BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window 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


    Construction Defect Claim Not Timely Filed

    Nine ACS Lawyers Recognized as Super Lawyers – Two Recognized as Rising Stars

    Hunton Insurance Coverage Group Ranked in National Tier 1 by US News & World Report

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

    Five Reasons to Hire Older Workers—and How to Keep Them

    New Illinois Supreme Court Trigger Rule for CGL Personal Injury “Offenses” Could Have Costly Consequences for Policyholders

    Texas Allows Wide Scope for Certificate of Merit

    The Contract Disputes Act: What Every Federal Government Contractor Should Know

    Engineer TRC Fends Off Lawsuits After Merger

    New York Court Grants Insured's Motion to Dismiss Construction Defect Case and Awards Fees to Insured

    Largest Per Unit Settlement Ever in California Construction Defect Case?

    New York Regulator Issues Cyber Insurance Guidelines

    PSA: New COVID Vaccine ETS Issued by OSHA

    Los Angeles Delays ‘Mansion Tax’ Spending Amid Legal Fight

    Boys (and Girls) of Summer: New Residential Solar Energy System Disclosures Take Effect January 1, 2019

    West Virginia Couple Claim Defects in Manufactured Home

    Crypto and NFTs Could Help People Become Real Estate Tycoons

    Couple Claims Contractor’s Work Is Defective and Incomplete

    ICE Said to Seek Mortgage Role Through Talks With Data Service

    Trump Signs $2-Trillion Stimulus Bill for COVID-19 Emergency

    CDJ’s #2 Topic of the Year: Ewing Constr. Co., Inc. v. Amerisure Ins. Co., 2014 Tex. LEXIS 39 (Tex. Jan.17, 2014)

    Carolinas Storm Damage Tally Impeded by Lingering Floods

    Precast Standards' Work Under Way as Brittle Fracture Warnings Aired

    NLRB Finalizes Rule for Construction Industry Unions to Obtain Majority Support Representational Status

    Insurers Get “Floored” by Court of Appeals Regarding the Presumptive Measure of Damages in Consent Judgments

    Michael Baker Intl. Settles Federal Pay Bias Allegations

    Florida Death Toll Rises by Three, Reaching 27 as Search Resumes

    Last Parcel of Rancho del Oro Masterplan Purchased by Cornerstone Communties

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    Newmeyer Dillion Named 2023 Best Law Firm in Multiple Practice Areas By U.S. News-Best Lawyers

    Policy's Operation Classification Found Ambiguous

    Three Recent Cases Strike Down Liquidated Damages Clauses In Settlement Agreements…A Trend Or An Aberration?

    “Since You Asked. . .”

    Study Finds San Francisco Bay is Sinking Faster than Expected

    Colorado Legislative Update: HB 20-1155, HB 20-1290, and HB 20-1348

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

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

    Recovery Crews Swing Into Action as Hurricane Michael Departs

    Keeping Your Workers Safe When Air Quality Isn't

    Treasure Island Sues Beach Trail Designer over Concrete Defects

    Illinois Attorney General Warns of Home Repair Scams

    Water Backup Payment Satisfies Insurer's Obligation to Cover for Rain Damage

    Housing Starts Surge 23% in Comeback for Canadian Builders

    Don’t Spoil Me: Oklahoma District Court Rules Against Spoliation Sanctions

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Lets Broad General Release Stand in SB 800 Case

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Gets Construction Defect Bill to Committee

    Sometimes You Just Need to Call it a Day: Court Finds That Contractor Not Entitled to Recover Costs After Public Works Contract is Invalidated

    Insurance Tips for Contractors

    Navigating Threshold Arbitration Issues in Construction Contracts

    Injured Construction Worker Settles for Five Hundred Thousand
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Insurer Prohibited from Bringing Separate Contribution Action in Subrogation to Rights of Suspended Insured

    January 15, 2019 —
    In Travelers Property Casualty Co. of Amer. v. Engel Insulation, Inc. (No. C085753, filed 11/30/18), a California appeals court held that an insurer may not file its own action to assert claims solely as a subrogee of a suspended corporation, where the corporation could not otherwise assert the claims on its own behalf. In Engel, a homeowners association filed a construction defect action against the developer, Westlake. Travelers defended Westlake as an additional insured on the policy of a subcontractor. After the case settled, Travelers brought a subrogation action against another subcontractor for contribution to the defense costs. However, Westlake had its corporate status suspended for failure to pay taxes, and the subcontractor moved for judgment on the pleadings, which was granted. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer Liable for Bad Faith Despite Actions of Insured Contributing to Excess Judgment

    January 02, 2019 —
    Reversing the intermediate appellate court, the Florida Supreme Court held the insurer liable for bad faith despite imperfect actions by the insured. Harvey v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., 2018 Fla. LEXIS 1705 (Fla. Sept. 20, 2018). Insured James Harvey was involved in an auto accident in which the other driver, 51 year old John Potts, was killed. Harvey's vehicle was registered in both his name and his business's name, and was covered under a $100,000 liability policy. Harvey reported the accident to his insurer, GEICO. The claim was assigned to a claims adjuster, Fran Korkus. 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

    Sewage Flowing in London’s River Thames Draws Green Bond Demand

    April 04, 2022 —
    The green bond market just got one of its biggest challenges yet -- cleaning up London’s River Thames. A sale of the notes aims to help to fund upgrades to the city’s Victorian-era sewers, as population growth in London heaps increasing pressure on them. Designed to serve about 4 million people, the sewers instead handle waste from more than double that number, leading to multiple sewage overflows every year. Bazalgette Finance Plc sold 300 million pounds ($400 million) of green bonds Thursday to fund construction of a 25-kilometer tunnel to prevent millions of tonnes of sewage overflowing into the river. The 12-year notes were priced at 130 basis points above U.K. gilts, drawing investor orders of more than four times the amount on offer, according to a person with knowledge of the sale, who asked not to be named. The bond proceeds will be given to Bazalgette Tunnel Ltd for the ongoing construction of the Thames Tideway Tunnel, which is expected to be completed in 2023, according to the Tideway website. The 66 meter-deep tunnel is more than seven meters wide and will cost an estimated 4.2 billion pounds ($5.6 billion) at completion, according to an investor presentation seen by Bloomberg News. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ronan Martin, Bloomberg

    When Your “Private” Project Suddenly Turns into a “Public” Project. Hint: It Doesn’t Necessary Turn on Public Financing or Construction

    September 28, 2017 —
    In 1931, during the Great Depression, the federal government enacted the Davis-Bacon Act to help workers on federal construction projects. The Davis-Bacon Act, also known as the federal prevailing wage law, sets minimum wages that must be paid to workers on federal construction projects based on local “prevailing” wages. The law was designed to help curb the displacement of families by employers who were recruiting lower-wage workers from outside local areas. Many states, including California, adopted “Little Davis-Bacon” laws applying similar requirements on state and local construction projects. California’s current prevailing wage law requires that contractors on state and local public works projects pay their employees the general prevailing rate of per diem wages based on the classification or type of work performed by the employee in the locality where the project is located, as well as to hire apprentices enrolled in state-approved apprentice programs and to make monetary contributions for apprenticeship training. 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

    Why Ethiopia’s $5 Billion Dam Has Riled Its Neighbors

    September 12, 2022 —
    Ethiopia has been at loggerheads with downstream neighbors Egypt and Sudan for years over a $5 billion mega-dam it’s building on the Nile River. A third phase of filling a 74 billion cubic-meter (2.6 trillion cubic-foot) reservoir behind the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam was completed in August, a process that’s reignited tensions. Egypt has described the unilateral action as a violation of international law and its foreign minister, Sameh Shoukry, wrote to the United Nations Security Council in July, reiterating its objections and accusing Ethiopia of derailing attempts to resolve the standoff. 1. Why is the dam so significant? The Nile is the most important source of fresh water in a largely arid region that is very vulnerable to drought and climate change and is experiencing rapid population growth. Egypt relies on the 4,000-mile-long river for as much as 97% of its supply, and much of eastern Sudan’s population depends on it for survival. Ethiopia is counting on a 5,150-megawatt hydropower plant on its new dam to help supply electricity to the 60% of its population that don’t have access, and sustain its manufacturing industries. The plant began generating power in 2022, some of which will be sold to neighboring countries. Reprinted courtesy of Samuel Gebre, Bloomberg and Fasika Tadesse, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Yet Another Reminder that Tort and Contract Don’t Mix

    January 25, 2021 —
    I have stated on numerous occasions here at Musings that in Virginia, contract claims and tort claims (read fraud) don’t mix. A recent case from the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia presents another example of this principle. In Itility LLC v. The Staffing Resource Group, Judge Ellis of the Alexandria Division, considered ITility’s claims of fraud and breach of contract against SRG and one of its officers based upon SRG’s alleged violation of its duties under a teaming agreement. The claim by ITility was that TSRG provided false and misleading resumes and thus damaged ITility. SRG filed a Motion to Dismiss and the Court was therefore required to resolve the following issues: (1) whether plaintiff’s fraud claim is barred by Virginia’s “source of duty” rule; (2) whether plaintiff’s claim for tortious interference with a business expectancy is barred by SRG’s participation in the business expectancy, and (3) whether the teaming agreement between the parties bars plaintiff’s claims for consequential and punitive damages. Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    It’s Time to Start Planning for Implementation of OSHA’s Silica Rule

    May 03, 2017 —
    Getting a notification from OSHA that your company is being investigated for a health or safety violation is an unwanted disruption to your business that could lead to a hefty monetary fine. Worse yet, if your company is found to have committed multiple violations, OSHA may categorize your company as a severe violator, which makes you subject to follow-up inspections. In the last 6 years, OSHA has added 520 companies to the Severe Violator Enforcement Program - sixty percent of which are in the construction industry. New OSHA regulations impacting the construction industry may result in more companies facing investigations and fines, or worse yet, laying off workers and unable to compete for new work. In 2013, OSHA proposed a new mandate to reduce silicosis in workers. The mandate, which was revised multiple times before being made final in March 2016, requires that employers ensure their workers are exposed to no more than 50 micrograms of crystalline silica in an eight hour period (down from the current standard of 250 micrograms). Under the new mandate, employers are also held to heightened reporting requirements, protective measures and medical testing for employees with extended exposure to silica. In the construction industry alone, OSHA believes the new mandate will prevent 1,080 cases of silicosis and more than 560 deaths. Builder and trade groups believe the new mandate will result in the loss of tens of thousands of jobs and cost the building industry billions of dollars. The National Association of Home Builders estimates that the Silica Rule will cost homebuilders $1,500 per start. While the two sides mount their arguments and seek support, how to implement the rule and its long term feasibility are still contested questions. Recognizing the challenges employers will have with the heightened requirements of the Silica Rule, OSHA just announced that enforcement is being delayed 90 days to develop additional guidance for implementation of the rule in the construction industry. The new start date for enforcement of the Silica Rule is September 23, 2017.* Many in the industry are hoping the Trump administration repeals the Silica Rule like they have “blacklisting” and the Volks rule. However, until that happens, OSHA expects your company to implement processes to ensure compliance by the new start date. *The Silica Rule was adopted by Cal/OSHA in August 2016 even though Cal/OSHA’s own silica standard had been in place since 2008. Cal/OSHA adopted the federal standard with the June 23, 2017 effective date; however; in an effort to synchronize with OSHA, Cal/OSHA recently announced that the effective date in California will also be September 23, 2017. Nathan Owens is the Las Vegas Managing Partner of Newmeyer & Dillion, and represents businesses and individuals operating in a wide array of economic sectors including real estate, construction, insurance and health care in all stages of litigation in state and federal court. For questions related to the OSHA and the Silica Rule, you can reach him at Nathan.Owens@ndlf.com. Louis “Dutch” Schotemeyer is an associate in Newmeyer & Dillion’s Newport Beach office. Dutch’s practice concentrates on the areas of business litigation, labor and employment law, and construction litigation. For questions related to OSHA or the Silica Rule, you can reach him at Dutch.Schotemeyer@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Steps to Defending against Construction Defect Lawsuits

    July 21, 2011 —

    Writing in Claims Journal, Bryan Rendzio notes that the decline in construction has not been matched by a decline in construction defect lawsuits over condominiums. He reviews the ways in which lawyers representing developers can help protect their clients. He identifies four important considerations in defending developers from claims of construction defects.

    He advocates a careful review of the contract. “Under a breach of contract claim, the insured’s duties to the party who brought the claim against the insured flow from the contract. Commonly, construction contracts limit the scope of recoverable damages, such as by waiving consequential damages.’

    The next step, according to Rendzio is to check of a settlement agreement is already in place, noting that these are “a familiar occurrence in the construction industry, regardless of any lawsuits having been filed.”

    He considers the statute of repose “the single-most decisive weapon an insured possesses in its arsenal during a condo defect lawsuit.” He notes that no lawsuits can be brought for construction defects after the end specified by the statute of repose, and if a lawsuit is brought beforehand, no additional parties can be named once the statute has taken effect.

    Finally, he warns adjusters to be suspicious when a condo association requests contractual indemnification. He notes that the pitfall in this is that developers and the subsequent condominium association often have similar names, given the theoretical example of a condo project built by “Fake Lakes LLC” and later run by the “Fake Lakes Condominium Association.” Writing in regards to Florida law, he notes that condominium associations do not have successor interest in contracts developers made with contractors.

    Read the full story…

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