BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness construction
    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


    The G2G Year in Review: 2021

    Ownership is Not a Conclusive Factor for Ongoing Operations Additional Insured Coverage

    The Brooklyn Condominium That’s Reinventing Outdoor Common Space

    Colorado House Bill 1279 Stalls over 120-day Unit Owner Election Period

    Delaware Court Holds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    A Termination for Convenience Is Not a Termination for Default

    Effective October 1, 2019, Florida General Contractors Have a Statutory Right to Recovery of Attorney Fees Against a Defaulted Subcontractor’s Surety

    Eighth Circuit Affirms Judgment for Bad Faith after Insured's Home Destroyed by Fire

    Schools Remain Top Priority in Carolinas as Cleanup From Storms Continues

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

    Arizona Purchaser Dwelling Actions Are Subject to a New Construction

    The Legal Landscape

    San Diego Appellate Team Prevails in Premises Liability Appeal

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (05/18/22)

    Consequential Damage Claims for Insurer's Bad Faith Dismissed

    Contractual Indemnification Limitation on Florida Public Projects

    No Coverage for Property Damage That is Limited to Work Completed by Subcontractor

    End of an Era: Los Angeles County Superior Court Closes the Personal Injury Hub

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

    Extreme Heat, Smoke Should Get US Disaster Label, Groups Say

    Legal Fallout Begins Over Delayed Edmonton Bridges

    Design-Build Contracting for County Road Projects

    Is There Direct Physical Loss Under A Property Policy When COVID-19 is Present?

    Work to Solve the Mental Health Crisis in Construction

    The Legal 500 U.S. 2024 Guide Names Peckar & Abramson a Top Tier Firm in Construction Law and Recognizes Nine Attorneys

    A Recession Is Coming, But the Housing Market Won't Trigger It

    Megaproject Savings Opportunities

    Home Buyer May Be Third Party Beneficiary of Property Policy

    “Rip and Tear” Damage Remains Covered Under CGL Policy as “Accident”—for Now.

    Is the Event You Are Claiming as Unforeseeable Delay Really Unforeseeable?

    Insurance Alert: Insurer Delay Extends Time to Repair or Replace Damaged Property

    Steel Component Plant Linked to West Virginia Governor Signs $1M Pollution Pact

    New York Restrictions on Flow Through Provision in Subcontracts

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

    Century Communities Acquires Dunhill Homes Las Vegas Operations

    Summary Judgment for Insurer on Construction Defect Claim Reversed

    Coverage for Named Windstorm Removed by Insured, Terminating Such Coverage

    Two Architecturally Prized Buildings May be Demolished

    Illinois Court of Appeals Addresses What It Means to “Reside” in Property for Purposes of Coverage

    Get Construction Defects in Writing

    Wave Breaker: How a Living Shoreline Will Protect a Florida Highway and Oyster Bed

    California’s Fifth Appellate District Declares the “Right to Repair Act” the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    Construction Halted in Wisconsin Due to Alleged Bid Issues

    Understand the Dispute Resolution Provision You Are Agreeing To

    Billionaire Behind Victoria’s Secret Built His Version of the American Heartland

    Coverage for Construction Defects Barred By Exclusion j (5)

    South Carolina Contractors Regain General Liability Coverage

    Harmon Towers Case to Last into 2014

    Courthouse Reporter Series: The Travails of Statutory Construction...Defining “Labor” under the Miller Act

    English v. RKK- There is Even More to the Story
    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

    United States Supreme Court Backtracks on Recent Trajectory Away from Assertions of General Jurisdiction in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern

    August 01, 2023 —
    Washington, D.C. (June 28, 2023) – On June 27, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a sharply divided opinion that appears to backtrack on the Court’s steady trajectory away from assertions of general jurisdiction in recent years, e.g. Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, 564 U.S. 915, 919 (2011), Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S. Ct. 746 (2014), BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell, 2017, 137 S. Ct. 1549 (2017). Relying on a case from 1917, Pennsylvania Fire Ins. Co. of Philadelphia v. Gold Issue Mining & Milling Co., 243 U. S. 93 (1917), Justice Gorsuch, writing on behalf of the plurality, (Justices Gorsuch, Thomas, Sotomayor, and Jackson) (Justice Alito concurring) found that Norfolk Southern “consented” to jurisdiction in Mallory via 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. §5301(a)(2)(i),(b) by registering to do business in Pennsylvania. This statute, 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. §5301, specifically permits jurisdiction over a corporation “incorporat[ed] under or qualifi[ed]as a foreign corporation under the laws of this Commonwealth … for any cause of action that may asserted against him, whether or not arising from acts enumerated in this section.” In Pennsylvania Fire, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution in connection with a Missouri law that required an out-of-state insurance company desiring to transact any business in the state to file paperwork agreeing to (1) appoint a state official to serve as the company’s agent for service of process and (2) accept service on that official as valid in any suit. After more than a decade of complying with the law, Pennsylvania Fire was served with process and argued that the Missouri law violated due process. The Court unanimously found that there was “no doubt” that Pennsylvania Fire could be sued in Missouri because it had agreed to accept service of process in Missouri on any suit as a condition of doing business there. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Charles S. Anderson, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Anderson may be contacted at Charles.Anderson@lewisbrisbois.com

    FIFA Inspecting Brazil’s World Cup Stadiums

    March 26, 2014 —
    Representatives from FIFA have returned to Brazil to conduct inspections of the World Cup stadiums, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. Even though Brazil had told FIFA they would have all twelve done by the end of 2013, only nine are finished. Furthermore, “infrastructure work in many of the 12 host cities remains far from completed.” “This is the last occasion for the organizers to take stock of the operational preparations before the respective FIFA World Cup installations begin to be implemented in all 12 host cities,” FIFA said in a statement, as quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insured Cannot Sue to Challenge Binding Appraisal Decision

    December 16, 2023 —
    The court dismissed the insured condominium association's challenge to an appraisal award. The Courtyards at Prairie Fields Condominium Association v. West Band Mut. Ins. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169458 (N. D. Ill. Sept. 22, 2023). In July 2020, the insured filed a claim with West Bend for damage to the property's roof and other building components as a result of wind and hail. West Bend inspected and estimated the replacement cost for the damage was $60,989.54. This amount was paid to the insured minus the $10,000 deductible. The insured believed the damage was so severe that the roofs need to be replaced, which the insured estimated would cost $1,389,600. The insured demanded an appraisal. 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

    2018 Legislative Changes Affecting the Construction Industry

    June 06, 2018 —
    The 2018 Florida Legislative Session recently concluded and a number of important construction-related House Bills (HB) and Senate Bills (SB) were presented during the Session. Florida Governor Rick Scott has 15 days to act on the legislation once each Bill has passed the House and Senate. Bills signed by the Governor go into effect on July 1, 2018, unless indicated otherwise. These Bills may impact General Contractors and Construction Managers in a number of ways, not the least of which is the period of time that a cause of action may be initiated for the design, planning or construction of an improvement. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melinda Gentile, Peckar & Abramson
    Ms. Gentile may be contacted at mgentile@pecklaw.com

    Blurred Lines: New York Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Privileged Documents in Connection with Pre-Denial Communications Prepared by Insurer's Coverage Counsel

    September 17, 2015 —
    In a recent decision, the New York Supreme Court clarified the scope of privileged documents with respect to communications prepared by an insurer’s counsel prior to issuing a denial of coverage letter. The coverage litigation at issue arose out of MF Global Inc.’s claims under fidelity bonds for losses incurred as a result of large trades made by former MF Global employee, Evan Dooley. The trades cost MF Global, Dooley’s former clearing firm, $141 million after it had to reimburse the CME Group, Inc. futures clearinghouse that handled the trade. The insurers that issued the fidelity bonds contested coverage and sued MF Global in 2009. The opinion underscores the fact that there is no “bright line” rule in New York with respect to disclosure of communications in the insurance context prior to the issuance of a coverage determination – the disclosure requirement will instead turn on what’s actually privileged. In addition, while retention of counsel may not serve as an automatic shield for all documents prepared prior to the coverage decision, insurers will not be required to disclose, among other things, communications which include an “indicia of the provision of legal services.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Greg Steinberg, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Steinberg may be contacted at steinbergg@whiteandwilliams.com

    Real Case, Real Lessons: Understanding Builders’ Risk Insurance Limits

    August 12, 2024 —
    In the recent case of 5333 Mattress King LLC v. Hanover Insurance Company, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado provided significant insights into the limits of builders’ risk insurance policies. Mattress King LLC, a warehouse owner, faced a substantial loss when a subcontractor drove a crane over and damaged the warehouse’s concrete floor slab during construction. Despite having a builders’ risk insurance policy with Hanover Insurance Company, coverage was denied, leading to litigation. Applicable Policy Provisions The policy in question was a Commercial Marine/Commercial Lines Builders’ Risk insurance policy. Builders’ risk insurance is designed to cover direct physical loss to covered property during construction unless the loss is excluded or limited by the policy. Key exclusions of the policy at issue included losses caused by faulty, inadequate, or defective:
    • Planning, zoning, surveying, or development
    • Design, specifications, workmanship, repair, construction, renovation, remodeling, grading, or compaction
    • Materials used in construction or renovation
    • Maintenance of the covered property
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    New LG Headquarters Project Challenged because of Height

    January 24, 2014 —
    The new LG headquarters project in Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, has been challenged by various environmental groups because of what the groups see “as a blight on the Hudson River landscape,” according to the New York Times. The problem isn’t the building itself, but the proposed height of the tower: LG “plans to construct eight stories, 143 feet total, in an area previously zoned for a maximum of 35 feet. The height restriction was first lifted through a variance, which has been challenged in State Superior Court in one of two lawsuits filed to protect the view. Subsequently the land was rezoned to allow for a taller building.” Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Natural Resources Defense Council, and a New Jersey conservation group are continuing to fight against the removal of the height restriction. “This is like if somebody tried to build a high-rise next to Yellowstone,” Mr. Kennedy said in an interview with the New York Times. “It’s a national issue.” However, there is also local support for this project, “which LG has said will be environmentally sensitive and produce jobs,” reported the New York Times. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Notary Language For Mechanics Lien Releases and Stop Payment Notice Releases

    January 21, 2015 —
    Thanks to Scott Wolfe, Jr. over at ZLien for bringing this to my attention: Effective January 1, 2015, the notary language required for Certificates of Acknowledgment – used by notaries for mechanics lien releases and stop payment notice releases in California – now require the following new wording to appear at the top of the notary certificate in a box:
    A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
    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