BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect 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


    CRH to Buy Building-Products Firm Laurence for $1.3 Billion

    Negligent Failure to Respond to Settlement Offer Is Not Bad Faith

    Understand Agreements in Hold Harmless and Indemnity Provisions

    Location, Location, Location—Even in Construction Liens

    Common Construction Contract Provisions: Indemnity Provisions

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/24/24) – Long-Term Housing Issues in Hawaii, Underperforming REITs, and Growth in a Subset of the Hotel Sector

    The Best Lawyers in America© Peer Review Names Eight Newmeyer & Dillion Partners in Multiple Categories and Two Partners as Orange County’s Lawyers of the Year in Construction and Insurance Law

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

    Lenders Facing Soaring Costs Shutting Out U.S. Homebuyers

    Colorado Temporarily Requires Employers to Provide Sick Leave While Awaiting COVID-19 Testing

    Is the Sky Actually Falling (on Green Building)?

    National Infrastructure Leaders Visit Dallas' Able Pump Station to Tout Benefits of Water Infrastructure Investment

    California Supreme Court Raises the Bar on Dangerous Conditions on Public Property Claims

    Client Alert: Design Immunity Affirmative Defense Not Available to Public Entities Absent Evidence of Pre-Accident Discretionary Approval of the Plan or Design

    San Diego County Considering Updates to Green Building Code

    California Court Holds No Coverage Under Pollution Policy for Structural Improvements

    Structural Problems May Cause Year-Long Delay Opening New Orleans School

    Washington Court of Appeals Divisions Clash Over Interpretations of the Statute of Repose

    Bond Principal Necessary on a Mechanic’s Lien Claim

    Illinois Joins the Pack on Defective Construction as an Occurrence

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Sub-Contractor

    Eleventh Circuit Upholds Coverage for Environmental Damage from Sewage, Concluding It is Not a “Pollutant”

    A Few Things You Might Consider Doing Instead of Binging on Netflix

    Assessing Defective Design Liability on Federal Design-Build Projects

    Nevada’s Changing Liability Insurance Landscape—State Insurance Regulator Issues Emergency Regulation and Guidance Addressing Controversial “Defense-Within-Limits” Legislation

    U.S. Government Bans Use of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements between Nursing Homes and Residents, Effective November 28, 2016

    Viewpoint: A New Approach to Job Site Safety Reaps Benefits

    Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Faulty Work By Subcontractor Constitutes "Occurrence"

    Alabama Still “An Outlier” on Construction Defects

    Real-Estate Pros Fight NYC Tax on Wealthy Absentee Owners

    Environmental Roundup – May 2019

    Recent Bad Faith Decisions in Florida Raise Concerns

    High Court Could Alter Point-Source Discharge Definition in Taking Clean-Water Case

    Failure to Comply with Sprinkler Endorsement Bars Coverage for Fire Damage

    Washington State Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision on Spearin Doctrine

    Protecting Your Business From Liability Claims Stemming From COVID-19 Exposure

    Subsurface Water Exclusion Found Unambiguous

    Back Posting with Thoughts on Lien Waivers

    Specific Performance of an Option Contract to Purchase Real Property is Barred Absent Agreement on All Material Terms

    Massachusetts District Court Holds Contractors Are Not Additional Insureds on Developer’s Builder’s Risk Policy

    Fungi, Wet Rot, Dry Rot and "Virus": One of These Things is Not Like the Other

    NYC’s Next Hot Neighborhoods Targeted With Property Funds

    Colorado Rejects Bill to Shorten Statute of Repose

    Giving Insurance Carrier Prompt Notice of Claim to Avoid “Untimely Notice” Defense

    WA Supreme Court Allows Property Owner to Sue Engineering Firm for Lost Profits

    Bert L. Howe & Associates Brings Professional Development Series to Their Houston Office

    Meet Your Future Team Members: AI Agents

    Oregon agreement to procure insurance, anti-indemnity statute, and self-insured retention

    Spa High-Rise Residents Frustrated by Construction Defects

    3D Printing Innovations Enhance Building Safety
    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

    Construction Defect Specialist Joins Kansas City Firm

    January 13, 2014 —
    David Schatz, whose practice specializes in construction disputes and defects, has joined the Kansas City, Missouri firm Spencer Fane Britt & Brown LLP in their litigation practice group. Mr. Schatz’s expertise also includes banking and finance, banking litigation, commercial disputes, insurance, surety, employment, contract claims, and personal injury. Pat Whalen, Chairman of Spencer Fane Britt & Brown, said that Schatz “brings great experience across a range of industries, but many of us in Kansas City are particularly pleased by his construction and general litigation credentials, which will fit will with the resources we’re building in those areas.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Liability Coverage For Construction Claims May Turn On Narrow Factual Distinctions

    March 25, 2024 —
    In a recent trial court decision, a Montana federal court reminds us how fragile insurance coverage can be for construction-related insurance claims. Specifically, this case illustrates how seemingly small factual nuances can make or break coverage. The case turned on the application of policy provisions familiar to all who deal with these kinds of cases. (See Nautilus Ins. Co. v. Farrens, No. CV 22-193-M-DWM, 2024 WL 885109 (D. Mont. Mar. 1, 2024)) First, the court rebuffed the insurer’s argument that damage resulting from defective workmanship (in this case, the flawed design and installation of an elaborate floating-floor pool system) is not “caused by an occurrence.” The court correctly applied the test followed by most states: if either act causing injury is unintentional or the resulting injury is unexpected or unintended, the “occurrence” requirement is met. Fortunately, the court distinguished sloppy language from earlier Montana federal court decisions suggesting otherwise. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott S. Thomas, Payne & Fears
    Mr. Thomas may be contacted at sst@paynefears.com

    With Wildfires at a Peak, “Firetech” Is Joining Smart City Lineups

    October 21, 2024 —
    The threat of extreme wildfires has doubled in the past 20 years, with almost 20,000 fires blazing across the United States in 2024 alone. These high-intensity fires can be deadly, expensive, and create lingering health and environmental consequences. While we are used to seeing firefighters on the frontlines, researchers hope that next-generation smart technology, augmented by artificial intelligence (AI), will also play a key role in battling these conflagrations. Many municipalities, particularly those near wildfire-prone forests, are beginning to incorporate fire-focused advances (or “firetech”) into their smart city ecosystems. “Smart cities” are urban centers enhanced by utilities, emergency services, traffic signals and more that are linked through information and communications technology. Though the concept can spark cybersecurity-related concerns, many locales are gradually implementing many different kinds of smart tech. Following the 2023 wildfire that devastated Maui, for example, Hawaii installed a network of cloud-based fire and wind sensors that use AI to detect wildfires in real time. Smart tools like these can aid in predicting and discovering fires, streamlining emergency alert protocols, calculating vital analytics and improving firefighter safety. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) is actively studying these innovations, particularly in terms of environmental (smart buildings or robotics), operational (communications) and personnel (PPE sensors or biometrics). Below are a few of the key technologies to watch in this emerging field:
    • Smart Sensors. A total of 80 sensors (64 wildfire sensors and 16 wind sensors) were placed throughout Hawaii starting in March of 2024. Attached to existing utility poles, they detect heat in the air, and then engage AI and smart learning to distinguish smoke particles and gases produced by fires from those commonly found in Hawaii’s atmosphere—such as volcanic ash and ocean salt. Positioned in “strings,” the sensors “talk” to each other and send text messages to officials when they find a problem.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James P. Bobotek, Pillsbury
    Mr. Bobotek may be contacted at james.bobotek@pillsburylaw.com

    The Cross-Party Exclusion: The Hazards of Additional Named Insured Provisions

    July 19, 2021 —
    Most construction contracts contain insurance provisions setting forth the insurance required of the contractor or other downstream parties. Some provisions are detailed and lengthy while others are short and sweet, but all are of critical importance and should be fully understood by the contractor before signing the contract. Also, every insured should understand not only what the contract requires but more importantly what the actual policy states, as the policy, not the contract, will govern whether or not there is coverage. It is possible that certificates received will match the contractual requirements, but much of what the policy covers is not reflected on a certificate. Lurking behind the certificate is the policy, which is where the actual coverage lies. The endorsements or exclusions to the policy can make the certificates worthless pieces of paper. There are many exclusions that can cancel coverage for the work a contractor may perform. Height exclusions, residential exclusions, EFIS exclusions and many more, focus on the type of work or materials that the contractor is performing or using. One exclusion, however, focuses on who is insured and that exclusion alone can eliminate all coverage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Laurie A. Stanziale, Fox Rothschild LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Ms. Stanziale may be contacted at lstanziale@foxrothschild.com

    Court Grants Motion to Dismiss Negligence Claim Against Flood Insurer

    December 22, 2019 —
    The insurer successfully moved to dismiss the insured's negligence claim and demand for jury trial, leaving only the insured's breach of insurance contract claim under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). La Mirage Homeowners Association Inc. v. Wright National Flood Ins. Co., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147667 (S.D. Tex. Aug 29, 2019). Hurricane Harvey damaged three of insured homeowner's association condominium's buildings. Wright National Flood Insurance Company was the insurer pursuant to the NFIP when the hurricane damaged the insured's property. The insured alleged that Wright breached the policy by underpaying on the flood loss claims and by not initiating the appraisal the insured demanded. The insured sought recovery for negligence, consequential damage, statutory penalties, attorney's fees and pre-and-post judgment interest. Wright moved to dismiss the extra-contractual claims and to strike the jury demand. The NFIP's regulations allowed homeowners to purchase policies either directly from FEMA or from private insurers that functioned as Write Your Own (WYO) providers and fiscal agents of the United States. The Fifth Circuit had previously held that state law tort claims arising from claims handling by a WYO were preempted under federal law. The court, therefore, was faced with the issue of whether the insured's claims of negligence, attorney's fees, statutory penalties, and interest were policy-handling claims which were preempted by federal law. 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

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Fires up a Case-By-Case Analysis for Landlord-Tenant, Implied Co-Insured Questions

    February 03, 2020 —
    In Joella v. Cole, 2019 PA Super. 313, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania recently considered whether a tenant, alleged by the landlord’s property insurance carrier to have carelessly caused a fire, was an implied co-insured on the landlord’s policy. The court found that the tenant was an implied co-insured because the lease stated that the landlord would procure insurance for the building, which created a reasonable expectation that the tenant would be a co-insured under the policy. Since the tenant was an implied co-insured on the policy, the insurance carrier could not maintain a subrogation action against the tenant. This case confirms that Pennsylvania follows a case-by-case approach when determining whether a tenant was an implied co-insured on a landlord’s insurance policy. The Joella case stems from a fire at an apartment building in Northampton County, Pennsylvania. The landlord’s property insurance carrier paid the landlord $180,000 to repair the damages resulting from the fire. In March 2018, the insurer brought a subrogation action against Annie Cole, a tenant in the building, alleging that Ms. Cole’s negligent use of an extension cord caused the fire. Ms. Cole raised the affirmative defense that she was an implied co-insured on the landlord’s insurance policy. The subrogating insurer filed a partial motion for summary judgment seeking to dismiss Ms. Cole’s defense. In response, Ms. Cole filed a cross motion for partial judgment, arguing that because the lease specified that the landlord would maintain fire insurance for the building, there was a reasonable expectation that she would be a co-insured on that policy. The trial court found in favor of Ms. Cole, holding that the landlord’s insurer could not maintain a subrogation action against her because she was an implied co-insured of the landlord’s insurance policy under the terms of the lease. The landlord’s insurer filed an appeal with the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Indemnity Provision Provides Relief to Contractor; Additional Insured Provision Does Not

    January 06, 2016 —
    The court found that the contractor was entitled to relief under the contractual indemnity provision, but not the policy's additional insured clause. Chatelain v. Fluor Daniel Constr. Co., 2015 La. App. LEXIS 2257 (Ct. App. La. Nov. 10, 2015). Following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, FEMA retained Fluor Enterprises, Inc. as a contractor to transport and install FEMA trailers. Fluor entered a Blanket Ordering Agreement (BOA) with Bobby Reavis Contracting, Inc. to transport and install the trailers. The BOA provided Reavis would defend and indemnify Fluor from all liability arising from the subcontractor's work. Reavis also agreed to name Fluor as an additional insured under its CGL policy. Reavis installed a FEMA trailer for Connie Chatelain. Ms. Chatelain was injured when she fell exiting her FEMA trailer. She sued Fluor and Reavis. Fluor tendered the suit to Reavis and Reavis' insurer, Guilford Insurance Company. The tender was rejected and Fluor filed a third-party action demanding indemnification, reimbursement of all legal expenses and damages for insurer misconduct. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    The Construction Lawyer as Counselor

    June 10, 2019 —
    It’s been a while since I discussed the role that I believe a construction lawyer should serve. Back in 2013, I discussed how those of us that practice construction law are seen as “necessary evils.” I was thinking over the weekend about certain clients and matters (as I often do, particularly in the shower) and came to the conclusion that the best role for me as a Virginia construction attorney is that of counselor and sounding board for my clients. Sure I come from a litigation background, enjoy working with other construction lawyers here in the Commonwealth, and often the first contact that I have with clients is when there is a problem, but I enjoy my practice, and I believe clients are more satisfied with their interactions with me when I try and provide a more cost effective and pragmatic solution than that which litigation or arbitration provides. The six years of solo construction practice since 2013 (yes, I’m close to the 9 year mark with my practice) has only served to cement the fact that construction professionals need and want the “counselor” portion of “attorney and counselor at law.” Working as a sort of “in house counsel” to various construction companies, as opposed to simply dealing with the litigation, allows me to better understand their businesses and assist them in avoiding problems through contract review, discussions of situations that come up short of claims, and general risk management. I also get to know these mostly small business owners on a more personal level (sometimes even resulting in a fishing trip or two). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com