BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect 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


    Toward Increased Citizen Engagement in Urban Planning

    Rams Owner Stan Kroenke Debuts His $5.5 Billion Dream Stadium

    Estoppel Certificate? Estop and Check Your Lease

    #12 CDJ Topic: Am. Home Assur. Co. v. SMG Stone Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75910 (N. D. Cal. June 11, 2015)

    Dispute Waged Over Design of San Francisco Subway Job

    Keep Your Construction Claims Alive in Crazy Economic Times

    San Francisco Office Secures Defense Verdict in Legal Malpractice Action

    Study May Come Too Late for Construction Defect Bill

    You Can Now Build a Multi-Million Dollar Home via Your iPad

    Tom Newmeyer Elected Director At Large to the 2017 Orange County Bar Association Board of Directors

    Constructive Changes – A Primer

    So, You Have a Judgment Against a California Contractor or Subcontractor. What Next? How Can I Enforce Payment?

    Attorneys’ Fees and the American Arbitration Association Rule

    Nebraska’s Prompt Pay Act for 2015

    What You Need to Know About “Ipso Facto” Clauses and Their Impact on Termination of a Contractor or Subcontractor in a Bankruptcy

    Coverage Doomed for Failing Obtain Insurer's Consent for Settlement

    NYC Shuts 9 Pre-Kindergartens for Health, Safety Issues

    Brazil Congress Chiefs Deny Wrongdoing in Petrobras Scandal

    NYC Design Firm Executives Plead Guilty in Pay-to-Play Scheme

    No Coverage Based Upon Your Prior Work Exclusion

    Valerie A. Moore and Christopher Kendrick are JD Supra’s 2020 Readers’ Choice Award Recipients

    New York Court of Appeals Addresses Choice of Law Challenges

    Professor Stempel's Excpert Testimony for Insurer Excluded

    The EPA and the Corps of Engineers Propose Another Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States”

    When is a “Notice of Completion” on a California Private Works Construction Project Valid? Why Does It Matter for My Collection Rights?

    Contractors: A Lesson on Being Friendly

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (08/24/22) – Local Law 97, Clean Energy, and IRA Tax Credits

    What Sustainable Building Materials Will the Construction Industry Rely on in 2020?

    OSHA Reinforces COVID Guidelines for the Workplace

    Manhattan Condo Resale Prices Reach Record High

    Hawaii Supreme Court Tackles "Other Insurance" Issues

    How Does Your Construction Contract Treat Float

    Baltimore Bridge Collapse Occurred After Ship Lost Power Multiple Times

    Firm Pays $8.4M to Settle Hurricane Restoration Contract Case

    Contractor Succeeds At the Supreme Court Against Public Owner – Obtaining Fee Award and Determination The City Acted In Bad Faith

    Bridges Crumble as Muni Rates at Least Since ’60s Ignored

    Deterioration Known To Insured Forecloses Collapse Coverage

    Dynamics of Managing Professional Liability Claims for Design Builders

    Hawaii Supreme Court Says Aloha to Insurers Trying to Recoup Defense Costs From Policyholders

    Concurrent Causation Doctrine Applies Where Natural and Man-made Perils Combine to Create Loss

    Creative Avenue for Judgment Creditor to Collect a Judgment

    Hilti Partners with Canvas, a Construction Robotics Company

    When Is an Arbitration Clause Unconscionable? Not Often

    Can Baltimore Get a Great Bridge?

    Design-build Trends, Challenges and Risk Mitigation

    Construction of World's Tallest Building to Resume With New $1.9B Contract for Jeddah Tower

    Red Tape Is Holding Up a Greener Future

    10 Answers to Those Nagging Mechanics Lien Questions Keeping You Up at Night. Kind of

    Emotional Distress Damages Not Distinct from “Annoyance and Discomfort” Damages in Case Arising from 2007 California Wildfires

    SCOTUS, Having Received Views of Solicitor General, Will Decide Whether CWA Regulates Indirect Discharge of Pollutants Into Navigable Water Via Groundwater
    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. Drawing 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

    KY Mining Accident Not a Covered Occurrence Under Commercial General Liability Policy

    December 04, 2018 —
    In Am. Mining Ins. Co. v. Peters Farms, LLC,1 the Kentucky Supreme Court ruled that a mining error was not a covered accident under a commercial general liability insurance policy. The central issue was whether an insured mining company’s unauthorized removal of minerals from a neighboring property was an “occurrence” that unintentionally caused “property damage” as defined by the mining company’s commercial general liability policy (“CGL Policy”). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Phillip A. Perez, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Perez may be contacted at pap@sdvlaw.com

    You're Doing Construction in Russia, Now What?

    May 16, 2022 —
    In recent weeks, there has been a long list of companies, from all industries spanning from construction/engineering to fashion and hospitality, that have announced that they are completely severing ties with Russia, while a host of others have announced a temporary halt. See Jeffrey A. Sonnenfeld, Over 400 Companies Have Withdrawn from Russia – But Some Remain, Yale School of Management (Updated Mar. 21, 2022), https://som.yale.edu/story/2022/over-400-companies-have-withdrawn-russia-some-remain?utm_campaign=mb. For those developers, EPC contractors, and design professionals (engineers and architects) who have construction projects in Russia, the question is, “How should we proceed?” The U.S. initially stated that it was not issuing a total embargo on business dealings and trade relations with Russia in response to the nation’s invasion of Ukraine. Instead, the U.S., along with many other Western nations, issued targeted sanctions. See Francesco Giumelli, Understanding Targeted U.N. Sanctions: An Empirical Analysis, International Affairs, 91(6), 1351-1368 (explaining the difference between embargoes and targeted sanctions). However, after evidence of war crimes by Russia emerged, President Biden issued an Executive Order prohibiting U.S. individuals, whether in the states or abroad, from new investments in Russia and prohibiting U.S. individuals from transactions with Russian state-owned entities. See April 6, 2022, Presidential Actions, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2022/04/06/prohibiting-new-investment-in-and-certain-services-to-the-russian-federation-in-response-to-continued-russian-federation-aggression/. This new Executive Order is said to not affect existing contracts in Russia, but instead prohibits new ones. Reprinted courtesy of Anazette Ray, Zetlin & De Chiara LLP and Michael Vardaro, Zetlin & De Chiara LLP Ms. Ray may be contacted at aray@zdlaw.com Mr. Vardaro may be contacted at mvardaro@zdlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Wyoming Supreme Court Picks a Side After Reviewing the Sutton Rule

    January 16, 2024 —
    In a matter of first impression, the Supreme Court of Wyoming (Supreme Court), in West American Insurance Company v. Black Dog Consulting Inc., No. S-23-0052, 2023 WY 109, 2023 Wyo. LEXIS 111, examined whether a landlord’s insurer could pursue a subrogation claim against a tenant who caused a fire loss. The Supreme Court, applying a case-by-case approach, found that the insurer could not subrogate against the tenant. West American Insurance Company (West) insured Profile Properties (Profile), which owned commercial property in Cheyenne, Wyoming. Black Dog Consulting Inc., d/b/a C.H. Yarber (Yarber) leased commercial space from Profile where it operated a metal fabrication business. The lease agreement between Profile and Yarber required Yarber to pay the full expense of Profile’s blanket insurance policy, which included general commercial liability insurance and fire and extended coverage insurance on the building. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryan Bennett, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Bennett may be contacted at bennettr@whiteandwilliams.com

    Zurich American Insurance Company v. Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company

    October 05, 2020 —
    In Zurich American Ins. Co. v. Ironshore Specialty Ins. Co., __F.3d__(July 2, 2020), the United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals certified the following questions to the Nevada Supreme Court in connection with a contribution action for defense costs filed by Zurich American Insurance Company and American Guarantee & Liability Insurance Company (“Zurich”) against Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company (“Ironshore”) with respect to the defense and settlement of 14 construction defect lawsuits on behalf of eight subcontractors (“lawsuits”) insured by both companies:
    Whether, under Nevada law, the burden of proving the applicability of an exception to an exclusion of coverage in an insurance policy falls on the insurer or the insured? Whichever party bears such a burden, may it rely on evidence extrinsic to the complaint to carry its burden, and if so, is it limited to extrinsic evidence available at the time the insured tendered the defense of the lawsuit to the insurer?
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Velladao, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Velladao may be contacted at Michael.Velladao@lewisbrisbois.com

    Kentucky Supreme Court Creates New “Goldilocks Zone” to Limit Opinions of Biomechanical Experts

    July 24, 2023 —
    Lexington, Ky. (June 26, 2023) – In a recent decision, the Kentucky Supreme Court placed stricter limitations on the opinions that biomechanical engineers may offer at trials in Kentucky courts. Specifically, the published opinion issued in Renot v. Securea, Supreme Ins. Co., 2023 Ky. LEXIS 163, recognizes a new space for the testimony of biomechanics experts – “The Goldilocks Zone.” Where is the Goldilocks Zone? The Goldilocks Zone is a perfect place in which the proffered testimony is neither too specific such that it wanders into the realm of medical causation, nor too general such that it fails to help a lay jury. Specifically, a biomechanical engineer’s expert testimony must be limited to the forces generated by the subject collision, the generally anticipated responses of a hypothetical person’s body to those forces, and the range of typical injuries resulting from such forces. Moreover, following Renot, a biomechanical engineer’s proffered opinions no longer may enter into the realm of diagnosing a specific medical condition associated with a traumatic injury. Instead, the question of whether a trauma actually caused or exacerbated a plaintiff’s injuries falls solely within the purview of a medical doctor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aimee E. Muller, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Muller may be contacted at Aimee.Muller@lewisbrisbois.com

    Owner Can’t Pursue Statutory Show Cause Complaint to Cancel Lien… Fair Outcome?

    June 10, 2024 —
    If there is a payment dispute with a construction lienor — could be a contractor, a subcontractor, or supplier – it is possible, and more than likely, a construction lien may get recorded against real property. This scenario is not uncommon as the lien is the mechanism for the lienor to collateralize their claimed nonpayment. Now, in reality, it does not take much money to record a lien. A lienor should utilize a lawyer to prepare their liens, but maybe they prepare liens in-house. Regardless, the recording of the lien is a nominal cost and the clerk that dockets and records the lien does NOT analyze the merits of the lien. That is not what the clerk is there to do; nor do you really want them the delve into the factual merits. Well, what if a lien is facially invalid, meaning that the lien, on its face, includes information that demonstrates it is NOT properly perfected. Or what if the lienor failed to properly preserve or perfect its lien rights before recording the lien. This happens! Naturally, an owner of the real property wants the lien removed from the property. The owner does not want the encumbrance. The owner could transfer the lien to a lien transfer bond under Florida’s Lien Law, but that is easier said than done. And this does not discharge the lien; it just removes the lien from the property to the security of the bond. 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

    Employee Screening and Testing in the Covid-19 Era: Getting Back to Work

    August 10, 2020 —
    Currently Available Workplace Protocols for Employers Employers seeking to minimize the risk of COVID-19 transmission in the workplace should consider from among the three currently available protocols: Written Questionnaires; Temperature Checks; and Viral or Diagnostic Testing. When implementing a screening or testing protocol, employers should explain the following in writing to employees: (1) the specific screening process or test utilized by the employer; (2) employee compliance expectations and any consequences for a refusal to participate; (3) how employee privacy will be protected; (4) if screening, the general benchmarks that indicate the employee has “passed” (e.g., temperature below 100.4ºF, per CDC guidelines); and (5) the outcome of an unsuccessful screen or test (e.g., being sent home from the workplace). Employers must also ensure that those administering the screening and/or testing are properly trained, and that appropriate written acknowledgements are obtained from employees consenting to the applicable protocol. Reprinted courtesy of Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson and Shannon D. Azzaro, Peckar & Abramson Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com Ms. Azzaro may be contacted at sazzaro@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Banks Loosening U.S. Mortgage Standards: Chart of the Day

    August 13, 2014 —
    Perhaps more U.S. banks than at any time in two decades are making it easier to qualify for a mortgage. The CHART OF THE DAY shows the net share of banks telling the Federal Reserve that they’re tightening standards in the home-loan market. In the central bank’s July survey of senior loan officers released last week, the net percentage for prime mortgages was negative 18.3 percent, by far the most loosening since it started asking the question by loan-quality category in 2007. It was also greater than the highest net share of banks easing in “all” mortgages in the 1990s or 2000s. Still, lenders have a long way to go before they unwind the restrictions they imposed in the wake of the global financial crisis that risky home loans helped to create. The current trend is mainly about “small tweaks around the edges,” according to JPMorgan Chase & Co. mortgage-bond analysts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jody Shenn, Bloomberg
    Ms. Shenn may be contacted at jshenn@bloomberg.net