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


    Colorado homebuilders target low-income buyers with bogus "affordable housing" bill

    California Supreme Court Raises the Bar on Dangerous Conditions on Public Property Claims

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa Rolle Wins Summary Judgment on Behalf of Contract Utility Company in Personal Injury Action

    Court Finds Duty To Defend Environmental Claim, But Defense Limited to $100,000

    The ARC and The Covenants

    Priority of Liability Insurance Coverage and Horizontal and Vertical Exhaustion

    Manhattan to Get Tall, Skinny Tower

    Rio Olympics Work Was a Mess and Then Something Curious Happened

    Fall 2024 Legislative Update:

    I’m Sorry Ms. Jackson, I [Sovereign Immunity] am For Real

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

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    Non-compliance With Endorsement Means No Indemnity Coverage

    Insurer Fails to Establish Prejudice Due to Late Notice

    California Makes Big Changes to the Discovery Act

    Thinking About a Daubert Motion to Challenge an Expert Opinion?

    CGL Insurer’s Duty to Defend Insured During Pre-Suit 558 Process: Maybe?

    Illinois Legislature Passes Bill Allowing Punitive Damages In Most Wrongful Death Actions

    Subcontractors Eye 2022 with Guarded Optimism

    NJ Condo Construction Defect Case Dismissed over Statute of Limitations

    One Word Makes All The Difference – The Distinction Between “Pay If Paid” and “Pay When Paid” Clauses

    Insurers Can Sue One Another for Defense Costs on Equitable Indemnity and Equitable Contribution Basis

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (08/24/22) – Local Law 97, Clean Energy, and IRA Tax Credits

    Defense Victory in Breach of Fiduciary Action

    Architect Sues School District

    Another Worker Dies in Boston's Latest Construction Accident

    Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies the Meaning of "Living in the Same Household" for Purposes of Coverage Under a Homeowners Policy

    2019 California Construction Law Update

    Almost Nothing Is Impossible

    The Expansion of Potential Liability of Construction Managers and Consultants

    Hawaii Court Finds No Bad Faith, But Negligent Misrepresentation Claim Survives Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Action

    The Murky Waters Between "Good Faith" and "Bad Faith"

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    Amazon Can be Held Strictly Liable as a Product Seller in New Jersey

    Default, Fraud, and VCPA (Oh My!)

    NTSB Faults Maintenance, Inspection Oversight for Fern Hollow Bridge Collapse

    Taking Service Network Planning to the Next Level

    Allegations Confirm Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims

    New Iowa Law Revises Construction Defects Statute of Repose

    SFAA Commends U.S. House for Passage of Historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill

    Evergrande’s Condemned Towers on China’s Hawaii Show Threat

    Hunton Insurance Practice Again Scores “Tier 1” National Ranking in US News Best Law Firm Rankings

    Public-Employee Union Fees, Water Wars Are Key in High Court Rulings

    Court Finds No Occurrence for Installation of Defective flooring and Explains Coverage for Attorney Fee Awards

    An Expert’s Qualifications are Important

    Time is of the Essence, Even When the Contract Doesn’t Say So

    From the Ashes: Reconstructing After the Maui Wildfire

    Negligence Per Se Claim Based Upon Failure to Pay Benefits Fails

    Chambers USA 2021 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    Motion for Reconsideration Challenging Appraisal Determining Cause of Loss Denied
    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. Leveraging 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

    One Insurer's Settlement with Insured Does Not Bar Contribution Claim by Other Insurers

    October 30, 2013 —
    The New Jersey Supreme Court held that one insurer could seek contribution from another insurer who settled with and secured a release from the insured. Potomac Ins. Co. v. Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Ass'n Ins. Co., 2013 N.J. LEXIS 847 (N.J. Sept. 16, 2013) The township of Evesham retained Roland Aristone, Inc. to be its general contractor for construction of a new middle school. After completion of the school, the roof leaked. Evesham sued Aristone for the construction defects. Aristone tendered to its various CGL carriers. Two insurers, Selective Way Insurance Company and OneBeacon Insurance Company, defended. Two others, Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Insurance Company (PMA) and Royal Insurance Company, denied coverage. Aristone sued PMA and Royal, and ultimately settled with PMA for $150,000 in exchange for Aristone's release from all claims, including claims for defense fees and costs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Dot I’s and Cross T’s When It Comes to Construction Licensure Requirements

    February 21, 2022 —
    It should serve as no surprise that making sure you are appropriately licensed is important. This includes complying with any state requirement that requires licensure, as well as complying with any local licensure requirement. Not doing so can result in the dispute centered on the lack of licensure, as opposed to leading facts relating to the substance of the dispute. In other words, you are dealing with a technicality that could have harsh implications. This lack of licensure issue recently played out in a dispute with a contractor and subcontractor in ABA Interior, Inc. v. The Owen Corp., 2022 WL 386103 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022), dealing with a local licensure requirement. In this case, a subcontractor was hired by the general contractor for a commercial project in Palm Beach County. The subcontract contained the standard provision that the subcontractor would comply with all federal, state, and local laws and ordinances. 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

    South Carolina Law Clarifies Statue of Repose

    July 11, 2011 —

    A new law in South Carolina, H 3375, fixes a loophole in that state’s statute of repose. State law puts a cap of eight years on construction defects, but the 2008 law that set that limit had a loophole that would allow for construction defect claims to start thirteen years after construction. The law also provides a cap on punitive damages.

    The measure was backed by the Carolinas Association of General Contractors. Their spokesperson said that the legislation “increases our state’s ability to be economically competitive and helps protect our members from frivolous lawsuits.”

    Read the full story…

    Read South Carolina H 3375…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Think Twice About Depreciating Repair Costs in Our State, says the Tennessee Supreme Court

    July 09, 2019 —
    Tennessee’s Supreme Court recently held that an insurer may not withhold repair labor costs as depreciation when the policy definition of actual cash value is found to be ambiguous. Tennessee joins other states like California and Vermont that prohibit the depreciation of repair labor costs in property policies. In Lammert v. Auto-Owners (Mut.) Ins. Co., No. M201702546SCR23CV, 2019 WL 1592687, the Lammerts and other insureds sought property damage coverage from Auto Owners Insurance for hail damage to a home and other structures they owned in Tennessee. Auto-Owners Insurance agreed to settle the claims on an actual cash value basis (ACV), which is a method of establishing the value of insured property that must be replaced to determine the indemnity by the insurer. There are multiple methods to calculate ACV. Auto-Owners decided to use the ACV calculation method of deducting depreciation from the cost to repair or replace the damaged property. Depreciation is the decline in value of a property since it was new because of use, age or wear. The rationale behind this method is that an insured should not make a profit by recovering the cost of, for example, a new roof for a damaged roof that was ten years old, and thus depreciation is deducted from the indemnity. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Andres Avila, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Avila may be contacted at ara@sdvlaw.com

    How To Fix Oroville Dam

    January 04, 2018 —
    Originally Published by CDJ on March 22, 2017 On Sunday, Feb. 12, California officials ordered the immediate, mandatory evacuation of 188,000 residents from towns below the Oroville Dam. Two days later, when federal and state officials deemed the dam safe, the evacuation order was rescinded, and people were allowed to return to their homes. It isn't often that hundreds of thousands of people in the U.S. have to leave their homes because of worries about a catastrophic structural failure. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Henry W. Burke, ENR
    Mr. Burke may be contacted at hwburke@cox.net

    Failing to Adopt a Comprehensive Cyber Plan Can Lead to Disaster

    January 13, 2020 —
    Despite being aware of cyber risk, and even frightened by it, a shocking number of companies in the construction industry have neither a cyber insurance policy nor a basic cyber security plan to deal with a hack or breach into their computer systems. Once breached, companies with no plan in place become, essentially, a rudderless ship subject to the whims of criminal tides. A proper cyber plan lays out at least the following:
    • the criteria for when a plan would be triggered (i.e., in the event of a breach or a hack);
    • which persons inside the company (in-house counsel, IT personnel, executive, project managers) and which persons outside the company (attorney with knowledge of cyber issues and ideally construction law as well; forensic computer experts, crisis management experts; and an insurance broker familiar with cyber policies) should be involved;
    • the chain of command and communication in this type of situation and the distinct roles each of the above players will fulfill (Note: this is not the same as the normal corporate chain of command); and
    • the various available options to address the breach situation, which will all depend upon the facts at issue—such as the type and extent of the breach and how much of what particular kind of information was lost, stolen or exfiltrated.
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard Volack, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Volack may be contacted at rvolack@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Public Contract Code Section 1104 Does Not Apply to Claims of Implied Breach of Warranty of Correctness of Plans and Specifications

    October 30, 2023 —
    It’s the classic tale of two cities. One city is occupied by architects and engineers. The other, by contractors. And while the cities typically co-exist relatively peacefully together, at times, they do not, such as when a defect arises that can either be a design or construction defect. Sometimes, project owners are pulled into these fights as well. There is a common law rule that when contracting with a contractor the owner impliedly warrants to the contractor that the plans and specifications are sufficiently accurate and correct. And, if you work on local public works projects, you may be familiar with Public Contract Code section 1104 which provides that, with the exception of design-build projects, local public entities cannot require a bidder to assume responsibility for the completeness and accuracy of architectural or engineering plans and specifications. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Florida Court of Appeals Holds Underlying Tort Case Must Resolve Before Third-Party Spoliation Action Can Be Litigated

    December 04, 2018 —
    In Amerisure Ins. Co. v. Rodriguez, 43 Fla. L. Weekly 2225 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App., Sept. 26, 2018), the Third District Court of Appeals of Florida addressed whether a third-party spoliation claim should be litigated and tried at the same time as the plaintiff’s underlying tort case. The court held that since the third-party spoliation claim did not accrue until the underlying claim was resolved, the spoliation cause of action could not proceed until the plaintiff resolved his underlying claim. The underlying matter in Amerisure involved a personal injury claim by plaintiff Lazaro Rodriguez. While working as an employee for BV Oil, Inc. (BV), Mr. Rodriguez was knocked from the top of a gasoline tanker he was fueling at a gasoline storage warehouse owned by Cosme Investment (Cosme). Mr. Rodriguez filed a personal injury lawsuit against Cosme. He also collected worker’s compensation benefits from Amerisure Insurance Company (Amerisure), BV’s worker’s compensation carrier, while his lawsuit was pending. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lian Skaf, White & Williams LLP
    Mr. Skaf may be contacted at skafl@whiteandwilliams.com