BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness construction
    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


    Hawaii Court Looks at Changes to Construction Defect Coverage after Changes in Law

    Millennium’s Englander Buys $71.3 Million Manhattan Co-Op

    Supreme Court of Wisconsin Applies Pro Rata Allocation Based on Policy Limits to Co-Insurance Dispute

    The Woodland Hills Office Secures a Total Defense Award on Behalf of their High-End Custom Home Builder Client!

    Force Majeure, Construction Delays, Labor Shortages and COVID-19

    Coronavirus and Contract Obligations

    Excess Must Defend After Primary Improperly Refuses to Do So

    Condo Board Goes after Insurer for Construction Defect Settlement

    Texas Shortens Cut-Off Date for Suits Against Homebuilders Who Provide a 6-Year Written Warranty

    Do Change Orders Need to be in Writing and Other Things That Might Surprise You

    ‘I’m a Scapegoat,’ Says Former CEO of Dubai Construction Firm

    On-Site Supersensing and the Future of Construction Automation – Discussion with Aviad Almagor

    Construction in the Time of Coronavirus

    It’s Time for a Net Zero Building Boom

    The Future Has Arrived: New Technologies in Construction

    Philadelphia Revises Realty Transfer Tax Treatment of Acquired Real Estate Companies

    Fire Damages Unfinished Hospital Tower at NYU Langone Medical Center

    New Orleans Drainage System Recognized as Historic Civil Engineering Landmark

    The CA Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review of McMillin Albany LLC v. Super Ct. 2015 F069370 (Cal.App.5 Dist.) As to Whether the Right to Repair Act (SB800) is the Exclusive Remedy for All Defect Claims Arising Out of New Residential Construction

    Construction Law Client Alert: Hirer Beware - When Exercising Control Over a Job Site’s Safety Conditions, You May be Held Directly Liable for an Independent Contractor’s Injury

    “Source of Duty,” Tort, and Contract, Oh My!

    Colorado Statutes of Limitations and Repose, A First Step in Construction Defect Litigation

    Why Employees Are Taking Ownership of Their Architecture Firms

    Sixth Circuit Rejects Claim for Reverse Bad Faith

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2023 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Lost Rental Income not a Construction Defect

    The Small Stuff: Small Claims Court and Limited Civil Court Jurisdictional Limits

    Hovnanian Reports “A Year of Solid Profitability”

    Legal Implications of 3D Printing in Construction Loom

    PSA: Latest Updates from AGC-VA on COVID Rules (UPDATED)

    California Court of Appeal Holds That the Right to Repair Act Prohibits Class Actions Against Manufacturers of Products Completely Manufactured Offsite

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    Terms of Your Teaming Agreement Matter

    How Drones are Speeding Up Construction

    Five Years of Great Legal Blogging at Insurance Law Hawaii

    Renee Mortimer Recognized as "Defense Lawyer of the Year" by DTCI

    Zinc in London Climbs for Second Day Before U.S. Housing Data

    General Contractor’s Professional Malpractice/Negligence Claim Against Design Professional

    Pollution Exclusion Does Not Apply To Concrete Settling Dust

    California Ranks As Leading State for Green Building in 2022

    Staying the Course, Texas Supreme Court Rejects Insurer’s Argument for Exception to Eight-Corners Rule in Determining Duty to Defend

    Fourth Circuit Confirms Scope of “Witness Litigation Privilege”

    Foreign Entry into the United States Construction, Infrastructure and PPP Markets

    Department of Transportation Revises Its Rules Affecting Environmental Review of Transportation Projects

    Insured's Complaint for Breach of Contract and Bad Faith Adequately Pleads Consequential Damages

    It’s a COVID-19 Pandemic; It’s Everywhere – New Cal. Bill to Make Insurers Prove Otherwise

    Is Your Design Professional Construction Contract too Friendly? (Law Note)

    Defending Against the Res Ipsa Loquitur Doctrine – Liability Considerations

    OSHA Investigating Bridge Accident Resulting in Construction Worker Fatality

    Res Judicata Bars Insured from Challenging Insurer's Use of Schedule to Deduct Depreciation from the Loss
    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

    Evolving Climate Patterns and Extreme Weather Demand New Building Methods

    May 22, 2023 —
    Compared to the rest of the world, most buildings in the United States are relatively young. But most residential and commercial properties could use a makeover. Buildings constructed over twenty, fifty and one hundred years ago are, unsurprisingly, not as energy-efficient or as safe as new builds following modern methods—especially when considering the effects of climate change and more frequent extreme weather events on the integrity of that infrastructure. According to the National Association of Home Builders, over 90% of new homes built in the United States today are wood-framed. These homes are incapable of withstanding a tornado or hurricane, yet they are still being built directly in the path of storms. Even buildings constructed in some of the most earthquake-prone areas of the U.S. may contain design flaws that make them susceptible to damage because they are built using a non-ductile concrete method, which experts say has an inadequate configuration of steel reinforcing bars—making the building vulnerable when shaken. While this building method was banned for new construction, it is not yet required to retrofit older construction to improve safety and structural integrity. Reprinted courtesy of Annette Rubin, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Surety Trends to Keep an Eye on in the Construction Industry

    March 25, 2024 —
    Reflecting on the dynamics of the 2023 construction and surety industries, it is evident that opportunities and challenges have emerged for contractors that will shape the landscape for the year ahead. Contractors can not only capitalize on these trends but protect the successful companies they have already built. PROJECT OPPORTUNITIES There has been a notable increase in public works opportunities, driven by increased government spending and the aging infrastructure in the United States. This trend is expected to continue in 2024 and beyond, with a notable portion of work coming in transportation- and public-utility-related infrastructure. Due to increased spending, many contractors are reporting historically high backlogs—and that often includes the largest project their company has contracted in their history. While increased spending presents more opportunity, it’s critical contractors be even more diligent about new opportunities, giving additional consideration to the following: Job Selection: New geographies, scope, project owners and/or subcontractor relationships commonly come with a learning curve. With the current state of the market, it’s not the ideal time to be learning costly lessons. Contractors should focus on having a proactive go/no-go strategy when reviewing potential projects to identify risks early and plan accordingly. Reprinted courtesy of Oliver Craig, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Lewis Brisbois Ranked Tier 1 Nationally for Insurance Law, Mass Tort/Class Actions Defense by U.S. News/Best Lawyers

    November 21, 2022 —
    (November 3, 2022) - Lewis Brisbois has once again been ranked Tier 1 nationally by U.S. News & World Report/Best Lawyers for ‘Insurance Law’ and ‘Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants,’ as well as ranking Tier 1 in 14 different practice areas across 15 metro regions. In addition to Lewis Brisbois' national ranking, the firm also ranked Tier 1 for ‘Insurance Law’ in the Philadelphia, Reno, and Tampa metro areas, and Tier 1 for ‘Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants’ in the Los Angeles area. The firm was also ranked Tier 1 in the following regional categories:
    • ‘Commercial Litigation’ in Akron;
    • ‘Corporate Governance Law’ in San Francisco;
    • ‘Corporate Law’ in Akron;
    • ‘Environmental Law’ in Washington, D.C.;
    • ‘Litigation - Health Care’ in Portland, Ore. and Roanoke;
    • ‘Litigation – Municipal’ in Wichita;
    • ‘Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants’ in Chicago and Roanoke;
    • ‘Mergers & Acquisitions Law’ in Akron;
    • ‘Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants’ in Chicago, Inland Empire, New York City, Orange County, Roanoke, and Seattle;
    • ‘Product Liability Litigation – Defendants’ in Philadelphia;
    • ‘Tax Law’ in Akron; and
    • ‘Trusts & Estates Law’ in Akron.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    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

    Fourth Circuit Rejects Application of Wrap-Up Exclusion to Additional Insured

    December 11, 2018 —
    Utilizing an owner-controlled or contractor-controlled insurance program (collectively known as “wrap-ups”) can reduce claims, save costs, and give owners and general contractors comfort in knowing their project is adequately insured. However, problems often arise when a subcontractor doesn’t enroll in the wrap-up and, instead, agrees to provide additional insured coverage to the owner and general contractor on the subcontractor’s own general liability policy. One of those problems is the prevalence of wrap-up exclusions on subcontractors’ general liability policies. If the wrap-up exclusion is too broadly drafted, the exclusion can eliminate coverage for the general contractor and owner even when the subcontractor is not enrolled in the wrap-up. Reprinted courtesy of K. Alexandra Byrd, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Samantha M. Oliveira, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Byrd may be contacted at kab@sdvlaw.com Mr. Oliveira may be contacted at smm@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “The New Empty Chair.”

    June 04, 2024 —
    In a unanimous opinion, the United States Supreme Court ruled that cases in litigation in federal court but which are determined to be governed by the Federal Arbitration Act should be stayed pending arbitration, not dismissed. Traditionally, some federal circuits treated the text of 9 U.S.C. §3 – which speaks in terms of a stay of a matter filed in court but referred to arbitration (“…shall on application of one of the parties stay the trial of the action until such arbitration has been had in accordance with the terms of the agreement…”) – as discretionary, dismissing suits when all of the claims brought in the court were referred to arbitration. In the case, the plaintiffs sued in Arizona state court on labor law violations, and the case was removed to federal court. When the defendant moved to compel arbitration and to dismiss, the plaintiffs “conceded that all of their claims were arbitrable.” Nonetheless, the plaintiffs requested a stay of the case, which the district court refused, dismissing the case without prejudice. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Insurer’s Consent Not Needed for Settlement

    October 14, 2013 —
    The Texas Supreme Court has concluded in Lennar Corp. v. Markel Am. Ins. Co. that “the costs incurred by a builder to locate and repair damage caused by the builder’s defective product are covered under its general liability insurance policy.” Hunton & Williams have issued a Client Alert discussing the case. For the background of the case, Lennar built about 800 homes using EIFS. The EIFS trapped water and the homes suffered from rot, structural damage, mold, mildew, and termites. Lennar fixed all the homes so built, avoiding litigation. Lennar “notifed its insurers of the defects and invited its insurers to participate in the proactive remediation program.” A lower court had agreed with Markel, one of Lennar’s insurers, that the losses were not “caused by property damage,” and that Lennar should not have made “voluntary payments without Markel’s consent.” The Texas Supreme Court granted review, rejecting Markel’s argument and affirming the jury’s finding. According to Hunton & Williams, the implications of the Texas Lennar decision is that it “confirms that all insurers with policy in effect at the time of property damage are responsible for all sums for which the policyholder is liable.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Supreme Judicial Court of Maine Addresses Earth Movement Exclusion

    March 01, 2021 —
    In Bibeau v. Concord Gen. Mut. Ins. Co., 2021 WL 243867, 2021 ME 4, the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine addressed an earth movement exclusion contained in a residential homeowners policy. In 2017, the insured submitted a claim to Concord for damage to the insured’s home which included foundation cracks and settlement resulting in interior damage to the home. The insured contended that the damage was the result of a 2006 water line leak. Concord denied the claim based on the Earth Movement exclusion contained in it’s policy which precluded coverage for losses caused by earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, mudflow, subsidence, sinkholes or “[a]ny other earth movement including earth sinking, rising or shifting; caused by or resulting from human or animal forces or any act of nature”. The insured filed suit asserting a breach of the policy and unfair claims settlement practices. According to the insured’s expert, the damage was caused by a 2006 water line leak -- which in turn caused the foundation to settle. Concord's expert, however, concluded that the settling was caused by the house being built on “unprepared or uncontrolled fill” which allowed the house to settle at different rates. Despite the disagreement regarding the cause of the settling, the parties ultimately agreed that the damage was the result of earth moving under the house's foundation. Concord moved for summary judgment and the trial court entered summary judgment for Concord, reasoning that because there was no genuine dispute that the losses were caused by “subsurface soils being undermined and earth movement,” the Earth Movement exclusion precluded coverage. The trial court further concluded that the disagreement over the cause of the settlement was not material because regardless of the cause of the earth movement, the losses were clearly excluded by the policy's Earth Movement exclusion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James M. Eastham, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Eastham may be contacted at jeastham@tlsslaw.com