BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut 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


    Arizona Is the No. 1 Merit Shop Construction State, According to ABC’s 2020 Scorecard

    Connecticut Reverses Course for Construction Managers on School Projects

    Court of Appeals Rules that HOA Lien is not Spurious, Despite Claim that Annexation was Invalid

    Contractor Jailed for Home Repair Fraud

    A Court-Side Seat: Guam’s CERCLA Claim Allowed, a “Roundup” Verdict Upheld, and Judicial Process Privilege Lost

    Consider Arbitration Provision in Homebuilder’s Warranty and Purchase-and-Sale Agreement

    Citigroup Pays Record $697 Million for Hong Kong Office Tower

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment to Reject Collapse Coverage Denied

    Legal Disputes Soar as Poor Information Management Impacts the AEC Industry

    House of the Week: Spanish Dream Home on California's Riviera

    Whose Employee is it Anyway?: Federal Court Finds No Coverage for Injured Subcontractor's Claim Based on Modified Employer's Liability Exclusion

    Coverage Denied for Ensuing Loss After Foundation Damage

    Everybody Is Going to End Up Paying for Texas' Climate Crisis

    Firm Offers Tips on Construction Defects in Colorado

    Winning Attorney Fees in Litigation as a California Construction Contractor or Subcontractor

    Brooklyn’s Hipster Economy Challenges Manhattan Supremacy

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions

    Supreme Court of Kentucky Holds Plaintiff Can Recover for Stigma Damages in Addition to Repair Costs Resulting From Property Damage

    How to Cool Down Parks in Hot Cities

    Subrogation 101 (and Why Should I Care?)

    California Court of Appeal Provides Clarity On What Triggers Supplemental Analysis Under California Environmental Quality Act

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2021 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    Liquidated Damages: A Dangerous Afterthought

    What If an Irma-Like Hurricane Hit the New York City Metro Area?

    Introducing Nomos LLP!

    New York City Construction: Boom Times Again?

    Union Handbilling: When, Where, and Why it is Legal

    Court Finds That Split in Underground Storage Tank is Not a Covered Collapse

    Taking the Stairs to Human Wellness and Greener Buildings

    Appellate Court reverses district court’s finding of alter ego in Sedgwick Properties Development Corporation v. Christopher Hinds (2019WL2865935)

    Seeking the Urban Lifestyle in the Suburbs

    Homeowner's Mold Claim Denied Due to Spoilation

    Defect Claims Called “Witch Hunt”

    Good News on Prices for Some Construction Materials

    Tighter Requirements and a New Penalty for Owners of Vacant or Abandoned Storefronts in San Francisco

    California Precludes Surety from Asserting Pay-When-Paid Provision as Defense to Payment Bond Claim

    The Cross-Party Exclusion: The Hazards of Additional Named Insured Provisions

    Look Up And Look Out: Increased Antitrust Enforcement Of Horizontal No-Poach Agreements Signals Heightened Scrutiny Of Vertical Agreements May Be Next

    Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Faulty Work By Subcontractor Constitutes "Occurrence"

    Contractor Haunted by “Demonized” Flooring

    Oregon Court of Appeals Rules That Negligent Construction (Construction Defect) Claims Are Subject to a Two-Year Statute of Limitations

    Application of Set-Off When Determining Prevailing Party for Purposes of Attorney’s Fees

    State-Fed Fight Heats Up Over Building Private Nuclear Disposal Sites

    Big Builder’s Analysis of the Top Ten Richest Counties

    NY Project Produces America's First Utility Scale Wind Power

    One Colorado Court Allows Negligence Claim by General Contractor Against Subcontractor

    West Virginia Couple Claim Defects in Manufactured Home

    DC Circuit Upholds EPA’s Latest RCRA Recycling Rule

    President Obama Vetoes Keystone Pipeline Bill

    Design Firm Settles over Construction Defect Claim
    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

    Quick Note: Steps to Protect and Avoid the “Misappropriation” of a “Trade Secret”

    November 23, 2020 —
    Florida’s Uniform Trade Secret Act (included in Florida Statute s. 688.001 en seq.) defines the terms “trade secret” and “misappropriation.” These definitions (found here) are important in that just because 1) we deem something a trade secret does not, in of itself, make it so, and 2) we deem someone to have misappropriated a trade secret does not, in of itself, make it so. If a party deems something to be a trade secret they should identify the document or paper as “confidential trade secret” as the first-step in preserving the confidentiality of that information. The party should also consider entering into an agreement with the party that may receive that information to maximize the protection of such confidential trade secret information during the parties’ agreement. 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

    Two Years, Too Late: Time-Barred Hurricane Loss is Timely Reminder to Insureds

    November 01, 2021 —
    It happens every year. A clearly covered loss occurs and for one reason or another, the policyholder delays in notifying its insurer of the loss. Usually, the cause for the delay is innocent. It may even appear to be justified, such as where the insured prioritizes steps to save its property, inventory or assist dependent customers. But no matter the reason, insurers can be hard-lined in their refusal to accept an untimely claim. This is especially true in states that presume prejudice to the insurer, or where the insurer need not show prejudice at all. In LMP Holdings, Inc. v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., (Case No. 20-24099-CIV) (S.D. Fla.), a twenty‑seven month delay in notifying the insurer of damage from Hurricane Irma proved fatal to the claim. LMP owns a building in Miami, Florida insured under an all-risk commercial property policy issued by Scottsdale. On September 10, 2017, Hurricane Irma struck South Florida and caused extensive damage to LMP’s building, including punctures to the roof and water damage. LMP identified the damage shortly after the storm. Then, in 2018, LMP identified other storm-caused damage, including a water stain on the ceiling. It again identified additional storm damage in 2019. LMP submitted a claim to its insurer on December 10, 2019—about twenty-seven months after it first noticed the damage. Scottsdale agreed to inspect the property but reserved its rights to deny coverage based on late notice. On July 10, 2020, Scottsdale denied coverage for the damage to the property. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Yaniel Abreu, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Abreu may be contacted at yabreu@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Collapse Claim Dismissed

    December 04, 2018 —
    The complaint alleged collapse, but the claimed cause of the collapse was not a covered cause under the insured's policy, mandating a dismissal of the complaint. Coonce v. CSSA Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 25010 (10th Cir. Sept. 4, 2018). The ceiling in the insured's living and dining areas caved in. An engineering survey determined that the nails used in the construction had failed to hold. The insured made a claim on her policy issued by CSAA. Coverage was denied and the insured sued. The insured was given two opportunities to amend her complaint by the district court, but the motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim was eventually granted. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Todd Seelman Recognized as Fellow of Wisconsin Law Foundation

    February 15, 2021 —
    Denver Managing Partner Todd R. Seelman has been recognized as a Fellow of the Wisconsin Law Foundation, joining a select group of attorneys who comprise no more than 2.5% of the entire membership of the Wisconsin Bar. Mr. Seelman's membership in the Fellows organization represents that his peers have recognized him for his outstanding professional achievements and devotion to the welfare of his community, state, and country, as well as the advancement of the legal profession. “I am grateful for this honor and opportunity to become a member of an exceptional group of lawyers," Mr. Seelman said. "I look forward to working to advance the Fellows’ important goals, including promoting justice and improving legal education. The Fellows organization was created to honor members of the Wisconsin Bar who have achieved significant professional accomplishments and contributed leadership and service to their communities. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Todd Seelman, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Seelman may be contacted at Todd.Seelman@lewisbrisbois.com

    Coverage Issues: When You Need Your Own Lawyer in a Construction Defect Suit

    October 16, 2013 —
    When an insurer hires an attorney on behalf of a client in a construction defect suit, that attorney is the client’s lawyer, but as Mike Curry writes on the website of Pendleton Wilson Hennessey & Crow, PC, a point may come when you need to hire your own additional attorney. Even though an insurance company client may refer to the lawyer as “the insurance carrier’s attorney,” Mr. Curry cites the words of the Colorado Bar Association’s ethics committee, “the insured is the client to whom the lawyer’s duty of loyalty is owed, regardless of any retention agreement the lawyer may have with the carrier.” Mr. Curry then offers the example of what happens when the insurance company advises its client that it may not cover. “You presumably call your attorney and ask him to explain what’s going on, what the letter means, and what to do next.” All the attorney can say is “I cannot offer legal advice on coverage issues.” This is the limitation of what Mr. Curry refers to as “the tripartite relationship.” The attorney has been retained for issues related to the construction defect dispute between the insured and the plaintiff. Not between the insurer and its insured. The attorney has, as he points out, a fiduciary obligation to the insurance company. When coverage issues arise, “an independent attorney — one you hire — can help you with the coverage issues that your insurance-assigned attorney simply cannot address.” He further notes that “personal counsel owes no fiduciary obligation to the insurance company,” and can be “utilized to persuade the carrier to provide coverage or settle the case.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Sometimes, Being too Cute with Pleading Allegations is Unnecessary

    June 06, 2018 —
    There are times where being too darn cute with your pleading allegations is unnecessary and does not work. But, the point is really that the cuteness is unnecessary. In a Miller Act payment bond dispute in Boneso Brothers Construction, Inc. v. Sauer, Inc., 2018 WL 2387833 (N.D.Cal. 2018), a claimant asserted claims against a Miller Act payment bond surety for breach of the payment bond, breach of a subcontract, open account, and account stated. The question is why would the claimant sue the payment bond surety for breach of subcontract (when the subcontract was not with the surety), and open account and account stated. I have no clue, other than such claims appeared quite unnecessary when the claimant asserted an action on the Miller Act payment bond (which is what the surety is liable under — actions under the statutory payment bond). Such claims were dismissed. And, they should have been. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Experts: Best Bet in $300M Osage Nation Wind Farm Dispute Is Negotiation

    March 11, 2024 —
    Nearly two months after a federal judge ruled that renewables developer Enel Green Power North America must deconstruct 84 land-based wind turbines because it did not secure mineral rights on Osage Nation land in northern Oklahoma, two energy sector attorneys say the unit of an Italy-based company must negotiate with the tribe. Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Tyson, Engineering News-Record Mr. Tyson may be contacted at tysond@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Winners Announced in Seattle’s Office-to-Residential Call for Ideas Contest

    July 10, 2023 —
    On June 7, 2023, the City of Seattle announced three winners of its Office to Residential: Call for Ideas contest for which it received a total of 13 submissions. Hybrid Architecture, LLC, took first place; Gensler, Seattle Office Project Team took second; and the Miller Hull Partnership took third. Seattle’s Department of Construction and Inspections will study the submissions and determine what legislative and regulatory modifications would be necessary to support and further these proposals and other future office-to-residential conversion projects. Seattle will also be holding a series of exhibitions over the coming weeks where project submissions will be available to the public. On June 14, 2023, from 5:30 PM to 7:30 PM, a reception will be hosted by the Seattle Architecture Foundation and the City at the American Institute of Architects. The gallery will also be open to the public from 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM on June 21, 28, and July 5. After June 14, 2023, those interested can access contest submissions at the project website. Seattle’s primary goal with this contest was to provide a vision for the future of downtown and begin charting a concrete path to getting there. Since working from home has become more common following the COVID-19 pandemic, vacancy rates in many office buildings have risen sharply, while housing availability and affordability remain ongoing issues. If Seattle can show a realistic—and profitable—path to converting commercial office spaces into residences, it would be addressing both problems, killing two birds with one stone. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryanne Mathisen, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Ms. Mathisen may be contacted at ryanne.mathisen@acslawyers.com