BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering 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


    Biden Administration Issues Buy America Guidance for Federal Infrastructure Funds

    Finding Insurer's Declaratory Relief Action Raises Unsettled Questions of State Law, Case is Dismissed

    Were Condos a Bad Idea?

    Court Rules in Favor of Treasure Island Developers in Environmental Case

    Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claim Against Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    California Condo Architects Not Liable for Construction Defects?

    Quick Note: Don’t Forget To Serve The Contractor Final Payment Affidavit

    Colorado Statutes of Limitations and Repose, A First Step in Construction Defect Litigation

    Construction Contract Clauses Which Go Bump in the Night – Part 1

    Nevada Construction Defect Lawyers Dead in Possible Suicides

    What to Know Before Building a Guesthouse

    Amid the Chaos, Trump Signs Executive Order Streamlining Environmental Permitting and Disbands Infrastructure Council

    Constructive Change Directives / Directed Changes

    Corvette museum likely to keep part of sinkhole

    #3 CDJ Topic: Underwriters of Interest Subscribing to Policy No. A15274001 v. ProBuilders Specialty Ins. Co., Case No. D066615

    "Your Work" Exclusion Bars Coverage

    New Megablimp to Deliver to Remote Alaskan Construction Sites

    Ohio subcontractor work exception to the “your work” exclusion

    Boston Water Main Break Floods Trench and Kills Two Workers

    Utah’s Highest Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Properly Commence an Action to Rely on the Relation-Back Doctrine to Overcome the Statute of Repose

    California Court of Appeal Clarifies Intent of Faulty Workmanship Exclusions

    Increases in U.S. Office Rents Led by San Jose and Dallas

    Updated: Happenings in and around the West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Palo Alto Proposes Time Limits on Building Permits

    Additional Insured Not Covered Where Injury Does Not Arise Out Of Insured's Work

    Cross-Motions for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings for COVID-19 Claim Denied

    Supreme Court of Canada Broadly Interprets Exception to Faulty Workmanship Exclusion

    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    South Carolina Couple Must Arbitrate Construction Defect Claim

    BUILD Act Inching Closer To Reality

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2023 New York – Metro Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    Construction Defect Claim Not Timely Filed

    So a Lawsuit Is on the Horizon…

    Hilti Partners with Canvas, a Construction Robotics Company

    Stair Collapse Points to Need for Structural Inspections

    Texas Approves Law Ensuring Fair and Open Competition

    Federal Judge Refuses to Limit Coverage and Moves Forward with Policyholder’s Claims Against Insurer and Broker

    Bankruptcy on a Construction Project: Coronavirus Edition

    Is Your Business Insured for the Coronavirus?

    Tariffs, Supply Snarls Spur Search for Factories Closer to U.S.

    A New Hope - You Now May Have Coverage for Punitive Damages in Connecticut

    Connecticut’s New False Claims Act Increases Risk to Public Construction Participants

    Multiple Construction Errors Contributed to Mexico Subway Collapse

    Massachusetts Federal Court Rejects Adria Towers, Finds Construction Defects Not an “Occurrence”

    A Year-End Review of the Environmental Regulatory Landscape

    Engineering, Architecture, and Modern Technology – An Interview with Dr. Jakob Strømann-Andersen

    Nevada Judge says Class Analysis Not Needed in Construction Defect Case

    Attorneys' Fees Awarded "Because Of" Property Damage Are Covered by Policy

    Neighbor Allowed to Remove Tree Roots on Her Property That Supported Adjoining Landowners’ Two Large Trees With Legal Immunity

    A Look Back at the Ollies
    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

    Trial Court’s Grant of Summary Judgment On Ground Not Asserted By Moving Party Upheld

    December 17, 2015 —
    In Marlton Recovery Partners, LLC v. County of Los Angeles, et al. (filed 11/20/15), the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, affirmed summary judgment in favor of the defendants County of Los Angeles, the County Treasurer-Tax Collector and Board of Supervisors (collectively the “County”) despite the fact summary judgment was granted on grounds not raised by the County. The Court of Appeal determined that because the plaintiff could not have shown a triable issue of material fact on the ground of law relied upon by the trial court, summary judgment was proper. In the underlying case, plaintiff sought cancellation of penalties on delinquent property taxes for 26 parcels under Revenue and Taxation Code §4985.2, which allows the tax collector to cancel such penalties under certain circumstances. The County denied the request prompting plaintiff to challenge the denial on a petition for peremptory writ of mandate to the trial court. Reprinted courtesy of Laura C. Williams, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Williams may be contacted at lwilliams@hbblaw.com Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Subcontractor’s Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    September 07, 2017 —
    Since I wrote my ebook on the application of federal Miller Act payment bonds, I have not discussed a case applying the Miller Act. Until now! Below is a case that reinforces two important points applicable to Miller Act payment bond claims. First, the case reinforces what a claimant needs to prove to establish a Miller Act payment bond claim. Very important. Second, the case reinforces that a subcontractor is going to be governed by its subcontract. This means that those provisions regarding payment and scope of work are very important. Not that you did not already know this, but ignoring contractual requirements will not fly. In U.S.A. f/u/b/o Netplanner Systems, Inc. v. GSC Construction, Inc., 2017 WL 3594261 (E.D.N.C. 2017), a prime contractor hired a subcontractor to run cabling and wiring at Fort Bragg. The subcontractor claimed it was owed a balance and filed a lawsuit against the general contractor the Miller Act payment bond. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at Dadelstein@gmail.com

    The Fair Share Act Impacts the Strategic Planning of a Jury Trial

    May 10, 2017 —
    Complex questions surrounding the application of the Fair Share Act, which modified Pennsylvania’s common law “joint and several” liability law, are being taken up by courts in the Commonwealth with increasing frequency. Given the practical consequences of the differences in application between the Act and “joint and several” liability, additional litigation over the application of the Fair Share Act to real world factual situations will undoubtedly arise. Recent Caselaw Currently, in Roverano v. PECO Energy, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania is considering the question of whether, under the Fair Share Act, the jury, or else the trial judge, is responsible for the task of apportioning liability to multiple defendants in a strict liability case. In Roverano – an asbestos case -- a jury awarded the plaintiff $6.3 million. On the verdict sheet were eight joint tortfeasor co-defendants. The judge did not allow the jury to apportion liability to each defendant and, as a result, no guidance was provided by the jury about how much each defendant was to contribute to the award. Instead, the judge merely divided the jury’s award by eight (the number of defendants in the case) and apportioned to each defendant one-eighth of the verdict amount. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Andrew Ralston, Jr., White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Ralston may be contacted at ralstona@whiteandwilliams.com

    Homebuilders Call for Housing Tax Incentives

    May 10, 2013 —
    The National Association of Home Builders has asked Congress to support tax incentives for home buyers and renters, including the Low Income Housing Tax Credit and the mortgage interest deduction. Robert Dietz, an economist at the NAHB, noted that in 2009, 35 million home owners were able to claim the mortgage deduction. Dietz responded to arguments that the deduction simply lead to people buying bigger homes by saying that “the need for a larger home created the higher loan deduction, not the other way around.” The NAHB notes that one hundred new single-family homes creates more than 300 jobs and generates substantial tax revenues. “Housing provides the momentum behind an economic recovery because home building and associated businesses employ such a wide range of workers” said Dietz. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    To Ease Housing Crunch, Theme Parks Are Becoming Homebuilders

    January 29, 2024 —
    For visitors, Universal Studios Florida offers a chance to visit a fantastical land full of wizards, Minions and various characters from NBC Universal’s many film and television properties. But for the roughly 28,000 men and women who work at the 840-acre theme park and resort complex in Orlando, the troubles of the real world — like the rising cost of housing — are not far away. Central Florida has seen some of the nation’s fastest pandemic-era rent increases, thanks to a confluence of job growth, migration and housing underproduction that has put a strain on residents. The average tenant in the region saw their monthly rent jump by $600 between early 2020 and early 2023. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, the Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford metro area has one of the worst affordable housing shortages in the US, with only 15 available units for every 100 extremely low-income renter households. The dire need for workforce housing is behind the entertainment conglomerate’s latest project in Central Florida: a 1,000-unit mixed-use development, set to open in 2026, that promises to give tenants who work in the service industry a short commute to the constellation of tourist attractions and hotels nearby. To launch the project, Universal donated 20 acres of land adjacent to the Orange County convention center. Called Catchlight Crossings and built in partnership with local developer Wendover Housing Partners, the project broke ground in November. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Sisson, Bloomberg

    The Coverage Fun House Mirror: When Things Are Not What They Seem

    December 14, 2020 —
    When it comes to commercial general liability coverage, sometimes things are not what they seem. Some policy language looks like it has a clear meaning. But it turns out that there is more than meets the eye. To see this, you need not look further than the first page of the commercial general liability form. Take its insuring agreement. Its words are by now etched in stone tablets. But even so. Any potential coverage is tied, in part, to damages because of “bodily injury.” Everyone knows what “bodily injury” is. The blood and broken bones are hard to miss. But is emotional injury bodily injury? Or what about hair loss, weight loss, fragile fingernails, loss of sleep, crying or a knot in your stomach? Courts have been required to address whether all of these are “bodily injury.” And was that “bodily injury” caused by an “occurrence?” as required by the CGL insuring agreement? An “occurrence” is defined as an accident. Of course everyone knows what an accident is. Then why is it the oldest and most litigated coverage question of them all, with courts struggling with it for about 150 years? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Randy J. Maniloff, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Maniloff may be contacted at maniloffr@whiteandwilliams.com

    Alabama Appeals Court Rules Unexpected and Unintended Property Damage is an Occurrence

    June 17, 2015 —
    In Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Company v St. Catherine of Siena Parish, a U.S. appeals court affirmed "that unexpected and unintended property damage is an ‘occurrence,’” reported Construction Equipment Guide. The underlying case involved roof leaks after the replacement of two Parish roofs, which ultimately led to a trial where Parish was awarded $350,000 in compensatory damages for breach of contract. However, Penn National disputed any obligation to pay, stating that “a breach of contract claim was not an ‘occurrence’ under the policy and even if such claims were an occurrence, the contractual liability and/or ‘your work’ exclusions would bar recovery.” However, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama ruled “that there was coverage for the property damage caused by the leaks because an ‘accident’ meant an unintended and unforeseen injury and the allegedly faulty workmanship led to damage to other areas of the structure and thus damage beyond simply the cost to replace the defective roof.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Policing Those Subcontractors: It Might Take Extra Effort To Be An Additional Insured

    June 14, 2011 —

    I just came across a case that I think truly paints the insurance dilemma for contractors. Thanks to this recent Illinois case, I don’t have to make up any factual scenarios—so kudos to Attorney Robert Boylan for posting it.

    In reading over my RSS feeds this weekend, I noticed a great writeup on long-time blogger Josh Glazov’s Construction Law Today. Attorney Robert Boylan’s post describes a recent Illinois case where a general contractor was denied its additional insured status on a second-tier subcontractor’s insurance. The reason for the denial: the general contractor failed to procure an agreement in writing with the second-tier subcontractor, requiring it to be listed as an additional insured.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of