BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction 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


    When an Intentional Act Results in Injury or Damage, it is not an Accident within the Meaning of an Insurance Policy Even When the Insured did not Intend to Cause the Injury or Damage

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (8/6/24) – Construction Tech Deals Surge, Senators Reintroduce Housing Bill, and Nonresidential Spending Drops

    California Supreme Court Rights the “Occurrence” Ship: Unintended Harm Resulting from Intentional Conduct Triggers Coverage Under Liability Insurance Policy

    Skilled Labor Shortage Implications for Construction Companies

    Can’t Get a Written Change Order? Document, Document, Document

    Trump Administration Announces New Eviction Moratorium

    Recent Statutory Changes Cap Retainage on Applicable Construction Projects

    Claimants’ Demand for Superfluous Wording In Release Does Not Excuse Insurer’s Failure to Accept Policy Limit Offer Within Time Specified

    Dispute between City and Construction Company Over Unsightly Arches

    Perez Broke Records … But Should He Have Settled Earlier?

    Water Seepage, Ensuing Mold Damage Covered by Homeowner's Policy

    Harmon Towers to Be Demolished without Being Finished

    Benford’s Law: A Seldom Used Weapon in Forensic Accounting

    Third Circuit Holds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Despite Insured’s Expectations

    Were Quake Standards Illegally Altered for PG&E Nuclear Power Plant?

    New York Court Rejects Owner’s Bid for Additional Insured Coverage

    Construction Client Advisory: The Power of the Bonded Stop Notice Extends to Expended Construction Funds

    Sinking Buildings on the Rise?

    Governmental Action Exclusion Bars Claim for Damage to Insured's Building

    TARP Funds Demolish Homes in Detroit to Lift Prices: Mortgages

    Why a Challenge to Philadelphia’s Project Labor Agreement Would Be Successful

    What Construction Contractors Should Know About the California Government Claims Act

    Chambers USA 2019 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    Congratulations to Associate Madeline Arcellana on Her Selection as a Top Rank Attorney in Southern Nevada!

    What to do about California’s Defect-Ridden Board of Equalization Building

    Protect Projects From Higher Repair Costs and Property Damage

    Top 10 Lessons Learned from a Construction Attorney

    Developer's Novel Virus-killing Air Filter Ups Standard for Indoor Air Quality

    Candis Jones Named “On the Rise” by Daily Report's Georgia Law Awards

    Court of Appeals Invalidates Lien under Dormancy Clause

    Flexible Seattle Off-Ramp Would Retain Shape in Quake

    Ohio Supreme Court Rules That Wrongful Death Claims Are Subject to the Four-Year Statute of Repose for Medical Claims

    Bad Faith Claim for Inadequate Investigation Does Not Survive Summary Judgment

    Builder and County Tussle over Unfinished Homes

    ‘Revamp the Camps’ Cabins Displayed at the CA State Fair

    Las Vegas, Back From the Bust, Revives Dead Projects

    Los Angeles Construction Sites May Be on Fault Lines

    City of Seattle Temporarily Shuts Down Public Works to Enforce Health and Safety Plans

    Land Planners Not Held to Professional Standard of Care

    BIM Legal Liabilities: Not That Different

    After Elections, Infrastructure Talk Stirs Again

    Building 47 Bridges in Two Years

    Traub Lieberman Partner Eric D. Suben Obtains Federal Second Circuit Affirmance of Summary Judgment in Insurer’s Favor

    Happenings in and around the 2015 West Coast Casualty Seminar

    The Right to Repair Act Isn’t Out for the Count, Yet. Homebuilders Fight Back

    3 Common Cash Flow Issues That Plague The Construction Industry

    Homeowner’s Claims Defeated Because “Gravamen” of Complaint was Fraud, not Breach of Contract

    Milhouse Engineering and Construction, Inc. Named 2022 A/E/C Building a Better World Award Winner

    Texas Court Construes Breach of Contract Exclusion Narrowly in Duty-to-Defend Case

    Labor Shortages In Construction
    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

    Multiple Occurrences Found For Claims Against Supplier of Asbestos Products

    May 07, 2015 —
    The federal district court found that various claims for bodily injury against a supplier of asbestos products arose from multiple occurrences, increasing indemnity amounts available under the policy. Westfield Ins. Co. v. Continental Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45437 (N.D. Ohio April 7, 2015). Mahoning Valley Supply Company (MVS) was sued by numerous claimants who alleged that they had been injured by asbestos-containing products manufactured by third parties, but supplied by MVS. The claimants alleged exposure to asbestos fibers at a variety of job sites, on numerous dates, and under a variety of conditions. Two insurers shared defense and indemnity costs. In 2013, Continental informed MVS that the three policies issued to MVS were nearly exhausted. Therefore, the parties disputed whether MVS' asbestos claims arose out of a single "occurrence" rather than multiple occurrences. The policies defined "occurrence" as "an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to conditions, which results in bodily injury or property damage neither expected nor intended from the standpoint of the insured." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Is Arbitration Final and Binding?

    July 02, 2018 —
    Parties involved in a dispute may face a choice between arbitration and litigation. Previous articles in this series have discussed various factors that can influence that choice. One generally perceived advantage of arbitration is finality. But how final and binding is an arbitration award? The answer is governed primarily by the Federal Arbitration Act. The Federal Arbitration Act
      The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) is a statute enacted in 1925 which provides the basic legal principles applicable to arbitration in the United States. At its core is the following principle—arbitration agreements involving interstate or foreign commerce (which includes virtually all construction contracts in the United States) must be considered:
    • Valid
    • Irrevocable; and
    • Enforceable, except on legal or equitable grounds for the revocation of a contract.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeanne M. Harrison, Smith Currie
    Ms. Harrison may be contacted at jmharrison@smithcurrie.com

    Delaware Supreme Court Choice of Law Ruling Vacates a $13.7 Million Verdict Against Travelers

    August 07, 2018 —
    On July 16, 2018, the Delaware Supreme Court held in Travelers Indemnity Company v. CNH Industrial America, LLC, No. 420, 2017 (Del. Jul. 16, 2018), that a court’s choice of law inquiry in an insurance coverage dispute should focus on the contacts most relevant to the insurance contract rather than the location of the underlying claims. In Travelers, CNH Industrial America, LLC (CNH), sought coverage for asbestos liabilities associated with J.I. Case, Inc., a subsidiary it had acquired, under policies issued to J.I. Case and its former parent company, Tenneco, Inc. The issue before the Delaware Supreme Court was whether the anti-assignment clause in three Travelers policies issued to Tenneco, Inc. precluded the assignment of the policies to CNH. The validity of the assignment turned on which state’s law governed the dispute. (Under Wisconsin law, the parties agreed that the assignment was valid, while under Texas law, the parties agreed the assignment was invalid.) Reprinted courtesy of Gregory Capps, White and Williams LLP and Zachery Roth, White and Williams LLP Mr. Capps may be contacted at cappsg@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Roth may be contacted at rothz@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Schools Remain Top Priority in Carolinas as Cleanup From Storms Continues

    November 06, 2018 —
    A month after Hurricane Florence dumped more than 30 inches of rain on the Carolinas, Hurricane Michael delivered additional flash flooding, power outages and wind damage. While the construction-related impact of Hurricane Michael is still being assessed (stay tuned for more on that front in the coming weeks), Moody’s Analytics estimates total property damage from Florence at $17 billion to $22 billion, factoring in losses from homes, roads, crops, livestock, coal ash ponds and more. While it’s difficult to pinpoint which counties were hit the hardest, the majority of the damage was in the eastern coastal areas of North Carolina. According to Rob Beale, a vice president in W.M. Jordan’s Wilmington, North Carolina, office, Carteret and Onslow counties took the brunt of the storm, while Columbus and Brunswick counties experienced the biggest flooding impact. Reprinted courtesy of Joanna Masterson, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    SB 721 – California Multi-Family Buildings New Require Inspections of “EEEs”

    December 19, 2018 —
    Many in the construction industry and multi-family development field have been closely following Senate Bill 721, or the “Balcony Bill,” regarding new requirements for building owners associated with decks and balconies. After almost a dozen amendments, the “Balcony Bill” finally passed in the state legislature with an overwhelming majority and was signed into law September 17th, 2018, by Governor Jerry Brown. Balconies and decks, called “Exterior Elevated Elements” (“EEE”) in the statute, are common features in most multi-family buildings in California – where better to enjoy the California sun? However, many of the structures have proven to be problematic at best due to complex intersections of construction trades and design issues as well as limited understanding and effectuation of maintenance. Indeed, the “Balcony Bill” arose largely out of an outcry following the 2015 balcony collapse in Berkeley in 2015, which left six young people dead and another seven injured. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brenda Radmacher, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Ms. Radmacher may be contacted at bradmacher@grsm.com

    Second Circuit Clarifies What Must Be Alleged to Establish “Joint Employer” Liability in the Context of Federal Employment Discrimination Claims

    March 14, 2022 —
    The “joint employer” doctrine has been used with increasing frequency by the plaintiffs’ bar to broaden the scope of target defendants in discrimination cases beyond those who would be traditionally regarded as the employer. This is true even in the construction industry, which has seen a rise in cases where general contractors or construction managers are being targeted when discrimination is alleged on a construction project, even when the GC or CM is far removed from the underlying events and had no control over the employees in question. Until now, the Courts in the federal circuit which includes New York City (the Second Circuit) have been left to decipher a patchwork of case law to ascertain the scope and extent of joint employer liability in discrimination cases. This week, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Felder v. United States Tennis Association, et al., 19-1094, issued a comprehensive decision which provides a helpful summary of what must be pled and proven to broaden liability under the joint employer theory in discrimination cases. Reprinted courtesy of Kevin J. O’Connor, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Lauren Rayner Davis, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. O'Connor may be contacted at koconnor@pecklaw.com Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com Ms. Davis may be contacted at ldavis@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (4/10/24) – Hotels Integrate AI, Baby-Boomers Stay Put, and Insurance Affects Housing Market

    May 06, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, DOT’s major grant programs, proptech’s solution to climate change risks, mortgage-locked sellers put their homes on the market, and more! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Impact of Lis Pendens on Unrecorded Interests / Liens

    September 15, 2016 —
    In a previous article, I discussed the importance of recording a lis pendens in a construction lien foreclosure action. There is another noteworthy point relating to the impact of lis pendens that can provide quite a bit of consternation. Florida Statute 48.23(1)(d) provides: Except for the interest of persons in possession or easements of use, the recording of such notice of lis pendens, provided that during the pendency of the proceeding it has not expired pursuant to subsection (2) or been withdrawn or discharged, constitutes a bar to the enforcement against the property described in the notice of all interests and liens, including, but not limited to, federal tax liens and levies, unrecorded at the time of recording the notice unless the holder of any such unrecorded interest or lien intervenes in such proceedings within 30 days after the recording of the notice. If the holder of any such unrecorded interest or lien does not intervene in the proceedings and if such proceedings are prosecuted to a judicial sale of the property described in the notice, the property shall be forever discharged from all such unrecorded interests and liens. If the notice of lis pendens expires or is withdrawn or discharged, the expiration, withdrawal, or discharge of the notice does not affect the validity of any unrecorded interest or lien. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com