BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code 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


    Fifth Circuit Reverses Insurers’ Summary Judgment Award Based on "Your Work" Exclusion

    Insurer's Attempt to Limit Additional Insured Status Fails

    Las Vegas Partner Sarah Odia Named a 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyer Rising Star

    Defining Construction Defects

    Disjointed Proof of Loss Sufficient

    Haight’s 2020 San Diego Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Construction Defect Litigation at San Diego’s Alicante Condominiums?

    Additional Insured Not Covered Where Injury Does Not Arise Out Of Insured's Work

    California Joins the Majority of States in Modifying Its Survival Action Statute To Now Permit Recovery for Pain, Suffering And Disfigurement

    Quick Note: COVID-19 Claim – Proving Causation

    Wall Street Is Buying Starter Homes to Quietly Become America’s Landlord

    Ninth Circuit Reverses Grant of Summary Judgment to Insurer For Fortuitous Loss

    Congratulations to Jonathan Kaplan on his Promotion to Partner!

    Slump in U.S. Housing Starts Led by Multifamily: Economy

    Electronic Signatures On Contracts: Are They Truly Compliant?

    Parking Reform Takes Off on the West Coast

    Buyer's Demolishing of Insured's Home Not Barred by Faulty Construction Exclusion

    Richest NJ Neighborhood Fights Plan for Low-Cost Homes on Toxic Dump

    U.S. Supreme Court Limits the Powers of the Nation’s Bankruptcy Courts

    2021 2Q Cost Report: Industry Execs Believe Recovery Is in Full Swing

    Sierra Pacific v. Bradbury Goes Unchallenged: Colorado’s Six-Year Statute of Repose Begins When a Subcontractor’s Scope of Work Ends

    Pipeline Safety Violations Cause of Explosion that Killed 8

    Ahlers, Cressman & Sleight PLLC Ranked Top Washington Law Firm By Construction Executive

    New Mexico Architect Is Tuned Into His State

    New Stormwater Climate Change Tool

    Arizona Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Provision Relating to Statutory Authority for Constructing and Operating Sports and Tourism Complexes

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (08/08/23) – Buy and Sell With AI, Urban Real Estate Demand and Increasing Energy Costs

    Tenants Underwater: Indiana Court of Appeals Upholds Privity Requirement for Property Damage Claims Against Contractors

    Insurer Need Not Pay for Rejected Defense When No Reservation of Rights Issued

    The Colorado Supreme Court affirms Woodbridge II’s “Adverse Use” Distinction

    Presidential Memorandum Promotes Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West

    When Must a New York Insurer Turn Over a Copy of the Policy?

    Quick Note: Independent Third-Party Spoliation Of Evidence Claim

    Autovol’s Affordable Housing Project with Robotic Automation

    Berger: FIGG Is Slow To Hand Over All Bridge Collapse Data

    Five Pointers for Enforcing a Non-Compete Agreement in Texas

    Required Contract Provisions for Construction Contracts in California

    Brazil World Cup Soccer Crisis Deepens With Eighth Worker Death

    US Homes Face Costly Retrofits for Induction Stoves, EV Chargers

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    Sometimes you Need to Consider the Coblentz Agreement

    Can Baltimore Get a Great Bridge?

    Triple Points to the English Court of Appeal for Clarifying the Law on LDs

    Mississippi Supreme Court Addresses Earth Movement Exclusion

    My Employees Could Have COVID-19. What Now?

    Utilities’ Extreme Plan to Stop Wildfires: Shut Off the Power

    Viewpoint: A New Approach to Job Site Safety Reaps Benefits

    Insurance Attorney Gary Barrera Joins Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

    Here's How Much You Can Make by Renting Out Your Home
    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

    Fire Raging North of Los Angeles Is Getting Fuel From Dry Winds

    June 17, 2024 —
    A wildfire raging north of Los Angeles has sent smoke billowing south and forced more than 1,000 people to evacuate — and with dry winds raking the hills, the blaze is poised to intensify. A red flag fire warning has been raised in the area around the Post Fire, which is forecast to be whipped with winds reaching at least 20 miles (32 kilometers) per hour, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, commonly called Cal Fire. The flames, which have burned more than 14,000 acres (5,700 hectares), are only about 8% contained and the smoke has prompted air quality alerts in parts of Los Angeles County and Ventura County. “Crews are working to establish perimeter fire lines around the fire’s edges,” Cal Fire said in a report. “Aircraft are being utilized to halt the fire’s forward progress but are facing challenges due to limited visibility.” Along with the Post Fire, crews are battling 10 other blazes throughout the state that flared up over the weekend in an ominous start to wildfire season. While California had heavy snow and rain this past winter, that doesn’t mean a respite from fires. The moisture that kept drought away allowed for grasses and brush to grow, meaning more wildfire fuel as California enters its driest months. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian K Sullivan, Bloomberg

    Without Reservations: Fourth Circuit Affirms That Vague Reservation of Rights Waived Insurers’ Coverage Arguments

    January 09, 2023 —
    The Fourth Circuit recently affirmed insurance coverage for a South Carolina policyholder based on the “axiomatic principle” that an insurer which fails to fully and fairly articulate its potential coverage defenses in a reservation of rights letter loses the right to contest coverage on those grounds. Stoneledge at Lake Keowee Owner’s Assoc. v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., No. 19-2009, 2022 WL 17592121 (4th Cir. 2022) (quoting Harleysville Group Insurance v. Heritage Communities, Inc., 803 S.E.2d 288 (S.C. 2017)). More particularly, in Stoneledge, the Fourth Circuit affirmed per curiam a South Carolina District Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of a homeowners association that had successfully sued its general contractors for construction defects and was seeking to recover the damages owed from the contractors’ insurers. The Fourth Circuit agreed that the insurers’ vague reservation of rights letters failed to reserve the defenses on which the insurers purported to deny coverage. The question before the court in Stoneledge was whether the two insurers that had each agreed to defend their respective general-contractor insureds in the homeowner association’s underlying litigation had sufficiently informed their policyholders of their coverage positions. Specifically, the court considered whether the insurers provided notice of their intention to challenge coverage on specific bases and explained why those bases applied in their respective reservation of rights letters. Both of the insurers’ letters followed the typical approach of identifying various policy provisions and exclusions and outlining the general mechanics of those provisions, but they fell short of applying the provisions or exclusions to the facts in the case at hand. Further, the letters stated that the insurers would reevaluate how the provisions applied as the underlying case progressed. One of the insurer’s letters expressed doubt as to coverage but did not offer any analysis on the reasons for the prospective coverage denial. Reprinted courtesy of Lara Degenhart Cassidy, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Matthew J. Revis, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Cassidy may be contacted at lcassidy@HuntonAK.com Mr. Revis may be contacted at mrevis@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Enforceability Of Subcontract “Pay-When-Paid” Provisions – An Important Update

    June 15, 2020 —
    A California Court of Appeals opinion published earlier this month brings a change to payment bond claims brought by unpaid subcontractors and suppliers. The decision (Crosno Construction, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America) places limitations on a payment bond surety’s ability to rely on subcontract “pay-when-paid” language, stating that a payment provision typically found in subcontracts is contrary to the “reasonable time” statutory requirement and will not be enforced. This represents a major shift in California construction payment bond claim rights. Plaintiff Crosno Construction, Inc. (“Crosno) was a subcontractor to general contractor Clark Brothers (“Clark”), who was principal on a public works payment bond issued by Travelers. The owner was a public agency district (“District.”) Crosno had completed most of its subcontract work when a dispute between District and Clark arose, causing the project to stop. Crosno then sought payment through a payment bond claim against Travelers. Travelers denied the claim, relying on the subcontract’s payment provisions and asserting the defense that it had no obligation to pay on the bond claim because the litigation between Clark and the District had not yet reached its conclusion. Subcontract. The subcontract between Clark and Crosno contained a “pay-when-paid” provision stating that Clark would pay Crosno within a reasonable time after receiving payment from the District. In defining “a reasonable time,” the subcontract language provided that the time for payment “in no event shall be less than the time [Clark] and [Crosno] require to pursue to conclusion their legal remedies against [District] or other responsible party to obtain payment.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick McNamara, Porter Law Group
    Mr. McNamara may be contacted at pmcnamara@porterlaw.com

    Second Month of US Construction Spending Down

    November 05, 2014 —
    ABC News reported that US Construction spending was down again in September, though housing had a slight rebound. "Construction spending dropped 0.4 percent in September compared to August when spending fell 0.5 percent, the Commerce Department reported Monday," as quoted by ABC News. However, "expectation is that further gains in construction will help support growth this quarter and into next year. Many economists are looking for the economy to grow at a 3 percent rate in the final three months of this year and average 3 percent in 2015 as well," according to ABC News. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Traub Lieberman Partner Colleen Hastie and Associate Jeffrey George Successfully Oppose Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate Dismissal

    September 11, 2023 —
    Traub Lieberman Partner Colleen Hastie and Associate Jeffrey George successfully opposed Plaintiff’s motion to vacate a prior dismissal of plaintiff’s medical malpractice action brought before the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Bronx County. The lawsuit, commenced by Plaintiff in 2015, alleged medical malpractice stemming from treatment Plaintiff received at a New York medical facility after falling out of a window at a rental property owned by Traub Lieberman’s client (“Property Owner”). Property Owner moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint or preclude Plaintiff from offering evidence in support of its claims, or in the alternative, compel plaintiff to produce all outstanding discovery. The Medical Facility cross-moved for the same relief. Defendants agreed to adjourn the motion until after plaintiff’s deposition, but plaintiff made no effort to secure an adjournment with the court and plaintiff filed no opposition to the motion, allowing the motion to be granted on default. Plaintiff waited nearly a year to file a motion to vacate the default judgment, despite receiving notification of the default from defense counsel. Property Owner, in opposing plaintiff’s motion, pointed to plaintiff’s long history of dilatory conduct and failure to comply with discovery orders in support of its position that plaintiff failed to show any good cause for its default on the motion to dismiss. Reprinted courtesy of Colleen E. Hastie, Traub Lieberman and Jeffrey George, Traub Lieberman Ms. Hastie may be contacted at chastie@tlsslaw.com Mr. George may be contacted at jgeorge@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    City of Sacramento Approves Kings NBA Financing Plan

    May 21, 2014 —
    Sacramento, California’s city council recently approved a financing plan that will enable the construction of the $477 million downtown arena project to move forward, reported KNOE News. Sacramento will now be responsible for a $223 million subsidy, and “the Kings would contribute $254 million to construct the arena and develop surrounding land with a hotel, office tower and shopping.” “Kings President Chris Granger called it a historic day for the team and Sacramento region, saying the arena would serve as a hub for economic development,” according to KNOE News. “The project would bring 11,000 construction jobs and 4,000 permanent jobs, [Granger] said.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Jersey’s Governor Puts Construction Firms on Formal Notice of His Focus on Misclassification of Workers as Independent Contractors

    May 24, 2018 —
    We have written quite a bit about the mounting threat to employers, both nationally and locally, of claims of misclassification of workers as independent contractors rather than employees. New Jersey’s new Gov. Phil Murphy signed an executive order last week that establishes a task force on employee misclassification to punish contractors who commit fraud by classifying their employees as independent contractors. In the words of Governor Murphy: “I am signing this order to crack down on unscrupulous contractors who commit 1099 fraud to exploit workers and rob them of family and medical leave and safe workplace protections that the law provides,” Murphy said. “The employer gives themselves an unfair business advantage and this practice is illegal. This is a question of enforcing what is already on the books.” He has vowed that any employer caught misclassifying workers will either be brought into compliance or put out of business. The task force will foster compliance with the law and conduct a comprehensive review of existing practices. Reprinted courtesy of Kevin J. O'Connor, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Joseph M. Vento, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. O'Connor may be contacted at koconnor@pecklaw.com Mr. Vento may be contacted at jvento@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Court-Side Seat: Coal-Fired Limitations, the Search for a Venue Climate Change and New Agency Rules that May or May Not Stick Around

    February 15, 2021 —
    This is a brief review of recent significant environmental and administrative law rulings and developments. With the change in presidential administrations, the fate of at least some of the newly promulgated rules is uncertain. THE U.S. SUPREME COURT BP PLC v. City and County of Baltimore On January 19, 2021, the Court heard oral argument in BP PLC v. City and County of Baltimore. The respondents filed a Greenhous Gas Climate Change lawsuit in state court, alleging that BP, like other energy companies, is liable for significant damage caused by the sale and promotion of petroleum products while knowing that the use of these products and the resulting release of greenhouse gases damages the environment and public property. Several similar lawsuits have been filed in state courts, pleading common law violations as well as trespass and nuisance law violations The energy companies have tried, unsuccessfully to date, to remove these cases to federal court. The petitioners argue that the federal removal statutes allow the federal courts of appeal to review the lower court’s remand, thus opening the possibility that some of the issues presented in these cases can be tried in federal court, presumably a friendlier forum. A decision on this procedural issue should be rendered in a few months. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com