BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut construction claims 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


    Home Improvement in U.S. Slowing or Still Intact -- Which Is It?

    Baltimore Project Pushes To Meet Federal Deadline

    Lease-Leaseback Battle Continues as First District Court of Appeals Sides with Contractor and School District

    Scott Saylin Expands Employment Litigation and Insurance Litigation Team at Payne & Fears

    The Miller Act Explained

    Creative Avenue for Judgment Creditor to Collect a Judgment

    Manhattan Condos at Half Price Reshape New York’s Harlem

    Firm Sued for Stopping Construction in Indiana Wants Case Tried in Germany

    Labor Development Impacting Developers, Contractors, and Landowners

    Update Regarding New York’s New Registration Requirement for Contractors and Subcontractors Performing Public Works and Covered Private Projects

    Occurrence-Based Insurance Policies and Claims-Made Insurance Policies – There’s a Crucial Difference

    No Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims under Kentucky Law

    DC Metro Extension’s Precast Supplier Banned from Federal Contracts

    At Long Last, the Colorado Legislature Gets Serious About Construction Defect Reform – In a Constructive Way

    Ruling Dealing with Constructive Changes, Constructive Suspension, and the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

    Michigan Claims Engineers’ Errors Prolonged Corrosion

    New Insurance Case: Owners'​ Insurance Barred in Reimbursement Action against Tenant

    Hawaii Federal District Court Again Rejects Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    $17B Agreement Streamlines Disney World Development Plans

    Suspend the Work, but Don’t Get Fired

    What to Look for in Subcontractor Warranty Endorsements

    Court Says No to Additional Lawyer in Las Vegas Fraud Case

    Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Denied

    Emerging World Needs $1.5 Trillion for Green Buildings, IFC Says

    Not So Fast, My Friend: Pacing and Concurrent Delay

    Florida’s Statute of Limitations / Repose for Actions Founded on Construction Improvement Modified

    Governor Murphy Approves Legislation Implementing Public-Private Partnerships in New Jersey

    Kahana & Feld P.C. Enhances Client Offerings, Expands Litigation Firm Leadership

    A Quick Virginia Mechanic’s Lien Timing Refresher

    Emotional Distress Damages Not Distinct from “Annoyance and Discomfort” Damages in Case Arising from 2007 California Wildfires

    Avoid Delay or Get Ready to Pay: The Risks of “Time-Is-of-The-Essence” Clauses

    Las Vegas Stadium for Athletics, Now $1.75B Project, Gains Key OK

    English v. RKK. . . The Rest of the Story

    Duty To Defend Construction Defect Case Affirmed, Duty to Indemnify Reversed In Part

    Amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 – Expert Testimony

    Know What’s Under Ground and Make Smarter Planning Decisions

    "On Second Thought"

    Where There's Smoke...California's New Emergency Wildfire Smoke Protection Regulation And What Employers Are Required To Do

    Tesla Powerwalls for Home Energy Storage Hit U.S. Market

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    Florida SB 2022-736: Construction Defect Claims

    BHA Has a Nice Swing

    AI AEC Show: Augmenta Gives Designers Superpowers

    Useful Life: A Valuable Theory for Reducing Damages

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    Staten Island Villa Was Home to Nabisco 'Nilla' Wafer Inventor

    Massachusetts Judge Holds That Insurer Breached Its Duty To Defend Lawsuit After Chemical Spill

    Loss of Use From Allegedly Improper Drainage System Triggers Defense Under CGL Policy

    Business Solutions Alert: Homeowners' Complaint for Breach of Loan Modification Agreement Can Proceed Past Pleading Stage

    Greystone on Remand Denies Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment To Bar Coverage For Construction Defects
    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

    Insurance Law Alert: Incorporation of Defective Work Does Not Result in Covered Property Damage in California Construction Claims

    June 18, 2014 —
    In Regional Steel Corp. v. Liberty Surplus Ins. (No. B245961, filed 5/16/14, ord. pub. 6/13/14), a California appeals court held that the insured's use of the wrong steel seismic reinforcement hooks in construction of a mixed-use building was not an occurrence, and did not result in covered property damage. Regional Steel was the structural steel subcontractor on a 14-story mixed-use project in North Hollywood, California. Regional supplied plans which were approved by the developer and its structural engineers for installation of steel reinforcements, including seismic reinforcement hooks, to be encased in concrete. During construction, City inspectors determined that the plans called for the wrong hooks, necessitating repairs to finished portions of the work and delays in further construction. This ultimately resulted in a lawsuit between the developer, Regional Steel, the concrete subcontractor, the structural engineer and a quality assurance inspector. The project was insured under a wrap policy issued to the developer, with Regional named as an additional insured. The court rejected an argument that the wrap endorsement fundamentally changed the insurance, and the issue boiled down to whether incorporation of the wrong hooks, the damage caused by tearing out concrete to replace the hooks, or the resulting loss of use, triggered coverage. Liberty asserted that no damage to property was alleged and the purely economic losses caused by the need to reopen the poured concrete to correct the tie hook problem did not constitute "property damage" within the meaning of the policy. Liberty further posited that the tie hook problem did not constitute an “occurrence” within the meaning of the policy because the alleged damage was not caused by an accident. Reprinted courtesy of Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Chris Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    William Doerler Recognized by JD Supra 2022 Readers’ Choice Awards

    March 14, 2022 —
    Congratulations to Bill Doerler, Counsel of the Subrogation Group who has been recognized as a top author in Product Liability in the 2022 JD Supra Readers' Choice Awards. Bill was ranked number 9 out of a pool of approximately 800 authors writing about product liability matters on JD Supra in 2021. The Readers’ Choice Awards recognize top authors and firms for their thought leadership in key topics read by C-suite executives, in-house counsel, media and other professionals across the JD Supra platform during 2021. These annual awards (now in their seventh year) recognize JD Supra contributors for the visibility and engagement their thought leadership earned among readers in select subjects during the previous 12 months. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    What Happens When a Secured Creditor Files a Late Claim in an Equity Receivership?

    September 28, 2017 —
    Pitting a receivership court’s inherent equitable powers against pre-existing property rights can lead to some pretty interesting questions. In SEC v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 848 F.3d 1339, 1343-44 (11th Cir. 2017), the Eleventh Circuit recently examined whether a district court’s inherent authority to establish a claims submission process allowed the court to extinguish a security interest in real property based solely upon an untimely proof of claim. Much to the relief of secured creditors, the Eleventh Circuit held that the district court erred, as a matter of law, by extinguishing the creditor’s pre-existing property rights under those circumstances. Introduction Equity vests a district court with “‘broad powers and wide discretion to determine relief in an equity receivership.’” Wells Fargo, 848 F.3d at 1343-44 (quoting SEC v. Elliot, 953 F.2d 1560, 1566 (11th Cir. 1992)). These powers include: (i) establishing procedures for the submission of claims to a receiver, and (ii) setting a claims bar date. Id. at 1344 (citing SEC v. Tipco, Inc., 554 F.2d 710, 711 (5th Cir. 1977)). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ben Reeves, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Reeves may be contacted at breeves@swlaw.com

    Lasso Needed to Complete Vegas Hotel Implosion

    February 18, 2015 —
    The Miami Herald reported that “demolition workers used an Old West method on Tuesday to finish an incomplete casino implosion in Las Vegas.” The Clarion Hotel and Casino owner Lorenzo Doumani told the Miami Herald that “[t]hey lassoed the building with steel cables, got a crane, and pulled and pulled and pulled.” Burke Construction used a 2-ton explosive punch to bring the structure down, however, the concrete building dropped four stories but remained upright. Burke Construction’s corporate safety coordinator, Anthony Schlect, told the Miami Herald that he was investigating the incident. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Firm Sued for Stopping Construction in Indiana Wants Case Tried in Germany

    October 16, 2013 —
    Getrag Transmission, a German firm, is being sued by a Detroit-based construction firm that Getrag had hired to build a factory in Indiana. When a court gave the go-ahead to Walbridge Construction for the suit, Getrag appealed, stating that the case should be held in German so that Getrag officials do not have the expense of traveling to Indiana. Getrag was building the plant, which would have cost $350 million, as part of a partnership with Chrysler. Chrysler dropped from the project after filing for bankruptcy. Shortly afterward, Getrag also filed for bankruptcy. Walbridge is seeking $118.5 million due to expenses incurred with subcontractors. Chrysler has announced its intention of finishing the plant, which they estimate will cost about $162 million. Once complete, the plant will employ about 850 workers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is it the Dawning of the Age of Strict Products Liability for Contractors in California?

    March 30, 2016 —
    It was the Age of Aquarius. And everything was changing. Politically, socially . . . and legally. Through the 19th Century the doctrine of caveat emptor, literally “let the buyer beware,” was the rule of law. Under the doctrine a buyer was expected to protect him or herself against both obvious and hidden defects in a product. It wasn’t until the late 1800s that U.S. courts began to impose implied warranties – for merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose – to protect consumers. But implied warranties were premised on their being a contract between the manufacturer and the user of a defective product, and by the mid 20th Century it was increasingly uncommon for consumers to purchase products directly from a manufacturer. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Last Call: Tokyo Iconic Okura Hotel Meets the Wrecking Ball

    August 26, 2015 —
    Tokyo’s iconic nod to Japanese Modernism, the Hotel Okura, will bid farewell to its last guests next week and face the wrecking ball, despite petitions from around the world to save it. The 1960s-era hotel, which has welcomed international dignitaries and inspired a throng of admirers eager for preservation, will close its doors Aug. 31 to make way for a gleaming new hotel rebuilt in time for the 2020 Olympics, at a cost of about 100 billion yen ($836 million). “What’s odd about the Okura is that it’s a perfect embodiment of ‘60s Modernism, and it represents that very first wave of new development in the region,” Tyler Brule, editor in chief of Monocle magazine, who spearheaded a campaign that included a petition with almost 9,000 signatures, said in an e-mailed response to questions. “For this reason alone, it deserves to be preserved.” Reprinted courtesy of Komaki Ito, Bloomberg and Andreea Papuc, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Michigan Lawmakers Pass $4.7B Infrastructure Spending Bill

    April 11, 2022 —
    Michigan lawmakers have passed legislation appropriating $4.7 billion for state infrastructure, including more than $1 billion for various water projects.About $750 million will go toward drinking water infrastructure such as projects to replace lead service lines or remove contaminants like PFA substances, potentially harmful chemicals used in industrial and consumer products that are have been found in water. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of