BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut contractor 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


    Liability Insurer Precluded from Intervening in Insured’s Lawsuit

    Res Judicata Not Apply to Bar Overlapping Damages in Separate Suits Against Contractor and Subcontractor

    Jersey City, New Jersey, to Get 95-Story Condo Tower

    Last Call: Tokyo Iconic Okura Hotel Meets the Wrecking Ball

    Workers Compensation Immunity and the Intentional Tort Exception

    Cyber Thieves Phish Away a $735K Payment to a Minnesota Contractor

    Job Growth Seen as Good News for North Carolina Housing Market

    Trends in Project Delivery Methods in Construction

    DOD Contractors Receive Reprieve on Implementation of Chinese Telecommunications Ban

    Coping With The New Cap And Trade Law

    Subsequent Owners of Homes Again Have Right to Sue Builders for Construction Defects

    Hammer & Hand’s Top Ten Predictions for US High Performance Building in 2014

    Does Arbitration Apply to Contemporaneously Executed Contracts (When One of the Contracts Does Not Have an Arbitration Provision)?

    Congratulations to Partner Madeline Arcellana on Her Selection as a Top Rank Attorney in Nevada!

    Preventing Common Electrical Injuries on the Jobsite

    Be Sure to Dot All of the “I’s” and Cross the “T’s” in Virginia

    Be Wary of Construction Defects when Joining a Community Association

    Water Intrusion Judged Not Related to Construction

    How Small Mistakes Can Have Serious Consequences Under California's Contractor Licensing Laws.

    China Construction Bank Sued in US Over Reinsurance Fraud Losses

    Saved By The Statute: The Economic Loss Doctrine Does Not Bar Claims Under Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law

    Invest In America Act Offers 494 Billion In Funding to U.S. Infrastructure and Millions of New Jobs

    California Supreme Court Clarifies Deadline to File Anti-SLAPP Motions in Light of Amended Pleadings

    Pending Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Increase 0.8% in November

    Stadium Intended for the 2010 World Cup Still Not Ready

    Texas Court Requires Insurer to Defend GC Despite Breach of Contract Exclusion

    The Importance of the Recent Amendment to Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence

    Tips for Drafting Construction Contracts

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

    Appellate Team Secures Victory in North Carolina Governmental Immunity Personal Injury Matter

    Contractors Pay Heed: The Federal Circuit Clarifies Two Important Issues For Bid Protestors

    Seyfarth Shaw’s Construction Group Receives Top Tier Recognition from Legal 500

    Unlicensed Contractor Shoots for the Stars . . . Sputters on Takeoff

    Zoning Hearing Notice Addressed by Georgia Appeals Court

    Resolving Subcontractor Disputes with Pass-Through Claims and Liquidation Agreements

    California Case Is a Reminder That Not All Insurance Policies Are Alike Regarding COVID-19 Losses

    Couple Perseveres to Build Green

    Steel-Fiber Concrete Link Beams Perform Well in Tests

    More Details Emerge in Fatal Charlotte, NC, Scaffold Collapse

    National Demand Increases for Apartments, Refuting Calls for Construction Defect Immunity in Colorado

    A Win for Policyholders: Court Finds Flood Exclusion Inapplicable to Plumbing Leaks Caused by Hurricane Rainfall

    Louisiana Couple Claims Hurricane Revealed Construction Defects

    As Some States Use the Clean Water Act to Delay Energy Projects, EPA Issues New CWA 401 Guidance

    OSHA Issues Final Rule on Electronic Submission of Injury and Illness Data

    California Supreme Court Finds that When it Comes to Intentional Interference Claims, Public Works Projects are Just Different, Special Even

    Builder’s Be Wary of Insurance Policies that Provide No Coverage for Building: Mt. Hawley Ins. Co v. Creek Side at Parker HOA

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Lets Broad General Release Stand in SB 800 Case

    House Passes Bill to Delay EPA Ozone Rule

    Be Careful How You Terminate: Terminating for Convenience May Limit Your Future Rights

    Florida Issues Emergency Fraud Prevention Rule to Protect Policyholders in Wake of Catastrophic Storms
    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

    In Midst of Construction Defect Lawsuit, City Center Seeks Refinancing

    October 02, 2013 —
    The owners of the City Center complex in Las Vegas are going through with a refinancing of their $1.8 of debt while they still seek to demolish the Harmon Tower. The cost of building City Center was $8.5 billion, making it the most expensive development on the Las Vegas strip. Unfortunately for the owners, the Harmon Tower isn’t the only empty space in the complex. MGM Resorts is currently in the midst of a construction defect lawsuit against the builder of the Harmon Tower. The judge in the case has given a go-ahead to tear down the building. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Federal Magistrate Judge Recommends Rescission of Policies

    February 12, 2024 —
    In the recent case of Union Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. 142 Driggs LLC, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220393, Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York recommended granting the insurer's default judgment and holding that of three policies issued to 142 Driggs LLC ("Driggs") be rescinded ab initio. Driggs had represented on its insurance applications that it did not provide parking to anyone other than itself, tenants, and its guests at the subject insured premises. However, Union Mutual learned that Driggs had been renting out three garages to non-tenants. Second, Driggs represented that the mercantile square footage was around 1,000 square feet, when in actuality, it was larger than allowed under the policies. Union Mutual provided underwriting guidelines in connection with its default motion, which state that "parking provided for anyone other than the insured, tenants and their guests," presents an "unacceptable risk." The guidelines also state that answering yes to any "preliminary application questions (which presumably included those regarding mercantile square footage and parking) is an "unacceptable risk." The court held that these guidelines supported a finding that Driggs made material misrepresentation and that Union Mutual relied on these misrepresentations in issuing the policies. The court, as such, recommended that the policies at issue be rescinded from inception. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com

    Scope of Alaska’s Dump Lien Statute Substantially Reduced For Natural Gas Contractors

    March 16, 2020 —
    In All American Oilfield, LLC v. Cook Inlet Energy, LLC,[1] the Supreme Court of Alaska clarified and substantially reduced a natural gas contractor’s ability to secure a preferred lien for its contribution to a natural gas well. Alaska’s dump lien statute (AS § 34.35.140) authorizes a laborer to claim a lien for the amount owed for their labor in the production of a “dump or mass” of “extracted, hoisted and raised” matter from a mine. While Alaska’s dump lien statute is one of three Alaskan statutes allowing laborers to attach liens to mines, mining equipment or minerals,[2] the dump lien statute is unique because it is prior and preferred over other liens, increasing the laborer’s chance of being paid in a bankruptcy proceeding. Attaching a lien to a “dump or mass” of hard-rock minerals piled outside a mine or oil stored in a tank is relatively straightforward. However, natural gas is typically left in its natural reservoir until removed by a pipeline that carries the gas to a location far from the mine. Natural gas is not extracted and stored in a “dump or mass” like other minerals, and until August 2019, controversy existed over how—or if—the dump lien statute could be used by natural gas contractors. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Trevor Lane, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Lane may be contacted at trevor.lane@acslawyers.com

    Mercury News Editorial Calls for Investigation of Bay Bridge Construction

    July 01, 2014 —
    Editors at the San Jose Mercury News called for investigations of the construction of the new eastern span of the Bay Bridge: “It's time for public officials, especially members of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, state legislators and Gov. Jerry Brown, to demand thorough independent analyses.” Problems with the $6.5 billion structure were found about nine months ago, which led to questions regarding the “integrity and maintenance costs” that were allegedly covered up by Caltrans officials. Issues raised included questions “about the strength of thousands of bolts, including at the base of the tower and the connections of the main cable; cracked welds in the suspension span; and rusting of the single cable holding up the bridge.” The Mercury editors, however, do not show much optimism about the situation: “It's likely that, absent a political outcry, Caltrans will sign off. From the start, agency officials have failed to adequately oversee the construction and thrown public money at problems while trying to cover-up their own failures. Brown, ultimately responsible for Caltrans, has dismissed concerns about the bridge's integrity.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Expanded Virginia Court of Appeals Leads to Policyholder Relief

    January 29, 2024 —
    Exercising its newly expanded jurisdiction that now permits Virginia’s intermediate appellate courts to hear insurance coverage disputes, the Court of Appeals recently reversed a lower court decision that allowed a two-year “Suits Against Us” provision to serve as a basis for an insurer’s refusal to reimburse repair and replacement costs incurred more than two years after the date of loss. Bowman II v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co., Record No. 1256-22-3 (Nov. 21, 2023). CAV (unpublished opinion). In the proceeding below, the circuit court found no justiciable controversy and dismissed the complaint where repairs to the policyholder’s fire-damaged home continued more than two years after the date of the fire. The circuit court relied on a two-year limitation in the policy that governed the period within which the policyholder must bring suit against the insurer. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Olivia G. Bushman, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Ms. Bushman may be contacted at obushman@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Law Impacting Florida’s Statute of Repose

    June 29, 2017 —
    On June 14, 2017, Governor Scott signed House Bill 377 into law, clarifying that Florida’s ten-year Statute of Repose commences either when the work is completed or when final payment becomes due, whichever is latest. The new law resolves a problem for contractors created by a recent Florida court ruling that held the Statute of Repose to commence as late as when the owner made final payment. The applicable amendments to Florida Statute Section 95.11 take effect on July 1, 2017 and apply to all causes of action that accrue on or after that date. Perhaps the most critical component of a construction professional’s risk management program is the length of time that it is liable for the work performed on a project. While contractual warranty periods typically run one or two years from substantial completion, the true length of a contractor’s post-completion obligation is measured by the “Statute of Repose,” which establishes the period of time following the completion of construction that a lawsuit can be filed for construction defects. Reprinted courtesy of Meredith N. Reynolds, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and K. Stefan Chin, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Ms. Reynolds may be contacted at mreynolds@pecklaw.com Mr. Chin may be contacted at kschin@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Privity Problems Continue for Additional Insureds in the Second Circuit

    November 08, 2017 —
    On October 4, the Second Circuit held that Harleysville Insurance Company had no duty to defend or indemnify a project owner or general contractor as additional insureds under a sub-subcontractor’s commercial general liability (CGL) policy due to lack of direct contractual privity. 1 The underlying claim arose when an employee of The Kimmell Company, Inc. (Kimmell) was injured while repairing an HVAC system at a building owned by the University of Rochester Medical Center (UR). The injured employee sought damages for his injuries and fi led suit against (1) UR; (2) LeChase Construction Corp. (LeChase), the general contractor for the project; and (3) J.T. Mauro Co. Inc. (Mauro), a subcontractor hired by LeChase. Mauro hired Kimmell as a sub-subcontractor to perform HVAC services at the project. The Mauro-Kimmel contract required Kimmel to add Mauro, UR, and LeChase as additional insureds under Kimmell’s CGL policy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Samantha M. Martino, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Martino may be contacted at smm@sdvlaw.com

    California Supreme Court Holds Insured Entitled to Coverage Under CGL Policy for Negligent Hiring

    June 13, 2018 —
    In its recent decision in Liberty Surplus Ins. Corp. v. Ledesma & Meyer Constr. Co.,2018 Cal. LEXIS 4063 (Cal. June 4, 2018), the Supreme Court of California addressed the question of whether an insured’s negligent hiring, retention and supervision of an employee who intentionally injured a third-party can be considered an occurrence under a general liability policy. The insured, L&M, was the construction manager on a project at a middle school in California. It was alleged that one of its employees sexually abused a thirteen year old student during the course of the project. The student later brought a civil suit against L&M based on its negligent hiring, retention and supervision of the employee-perpetrator. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP