BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut architectural 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


    Three Firm Members Are Top 100 Super Lawyers & Ten Are Recognized As Super Lawyers Or Rising Stars In 2018

    Suffolk Pauses $1.5B Boston Tower Project for Safety Audit After Fire

    Subcontractor’s Claim against City Barred by City’s Compliance with Georgia Payment Bond Statute

    Finalists in San Diego’s Moving Parklet Design Competition Announced

    Supply Chain Delay Recommendations

    Sales of New Homes in U.S. Increased 5.4% in July to 507,000

    Rising Construction Disputes Require Improved Legal Finance

    Badly Constructed Masonry Walls Not an Occurrence in Arkansas Law

    New York’s Highest Court Reverses Lower Court Ruling That Imposed Erroneous Timeliness Requirement For Disclaimers of Coverage

    Court of Appeals Invalidates Lien under Dormancy Clause

    Injury to Employees Endorsement Eliminates Coverage for Insured Employer

    Part II: Key Provisions of School Facility Construction & Design Contracts

    How a Robot-Built Habitat on Mars Could Change Construction on Earth

    Proposed Law Protecting Tenants Amended: AB 828 Updated

    Court Says KBR Construction Costs in Iraq were Unreasonable

    Relying Upon Improper Exclusion to Deny Coverage Allows Bad Faith Claim to Survive Summary Judgment

    Cleveland Condo Board Says Construction Defects Caused Leaks

    Muir named Brown and Caldwell Eastern leader

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “I Never Had a Chance”

    BHA’s Next MCLE Seminar in San Diego on July 25th

    We Knew Concrete Could Absorb Carbon—New Study Tells How Much

    Wow! A Mechanic’s Lien Bill That Helps Subcontractors and Suppliers

    Options When there is a Construction Lien on Your Property

    The G2G Year-End Roundup (2022)

    Meet Daniel Hall, Assistant Professor at TU Delft

    Waiver of Subrogation Enforced, Denying Insurers Recovery Against Additional Insured in $500 Million Off-Shore Oil Rig Loss

    Home Buyer Disclosures, What’s Required and What Isn’t

    Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion on Business Risk Exclusions Fails

    Foreclosures Decreased Nationally in September

    CA Court of Appeal Reinstates Class Action Construction Defect Claims Against Homebuilder

    No One to Go After for Construction Defects at Animal Shelter

    There’s an Unusual Thing Happening in the Housing Market

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

    The 2021 Top 50 Construction Law Firms™

    Federal District Court Addresses Anti-concurrent Cause Language in Property Policy

    Quick Note: October 1, 2023 Changes to Florida’s Construction Statutes

    1 De Haro: A Case Study on Successful Cross-Laminated Timber Design and Construction in San Francisco

    EPA Seeks Comment on Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification Rule

    Fifth Circuit Reverses Insurers’ Summary Judgment Award Based on "Your Work" Exclusion

    Don’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public Project

    Illinois Town Sues over Construction Defects at Police Station

    New Jersey Supreme Court Holding Impacts Allocation of Damages in Cases Involving Successive Tortfeasors

    New Jersey Court Upholds Registration Requirement for Joint Ventures Bidding on Public Works Contracts

    Insurer's Appeal of Jury Verdict Rejected by Tenth Circuit

    Keeping Up With Fast-moving FAA Drone Regulations

    The Murky Waters Between "Good Faith" and "Bad Faith"

    Concerns About On-the-job Safety Persist

    Arizona Is Smart About Water. It Should Stay That Way.

    U.K. Developer Pledges Building Safety in Wake of Grenfell

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected for the 2024 Edition of Best Lawyers and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch
    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

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2021 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    January 25, 2021 —
    Eight Haight attorneys have been selected to the 2021 Southern California Super Lawyers list. Congratulations to: Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

    Los Angeles Team Secures Summary Judgment for Hotel Owner & Manager in Tenant’s Lawsuit

    July 08, 2024 —
    Los Angeles, Calif. (June 11, 2024) - Los Angeles Partners David Samuels and Meegan Moloney recently obtained summary judgment for the owner and manager of a Southern California hotel in a lawsuit brought by a tenant who alleged that she suffered injuries due to the presence of mold in her leased space. The plaintiff had entered into a commercial lease for space within the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Redondo Beach, California, for use for her spa and massage business. The lease contained "exculpatory provisions" absolving Lewis Brisbois' clients "from any and all liability and responsibility for any loss, injury or damage incurred or claimed by reason of damage to property located on the leased premises." Shortly after taking possession of the space in September 2019, the plaintiff claimed she became ill and subsequently discovered the presence of mold in the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning ducts. In October 2022, she sued the hotel's owner and manager, asserting a host of claims including negligence, fraud - negligent and intentional misrepresentation, negligent infliction of emotional distress, breach of contract, breach of covenant of quiet enjoyment, private nuisance, and unfair business practices. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Architectural Firm, Fired by School District, Launches Lawsuit

    October 01, 2013 —
    El Associates Architects and Engineers is suing the Boyertown School District after the district fired them for underestimating the cost of an expansion project. The school district, located in Pennsylvania, was seeking to increase student capacity. El Associates estimate lead to a $55 million budget, but D’Huy Engineering, the district’s construction management firm, estimated $70 million for the project. After the Boyertown School District hired KCBA Architects, El Associates filed suit. El Associates contends that it had followed the contract requirements and that the school district was in violation of the contract’s provisions on terminating the agreement. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    An Additional Insured’s Reasonable Expectations may be Different from the Named Insured’s and Must be Considered to Determine whether the Additional Insured is Entitled to Defense from the Insurer of a Commercial Excess & Umbrella Liability Policy

    June 12, 2014 —
    The Second District Court of Appeal’s recent decision, Transport Insurance Company v. Superior Court (2014) 222 Cal.App.4th 1216, immediately affects builders and contractors (collectively “builders”) who are often named as additional insureds (AIs) to contractors’ general liability policies. The decision is an important tool for builders’ counsel because the builder’s reasonable expectations can alter the interpretation of ambiguous terms in policies issued to subcontractors. Essentially, the builder’s intent is relevant to the interpretation of policy terms because the subcontractor’s intent in requesting additional coverage depends on the agreement it made with the builder. The salient aspects of the facts, the Appellate Court’s reasoning, and practical considerations are discussed below. Transport Insurance Company (Transport) issued a commercial excess and umbrella liability policy (Policy) to Vulcan Materials Company (Vulcan), naming R.R. Street & Co., Inc. (Street) as an AI for its distribution of a solvent. The Policy provided that Transport would indemnify and defend the insured for loss caused by property damage if (1) it was not covered by “underlying insurance” but was within the terms of coverage of the Policy, or (2) if the limits of liability of the “underlying insurance” were exhausted during the Policy period due to property damage. The Policy included a Schedule of Underlying Insurance (Schedule) that listed policies issued to Vulcan. Thereafter, Vulcan and Street were named as defendants in several environmental contamination actions (Underlying Actions). Transport brought a declaratory relief action against Vulcan regarding Transport’s duty to defend. (Legacy Vulcan Corp. v. Superior Court (Legacy Vulcan) (2010) 185 Cal.App.4th 677). The trial court found the term “underlying insurance” ambiguous as it was not expressly defined to include only the policies on the Schedule and could be interpreted to include all primary policies in effect. Vulcan challenged the trial court’s decision by petition for writ of mandate, contending “underlying insurance” only included policies listed on the Schedule. The Court of Appeal found “underlying insurance” ambiguous because it was an expressly qualified term under other Policy provisions but not in the umbrella coverage provision and, thus, it was a generic term that was not limited to policies listed in the Schedule or inclusive of all primary insurance. Reprinted courtesy of Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger attorneys Richard H. Glucksman, Jon A. Turigliatto and Kacey R. Riccomini Mr. Glucksman may be contacted at rglucksman@cgdrblaw.com; Mr. Turigliatto may be contacted at jturigliatto@cgdrblaw.com, and Ms. Riccomini may be contacted at kriccomini@cgdrblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Your “Independent Contractor” Clause Just Got a Little Less Relevant

    January 12, 2015 —
    Construction projects are complex, multi-partied, multi-disciplinary endeavors, in which subcontracting all or a portion of the work to be performed is not uncommon. When subcontracting work, parties usually make it clear in their contracts that the party performing work is acting as an “independent contractor.” Here’s a fairly typical provision from the AIA A201 General Conditions:
    The parties agree that the contractual relationship on Contractor to Owner is one solely of an independent contractor in all respects and that the Contract Documents do not in any way create a partnership, joint venture or any other relationship between Owner and Contractor other than the contractual relationship as specified in this Agreement.
    These provisions are intended to shield the contracting party from claims that it is responsible for workers’ compensation premiums, retirement contributions, health care insurance, or other benefits provided for the benefit of employees of the company performing the work. Fair enough. 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

    Nevada Provides Independant Counsel When Conflict Arises Between Insurer and Insured

    December 02, 2015 —
    The Nevada Supreme Court, responding to certified questions, determined that an insurer must provide independent counsel for its insured when a conflict of interest arises between the insurer and insured. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Hansen, 2015 Nev. LEXIS 86 (Nev. Sept. 24, 2015). The insured struck the vehicle of another driver, Hansen. Hansen sued the insured alleging both negligence and various intentional torts. State Farm agreed to defend under a reservation of rights. The reservation of rights letter reserved the right to deny coverage for liabiltiy resulting from intentional acts and punitive damages. 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

    Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Is Still in Trouble, Two Major Reviews Say

    November 07, 2022 —
    Two separate assessments of the health of the Chesapeake Bay indicate that most jurisdictions within its watershed are not on track to meet target goals to cut nitrogen and phosphorus discharge levels by 2025. But new plans and programs put in place in 2022 could improve the restoration trajectory, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Reprinted courtesy of Pam McFarland, Engineering News-Record Ms. McFarland may be contacted at mcfarlandp@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Coverage Denied Where Occurrence Takes Place Outside Coverage Territory

    December 11, 2018 —
    The court held there was no coverage for construction defect claims that occurred outside the coverage territory. Foremost Signature Ins. Co. v. Silverboys, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154524 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 11, 2018). Solo Design, LLC, a Miami-based design company, entered into a contract with Silverboys, LLC (Owner) to provide interior design services in conjunction with the renovation of the Owner's vacation home in the Bahamas. Solo retained Whittingham, a Bahamian architect, as a subcontractor to serve as project manager. Owner sued Solo, Whittingham and others in Florida for breach of contract, fraud, conversion and negligence when the project did not go as planned. The underlying complaint alleged intentional misconduct, lying about qualifications and the progress of the project, submitting false invoices, requesting money for services that were not performed, etc. Owner alleged that the damages included: (a) the cost to repair substandard work; (b) loss of use of the home due to delay; and (c) overcharges for furnishings, contract fees, and expenses. The underlying complaint set forth only a few instances of physical injury to the home, including mold on the ceiling in the master shower, faulty millwork on the children's playroom bookshelf, and a defective front door and resysta facade. 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