BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance 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


    Repair of Fractured Girders Complete at Shuttered Salesforce Transit Center

    Contractor Sued for Contract Fraud by Government

    How Your Disgruntled Client Can Turn Into Your Very Own Car Crash! (and How to Avoid It) (Law Tips)

    GRSM Named Among 2025 “Best Law Firms” by Best Lawyers

    Two Texas Cities Top San Francisco for Property Investors

    No Coverage for Hurricane Sandy Damage

    Six Inducted into California Homebuilding Hall of Fame

    Emotional Distress Damages Not Distinct from “Annoyance and Discomfort” Damages in Case Arising from 2007 California Wildfires

    Taking Service Network Planning to the Next Level

    The Word “Estimate” in a Contract Matters as to a Completion Date

    Another (Insurer) Bites The Dust: Virginia District Court Rejects Narrow Reading of Pollution Exclusion

    Plaintiffs In Construction Defect Cases to Recover For Emotional Damages?

    Close Enough Only Counts in Horseshoes and Hand Grenades

    Court Confirms No Duty to Reimburse for Prophylactic Repairs Prior to Actual Collapse

    Digital Twins – Interview with Cristina Savian

    Prevailing Parties Entitled to Contractual Attorneys’ Fees Under California CCP §1717 Notwithstanding Declaration That Contract is Void Under California Government Code §1090

    Want More Transit (and Federal Funding)? Build Housing That Supports It

    Jobsite Safety Should Be Every Contractors' Priority

    House of Digital Twins

    Renters ‘Sold Out’ by NYC Pensions Press Mayor on Housing

    PSA: Virginia DOLI Amends COVID Workplace Standard

    Be Careful With Construction Fraud Allegations

    Microsoft Said to Weigh Multibillion-Dollar Headquarters Revamp

    Homeowner may pursue negligence claim for construction defect, Oregon Supreme Court holds

    The Secret to an OSHA Inspection

    Did You Really Accept That Bid? – How Contractors Can Avoid Post-Acceptance Bid Disputes Over Contract Terms

    Changes to Pennsylvania Mechanic’s Lien Code

    Home Prices Up in Metro Regions

    Construction Costs Must Be Reasonable

    The Best Laid Plans: Contingency in a Construction Contract

    As the Term Winds Down, Several Important Regulatory Cases Await the U.S. Supreme Court

    Gordie Howe Bridge Project Team Looks for a Third Period Comeback

    New York City Construction: Boom Times Again?

    California Mechanics’ Lien Case Treads Both Old and New Ground

    Questions of Fact Regarding Collapse of Basement Walls Prevent Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    No Duty to Indemnify Where No Duty to Defend

    Keeping Your Workers Safe When Air Quality Isn't

    AB5 Construction Exemption - A Checklist to Avoid Application of AB5's Three-Part Test

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twenty White and Williams Lawyers

    August Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Appreciate at Faster Pace

    Constructive Changes – A Primer

    4 Lessons Contractors Can Learn From The COVID-19 Crisis

    SFAA and Coalition of Partners Encourage Lawmakers to Require Essential Surety Bonding Protections on All Federally-Financed Projects Receiving WIFIA Funds

    As Florence Eyes East Coast, Are You Looking At Your Insurance?

    New York vs. Miami: The $50 Million Penthouse Battle From Zaha Hadid

    Precast Standards' Work Under Way as Brittle Fracture Warnings Aired

    New York’s Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act Imposes Increased Disclosure Requirements On Defendants at the Beginning of Lawsuits

    Florida trigger

    Subsequent Purchaser Can Assert Claims for Construction Defects

    Short on Labor, Israeli Builders Seek to Vaccinate Palestinians
    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

    The Goldilocks Rule: Panel Rejects Proposed Insurer-Specific MDL Proceedings for Four Large Insurers, but Establishes MDL Proceeding for the Smallest

    November 16, 2020 —
    It is an outcome few people expected. Back in August, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (Panel) refused plaintiffs’ requests to set up a single industry-wide multi-district litigation, which would have consolidated — in a single massive proceeding — all federal lawsuits seeking COVID-related business interruption coverage from insurers. The Panel acknowledged common legal issues, and potential benefits of coordinated management, but it balanced those benefits against the numerous factual differences between policies, carriers, and insureds, and noted that “[t]hese differences will overwhelm any common factual questions.” Then, after lengthy argument, the Panel ordered further briefing as to whether separate, company-specific MDL proceedings might be appropriate against five specific insurance carriers: specifically, the five carriers against whom the largest numbers of federal claims were pending. By choosing these five carriers and not others for further argument, the Panel seemed to be suggesting a formula: the larger the carrier, and the greater the number of claims against it, the greater the potential benefit from coordinated management, and the stronger the plaintiffs’ case for pre-trial consolidation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eric Hermanson, White and Williams
    Mr. Hermanson may be contacted at hermansone@whiteandwilliams.com

    More Charges Anticipated in Las Vegas HOA Scam

    February 28, 2013 —
    With almost forty people already charged in the conspiracy to take over Las Vegas homeowners associations in order to profit from construction defect claims, more charges are likely to come, according to an article in the Las Vegas Review Journal. The article also notes that the trial against Leon Benzer will involve millions of pages of documents. It is alleged that Benzer found straw purchasers for condominiums in order to control homeowner boards. Benzer’s firm, Silver Lining Construction, would then receive contracts to repair construction defects. The Justice Department will be seeking restitution for the victims, which may total $25 million. Four individuals with connections to the conspiracy have died since investigations began. At least three of these deaths were suicides, and included Nancy Quon, who with Benzer are thought to be the main figures in the scam. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Intel's $20B Ohio 'Mega-Site' is Latest Development in Chip Makers' Rush to Boost US Production

    January 24, 2022 —
    Intel’s recently announced Ohio chip manufacturing complex could begin construction by the end of this year, setting the stage for a long-term, multibillion-dollar development effort many experts have likened to building a small city from scratch. Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Precedent-Setting ‘Green’ Apartments in Kansas City

    September 17, 2015 —
    According to the Kansas City Star, the Missouri riverfront apartment development, Second and Delaware, is being constructed with “greener-than-green technology” and features the following: “Sixteen-inch-thick concrete walls. Rooftop gardens. A 90 percent reduction in energy use compared to current building codes.” The two buildings “will comprise the largest U.S. multifamily apartment project using Passive House Institute-certified construction, a system that’s more energy-efficient than the highest LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) building standard.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Rooftop Owners Sue Cubs Consultant for Alleged False Statements

    January 24, 2014 —
    A disagreement over signage potentially blocking rooftop owner’s views has stalled Wrigley Field’s proposed $300 million renovation, reported the Chicago Tribune. However, a recently lawsuit filed between the two entities regarded allegedly false statements made by Marc Ganic, a Chicago sports business consultant, published in the Chicago Sun-Times: “In the story, Ganis is quoted as saying the rooftop clubs were ‘stealing’ the Cubs product for their own profit,” according to the Chicago Tribune. The rooftop owners claimed in the suit that “they have a contractual arrangement with the team that allows them to sell tickets to people who want bird’s-eye views of the game.” The Chicago Tribune attempted to contact Ganis for comment, but he “did not return several messages.” The rooftop owners and the Cubs entered into a “20-year agreement in 2004 in which the rooftop owners pay the Cubs 17 percent of the team's yearly profits in exchange for unobstructed views into the ballpark,” according to ESPN. “The Cubs dispute that notion, however, contending the unobstructed views were guaranteed through the landmarking of the bleachers not with the agreement they have with the rooftop owners.” Business president Crane Kenney explained to ESPN that the city council amended the landmarking rule for the field: “[The council has] now recognized the outfield is not a historic feature. And above a 10-foot level we can have signage. That was the big win last summer, among many. That's what the rooftops would contest.” According to ESPN the Cubs will not start the renovation project until they have an agreement with the rooftop owners “that includes a guarantee not to sue the Cubs for breach of contract, which would delay construction.” Read the full story at the Chicago Tribune... Read the full story at ESPN... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Coverage for Injury to Insured’s Employee Not Covered

    June 10, 2015 —
    The employee exclusions in the employer's CGL and Umbrella policies barred coverage. Piatt v. Indiana Lumbermen's Mut. Ins. Co., 2015 Mo. LEXIS 32 (Mo. April 28, 2015). Linda Nunley was killed while working for Missouri Hardwood Charcoal, Inc. The kiln's large steel door had been removed and was leaning upright against another kiln when it blew over and crushed Ms. Nunley. Her family filed a wrongful death suit against Junior Flowers, the company's sole owner, director, and executive officer. The complaint alleged that Flowers was negligent in ordering employees to lean the kiln doors upright, even though he knew it was unsafe. The complaint further alleged that Flowers breached a personal duty of care owed to Ms. Nunley and that his actions were "something more" that a breach of the company's duty to provide a safe workplace. Flowers requested a defense under CGL and Umbrella policies issued by Lumbermen's. The policies insured Missouri Hardwood and its executive officers, but excluded liability for a work-related injury to an "employee of the insured." The policies also had a "separation of insureds" provision, stating that the insurance applied "separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought." Lumbermen's denied coverage. 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

    ASCE Statement on Devastating Tornado Damages Throughout U.S.

    December 20, 2021 —
    WASHINGTON, DC. – We are deeply saddened by the tragic tornado storms that ravaged six states across the Midwest and Southeastern portions of the U.S. last Friday evening, resulting in loss of life in five of those six states. Even though warnings were issued throughout the region, storms of this magnitude can be difficult to prepare for. Nevertheless, as civil engineers, our mission is to continually advance the design and construction of safe, reliable, and resilient building structures and infrastructure systems to mitigate the damage caused by storms. ASCE 7 — a nationally-adopted, consensus-based engineering standard that is the primary reference of structural design requirements in all U.S. building codes — was recently updated to include a new chapter for tornado loads in the 2022 edition. The new tornado provisions in ASCE 7-22 were a result of a decade-long effort in partnership with the National Institute of Standards and Technology following the 2011 Joplin, MO Tornado. ASCE 7-22 provides updated design requirements for a variety of structures, including many of the types impacted by Friday's storms. In an effort to assist, the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE is currently offering free access to a report issued after the Joplin, MO tornado in 2011 that killed more than 150 people. Joplin, Missouri, Tornado of May 22, 2011: Structural Damage Survey and Case for Tornado-Resilient Building Codes presents the observations, findings, and recommendations of an engineering reconnaissance team that surveyed residential structures and schools in the tornado path shortly after the event. The EF 5 tornado cut a seven-mile swath through Joplin, Missouri; it destroyed more than 5,000 buildings and killed more than 150 people. We will continue to keep those who have been affected in our hearts and thoughts, and we share our heartfelt sympathies. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Georgia Court of Appeals Upholds Denial of Coverage Because Insurance Broker Lacked Agency to Accept Premium Payment

    December 07, 2020 —
    In American Reliable Insurance Company v. Lancaster, the Georgia Court of Appeals reversed the denial of a property insurer’s summary judgment motion concerning the insurer’s denial of a fire loss claim. The basis of the denial was that the policyholders had failed to pay the policy premium. The policyholders, Charlie and Wanda Lancaster, claimed that they had paid their policy premiums for several years to their insurance agent, Macie Yawn. In October 2014, American Reliable mailed a renewal notice to the Lancasters notifying them that premium payments had to be made directly to the insurer. After it did not receive payment from the Lancasters, American Reliable sent them a cancellation notice in December 2014, again notifying them that payments be made directly to the insurer. The Lancasters denied having received either notice from American Reliable, but the record included a receipt for certificate of mailing. After the Lancaster’s home burned down in 2015, American Reliable denied coverage on the grounds that the policy had been cancelled for nonpayment of premium. In the subsequent coverage action, the trial court denied American Reliable’s motion for summary judgment, ruling that a factual issue existed as to the actual and apparent agency of the insurance agent, Yawn. On appeal, the Court of Appeals found that the trial court erred in deciding that there was a factual issue concerning Yawn’s agency. Specifically, the Court of Appeals ruled that the record showed American Reliable had terminated Yawn’s agency to accept policy premiums, and that the Lancaster’s received notice of that termination in the renewal and cancellation notices. In addition to determining that Yawn was not an actual agent, the Court held that Yawn did not have apparent agency, because the notices sent to the Lancasters stated that the premium payment was to be paid to American Reliable, not to the agent. Reprinted courtesy of Lawrence J. Bracken II, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Rachel E. Hudgins, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Bracken may be contacted at lbracken@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Ms. Hudgins may be contacted at rhudgins@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of