BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure 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


    What is Bad Faith?

    No Coverage For Construction Defects When Complaint Alleges Contractual Damages

    Does the Russia Ukraine War Lead to a Consideration in Your Construction Contracts?

    Toxic Drywall Not Covered Under Homeowner’s Policy

    Washington Supreme Court Finds Agent’s Representations in Certificate of Insurance Bind Insurance Company to Additional Insured Coverage

    Competition to Design Washington D.C.’s 11th Street Bridge Park

    The Conscious Builder – Interview with Casey Grey

    Manhattan Home Prices Top Pre-Crisis Record on Luxury Deals

    Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Duty to Defend When Case Law is Uncertain

    New LG Headquarters Project Challenged because of Height

    Professional Services Exclusion Bars Coverage Where Ordinary Negligence is Inseparably Intertwined With Professional Service

    Harmon Towers Case to Last into 2014

    Florida Federal Court Reinforces Principle That Precise Policy Language Is Required Before An Insurer Can Deny Coverage Based On An Exclusion

    Key Amendments to Insurance Claims-Handling Regulations in Puerto Rico

    HHMR Lawyers Recognized by Best Lawyers

    Old Case Teaches New Tricks

    Trump Tower Is Now One of NYC’s Least-Desirable Luxury Buildings

    Use It or Lose It: California Court of Appeal Addresses Statutes of Limitations for Latent Construction Defects and Damage to Real Property

    Colorado Senate Voted to Kill One of Three Construction Defect Bills

    OSHA Set to Tag More Firms as Severe Violators Under New Criteria

    No Coverage for Construction Defect Claim Only Impacting Insured's Work

    Colorado Mayors Should Not Sacrifice Homeowners to Lure Condo Developers

    New York's Highest Court Says Asbestos Causation Requires Evidence Of Sufficient Exposure To Sustain Liability

    After Fatal House Explosion, Colorado Seeks New Pipeline Regulations

    Taking Care of Infrastructure – Interview with Marilyn Grabowski

    Reminder: Your Accounting and Other Records Matter

    Sewage Treatment Agency Sues Insurer and Contractor after Wall Failure and Sewage Leak

    Resolve to Say “No” This Year

    AEM Pursuing ISO Standard for Earthmoving Grade-Control Data

    Blackouts Require a New Look at Backup Power

    Buildings Don't Have To Be Bird-Killers

    Bert Hummel Appointed Vice Chair of State Bar of Georgia Bench & Bar Committee

    South Dakota Supreme Court Holds That Faulty Workmanship Constitutes an “Occurrence”

    Contractor Beware: Design-Build Firms Must Review Washington’s Licensing Requirements

    Atlanta Office Wins Defense Verdict For Property Manager On Claims By Vendor, Cross-Claims By Property Owner

    Of Pavement and Pandemic: Liability and Regulatory Hurdles for Taking It Outside

    Where Standing, Mechanic’s Liens, and Bankruptcy Collide

    Colorado Construction Defect Action Reform: HB 17-1279 Approved by Colorado Legislature; Governor’s Approval Imminent

    2013 May Be Bay Area’s Best Year for Commercial Building

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Confident about Construction Defect Bill

    Houston’s High Housing Demand due to Employment Growth

    Case Remanded for Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    The G2G Mid-Year Roundup (2022)

    From the Ground Up

    Traub Lieberman Recognized in 2022 U.S. News – Best Lawyers “Best Law Firms”

    U.S. Construction Value Flat at End of Summer

    Former Sponsor of the Lenox Facing Suit in Supreme Court

    No Coverage for Property Damage That is Limited to Work Completed by Subcontractor

    Employee Exclusion Bars Coverage for Wrongful Death of Subcontractor's Employee

    Florida Former Public Works Director Fined for Ethics Violation
    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

    Appellate Court Reinforces When the Attorney-Client Relationship Ends for Purposes of “Continuous Representation” Tolling Provision of Legal Malpractice Statute of Limitations

    October 20, 2016 —
    In Gotek Energy, Inc. v. Socal IP Law Group, LLP (No. B26668, October 12, 2016), the Second District Court of Appeal held that rather than the date on which a client file is transferred to new counsel, the attorney-client relationship ends for statute of limitations purposes when, using an objective standard, there is no “ongoing mutual relationship” nor evidence of “activities in furtherance of the relationship.” (Emphasis in opinion.) Reprinted courtesy of Stephen J. Squillario, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and David W. Evans, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Squillario may be contacted at ssquillario@hbblaw.com Mr. Evans may be contacted at devans@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    COVID-19 Business Interruption Claims Four Years Later: What Have We Learned?

    September 23, 2024 —
    Four and half years ago the COVID-19 pandemic spread around the globe, bringing with it interesting, but challenging, legal problems for construction attorneys. Construction projects ground to a halt. Ever-changing guidance from authorities ranging from the U.S. Department of Labor to local health authorities resulted in a web of evolving obligations for general contractors and subs alike. One of the most closely watched legal questions was the wave of business interruption claims filed by plaintiffs, many of whom owned businesses impacted by government shutdowns. During the opening months of the pandemic, I noted that hundreds of business interruption claims had been filed by insureds across the country. At that time, the only thing certain was that although the outcome remained unknown, virus exclusions were likely to become more likely in the future. Needless to say, much has happened since early 2020. What does the data say about the outcome of business interruption claims? In sum, plaintiffs have had an uphill battle. A helpful resource for analyzing the outcome of business interruption suits is the Covid Coverage Litigation Tracker (“Tracker”), an insurance law analytics tool offered by Penn Carey Law of the University of Pennsylvania. According to its website, “[t]he Covid Coverage Litigation Tracker is a multi-sourced database and dashboard through which to view the unfolding insurance litigation arising out of the pandemic in federal and state courts. Widely cited in briefs, judicial opinions, and the press, the tracker also serves as a proof of concept for new methods to identify, track, and understand emerging case congregations in real time.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick McKnight, Fox Rothschild LLP
    Mr. McKnight may be contacted at pmcknight@foxrothschild.com

    St. Petersburg Florida’s Tallest Condo Tower Allegedly Riddled with Construction Defects

    October 15, 2014 —
    In a new lawsuit, the Signature Place Condominium Association claims "it is spending ‘large sums' of money to repair problems ranging from cracks in exterior walls to improper fire wall installation to excessive noise from air-conditioning and heating systems,” according to the Tampa Bay Times. The lawsuit also stated that “some of the alleged defects were hidden by building components and finishes and thus were not discovered by owners "until after the purchase and occupancy of the unit,” reported the Tampa Bay Times. The association “seeks damages in excess of $15,000, cites more than 100 other alleged construction and design defects.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Henderson Engineers Tests AI for Building Systems Design with Torch.AI

    September 26, 2022 —
    Torch.AI is testing a new artificial intelligence application with Henderson Engineers, a national building systems design firm, to unlock the creative and problem solving potential of the firm’s more than 1,000 employees. Henderson Engineers is a building systems design and engineering firm that works on projects across the business, community, health, retail, and venue sectors. Their projects include many high-profile projects, such as SoFi Stadium, host site for the 2022 Super Bowl. They know how the industry relies on highly complex information contained in equally complex unstructured data: drawings, images, PDFs, handwriting, raw text. Earlier this year, Henderson began testing new artificial intelligence from Torch.AI that could learn to read complex construction and engineering documents and diagrams. “When Kevin Lewis, Henderson’s CEO, and I got together to first discuss the partnership, I could tell they were already thinking way ahead of everyone else,” says Brian Weaver, Chairman and CEO of Torch.AI. “As an engineering firm they are meticulous, thoughtful, strategic. We quickly saw the potential impact these new AI systems could have for their amazingly talented teams and are excited to continue growing our relationship.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Renters ‘Sold Out’ by NYC Pensions Press Mayor on Housing

    May 19, 2014 —
    Elevators break down, ceilings leak and security is lax at the Metro North apartments overlooking the East River in Harlem, says retired rehabilitation technician Bob Montesi, who’s lived there for more than three decades. Even as deterioration accelerates at the 761-unit complex, which used to be in a state affordable-housing program, some tenants are facing rent increases of as much as 80 percent. For Montesi, 74, who worked at a New York City-run hospital for 41 years, the changes are especially galling. One of the owners of the building is his pension fund. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Martin Z. Braun, Bloomberg
    Mr. Braun may be contacted at mbraun6@bloomberg.net

    If You Don’t Like the PPP Now, Wait a Few Minutes…Major Changes to PPP Loan Program as Congress Passes Payroll Protection Program Flexibility Act

    July 27, 2020 —
    On June 5, 2020, President Trump signed into law the Payroll Protection Program Flexibility Act of 2020 (the Flexibility Act). The Flexibility Act provides much-needed flexibility for the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and its millions of business participants. The PPP offers loans to small businesses that have been adversely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and the measures taken by various governmental authorities to stem the spread of the virus so that they could keep their employees on the payroll during an eight-week period after receiving the funds. The PPP was particularly alluring to borrowers because the loans could be forgiven. But as the duration of lockdown orders and the accompanying economic aftershocks have extended longer than initially anticipated, particularly in those sectors that depend on in-person business such as restaurants, hospitality and other “main street” retail establishments, many recipients of PPP loans have found it challenging to use the PPP funds for payroll and other authorized purposes within the eight-week period after they had received the PPP funds, as is necessary to preserve eligibility for forgiveness. The Flexibility Act makes several key changes to the PPP program in order to allow borrowers who need a longer re-opening runway to do so without jeopardizing their ability to qualify for loan forgiveness. This alert outlines the key changes to the PPP made by the Flexibility Act. Reprinted courtesy of Ryan J. Udell, White and Williams LLP and Adam J. Chelminiak, White and Williams LLP Mr. Udell may be contacted at udellr@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Chelminiak may be contacted at chelminiaka@whiteandwilliams.com; Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurers Subrogating in Arkansas Must Expend Energy to Prove That Their Insureds Have Been Made Whole

    July 30, 2019 —
    Arkansas employs the “made whole” doctrine, which requires an insured to be fully compensated for damages (i.e., to be “made whole”) before the insurer is entitled to recover in subrogation.[1] As the Riley court established, an insurer cannot unilaterally determine that its insured has been made whole (in order to establish a right of subrogation). Rather, in Arkansas, an insurer must establish that the insured has been made whole in one of two ways. First, the insurer and insured can reach an agreement that the insured has been made whole. Second, if the insurer and insured disagree on the issue, the insurer can ask a court to make a legal determination that the insured has been made whole.[2] If an insured has been made whole, the insurer is the real party in interest and must file the subrogation action in its own name.[3] However, when both the insured and an insurer have claims against the same tortfeasor (i.e., when there are both uninsured damages and subrogation damages), the insured is the real party in interest.[4] In EMC Ins. Cos. v. Entergy Ark., Inc., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 14251 (8th Cir. May 14, 2019), EMC Insurance Companies (EMC) filed a subrogation action in the District Court for the Western District of Arkansas alleging that its insureds’ home was damaged by a fire caused by an electric company’s equipment. EMC never obtained an agreement from the insureds or a judicial determination that its insureds had been made whole. In addition, EMC did not allege in the complaint that its insureds had been made whole and did not present any evidence or testimony at trial that its insureds had been made whole. After EMC presented its case-in-chief, the District Court ruled that EMC lacked standing to pursue its subrogation claim because “EMC failed to obtain a legal determination that its insureds had been made whole . . . prior to initiating this subrogation action.” Thus, the District Court granted Entergy Ark., Inc.’s motion for judgment as a matter of law and EMC appealed the decision. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael J. Ciamaichelo, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Ciamaichelo may be contacted at ciamaichelom@whiteandwilliams.com

    Indemnification Against Release/“Disposal” of Hazardous Materials

    May 18, 2020 —
    It is very common, if not nearly an industry standard, for construction contracts and subcontracts to contain provisions addressing the discovery of unanticipated hazardous materials. Many of these provisions require a contractor or subcontractor to discontinue work where hazardous materials are discovered. An example of such a clause can be found in the American Institute of Architects (AIA) Document A201 (2017), Section 10.3.1, which states in part:
    If the Contractor encounters a hazardous material or substance not addressed in the Contract Documents and if reasonable precautions will be inadequate to prevent foreseeable bodily injury or death to persons resulting from a material or substance, including but not limited to asbestos or polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB), encountered on the site by the Contractor, the Contractor shall, upon recognizing the condition, immediately stop Work in the affected area and notify the Owner and Architect of the condition.
    A similar clause in ConsensusDocs does not require the contractor to stop work, but provides that the “Contractor shall not be obligated to commence or continue work until any Hazardous Material discovered at the Work site has been removed, rendered or determined to be harmless by the Owner as certified by an independent testing laboratory and approved by the appropriate government agency.” Reprinted courtesy of Brian S. Wood, Smith, Currie & Hancock LLP and Miranda R. Millerick, Smith, Currie & Hancock LLP Mr. Wood may be contacted at bswood@smithcurrie.com Ms. Millerick may be contacted at mrmillerick@smithcurrie.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of