BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim 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


    Harmon Towers Case to Last into 2014

    A Survey of Trends and Perspectives in Construction Defect Decisions

    Standard For Evaluating Delay – Directly from An Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeal’s Opinion

    Harmon Tower Opponents to Try Mediation

    Client Alert: Restaurant Owed Duty of Care to Driver Killed by Third-Party on Street Adjacent to Restaurant Parking Lot

    Partner Lisa M. Rolle and Associate Vito John Marzano Obtain Dismissal of Third-Party Indemnification Claims

    ASCE Statement on The Partial Building Collapse in Surfside, Florida

    The Risk of A Fixed Price Contract Is The Market

    Insurer Must Defend General Contractor

    Construction Defect Attorneys Call for Better Funding of Court System

    Recent Third Circuit OSHA Decision Sounds Alarm for Employers and Their Officers

    Allegations That COVID-19 Was Physically Present and Altered Property are Sufficient to Sustain COVID-19 Business Interruption Suit

    Massachusetts Business Court Addresses Defense Cost Allocation and Non-Cumulation Provisions in Long-Tail Context

    MDL for Claims Against Manufacturers and Distributors of PFAS-Containing AFFFs Focuses Attention on Key Issues

    Hawaii Federal District Court Again Rejects Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    New Safety Requirements added for Keystone Pipeline

    Subsequent Owners of Homes Again Have Right to Sue Builders for Construction Defects

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

    Whose Lease Is It Anyway: Physical Occupancy Not Required in Landlord-Tenant Dispute

    Contractor Beware: Design-Build Firms Must Review Washington’s Licensing Requirements

    Aging-in-Place Features Becoming Essential for Many Home Buyers

    Court Again Defines Extent of Contractor’s Insurance Coverage

    Is Ohio’s Buckeye Lake Dam Safe?

    Pulling the Plug

    California Appeals Court Remands Fine in Late Completion Case

    Amos Rex – A Museum for the Digital Age

    TOP TAKE-AWAY SERIES: The 2023 Fall Meeting in Washington, D.C.

    Florida Passes Tort Reform Bill

    Housing Bill Threatened by Rift on Help for Disadvantaged

    Let’s Talk About a Statutory First-Party Bad Faith Claim Against an Insurer

    Construction Defect Claim Not Timely Filed

    No Signature? Potentially No Problem for Sureties Enforcing a Bond’s Forum Selection Clause

    Manhattan Gets First Crowdfunded Condos

    Claims for Breach of Express Indemnity Clauses Subject to 10-Year Statute of Limitations

    A Year-End Review of the Environmental Regulatory Landscape

    Understanding the Real Estate and Tax Implications of Florida's Buyer Ban Law

    Ahlers & Cressman’s Top 10 Construction Industry Contract Provisions

    Lewis Brisbois Successfully Concludes Privacy Dispute for Comedian Kathy Griffin Following Calif. Supreme Court Denial of Review

    Preliminary Notice Is More Important Than Ever During COVID-19

    ASCE Releases New Report on Benefits and Burdens of Infrastructure Investment in Disadvantaged Communities

    Tesla’s Solar Roof Pricing Is Cheap Enough to Catch Fire

    New York Nonprofit Starts Anti-Scaffold Law Video Series

    “It Just Didn’t Add Up!”

    Be Careful in Contracting and Business

    Am I Still Covered Under the Title Insurance Policy?

    Obtaining Temporary Injunction to Enforce Non-Compete Agreement

    Massachusetts Pulls Phased Trigger On Its Statute of Repose

    Ninth Circuit Affirms Duty to Defend CERCLA Section 104 (e) Letter

    Nine Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch 2021

    Putting 3D First, a Model Bridge Rises in Norway
    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

    Hurdles with Triggering a Subcontractor Performance Bond

    April 05, 2017 —
    There have been a couple of decisions as of late, particularly in federal court, that have gone in favor of a performance bond surety and against a general contractor’s claim against a subcontractor’s performance bond. These decisions have been so unfavorable that they may be swaying certain internal decisions to move to subcontractor default insurance with, perhaps, subcontractors that pose less risk. From the general contractor’s perspective, if they have to stop the management of the job and progress to jump through hoops to trigger the performance bond’s obligations, rightfully or wrongfully, the bond may not provide them the value they need. Performance bonds are an appropriate product in many instances, but there should be more consistency regarding the actual trigger of a subcontractor’s performance bond obligations. Project teams need to absolutely understand what efforts they need to take, and how they need to take such efforts, in order to properly trigger a performance bond’s obligations. This is a must (and I have presented many seminars on this very issue). Or, the general contractor should move away from the traditional AIA /standard performance bond form, which is the direction I always go when I am involved in the drafting of a performance 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

    Virginia Joins California and Nevada in Passing its Consumer Privacy Act

    March 15, 2021 —
    California tends to be on the forefront in consumer privacy laws within the United States. However, there is a growing momentum for other states to join California in legislating consumer privacy rights, as well as pushes for federal legislation. The latest state to join in and pass consumer privacy legislation is Virginia, with its Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act (VCDPA). With Virginia joining the fray, several questions arise, such as how closely does the VCDPA follow California's legislation? How, if at all, does it differ from already-existing legislation? What do businesses need to comply with the VCDPA, if at all? WHAT IS THE VIRGINIA CONSUMER DATA PROTECTION ACT? The VCDPA largely mimics elements from its Californian cousins, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) as modified by the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA). The main features of the law include: (a) issuing the right to request what information is collected; (b) the right to correct information provided; (c) the right to deletion; (d) providing notice to consumers regarding the collection of their data; and (e) protecting consumer data. Further, the consumer requests, akin to the CCPA, do require verification, and similarly phrased data security practices that rely on how "reasonable" they are, depending on the volume and type of information at issue. Though, the VCDPA does expand on this slightly, requiring "data protection assessments" to determine the security of protected information, how it is shared and used, the benefits in sharing the information and harm resulting from any breaches. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kyle Janecek, Newmeyer Dillion
    Mr. Janecek may be contacted at kyle.janecek@ndlf.com

    Ongoing Operations Exclusion Bars Coverage

    December 09, 2019 —
    The insurer denied the insured contractor's claim seeking a defense for faulty workmanship based upon the ongoing operations exclusion. PJR Constr. of N.J. v. Valley Forge Ins. Co., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127973 (D. N. J. July 31, 2019). PJR Construction was the general contractor to build a swim club and pavilion building for Cambridge Real Property, LLC. PJR began construction on May 29, 2012, and was to complete the construction by March 1, 2013. The project took much longer than anticipated. PJR was denied access to the site on November 13, 2014. Cambridge contended PJR tolerated shoddy workmanship and breached the terms of the contract documents. Cambridge estimated that the project was between 55% and 74.3% complete. PJR and Cambridge went to arbitration. PJR sought a defense from the insurers. Coverage was denied based upon exclusions j (5) and j (6). Exclusion j (5), which the court referred to as the "Ongoing Operations Exclusion," provided the policy did not apply to,
    Property Damage to . . . [t]hat particular part of real property on which you or any contractors or subcontractors working directly or indirectly on your behalf are performing operations, if the property damage arises out of those operations.
    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

    Is the Construction Industry Actually a Technology Hotbed?

    August 19, 2024 —
    Technology has always been a driving force behind progress, and the construction industry is no exception. Over the years, technological advancements have revolutionized the way companies design, plan and build structures, leading to increased efficiency, safety and sustainability. From virtual-reality simulations to drones and 3D printing, technology has transformed every aspect of the construction process. However, the construction trades still lag behind other sectors in adoption of digital technologies. With a lack of skilled labor continuing to be an impediment to growth and profitability in the construction industry, technological developments could have significant implications for successful adopters. Already, the industry is seeing a huge difference in valuation between traditional engineering and construction firms and construction software companies. As labor shortages continue to hinder growth in the industry, consolidation is likely, as is the probability that companies with the greatest tech capabilities will be the most highly valued. There are several areas of technology that are of the greatest interest in the current marketplace. BIM Building information modeling with computer-aided design software now allows architects and engineers to create detailed and accurate 3D models of buildings and infrastructure projects, integrating data about every aspect of the building, from materials and costs to energy efficiency and maintenance schedules. These models not only help in visualizing the final product; they also enable better communication and collaboration among project stakeholders. Reprinted courtesy of Andrew Silver, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    COVID-19 Is Not Direct Physical Loss Or Damage

    April 13, 2020 —
    Is a cash register that is not being used damaged property? When you need to wash a table, a chair, or a section of flooring with readily available cleaning products to make them safe and useable, are you repairing damaged property? Is a spilled cup of coffee waiting to be wiped up actual damage to the premises? If your customers stay home to help stop the spread of a virus, has there been a physical loss inside your shuttered store or restaurant? The insuring agreements typically found in commercial property insurance policies require “direct physical loss of or damage to” covered property as the triggering event. Without establishing direct physical loss or damage a policyholder cannot meet its burden to trigger coverage for a purely economic loss of business income resulting from shuttering its business due to concerns over exposure to—or even the actual presence of—COVID-19. Despite this well-understood policy language, it is already beyond question that insurers will confront creative—albeit strained—arguments from policyholder firms attempting to trigger coverage for pure economic loss. The scope of the human and economic tragedy we all face will be matched by the scope of the effort to force the financial harm onto insurance companies. The plaintiffs in what appears to be the first-filed case seeking a declaratory judgment in the context of first-party insurance coverage rely on the assertion that “contamination of the insured premises by the Coronavirus would be a direct physical loss needing remediation to clean the surfaces” of its establishment, a New Orleans restaurant, to trigger coverage for business interruption.[1] See Cajun Conti, LLC, et. al. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, et. al. Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana. The complaint alleges that the property is insured under an “all risk policy” defining “covered causes of loss” as “direct physical loss.” The plaintiffs rely on the alleged presence of the virus on “the surface of objects” in certain conditions and the need to clean those surfaces. They go so far as to claim that “[a]ny effort by [the insurer] to deny the reality that the virus causes physical damage and loss would constitute a false and potentially fraudulent misrepresentation. . . .” Reprinted courtesy of Gordon & Rees attorneys Joseph Blyskal, Dennis Brown and Michelle Bernard Mr. Blyskal may be contacted at tblatchley@grsm.com Mr. Brown may be contacted at dbrown@grsm.com Ms. Bernard may be contacted at mbernard@grsm.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Former NYC Condo Empire Executive Arrested for Larceny, Tax Fraud

    March 11, 2024 —
    A former New York executive facing lawsuits over the collapse of real estate empire HFZ Capital Group has been arrested in Miami, charged with grand larceny and tax fraud. Nir Meir, 48, was arrested Monday, a spokesperson for the Miami-Dade Police Department confirmed. Meir was detained on an out-of-state warrant, suggesting his arrest may be the result of an investigation by law enforcement in New York. A spokesperson for the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. Meir’s attorney also didn’t immediately respond to an email. Meir, the former managing principal of HFZ Capital Group, has been battling multiple lawsuits in New York over his involvement in the once-prominent real estate firm. He’s denied wrongdoing. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ava Benny-Morrison, Bloomberg

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

    February 26, 2015 —
    Under California's SB 800 "Right to Repair Act," a builder may obtain a "reasonable release" to resolve a construction defect claim in exchange for a cash payment. So, what's a "reasonable release" under SB 800? This question was answered by the Second Appellate District in the case of Belasco v. Wells (filed 2/17/2015, No. B254525). Plaintiff David Belasco ("Plaintiff") purchased a newly constructed residence in 2004 from the builder defendant Gary Loren Wells ("Wells"). In 2006, Plaintiff filed a complaint against Wells with the Contractors' State License Board (the "Board") regarding certain alleged construction defects. The parties settled the 2006 action through written agreement that required Wells to pay Plaintiff $25,000 in consideration for Plaintiff executing a release and a Civil Code §1524 waiver of all known or unknown claims. In 2012, Plaintiff filed a subsequent action against Wells and Wells’ surety, American Contractors Indemnity Company ("American Contractors") (collectively "Defendants"), alleging a defect in the roof that was discovered by Plaintiff in 2011. Reprinted courtesy of Steven M. Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Colin T. Murphy, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com Mr. Murphy may be contacted at cmurphy@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    After 15 Years, Settlement Arrested at San Francisco's Millennium Tower

    June 26, 2023 —
    After overcoming several snags, the team for the voluntary effort to stem future significant settlement and tilting at San Francisco’s 645-ft-tall Millennium Tower has declared the project a success, now that loads have been fully transferred to 18 new perimeter piles driven to bedrock. Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of