BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofing
    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


    When is a Contract not a Contract?

    DoD Will Require New Cybersecurity Standards in 2020: Could Other Agencies Be Next?

    Beyond Inverse Condemnation in Wildfire Litigation: An Oregon Jury Finds Utility Liable for Negligence, Trespass and Nuisance

    How New York City Plans to Soak Up the Rain

    New York State Trial Court: Non-Cumulation Provision in Excess Policies Mandates “All Sums” Allocation

    Quick Note: Lis Pendens Bond When Lis Pendens Not Founded On Recorded Instrument Or Statute

    DOD Contractors Receive Reprieve on Implementation of Chinese Telecommunications Ban

    Godfather Charged with Insurance Fraud

    New Research Shows Engineering Firms' Impact on Economy, Continued Optimism on Business Climate

    Damp Weather Not Good for Wood

    The Most Expensive Travel Construction Flops

    Newmeyer & Dillion Named a Best Law Firm in 2019 in Multiple Practice Areas by U.S. News-Best Lawyers

    Was Jury Right in Negligent Construction Case?

    General Liability Alert: A Mixed Cause of Action with Protected and Non-Protected Activity Not Subject to Anti-SLAPP Motion

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    Just When You Thought General Contractors Were Necessary Parties. . .

    A Lien Might Just Save Your Small Construction Business

    Miller Act Claim for Unsigned Change Orders

    Manhattan Home Prices Jump to a Record as Buyers Compete

    Do You Really Want Mandatory Arbitration in Your Construction Contract?

    Senior Living Facility Makes Construction Defect Claims

    The New Jersey Theme Park Where Kids’ Backhoe Dreams Come True

    While Construction Permits Slowly Rise, Construction Starts and Completions in California Are Stagnant

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2023 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    New Jersey Imposes New Apprenticeship Training Requirements

    Court Denies Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Collapse Claim

    Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Insurance Bad Faith Trials

    Wilke Fleury Attorney Featured in 2022 Best Lawyers in America and Best Lawyers: Ones To Watch!

    The Moving Finish Line: Statutes of Limitation and Repose Are Not Always What They Seem

    The Cheapest Place to Buy a House in the Hamptons

    Florida Insurance Legislation Alert - Part I

    Six Inducted into California Homebuilding Hall of Fame

    Issue and Claim Preclusion When Forced to Litigate Similar Issues in Different Forums: White River Village, LLP v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland

    U.S. Supreme Court Weighs in on Construction Case

    Florida Governor Signs COVID-19 Liability Shield

    Nevada Senate Bill 435 is Now in Effect

    New California Construction Law for 2019

    Repeated Use of Defective Fireplace Triggers Duty to Defend Even if Active Fire Does Not Break Out Until After End of Policy Period

    A General Contractor’s Guide to Additional Insured Coverage

    Dallas Home Being Built of Shipping Containers

    California Judicial Council Votes to Rescind Prohibitions on Eviction and Foreclosure Proceedings

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds Asbestos Exclusion in Alleged Failure to Disclose Case

    Electronic Signatures On Contracts: Are They Truly Compliant?

    Gene Witkin Celebrates First Anniversary as Member of Ross Hart’s Mediation Team

    Freddie Mac Eases Mortgage Rules to Limit Putbacks

    Traub Lieberman Partner Stephen Straus Wins Spoliation Motion in Favor of Defendant

    Attorneys' Fees Awarded as Part of "Damages Because of Property Damage"

    Cable-Free Elevators Will Soar to New Heights, and Move Sideways

    Contractor Sues Construction Defect Claimants for Defamation

    Carbon Monoxide Injuries Caused by One Occurrence
    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

    Economic Loss Not Property Damage

    November 04, 2019 —
    The Fifth Circuit agreed with the district court that the insured subcontractor's economic losses did not amount to covered property damage. Greenwich Ins. Co. v. Capsco Industries, Inc., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 23949 (5th Cir. Aug 12, 2019). Capsco Industries, Inc. was a subcontractor on the construction of a casino. Capsco subcontracted with Ground Control to install water, sewage, and storm-drain lines. Ground Control was terminated from the project by the general contractor for alleged safety violations and failed drug tests of its employees. Ground Control sued in state court against multiple parties, including Capsco, seeking payment for work on the project. The claims were dismissed on summary judgment because neither party had obtained the required certificates of responsibility from the state, making the parties' contract void. The Mississippi Supreme Court agreed the contract was void, but reversed and remanded for further proceedings based solely on theories of unjust enrichment and quantum meruit. While the state case was on remand, Capsco's liability insurers, Greenwich Insurance Company and Indian Harbor Insurance Company, filed a compliant for declaratory judgment in federal district court seeking a declaration that they did not owe a defense or indemnity to Capsco. The defendants were Ground Control, Capsco, the general contractor, and the casino owner. The latter two parties were dismissed. Ground Control counterclaimed for coverage of its claims against Capsco. The district court stayed proceedings until the state court litigation ended. 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

    Insurer Could Not Rely on Extrinsic Evidence to Circumvent Its Duty to Defend

    February 14, 2023 —
    In First Mercury Insurance Co. v. First Florida Building Corp., et al., a federal district court ordered that an insurer had a duty to defend its insured against an underlying personal injury lawsuit. 2023 WL 23116, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 3, 2023). First Mercury is a cautionary tale about how insurers may try to circumvent their obligations by improperly considering extrinsic evidence when determining whether they have a duty to defend their insureds. First Mercury is a coverage dispute over an underlying personal injury lawsuit that was filed against the insured, a construction company, for injuries the claimant allegedly sustained at a construction site. Id. The claimant alleged that he was at the construction site as an invitee who was “working with” the insured. Id. The insurer agreed to defend the insured against the personal injury lawsuit under a reservation of rights. Id. However, the insurer filed a coverage action seeking a declaration that coverage for the personal injury lawsuit was excluded under the policy. Id. Specifically, the insurer, on summary judgment, argued that the claimant was an employee of the insured who was injured in the course of his employment, thus falling within the employer’s liability and workers’ compensation exclusions in the policy. Id. Although the insurer acknowledged that the personal injury complaint against the insured triggered its duty to defend under the policy, the insurer argued that those exclusions relieved its duty to defend or indemnify the insured. Id. Reprinted courtesy of Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Yaniel Abreu, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Mr. Abreu may be contacted at yabreu@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    SB800 Not the Only Remedy for Construction Defects

    October 01, 2013 —
    “We anticipate an increase in residential construction defect litigation in response to this ruling,” David Frenznic, a construction defect lawyer at Wilke, Fleury, Hoffelt, Gould & Birney LLP told the Central Valley Business Times. Mr. Frenznic was responding to an August ruling by the California Court of Appeals that found that SB800 does not create the only remedy for homeowners with construction defects. “Homeowners who suffer actual damage as a result of construction defects have a choice of remedies,” said Mr. Frenznick. SB800 established a shorter statute of limitations for construction defect claims, however, “the ruling makes clear that common law claims are still governed by the longer statues of limitations.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    One Insurer's Settlement with Insured Does Not Bar Contribution Claim by Other Insurers

    October 30, 2013 —
    The New Jersey Supreme Court held that one insurer could seek contribution from another insurer who settled with and secured a release from the insured. Potomac Ins. Co. v. Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Ass'n Ins. Co., 2013 N.J. LEXIS 847 (N.J. Sept. 16, 2013) The township of Evesham retained Roland Aristone, Inc. to be its general contractor for construction of a new middle school. After completion of the school, the roof leaked. Evesham sued Aristone for the construction defects. Aristone tendered to its various CGL carriers. Two insurers, Selective Way Insurance Company and OneBeacon Insurance Company, defended. Two others, Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Insurance Company (PMA) and Royal Insurance Company, denied coverage. Aristone sued PMA and Royal, and ultimately settled with PMA for $150,000 in exchange for Aristone's release from all claims, including claims for defense fees and costs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Bidder Be Thoughtful: The Impacts of Disclaimers in Pre-Bid Reports

    August 04, 2021 —
    When bidding a project, subsurface or latent site conditions that are not immediately apparent can massively impact the costs of performance to general contractors. Were contractors required to bid on projects without any information on pre-existing conditions, they would need either to be assured that any additional costs would be reimbursed by the owner, or to include significant contingencies for subsurface conditions in their bids. For owners, these options result in either increased risk or increased cost—neither of which is particularly palatable. Owners therefore implement several contractual tools to minimize these risks and costs. One of these tools is providing bidders with a report on latent conditions, often called a “geotechnical data report” or “GDR”, but otherwise shifting as much of the subsurface-related risk as possible to the contractor. In theory, these reports permit contractors to appropriately adjust their contingencies for latent conditions, thus saving owners money. However, several independent and thorny issues arise where site reports provided by the owner are either inconsistent with or silent on the actual conditions of a project site. Hence owners often include disclaimers with these reports, such as noting that the report is for “informational purposes only” or that the report is “not part of the contract documents." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joshua A. Morehouse, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Morehouse may be contacted at jmorehouse@pecklaw.com

    Want to Build Affordable Housing in the Heart of Paris? Make It Chic.

    November 01, 2022 —
    The project at 12 Rue Jean-Bart is a modest one, just eight units of affordable housing on a narrow lot in Paris near the Luxembourg Gardens. The social housing project nevertheless caused a stir with neighbors in the 6th arrondissement, one of the city’s more affluent areas. When local politicians backing the project came to visit the building during its construction, neighbors shouted from windows across the street that it was a shame to build social housing here, according to Jean-Christophe Quinton, the Paris-based architect who designed the small in-fill development. Local resistance was a persistent feature of the project throughout its three-year-long construction, Quinton says; the building regularly faced harsh scrutiny in local newspaper Le Parisien. Reprinted courtesy of Marie Patino, Bloomberg and Kriston Capps, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Coyness is Nice. Just Not When Seeking a Default Judgment

    March 04, 2019 —
    As Morrissey of the Smith’s sang: Coyness is nice, but Coyness can stop you, from saying all the things in life you’d like to. It’s not uncommon in litigation to see a complaint asking for “damages according to proof.” Call it laziness. Call it hiding the ball. Call it coy, even. I call it risky. And here’s why: If a defendant doesn’t appear and you need to seek a default judgment against him, her, or it, you are barred from doing so, since you are limited to recovering the amount you sought. And last I checked, something of nothing is nothing. In Yu v. Liberty Surplus Insurance Corporation, California Court of Appeals for the Fourth District, Case No. G054522 (December 11, 2018), one plaintiff found this out the hard way, although perhaps not quite in the way they expected it. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Faulty Workmanship Claims Amount to Multiple Occurrences

    August 03, 2022 —
    In a recommended decision, the magistrate found that claims of faulty workmanship against the insured constituted multiple occurrences. Millsap Waterproofing, Inc. v. United States Fire Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90112 (S.D. Tex. May 19, 2022). Maravilla Condominiums in Galveston, Texas was damaged by Hurricane Ike in 2008. While repairing the damage caused by the hurricane, an unrelated fire broke out and damaged 77 units. In 2010, the Maravilla Owners Association, Inc. hired several contractors, including Millsap Waterproofing, Inc. Multiple problems arose with the various contractors' work. In 2016, Maravilla sued the contractors alleging that their shoddy work damaged the condominium complex. More than 80 condominium owners intervened, alleging that Millsap negligently performed work on windows, doorways, walkways, and balconies, resulting in extensive water damage. 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