BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut concrete 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


    Treble Damages Awarded After Insurer Denies Coverage for Collapse

    Appellate Court of Maryland Construes Notice Conditions of A312 Performance Bond in Favor of Surety

    Construction defect firm Angius & Terry moves office to Roseville

    Construction Defect Suit Can Continue Against Plumber

    Construction Law- Where Pragmatism and Law Collide

    When Is an Arbitration Clause Unconscionable? Not Often

    Will Maryland Beltway Developer's Exit Doom $7.6B P3 Project?

    The National Labor Relations Board Joint Employer Standard is Vacated by the Eastern District of Texas

    Construction Law Alert: Builder’s Alternative Pre-litigation Procedures Upheld Over Strong Opposition

    Heat Exposure Safety and Risk Factors

    Look to West Africa for the Future of Green Architecture

    Court Addresses When Duty to Defend Ends

    Certificates of Merit: Is Your Texas Certificate Sufficient?

    Green Buildings Could Lead to Liabilities

    2017 California Employment Law Update

    Palo Alto Considers Fines for Stalled Construction Projects

    New California Construction Laws for 2020

    EPA Can't Evade Enviro Firm's $2.7M Cleanup Site Pay Claim, US Court Says

    Diggerland, UK’s Construction Equipment Theme Park, is coming to the U.S.

    High Court Could Alter Point-Source Discharge Definition in Taking Clean-Water Case

    Contract Change #1- Insurance in the A201 (law note)

    It’s a Bird, It’s a Plane . . . No, It’s a Drone. Long Awaited FAA Drone Regulations Finally Take Flight

    A Deep Dive Into an Undervalued Urban Marvel

    Red Tape Is Holding Up a Greener Future

    Claim Against Broker Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2023 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT HAS RULED THAT THE RIGHT TO REPAIR ACT (SB800) IS THE EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR CONSTRUCTION DEFECT CLAIMS NOT INVOLVING PERSONAL INJURIES WHETHER OR NOT THE UNDERLYING DEFECTS GAVE RISE TO ANY PROPERTY DAMAGE in McMillin Albany LL

    New Jersey Judge Declared Arbitrator had no Duty to Disclose Past Contact with Lawyer

    What Buyers Want in a Green Home—and What They Don’t

    Waive Not, Want Not: Waivers and Releases on California Construction Projects

    Record-Setting Construction in Fargo

    Deadlines. . . They’re Important. Project Owner Risks Losing Claim By Failing to Timely Identify “Doe” Defendant

    Condominium Construction Defect Resolution in the District of Columbia

    Industry Standard and Sole Negligence Defenses Can’t Fix a Defect

    Agree to Use your “Professional Best"? You may Lose Insurance Coverage! (Law Note)

    A Court-Side Seat: Flint Failures, Missed Deadlines, Toad Work and a Game of Chicken

    Reminder: In Court (as in life) the Worst Thing You Can Do Is Not Show Up

    Mondaq’s 2023 Construction Comparative Guide

    General Liability Alert: A Mixed Cause of Action with Protected and Non-Protected Activity Not Subject to Anti-SLAPP Motion

    Expired Contract Not Revived Due to Sovereign Immunity and the Ex Contractu Clause

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2020 Southern California Rising Stars List

    Don’t Put All Your Eggs in the Silent-Cyber Basket

    What to Expect From the New Self-Retracting Devices Standard

    Hunton Partner Michael Levine Appointed to Law360’s 2024 Insurance Authority Property Editorial Advisory Board

    Client Alert: Naming of Known and Unknown Defendants in Initial Complaints: A Cautionary Tale

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Advances to Debris Removal Phase

    Ohio subcontractor work exception to the “your work” exclusion

    Berlin Lawmakers Get a New Green Workspace

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

    Texas Supreme Court Declines to Waive Sovereign Immunity in Premises Defect Case
    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

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- The Claim

    December 02, 2015 —
    A new year brings with it promise and challenges. The promise is a relatively clean slate and the thought that 2015 will be a great year for construction professionals and those that assist them. The challenges come from the almost inevitable issues that can arise on a construction site with its many moving parts and enough potential pitfalls to make even the most optimistic construction attorney, contractor, subcontractor or supplier think that Murphy was an optimist. In order to assist with the potential challenges, this post will be the first in a series of “musings” on the best way to handle a payment dispute arising from a construction contract. This week’s post will discuss what the first steps should be once a payment dispute or claim arises. We’ll assume that you, as a construction contractor, have taken early advantage of the services of a construction lawyer and have carefully reviewed your contract for issues before signing that contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Coverage for Injury to Insured’s Employee Not Covered

    June 10, 2015 —
    The employee exclusions in the employer's CGL and Umbrella policies barred coverage. Piatt v. Indiana Lumbermen's Mut. Ins. Co., 2015 Mo. LEXIS 32 (Mo. April 28, 2015). Linda Nunley was killed while working for Missouri Hardwood Charcoal, Inc. The kiln's large steel door had been removed and was leaning upright against another kiln when it blew over and crushed Ms. Nunley. Her family filed a wrongful death suit against Junior Flowers, the company's sole owner, director, and executive officer. The complaint alleged that Flowers was negligent in ordering employees to lean the kiln doors upright, even though he knew it was unsafe. The complaint further alleged that Flowers breached a personal duty of care owed to Ms. Nunley and that his actions were "something more" that a breach of the company's duty to provide a safe workplace. Flowers requested a defense under CGL and Umbrella policies issued by Lumbermen's. The policies insured Missouri Hardwood and its executive officers, but excluded liability for a work-related injury to an "employee of the insured." The policies also had a "separation of insureds" provision, stating that the insurance applied "separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought." Lumbermen's denied coverage. 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

    FEMA Fire Management Assistance Granted for the French Fire

    July 08, 2024 —
    OAKLAND, Calif. – The Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Region 9 Administrator authorized the use of federal funds on July 4 at 11:37 p.m. PDT / 2:37 a.m. EDT to assist the state of California to combat the French Fire burning in Mariposa County. On July 4, the state of California submitted a request for a Fire Management Assistance Grant (FMAG). At the time of the request, the fire threatened approximately 1,019 homes in and around Mariposa, CA, population 1,300. 95% of the threatened homes are primary residences and 5% are secondary residences. The fire started on July 4, 2024 and had burned more than 790 acres of State and private land. The fire was 0% contained. There are five large fires burning uncontrolled within the State. FMAGs provide federal funding for up to 75 percent of eligible firefighting costs. The Disaster Relief Fund provides allowances for FMAGs through FEMA to assist in fighting fires that threaten to become a greater incident. Eligible costs covered by FMAGs can include expenses for field camps, equipment use, materials, supplies and mobilization, and demobilization activities attributed to fighting the fire. For more information on FMAGs, visit https://www.fema.gov/assistance/public/fire-management-assistance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractors Prepare for a Strong 2021 Despite Unpredictability

    April 05, 2021 —
    A recent IFS study found many construction and engineering companies are reimagining their business models to ensure a secure future, using the pandemic-induced lull in business to prepare themselves to get back to operations on a strong footing. The research shows 70% of businesses have increased or maintained digital transformation spend, despite the COVID-19 pandemic. In the infrastructure, engineering and construction sectors the figure is more than 75%. There are many challenges the industry will face in the new year following the unpredictability of 2020, but there are also many opportunities. Despite the uncertainties that lay ahead, here are the few trends predicted to impact the sector 2021 and beyond. Reprinted courtesy of Kenny Ingram, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Community Constantly on the Brink of Disaster

    February 06, 2023 —
    In the beautiful coastline region along the famous Pacific Coast Highway between Ventura and Santa Barbara rests the small cottage town of La Conchita. With unobstructed ocean views, this community is only 820 feet wide on a narrow strip of land abutting a 590 feet high cliffside bluff. The bluff has a slope of approximately 35 degrees and consists of poorly cemented marine sediments. This is the perfect recipe for constant disaster from a geological perspective and the site of several major landslides that have devastated this community. Geologic evidence indicates that landslides, which are part of the larger Rincon Mountain slides, have been occurring at and near La Conchita for many thousands of years up to the present with reported landslides beginning as early as 1865. In both 1889 and 1909, the Southern Pacific Rail Line running along the coast was inundated. In the 1909 slide, a train was buried. Since that time, other slides have occurred, covering at times cultivated land, roadways, and the community itself. The two most devastating landslides occurred in 1995 and 2005. 1995 Landslide From October 1994-March 1995, there was double the amount of seasonal rainfall for the area – in excess of 30 inches. The slide occurred on March 3, 1995, when surface cracks in the upper part of the slope opened on the hillside, and surface runoff was infiltrating into the subsurface. The heavy rains essentially saturated the slope causing a massive slide. On March 4, 1995, the hill behind La Conchita failed, moving tens of meters in minutes, and buried nine homes with no loss of life. The County of Ventura immediately declared the whole community a Geological Hazard Area, imposing building restrictions on the community to restrict new construction. On March 10, 1995, a subsequent debris flow from a canyon to the northwest damaged five additional houses in the northwestern part of La Conchita. In total, the slide measured approximately 390 feet wide, 1080 feet long and 98 feet deep. The deposit covered approximately 9.9 acres, and the volume was estimated to be approximately 1.7 million cubic yards of sediment. The devastation was immeasurable and the damage to homes, property and infrastructure was in the millions of dollars to repair. Litigation quickly arose following the 1995 slide with seventy-one homeowners suing the La Conchita Ranch Co. in Bateman v. La Conchita Ranch Co. The judge ruled that irrigation was not the major cause of the slide and that the ranch owners were not responsible. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Daniel Feld, Kahana Feld
    Mr. Feld may be contacted at jfeld@kahanafeld.com

    Factual Issues Prevent Summary Judgment Determination on Coverage for Additional Insured

    May 01, 2014 —
    Numerous factual issues prevented the court from deciding at the summary judgment stage whether the additional insured was covered for a personal injury claim that happened on a construction site. Paynes Cranes v. Am States Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40485 (E.D. N.Y. March 26, 2014). Intermetal Fabricators, Inc. hired Paynes to provide a crane and driver for the construction of a store. A construction worker was injured while working with the crane. The injured worker sued several defendants, including Paynes. Intermetal had coverage for the project that included additional insureds. The policy provided, “Any person or organization . . . for whom you [Intermetal] are required by written contract, agreement or permit to provide insurance is an insured, subject to the following additional provisions: a. The contract, agreement or permit must be in effect during the policy period . . . and must have been executed prior to the ‘bodily injury,’ ‘property damage,’ 'person and advertising injury.’” 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

    If a Defect Occurs During Construction, Is It an "Occurrence?"

    February 12, 2024 —
    Establishing insurance coverage for construction defects is almost as important as establishing liability in the underlying construction defect litigation itself. The risk to the defendant contractor of defending a construction claim can place significant burdens on a contractor’s operations and an uninsured judgment might even put the contractor out of business. For owners, suing a contractor for construction defects can become academic if there is no prospect of insurance coverage; obtaining a $1 million judgment against a contractor with limited assets would be a pyrrhic victory. Commercial General Liability (CGL) carriers are obligated to defend claims that potentially fall within the coverage granted by the policy.[1] When presented with a claim, CGL insurers typically have three options: (1) assume the defense without reservation; (2) assume the defense asserting defenses to coverage, and depending on the state, reserving the right to recover defense costs if it later determines there is no duty to defend; or (3) deny the claim outright and seek a declaratory judgment holding that the insurer has no duty to defend or indemnify. An insurer may deny the claim outright and not seek a declaratory judgment, but does so at its peril because it can expose the insurer to significant liability if the insured later shows the insurer in fact had a duty to defend. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brendan J. Witry, Laurie & Brennan LLP
    Mr. Witry may be contacted at bwitry@lauriebrennan.com

    Washington State May Allow Common Negligence Claims against Construction Professionals

    November 20, 2013 —
    Lane Powell, a law firm with offices in Washington, Oregon, Alaska, and London has issued a construction law update on a recent decision of the Washington Supreme Court. The case involved a development firm that sued its engineering firm. The developer had gained preliminary approval to develop two short plats, and after the approvals expired, sought the assistance of the engineering firm in regaining approval. Eventually, the developer lost the plats to foreclosure and sued the engineering firm. The Washington Supreme Court rejected most of the developer’s claims in the case, but sent the negligence claims back to the trial court. The Lane Powell construction law update notes that “the record didn’t adequately establish the scope of the professional obligations incorporated into the contract, the court refused to determine if any of the engineer’s duties to the plaintiffs arose independently of the contract.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of