prevailing Wage Definition

    ASCE Statement on House Passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024

    Why You Should Consider “In House Counsel”

    Where Do We Go From Here?

    Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell Recognized in 2024 Best Law Firm® Rankings

    Sales of U.S. New Homes Decline After Record May Revision

    Settlement Reached in Bridge Failure Lawsuit

    Suit Against Broker for Securing Inadequate Coverage Dismissed on Statute of Limitations Grounds

    A Construction Stitch in Time

    Celebrating Dave McLain’s Recognition in the Best Lawyers in America® 2025

    Cumulative Impact Claims and Definition by Certain Boards

    Can You Really Be Liable For a Product You Didn’t Make? In New Jersey, the Answer is Yes

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/16/24) – Algorithms Affect the Rental Market, Robots Aim to Lower Construction Costs, and Gen Z Struggle to Find Their Own Space

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/10/23) – Wobbling Real Estate, Booming (and Busting) Construction, and Eye-Watering Insurance Premiums

    9 Basic Strategies for Pursuing Coverage for Construction Accident Claims

    Kentucky Supreme Court Creates New “Goldilocks Zone” to Limit Opinions of Biomechanical Experts

    As California Faces Mandatory Water Use Reductions How Will the Construction Industry be Impacted?

    California Ballot Initiative Seeks to Repeal Infrastructure Funding Bill

    Judicial Economy Disfavors Enforcement of Mandatory Forum Selection Clause

    Prefabrication Contract Considerations

    Construction Defect Fund Approved for Bankrupt Las Vegas Builder

    Toronto Contractor Bondfield Wins Court Protection as Project Woes Mount

    Buy a House or Pay Off College? $1.2 Trillion Student Debt Heats Up in Capital

    Home Sales Going to Investors in Daytona Beach Area

    SFAA Commends Congress for Maintaining Current Bonding Protection Levels in National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)

    Cyber Thieves Phish Away a $735K Payment to a Minnesota Contractor

    Practical Pointers for Change Orders on Commercial Construction Contracts

    Travelers’ 3rd Circ. Win Curbs Insurers’ Asbestos Exposure

    Top 10 Insurance Cases of 2020

    The Benefits of Incorporating AI Into the Construction Lifecycle

    What Contractors Can Do to Address Rising Material Costs

    Michigan Court Waives Goodbye to Subrogation Claims, Except as to Gross Negligence

    Decline in Home Construction Brings Down Homebuilder Stocks

    Pennsylvania Mechanics’ Lien “Waivers” and “Releases”: What’s the Difference?

    Balestreri Potocki & Holmes Attorneys Named 2020 Super Lawyers and Rising Star
    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

    California’s Prompt Payment Laws: Just Because an Owner Has Changed Course Doesn’t Mean It’s Changed Course on Previous Payments

    April 20, 2016 —
    We’ve written before about California’s prompt payment laws which are designed to help contractors get paid in a timely and orderly fashion, which is always nice, right? California’s prompt payment laws require that project owners pay their direct contractors, who are in turn required to pay their subcontractors who are in turn required to pay their sub-subcontractors and so on within certain statutorily set deadlines, or be subject to prompt payment penalties nearly as high as the interest you pay on your credit cards. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    From Both Sides Now: Looking at Contracts Through a Post-Pandemic Lens

    August 03, 2020 —
    A little over a year ago, I wrote a blog post about the danger of relying on precedent. Now, more than ever, clients and their advisors need to revisit contract forms on which they may have been relying for years. While many of us have lived through times that required certain adjustments in how we viewed contractual obligations — recessions, wars, oil embargoes, natural disasters, 9/11 — none of these events had the widespread and long-lasting impact that the current COVID-19 pandemic is having. None of these events shut down the U.S. economy and impacted global supply chains across every industry in the manner we are now experiencing. With this in mind, there is a need to figure out what the “new normal” will look like for contract negotiations in a post-pandemic world. Business professionals need to now anticipate more widespread disruption than we could have ever before imagined. It isn’t just force majeure clauses or material adverse effect provisions, as these will likely add pandemics and government shutdowns to their ever-growing list of contemplated risks, if they were not already expressly covered. And it is not clear, at least in the near-term, whether a resurgence or mutation of COVID-19 or the emergence of another virus can truly be seen as unforeseeable in a post-COVID world. The issues are much more fundamental to the approach that parties may take in negotiating contracts. Commercial contracts between purchasers, vendors, distributors, licensors and licensees will need to evaluate allocation of risk from both sides and come to a new happy medium that all can live with in an ever-evolving world. While parties should review their standard contracts in their entirety, some key provisions to think about include:
    1. Length of the contract and exclusivity. Depending on which side you are on, you may want to reconsider a long-term arrangement that ties your company to a particular vendor or distributor. Supply chain disruption can have a seriously detrimental impact on your business. Are requirements contracts where a particular supplier is required to make available all of your needs for a certain good or service really the best arrangement for your business? What about take or pay arrangements where you are obligated to which are common in certain industries pay a minimum amount or a penalty to a supplier whether or not you actually purchase the contemplated volume of goods ? Do you really want to be tied up in an exclusive arrangement, or do you need flexibility to maintain secondary or tertiary sources of supply? Do you want to provide a licensee with an exclusive right to your technology (even within a limited field of use or industry sector)?
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lori S. Smith, White and Williams
    Ms. Smith may be contacted at smithl@whiteandwilliams.com

    Fourth Circuit Finds Insurer Reservation of Rights Letters Inadequate to Preserve Coverage Defenses Under South Carolina Law

    January 17, 2023 —
    In Stoneledge at Lake Keowee Owners Ass'n v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 34292 (D.S.C. Dec. 13, 2022), the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals addressed the adequacy of reservation of rights letters issued by Builders Mutual Insurance Company (“Builders Mutual”) and Cincinnati Insurance Company (“Cincinnati”) to their insureds, Marick Home Builders, LLC (“Marick”) and Rick Thoennes (“Thoennes”), Marick’s managing member, for an underlying construction defect lawsuit. In short, the Fourth Circuit found that the reservation letters were inadequate to preserve the insurers’ coverage defenses because they did not sufficiently explain the basis of the carriers’ position.  Stoneledge, a homeowners association, managed a community of 80 townhomes on South Carolina’s Lake Keowee. In 2009, Stoneledge brought suit against Marick and Thoennes, among other defendants, alleging construction defects in the townhomes that resulted in water intrusion and other physical damage. Marick and Thoennes held commercial general-liability policies through Cincinnati and Builders Mutual covering, in relevant part, “property damage” as defined by the policies. Builders Mutual issued policies covering the period from January 2004 to October 2007, and Cincinnati issued policies covering the period from April 2008 to April 2012. After Marick notified the insurers of the underlying action, Builders Mutual sent Marick two reservation of rights letters, one in May 2009 and one in July 2009. Cincinnati sent Marick one reservation of rights letter in March 2010. In March 2014, Stoneledge brought a declaratory-judgment action against Cincinnati seeking coverage for a judgment entered in the underlying action. The insurers removed the case to federal court, and in September 2016, Stoneledge amended its complaint, adding Builders Mutual as a defendant and seeking coverage for additional damages pursuant to a settlement agreement entered into by Stoneledge, Marick, Thoennes. The district court granted Stoneledge's motion for  summary judgment, primarily on the ground that the insurers failed to reserve the right to contest coverage. The insurers appealed to the Fourth Circuit, which affirmed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com

    Can Businesses Resolve Construction Disputes Outside of Court?

    August 19, 2024 —
    Time is of the essence in any construction project. So, if a dispute arises at any point, business owners generally wish to avoid the chance of a time-consuming case going to court. Can California construction businesses manage these disputes effectively outside of court? It is possible in some cases. Business owners should carefully consider these three steps. 1. Go Back to the Contract Even if the contract is at the center of the dispute, it is important to refer to any details regarding dispute resolution included within the document. It is common for contracts to have some form of a dispute resolution clause. In such a case, both parties should follow the steps outlined in that agreement. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott L. Baker, Baker & Associates
    Mr. Baker may be contacted at slb@bakerslaw.com

    Is Safety Compliance Putting Your Project in Jeopardy? Examining the Essentials of DOE’s Worker Safety and Health Program

    July 02, 2024 —
    Most contractors are familiar with the myriad of labor and safety regulations intended to safeguard the health and safety of workers. Many contractors will be equally familiar with the maze of forms and reports, the maintenance of safety personnel, safety walks and talks, and the many other measures intended to prevent and prepare for accidents. Less known among contractors and construction industry leaders is the regulatory framework establishing safety requirements and the ramifications of ignoring safety-related rules. Knowing and understanding the jurisdiction and authority of the agencies monitoring safety compliance on your project is critical to avoiding administrative ordeals and audits that could add days or weeks to your schedule and frustrate your staff. The Department of Energy’s Worker Safety and Health Program Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, as amended (OSH), the Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issues and enforces occupational health and safety regulations. OSHA, or a state with approval from OSHA, regulates the occupational health and safety of private sector employees unless another federal agency has and exercises its statutory authority to regulate. Several federal agencies have developed their own safety programs and conduct their own enforcement of those regulations independent of OSHA. For example, projects receiving funding from the Department of Energy (DOE) are subject to additional oversight of their safety programs by this agency. DOE directly manages its own Worker Safety and Health Program (WSHP), codified at 10 C.F.R. § 851, et seq., and will enforce compliance with its WSHP at all DOE sites. A “DOE site” is defined as a DOE-owned or -leased area or location or other area or location that DOE controls, where a contractor performs activities and operations in furtherance of a DOE mission. This broad definition encompasses a wide range of facilities and operations, including those not directly managed by the DOE but still under its control. The contractor at such a site must be aware of the specific requirements and procedures of the DOE under the WSHP and the ramifications of violating these regulations. Reprinted courtesy of Lucas T. Daniels, Peckar & Abramson, P.C and Benjamin J. Hochberg, Peckar & Abramson, P.C Mr. Daniels may be contacted at ldaniels@pecklaw.com Mr. Hochberg may be contacted at bhochberg@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Florida Court Puts the Claim of Landlord’s Insurer In The No-Fly Zone

    March 06, 2023 —
    In United States Aviation Underwriters v. Turnberry Airport Holdings, LLC, No. 3D22-270, 2023 Fla. App. LEXIS 1207 (U.S. Aviation), the Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District (Appellate Court) considered whether the insurer for a commercial landlord could pursue subrogation against the landlord’s tenant. Based on the terms of the lease between the landlord and the tenant, the Appellate Court held that the landlord’s insurer could not pursue subrogation. In U.S. Aviation, the defendant, Turnberry Airport Holdings, LLC (Turnberry Airport) leased space to an insured aircraft owner. The lease contained the following provision: TENANT agrees that all policies of insurance obtained by it in connection with the Space or as required hereunder shall contain appropriate waiver of subrogation clauses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    Hawaii Federal District Court Compels Appraisal

    December 03, 2024 —
    The Hawaii federal district court denied the insurers' motion to dismiss on forum non convenient grounds and granted the insured's motion to compel arbitration. BRE Hotels and Resorts LCC, et al. v. Ace Am Ins. Co., et al., 2024 U,.S. Dist. LEXIS 163852 (D. Haw. Sept. 11, 2024). BRE Hotels & Resorts LLC (BRE) owned the Grand Wailea Resort on Maui and the Turtle Bay Resort on Oahu. Both hotels were damaged by a rainstorm on March 9, 2021. Estimated losses exceeded $55 million. BRE filed a claim with its sixteen insurers. BRE sought $46 million in four categories: business interruption losses at the Grand Wailea ($29.6 million); damaged tiles at the Grand Wailea ($8.3 million); furniture, fixtures, and equipment at Turtel Bay ($6.2 million); and an assortment of ancillary issues at both properties ($1.9 million). The insurers investigated and took issued with BRE's estimates. The insurers contended that most of the tiles suffered from an independent defect and were not damaged by the storm, that the insurance policies did not cover the replacement of undamaged furniture, and that the claimed business interruption losses were too high. The insurers paid $4 million. 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

    Hawaii Federal District Court Remands Coverage Dispute

    June 15, 2020 —
    Accepting the insured's amended complaint, the federal district court of Hawaii remanded the coverage action to state court. Hale v. Lloyd's, London, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9061 (D. Haw. Jan. 17, 2020). Hale purchased a policy for his home in Hilo, Hawaii, from Defendant Pyramid Insurance Centre. The policy was memorialized by a Lloyd's Certificate issued by Defendant Lloyd's. On September 19, 2017, Hale entered Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. Included in the bankruptcy proceeding was Hale's home and a secured home mortgage loan now owned by Defendant Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC. The Bankruptcy Court issued a discharge order on January 18, 2018. On May 9, 2018, Hale's home was destroyed, being covered with lava from the Kilauea volcano eruption. Hale filed a claim with Lloyd's based upon the loss of his home. The claim was denied. Subsequently, however, Lloyd's issued a check for the full amount of the policy. Both Hale and Specialized Loan were listed as payees on the check. 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