BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnesses
    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


    Your Bad Faith Jury Instruction Against an Insurer is Important

    Insured's Motion for Reconsideration on Protecting the Integrity of Referral Sources under Florida Statute s. 542.335

    Agrihoods: The Best of Both Worlds

    New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Insurers’ Bid to Overturn a $400M Decision

    Union Handbilling: When, Where, and Why it is Legal

    Insurance Measures Passed by 2015 Hawaii Legislature

    Duty to Defend Requires Payments Under Policy's Supplemental Payments Provision

    Colorado Court of Appeals Confirms Senior Living Communities as “Residential Properties” for Purposes of the Homeowner Protection Act

    The “Unavailability Exception” is Unavailable to Policyholders, According to New York Court of Appeals

    Scotiabank Is Cautious on Canada Housing as RBC, BMO Seek Action

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

    Florida Court Gives Parties Assigned a Subrogation Claim a Math Lesson

    New Highway for Olympics Cuts off Village near Sochi, Russia

    Connecting IoT Data to BIM

    The End of Eroding Limits Policies in Nevada is Just the Beginning

    Illinois Appellate Court Affirms Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case

    Expert Medical Science Causation Testimony Improperly Excluded under Daubert; ID of Sole Cause of Medical Condition Not Required

    Federal Court Holds that Demolition Exclusion Does Not Apply and Carrier Has Duty to Defend Additional Insureds

    “Bee” Careful: Unique Considerations When Negotiating a Bee Storage Lease Agreement

    Serving Notice of Nonpayment Under Miller Act

    Quick Note: Aim to Avoid a Stay to your Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    EEOC Sues Schuff Steel, J.A. Croson in New Racial Harassment Cases

    St Louis County Approves Settlement in Wrongful Death Suit

    California Supreme Court McMillin Ruling

    See the Stories That Drew the Most Readers to ENR.com in 2023

    Assignment of Insured's Policy Ineffective

    Traub Lieberman Partners Dana Rice and Jason Taylor Obtain Summary Judgment For Insurance Carrier Client in Missouri Federal Court Coverage Action

    Appraisal Process Analyzed

    Anti-Fracking Win in N.Y. Court May Deal Blow to Industry

    Gardeners in the City of the Future: An Interview with Eric Baczuk

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Water Damage Claims

    America’s Infrastructure Gets a D+

    Part of the Whole: Idaho District Court Holds Economic Loss Rule Bars Tort Claims Related to Water Supply Line that was Part of Home Purchase

    Viva La France! 2024 Summer Olympics Construction Features Sustainable Design, Including, Simply Not Building at All

    Ruling Closes the Loop on Restrictive Additional Insured Endorsement – Reasonable Expectations of Insured Builder Prevails Over Intent of Insurer

    California Restricts Principles of “General” Personal Jurisdiction

    Does “Faulty Workmanship” Constitute An Occurrence Under Your CGL Policy?

    Do Engineers Owe a Duty to Third Parties?

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: Trigger and Allocation

    Tropical Storms Pile Up Back-to-Back-to-Back Out West

    Carwash Prosecutors Seek $1.6 Billion From Brazil Builders

    Manufacturer of Asbestos-Free Product May Still Be Liable for Asbestos Related Injuries

    FirstEnergy Fined $3.9M in Scandal Involving Nuke Plants

    Reasonableness of Denial of Requests for Admission Based Upon Expert’s Opinions Depends On Factors Within Party’s Understanding

    Insurer's Quote on Coverage for Theft by Hacker Creates Issue of Fact

    McGraw Hill to Sell off Construction-Data Unit

    Why Do Construction Companies Fail?

    Court of Appeal Puts the “Equity” in Equitable Subrogation

    Leaky Wells Spur Call for Stricter Rules on Gas Drilling

    Environmental Law Violations: When you Should Hire a Lawyer
    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

    Texas Supreme Court Cements Exception to “Eight-Corners” Rule Through Two Recent Rulings

    March 06, 2022 —
    The Texas “eight corners” rule precludes insurers from disclaiming a defense obligation based on facts not alleged in the underlying pleadings. Texas federal and appellate courts have been issuing rulings addressing exceptions to the eight corners rule and recently sought guidance from the Texas Supreme Court on whether Texas law recognizes such exceptions to the “eight corners” rule. The Texas Supreme Court has now spoken on the issue. Monroe Guar. Ins. Co. v. BITCO Gen. Ins. Corp., 65 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 440 (2022). In Monroe, David Jones contracted with 5D Drilling & Pump Services in the summer of 2014 to drill a 3,600-foot commercial irrigation well on his farmland. In 2016, Jones sued 5D for breach of contract and negligence relating to 5D’s drilling operations on Jones’s property. Jones’s pleading was silent as to when the damage flowing from 5D’s alleged acts of misconduct occurred. BITCO and Monroe stipulated that 5D’s drill struck a bore hole during 5D’s drilling operations in or around November 2014. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy S. Macklin, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Macklin may be contacted at jmacklin@tlsslaw.com

    A Glimpse Into Post-Judgment Collections and Perhaps the Near Future?

    July 13, 2020 —
    According to a recent study conducted by the Harvard University, the University of Chicago, and the University of Illinois, more than 100,000 small businesses (firms with fewer than 500 employees) representing 2% of small businesses in the America have closed their doors permanently due to the coronavirus. The next case, although about events occurring before COVID-19, provides a glimpse of what litigation may look like in the intervening months and years as companies struggle to keep their doors open. The Wanke Case Waterproofing company Wanke, Industrial, Commercial, Residential, Inc. sued a former employee, Scott Keck, and his competing company, WP Solutions, Inc., for trade secret misappropriation and obtained a judgment for $1,190,929. At the time, general contractor AV Builder Corp. had hired WP Solutions as a waterproofing subcontractor on fire residential and commercial projects. In the face of the judgment obtained by Wanke, Keck declared bankruptcy and dissolved WP Solutions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    New York Court Finds Insurers Cannot Recover Defense Costs Where No Duty to Indemnify

    March 01, 2021 —
    In a case of first impression, the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, found the insurer had no right to reimbursement of defense costs paid to defend the insured. Am. W. Home Ins. Co. v. Gjoaj Realty & Mgt. Co., 2020 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8286 (N.Y. App. Div. Dec. 30, 2020). Gjonaj Realty was sued by Viktor Gecaj when he fell from a ladder at the premises managed by Gjonaj Realty. The matter was not tendered to American Western Home Insurance Company until four years after the accident and after a judgment of $900,000 had been entered against Gjonaj Realty after its default. American denied coverage after late notice was given. Thereafter, the Supreme Court in the underling action vacated the default judgment. American then agreed to defend under a reservation of rights. The Appellate Division reversed the vacatur of the default judgment and reinstated the default against the insured. American then advised Gjonaj Realty that it was denying coverage and reserving its right to recover any fees and costs incurred in defending the underlying action. 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

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

    February 15, 2018 —

    On December 19, 2017, the Connecticut Supreme Court released its decision in Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co. v. Pasiak. The decision is significant for two reasons: 1) it clarifies the amount of proof an insurer needs to determine whether an exclusion to coverage applies; and 2) it found that where an insurance policy expressly provides coverage for an intentional act such as false imprisonment, common-law punitive damages are also covered.

    Underlying action

    The underlying action proves that real life is often stranger than fiction. Ms. S worked as an office help for a construction company owned by Mr. P, which operated out of his home. Ms. S was working alone in the home office, when an armed, masked intruder entered the office, tied her hands, gagged and blindfolded her and, pointing a gun to her head, threatened to kill her family if she did not give him the combination to a safe in the home. As this was happening, Mr. P entered the office, unmasked the intruder, and discovered it was his lifelong friend. After Ms. S was untied, she asked to leave, but Mr. P told her to stay. She was not allowed to leave for several hours as Mr. P made her accompany him to an errand. Ms. S sued Mr. P for false imprisonment, among other things. The trial court awarded her compensatory and punitive damages. Insurance coverage for the underlying judgment is at the heart of the Pasiak case.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stella Szantova Giordano, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Szantova Giordano may be contacted at ssg@sdvlaw.com

    DIR Reminds Public Works Contractors to Renew Registrations Before January 1, 2016 to Avoid Hefty Penalty

    December 17, 2015 —
    I know. You’re busy. Perhaps even a bit overwhelmed. You’ve got trees to trim, halls to deck with boughs of holly, and when you throw in (the office, your kids’ school, and the bowling league’s) holiday parties, you’re at the point where you’ve got visions of sugar plums (although it may vary) dancing through your head. Well, the DIR has come to give you its own yuletide greeting. Think of it as a Christmas card of sorts. Merry Christmas. The Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) announced today that a mandatory renewal deadline is approaching for contractors who bid or work on public works projects in California. Contractors whose public works contractor registration expired June 30, 2015, and have ongoing public works projects or plan to bid on new ones, must pay the $300 renewal fee before January 1, 2016 or face an additional $2,000 late penalty after that date. 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

    Dot I’s and Cross T’s When It Comes to Construction Licensure Requirements

    February 21, 2022 —
    It should serve as no surprise that making sure you are appropriately licensed is important. This includes complying with any state requirement that requires licensure, as well as complying with any local licensure requirement. Not doing so can result in the dispute centered on the lack of licensure, as opposed to leading facts relating to the substance of the dispute. In other words, you are dealing with a technicality that could have harsh implications. This lack of licensure issue recently played out in a dispute with a contractor and subcontractor in ABA Interior, Inc. v. The Owen Corp., 2022 WL 386103 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022), dealing with a local licensure requirement. In this case, a subcontractor was hired by the general contractor for a commercial project in Palm Beach County. The subcontract contained the standard provision that the subcontractor would comply with all federal, state, and local laws and ordinances. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Candlebrook Adds Dormitories With $230 Million Purchase

    November 05, 2014 —
    Candlebrook Properties LLC, a closely held company with about 5,000 apartments in the eastern U.S., is diversifying into student housing with the $230 million acquisition of five off-campus properties. Candlebrook joined with Lubert-Adler Partners on the purchase of buildings with about 3,400 beds near colleges in Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky and Virginia. Formerly known as Vantage Properties LLC, Candlebrook began as an investor in New York City apartments in 2005 and later expanded to New Jersey and the Philadelphia area. “Student housing is a natural extension of our pre-existing business line,” Neil Rubler, president of New York-based Candlebrook, said in a telephone interview. It’s “a business that’s far less crowded than multifamily, which has been our core business.” Capitalization rates on apartments, a measure of profitability, have dropped as investors drive up property prices. Student housing has become an attractive alternative, luring homebuilder Toll Brothers Inc. (TOL) and private-equity firm Colony Capital LLC to an industry already home to real estate investment trusts American Campus Communities Inc. (ACC), Campus Crest Communities Inc. (CCG) and Educational Realty Trust Inc. (EDR) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Gittelsohn, Bloomberg
    Mr. Gittelsohn may be contacted at johngitt@bloomberg.net

    Construction Defect Lawsuit Came too Late in Minnesota

    June 28, 2013 —
    The Minnesota Court of Appeals has upheld a summary judgment in a construction defect case, Lee v. Gorham. Minnesota law requires that contractors warranty that the home will be free of major construction defects during the first ten years, but claims must “be brought within two years of the discovery of the breach.” The Lees received a home inspection report in 2009 that identified a variety of defects, including “several possible structural defects.” The court noted that the report stated, “Contact your builder in writing of the findings, and discuss your options with an attorney.” The Lees contacted the contractor, Gorham Builders. After initial silence, Gorham told the Lees that problems would “have to be ‘turned over to [the] insurance company.’” Rodney noted in his testimony that he had two choices, to either sue Gorham or hire an outside contractor. Mr. Lee had concluded that the legal costs were likely to be equal to the cost of the contractor. In June, 2011, the Lees changed their mind about bringing a suit. Gorham sought and received a summary judgment dismissing the case on the grounds that too much time had passed since the Lees learned of the construction defect. The Lees appealed. The appeals court upheld the summary judgment. The Lees claimed that the 2009 home inspection did not alert them of a “major construction defect,” but the court concluded that the language of the report fit within the Minnesota statutory definition of a “major construction defect.” Nor was the appeals court convinced that at any time did Gorham provide “assurances that it would cure the defects to the home.” Within the same month as the May 2009 inspection, Gorham had made it clear that any problems were an issue for the insurance company. Thus, the appeals court concluded that the Lee’s equitable-estoppel argument was without merit. The Lees also brought to appeal the new argument that they did not realize they were dealing with “major construction defects” until they received a subsequent home inspection in 2011. The court noted that the second report does not detail “new defects or structural issues not identified in the 2009 inspection report.” In addition to being “without merit,” the court noted that this claim was not made in the district court and so the appeals court “need not consider this issue on appeal.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of