BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural 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


    Business Interruption Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    London’s Best Districts Draw Buyers on Italian Triple Dip

    Not to Miss at This Year’s Archtober Festival

    North Carolina Learns More Lessons From Latest Storm

    Just Decided – New Jersey Supreme Court: Insurers Can Look To Extrinsic Evidence To Deny a Defense

    Approaching Design-Build Projects to Avoid (or Win) Disputes

    Insurer Not Required to Show Prejudice from an Insured’s Late Notice When the Parties Contract for a Specific Reporting Period

    Boston Team Secures Summary Judgment Dismissal on Client’s Behalf in Serious Personal Injury Case

    Arbitration Clause Found Ambiguous in Construction Defect Case

    Construction Industry Survey Says Optimism Hits All-Time High

    Contractor Gets Green Light to Fix Two Fractured Girders at Salesforce Transit Center

    Unlicensed Contractors Caught in a Sting Operation

    Constructive Suspension (Suspension Outside of an Express Order)

    What Every Project Participant Needs to Know About Delay Claims

    Federal Court Denies Summary Judgment in Leaky Condo Conversion

    After Elections, Infrastructure Talk Stirs Again

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    Rooftop Owners Sue Cubs Consultant for Alleged False Statements

    Slowing Home Sales Show U.S. Market Lacks Momentum: Economy

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

    Auditor: Prematurely Awarded Contracts Increased Honolulu Rail Cost by $354M

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2019

    What Cal/OSHA’s “Permanent” COVID Standards Mean for Employers

    Is A Miller Act Payment Bond Surety Bound by A Default or Default Judgment Against Its Principal?

    St Louis County Approves Settlement in Wrongful Death Suit

    Policing Those Subcontractors: It Might Take Extra Effort To Be An Additional Insured

    California Assembly Passes Expedited Dam Safety for Silicon Valley Act

    Scaffolding Purchase Suggests No New Building for Board of Equalization

    Quick Note: October 1, 2023 Changes to Florida’s Construction Statutes

    Legislative Changes that Impact Construction 2017

    Want a Fair Chance at a Government Contract? Think Again

    Illinois Court Determines Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims

    Is It Time to Revisit Construction Defects in Kentucky?

    Title II under ADA Applicable to Public Rights-of-Way, Parks and Other Recreation Areas

    Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Insurance Bad Faith Trials

    Study Finds Mansion Tax Reduced Sales in New York and New Jersey

    Disputes Over Arbitrator Qualifications: The Northern District of California Offers Some Guidance

    Rihanna Gained an Edge in Construction Defect Case

    Blog Completes Sixteenth Year

    Wisconsin Court Applies the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Negligence Claims for Purely Economic Losses

    NYC Developer Embraces Religion in Search for Condo Sites

    My Employees Could Have COVID-19. What Now?

    Wall Street’s Palm Beach Foray Fuels Developer Office Rush

    Best Practices for ESI Collection in Construction Litigation

    Renters Trading Size for Frills Fuel U.S. Apartment Boom

    There is No Claims File Privilege in Florida, Despite What Insurers Want You to Think

    Following California Law, Federal Court Adopts Horizontal Allocation For Asbestos Coverage

    Massachusetts High Court: Attorney's Fee Award Under Consumer Protection Act Not Covered by General Liability Insurance Policy

    Details Matter: The Importance of Strictly Following Public Bid Statutes
    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

    New Jersey Courts Speed Up Sandy Litigation

    September 03, 2014 —
    In order to deal with the thousand plus property damage cases related to Hurricane Sandy the “U.S. District Chief Judge Jerome Simandle of the District of New Jersey, who sits in Camden, N.J., issued a standing order dated Aug. 13 that, in effect, cuts in half the amount of time that arbitrators and mediators will have to hear disputes over coverage and issue rulings,” the New Jersey Law Journal reported. “John O’Brien, chief deputy of operations for New Jersey’s federal courts, said that, as of Wednesday, 1,240 Sandy-related lawsuits had been filed in New Jersey and that 1,051 of those cases are still pending,” according to the New Jersey Law Journal. “Sixty of those pending cases have been referred to mediation and another six have been sent to arbitration panels, according to O’Brien.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    February 28, 2022 —
    For decades, an insurer’s duty to defend under Texas law was determined exclusively by reviewing the insurance contract and the allegations of the complaint under the “eight-corners rule.” All of this changed last week when, in a long-awaited decision, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that courts may consider extrinsic evidence to determine the existence of coverage in certain limited situations. Monroe Guar. Ins. Co. v. BITCO Gen. Ins. Corp., No. 21-0232, 2022 WL 413940 (Tex. Feb. 11, 2022). In Monroe, a drilling contractor was sued for damages arising out of the allegedly botched drilling of an irrigation well. The underlying lawsuit alleged that negligent drilling caused damage to surrounding farmland. However, the complaint did not allege when the damage occurred. The contractor’s insurers, BITCO General Insurance Corporation (“Bitco”) and Monroe Guarantee Insurance Company (“Monroe”) disputed whether Monroe owed a duty to defend. Although Bitco agreed to provide a defense, Monroe refused, arguing that the property damage happened before its policy period. Bitco sued Monroe for contribution. In the trial court, the insurers stipulated that a drill bit became stuck before Monroe’s policy incepted, a fact that would have supported Monroe’s “prior damage” defense. On summary judgment, though, the trial court ruled this stipulated fact could not be considered under Texas’ eight-corners rule. Monroe appealed, and the Fifth Circuit, which had previously endorsed an exception to the eight-corners rule under Northfield Insurance Co. v. Loving Home Care, Inc., 363 F.3d 523, 531 (5th Cir. 2004), certified the question to the Texas Supreme Court. Reprinted courtesy of Jared De Jong, Payne & Fears, Nathan A. Cazier, Payne & Fears and Scott S. Thomas, Payne & Fears Mr. Jong may be contacted at jdj@paynefears.com Mr. Cazier may be contacted at nac@paynefears.com Mr. Thomas may be contacted at sst@paynefears.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Haight’s 2020 San Diego Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    July 06, 2020 —
    Haight congratulates partners Michael Parme and Arezoo Jamshidi who were selected to the 2020 San Diego Super Lawyers Rising Stars list. Each year no more than 2.5% of the lawyers in the state are selected by the research team at Super Lawyers to receive this honor. Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    EPA Coal Ash Cleanup Rule Changes Send Utilities, Agencies Back to Drawing Board

    February 21, 2022 —
    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency plans to deny requests by three power facilities for extended deadlines to close unlined coal ash impoundments that are risks to groundwater, while offering only a provisional extension to another. The decision came as part of a larger agency push to strengthen regulation of coal combustion residuals disposal and facilities with unlined storage. Reprinted courtesy of Corinne Grinapol, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Homeowner Sues Brick Manufacturer for Spalling Bricks

    October 22, 2013 —
    A Columbia, South Carolina homeowner has sued Kinney Brick Co., alleging that the bricks used in his home were defective and are now crumbling. The lawsuit alleges that the manufacturer and the distributor were both aware that the bricks would retain moisture and crumble. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Handling Construction Defect Claims – New Edition Released

    February 11, 2013 —
    A lot has changed in the twenty-seven years since the Miller Law firm first released Handling Construction Defect Claims: Western States, and those changes are reflected in the recent publication of the fourth edition. Frank H. Wu, the Chancellor and Dean of UC Hastings College of Law describes the work as “more than a scholar’s treatise, it is the first resource for construction defect plaintiff and defense attorneys; as well as mediators, arbitrators and judges — or ought to be!” In the time since the first edition, the number of homeowner associations has grown nearly ten-fold. Further, as Rachel M. Miller, a Senior Partner at the firm and one of the authors, notes, “thousands of construction defect claims are filed every year, and in most cases, the developers insurance pick up these claims.” The book is available at Amazon at a price of $299. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Alabama Supreme Court States Faulty Workmanship can be an Occurrence

    July 16, 2014 —
    Carl A. Salisbury of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP in his Lexology article, stated that “it is now official and final: Alabama is no longer one of the outlier jurisdictions on the issue of coverage for faulty workmanship.” In the case Owners v. Jim Carr Homebuilders, in September 2013 the Alabama Supreme Court had “sided with insurers in holding that construction defects can never be accidental and, therefore, can never be covered by Commercial General Liability insurance.” However, in March “the Court withdrew that decision and reversed course,” holding “that faulty workmanship can, in fact, constitute a covered ‘occurrence,’ which CGL policies define as ‘an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to the same generally harmful conditions.’” “This is obviously good news for construction contractors that do work in the state of Alabama,” Salisbury stated. “It is also good news for policyholders in general as it continues the strong trend among state high courts that have been finding in favor of coverage in this important area of insurance law.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Sierra Pacific v. Bradbury Goes Unchallenged: Colorado’s Six-Year Statute of Repose Begins When a Subcontractor’s Scope of Work Ends

    November 03, 2016 —
    It’s official: the October 20, 2016 deadline to petition for certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals on its decision in Sierra Pacific Industries, Inc. v. Bradbury has passed, so it appears that decision will stand. In Sierra Pacific, the Court of Appeals held as a matter of first impression that the statute of repose for a general contractor to sue a subcontractor begins to run when a subcontractor’s scope of work is substantially complete, regardless of the status of the overall project. Sierra Pac. Indus., Inc. v. Bradbury, 2016 COA 132, ¶ 28, ___ P.3d ___. The Court of Appeals interpreted the statute of repose in C.R.S. section 13-80-104, which requires that “all actions against any architect, contractor, builder or builder vendor, engineer, or inspector performing or furnishing the design, planning, supervision, inspection, construction, or observation of any improvement to real property” must be brought within six years of substantial completion of that improvement. C.R.S. § 13-80-104(1)(a). Recognizing that “an improvement may be [to] a discrete component of an entire project” under Shaw Construction, LLC v. United Builder Services, Inc., 296 P.3d 145 (Colo. App. 2012), the Court of Appeals determined that “a subcontractor has substantially completed its role in the improvement at issue when it finishes working on the improvement.” Sierra Pac., 2016 COA at ¶¶ 20, 28. In doing so, it rejected Sierra Pacific’s argument that the statute could be tolled under the repair doctrine “while others worked to repair [the subcontractor’s] ‘improper installation work and flawed repair work.’” Id. at ¶ 29. Because six years had undisputedly passed since the subcontractor completed its scope of work when Sierra Pacific filed suit against it, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s order granting the subcontractor’s motion for summary judgment under Section 13-80-104(1)(a). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer Real Estate Litigation Blog
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com