BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineer
    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


    Trial Court Abuses Discretion in Appointing Unqualified Umpire for Appraisal

    Ninth Circuit Holds Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Applies Beyond All-Risk Policies

    Federal Magistrate Judge Recommends Rescission of Policies

    Automating Your Home? There’s an App for That

    Hennigh Law Corporation Wins Award Against Viracon, Inc In Defective Gray PIB Case

    Storm Eunice Damage in U.K. Could Top £300 Million

    Dispute between City and Construction Company Over Unsightly Arches

    New York’s Highest Court Weighs in on N.Y. Labor Law

    Submitting Claims on Government Projects Can Be Tricky

    Accounting for Payments on Projects Became Even More Crucial This Year

    New York Developer gets Reprieve in Leasehold Battle

    Is Performance Bond Liable for Delay Damages?

    Despite Increased Presence in Construction, Women Lack Size-Appropriate PPE

    Texas Supreme Court Authorizes Exception to the "Eight-Corners" Rule

    Avoid L&I Violations by Following Appropriate Safety Procedures

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/30/22) – Proptech Trends, Green Construction, and Sustainable Buildings

    Temecula Office Secures Approval for Development of 972-Acre Community on Behalf of Pulte Homes

    Between Scylla and Charybids: The Mediation Privilege and Legal Malpractice Claims

    Loss Ensuing from Alleged Faulty Workmanship is Covered

    In Texas, a General Contractor May be Liable in Tort to a Third-Party Lessee for Property Damage Caused by a Subcontractor’s Work

    “If It Walks Like A Duck . . .” – Expert Testimony Not Always Required In Realtor Malpractice Cases Where Alleged Breach Of Duty Can Be Easily Understood By Lay Persons

    Appellate Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Order Compelling Appraisal

    Despite Health Concerns, Judge Reaffirms Sentence for Disbarred Las Vegas Attorney

    What Happens When a Secured Creditor Files a Late Claim in an Equity Receivership?

    Consumer Product Safety Commission Recalls

    Retired Judge Claims Asbestos in Courthouse gave him Cancer

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

    Property Owner Entitled to Rely on Zoning Administrator Advice

    Did You Really Accept That Bid? – How Contractors Can Avoid Post-Acceptance Bid Disputes Over Contract Terms

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

    Construction Companies Must Prepare for a Surge of Third-Party Contractors

    Beware of Design Pitfalls In Unfamiliar Territory

    Withdrawal of an Admission in California May Shift Costs—Including Attorneys’ Fees—Incurred in Connection with the Withdrawal

    Robinson+Cole’s Amicus Brief Adopted and Cited by Massachusetts’s High Court

    Idaho District Court Affirms Its Role as the Gatekeeper of Expert Testimony

    2023 Construction Law Update

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    The Cheap and Easy Climate Fix That Can Cool the Planet Fast

    Nevada Court Adopts Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    Capitol View-Corridor Restrictions Affect Massing of Austin’s Tallest Tower

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Collapse Coverage Fails

    Power Point Presentation on Nautilus v. Lexington Case

    OSHA Begins Enforcement of its Respirable Crystalline Silica in Construction Standard. Try Saying That Five Times Real Fast

    Transportation Officials Make the Best of a Bumpy 2020

    Library to Open with Roof Defect Lawsuit Pending

    AMLO Hits Back at Vulcan, Threatens to Use Environmental Decree

    New Executive Orders Expedite the Need for Contractors to Go Green

    Montana Court Finds Duty to Defend over Construction Defect Allegation

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: The Colorado Court of Appeals’ Decision Protecting a Declarant’s Right to Arbitration in Construction Defect Cases

    More on Fraud, Opinions and Contracts
    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

    California Ranks As Leading State for Green Building in 2022

    February 01, 2023 —
    Washington, D.C. (Jan. 17, 2023) – The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) today released its annual ranking of U.S. states leading the way on green building, and California made the top ten at number four. USGBC's ranking is based on LEED-certified gross square footage per capita over the past year. The LEED rating system is the world's most widely used green building program and was created by USGBC as a leadership standard defining best practices for healthy, high-performing green buildings. "It was a strong year for LEED certifications across the U.S. as companies and governments embrace LEED as a tool for meeting ESG goals and organizational commitments to climate action, occupant wellbeing and resource efficiency," said Peter Templeton, USGBC president and CEO. "In California and beyond, LEED buildings are environmentally friendly, cutting their emissions and waste, and use less energy and water. At the same time, they also help reduce operational and maintenance costs, contributing to the bottom line." In 2022, California had 386 LEED-certified projects, totaling over 96.4 million square feet or 2.44 square feet per capita. Office buildings, residential apartment buildings, government buildings and schools were among those that were LEED-certified last year. The states ranking ahead of California were Massachusetts (3.76 LEED-certified square feet per resident), Illinois (3.47 square feet per capita), and New York (3.17 square feet per capita). Additional information on the 2022 rankings, along with a listing of notable projects, can be found here. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Tishman Construction Admits Cheating Trade Center Clients

    December 17, 2015 —
    Tishman Construction Corp., builder of One World Trade Center in New York’s financial district, admitted to an overbilling scheme spanning a decade and agreed to pay $20 million in restitution and penalties. The scam included the World Trade Center project, the renovation of the landmark Plaza Hotel on 5th Avenue and the expansion of the Javits Convention Center in Manhattan, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Brooklyn, New York, said Thursday. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Erik Larson, Bloomberg

    Three Reasons Late Payments Persist in the Construction Industry

    December 22, 2019 —
    Construction professionals are all too familiar with the payment issues that plague the construction industry. Contractors, subcontractors and material suppliers often have to deal with payment delays and even nonpayment—affecting cash flow and their ability to meet expenses. According to an Atradius study, a quarter of all B2B invoices issued in North America are overdue. The construction industry accounted for one-third of those past-due invoices, and many contractors and construction business owners do not have a positive outlook on the industry's payment issues. The same survey found 55% of U.S. firms think there will be no change in the industry’s payment practices over the coming months—one-third even expects an increase in late payments. These findings show that managing cash flow is a significant challenge in the construction industry. Having a negative cash flow will push the company toward financial trouble, which may ultimately lead to its demise. Understanding the reasons why payment issues persist in construction will help contractors protect their business, prevent these issues from happening or at least minimize their effect on the current operations. Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Hogan, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Department of Corrections Gets Hit With the Prison Bid Protest Blues

    October 16, 2018 —
    “I’m breakin’ rocks in the hot sun . . . I fought the law and the law won . . . I needed money ’cause I had none . . . I fought the law and the law won” – The Clash, I Fought the Law (1978) In the recent case, West Coast Air Conditioning Company, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Case No. D071106 (February 22, 2018), those lyrics could be aptly revised to, “the law fought the courts and the courts won.” West Coast Air Conditioning Company, Inc. v. California Department of Corrections In February 2015, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) published an invitation for bids for a new central air conditioning plant for the Ironwood State Prison in Blythe, California. West Coast Air Conditioning Company, Inc., Hensel Phelps Construction Co., and four other companies submitted bids. 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

    Rooftop Solar Leases Scaring Buyers When Homeowners Sell

    June 26, 2014 —
    Dorian Bishopp blames the solar panels on his roof for costing him almost 10 percent off the value of the home he sold in March. That’s because instead of owning them he leased the panels from SunPower Corp. (SPWR), requiring the new owner of the house to assume a contract with almost 19 years remaining. He had to shave the asking price for the house in Maricopa, Arizona, to draw in buyers unfamiliar with the financing arrangement. Leasing is driving a boom in solar sales because most require no money upfront for systems that cost thousands of dollars. That’s made solar affordable for more people, helping spur a 38 percent jump in U.S. residential installations in the past year. Since the business model only gained currency in the past two years, the details embedded in the fine print of the deals are only starting to emerge. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Will Wade, Bloomberg
    Mr. Wade may be contacted at wwade4@bloomberg.net

    Repair of Part May Necessitate Replacement of Whole

    February 10, 2012 —

    Judge Gleuda E. Edmonds, a magistrate judge in the United States District Court of Arizona issued a ruling in Guadiana v. State Farm on January 25, 2012. Judge Edmonds recommended a partial summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

    Ms. Guandiana’s home had water damage due to pluming leaks in September 2004. She was informed that polybutylene pluming in her house could not be repaired in parts “it must be completely replaced.” She had had the plumbing replaced. State Farm denied her claim, arguing that “the tear-out provision did not cover the cost of accessing and replacing those pipes that were not leaking.”

    In September 2007, State Farm filed a motion to dismiss. The court rejected this motion, stating that “If Guadiana can establish as a matter of fact that the system that caused the covered loss included all the pipes in her house and it was necessary to replace all the pipes to repair that system, State Farm is obligated to pay the tear-out costs necessary to replace all the pipes, even those not leaking.”

    In March 2009, State Farm filed for summary judgment, which the court granted. State Farm argued that “the tear-out provision only applied to ‘repair’ and not ‘replace’ the system that caused the covered leak.” As for the rest of the piping, State Farm argued that “the policy does not cover defective materials.”

    In December 2011, Ms. Guadiana filed for summary judgment, asking the court to determine that “the policy ‘covers tear-out costs necessary to adequately repair the plumbing system, even if an adequate repair requires replacing all or part of the system.”

    In her ruling, Judge Edmonds noted that Ms. Guadiana’s claim is that “the water damage is a covered loss and she is entitled to tear-out costs necessary to repair the pluming system that caused that covered loss.” She rejected State Farm’s claim that it was not obligated to replace presumably defective pipes. Further, she rejected State Farm’s argument that they were only responsible for the leaking portion, noting “Guadiana intends to prove at trial that this is an unusual case where repair of her plumbing system requires replacement of all the PB plumbing.”

    Judge Edmonds concluded by directing the District Court to interpret the tear out issue as “the tear-out provision in State Farm’s policy requires State Farm to pay all tear-out costs necessary to repair the plumbing system (that caused the covered loss) even if repair of the system requires accessing more than the leaking portion of the system.”

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Maryland Finally set to Diagnose an Allocation Method for Progressive Injuries

    February 18, 2020 —
    Maryland’s highest court recently heard arguments regarding the proper method of allocation of the covered damages from a slowly progressing asbestos injury amongst insurance policies in place over a period of years. Rossello v. Zurich American Insurance Company, Case No. 2436 (Md. 2019). The court may also be forced to determine what the proper trigger of coverage is for latent bodily injury claims, although the plaintiff has not framed the issue in that manner. In Rossello, the plaintiff, Patrick Rossello, worked for a period of years for the now-defunct Lloyd E. Mitchell, Inc. (“Mitchell”), a construction company operating until 1976. In 1974 he was exposed to and inhaled asbestos fibers. He was ultimately diagnosed in 2013 with malignant mesothelioma as a result of that exposure. Rossello obtained a judgment for approximately $2,700,000 against Mitchell and secured the right to pursue its insurance. As relevant to this dispute, Mitchell carried liability insurance policies, which provide coverage for asbestos related claims, from 1974 to 1977. Rossello seeks to hold Zurich, as successor to Maryland Casualty Company, accountable for the full value of his award, based on the 1974 policy. Although this contention actually implicates two separate issues, plaintiff’s counsel passed over the initial trigger of coverage issue and focused instead on the issue of allocation of coverage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William S. Bennett, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Bennett may be contacted at wsb@sdvlaw.com

    CISA Guidance 3.1: Not Much Change for Construction

    June 22, 2020 —
    This week, the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) issued Version 3.1 of its Guidance on the Essential Critical Infrastructure Workforce. For the most part, CISA’s Guidance 3.1 did not change from Version 3.0 as it relates to construction. However, CISA added a few construction-related services to “Essential Critical Infrastructure”:
    • “Workers who support the construction and maintenance of electric vehicle charging stations.”
    • “Engineers performing or supporting safety inspections.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Laura Bourgeois LoBue, Pillsbury
    Ms. LoBue may be contacted at laura.lobue@pillsburylaw.com