BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architect
    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


    Court Upholds Denial of Collapse Coverage Where Building Still Stands

    Acquisition, Development, and Construction Lending Conditions Ease

    How to Build Climate Change-Resilient Infrastructure

    The Final Frontier Opens Up New Business Opportunities for Private Contractors

    The American Rescue Plan Act: What Restaurants Need to Act on NOW

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

    A Court-Side Seat: Appeals and Agency Developments at the Close of 2020

    U.K. High Court COVID-19 Victory for Policyholders May Set a Trend in the U.S.

    20 Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2020 Top Lawyers!

    Building in the Age of Technology: Improving Profitability and Jobsite Safety

    Do Change Orders Need to be in Writing and Other Things That Might Surprise You

    Obtaining Temporary Injunction to Enforce Non-Compete Agreement

    No Coverage for Alleged Misrepresentation Claim

    COVID-19 Vaccine Considerations for Employers in the Construction Industry

    City of Pawtucket Considering Forensic Investigation of Tower

    Court of Appeals Issues Decision Regarding Second-Tier Subcontractors and Pre-Lien Notice

    Justice Dept., EPA Ramp Up Environmental Justice Enforcement

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

    COVID-19 Response: Key Legal Considerations for Event Cancellations

    Expert Medical Science Causation Testimony Improperly Excluded under Daubert; ID of Sole Cause of Medical Condition Not Required

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    Reminder: In Court (as in life) the Worst Thing You Can Do Is Not Show Up

    Gain in Home Building Points to Sustained U.S. Growth

    Florida Project Could Help Address Runoff, Algae Blooms

    Insurer's In-House Counsel's Involvement in Coverage Decision Opens Door to Discovery

    The “Climate 21 Project” Prepared for the New Administration

    Evaluating Smart Home Technology: It’s About More Than the Bottom Line

    Home-Rentals Wall Street Made Say Grow or Go: Real Estate

    California Insurance Commissioner Lacks Authority to Regulate Formula for Estimating Replacement Cost Value

    CRH to Buy Building-Products Firm Laurence for $1.3 Billion

    Drill Rig Accident Kills Engineering Manager, Injures Operator in Philadelphia

    You Are Your Brother’s Keeper. Direct Contractors in California Now Responsible for Wage Obligations of Subcontractors

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

    Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Strikes a Deathblow to Substantial Factor Causation in Most Cases; Is Asbestos Litigation Next?

    SFAA Commends U.S. Senate for Historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill

    Key Amendments to Insurance Claims-Handling Regulations in Puerto Rico

    Basement Foundation Systems’ Getting an Overhaul

    Balfour in Talks With Carillion About $5 Billion Merger

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

    So a Lawsuit Is on the Horizon…

    Top Five Legal Mistakes in Construction

    No Coverage for Sink Hole Loss

    Mitsui Fudosan Said to Consider Rebuilding Tilted Apartments

    Witt Named to 2017 Super Lawyers

    Notice of Claim Sufficient to Invoke Coverage

    Home Builders and Developers Beware: SC Supreme Court Beats Up Hybrid Arbitration Clauses Mercilessly

    In Search of Cement Replacements

    Construction Halted in Wisconsin Due to Alleged Bid Issues

    ASCE Releases New Report on Benefits and Burdens of Infrastructure Investment in Disadvantaged Communities

    Third Circuit Limits Pennsylvania’s Kvaerner Decision; Unexpected and Unintended Injury May Constitute an “Occurrence” Under Pennsylvania Law
    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

    Kaboom! Illinois Applies the Anti-Subrogation Rule to Require a Landlord’s Subrogating Property Insurer to Defend a Third-Party Complaint Against Tenants

    December 13, 2021 —
    In Sheckler v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co, 2021 IL App (3d) 190500, 2021 Ill. App. LEXIS 593, Auto-Owners Insurance Company (Insurer) paid its insured, Ronald McIntosh (McIntosh), for property damage following a fire in an apartment he rented to Monroe and Dorothy Sheckler (the Shecklers). Insurer filed suit against Wayne Workman (Workman), who performed service work on an oven in the Shecklers’ apartment that leaked gas and resulted in a fire. Workman filed a third-party complaint against the Shecklers for contribution and the Shecklers tendered the defense of the claim to Insurer. Insurer refused the tender and the Shecklers filed a declaratory judgment action. In the court below, the Shecklers argued that, as tenants, they were co-insureds on McIntosh’s property insurance policy. Following a liberal interpretation of precedent from the Supreme Court of Illinois in Dix Mutual Insurance Co. v. LaFramboise, 597 N.E. 2d 622 (Ill. 1992), an Illinois appellate court ruled that Insurer – who provided property insurance – must defend the tenants of a rental property from contribution claims if the tenants are co-insureds under the landlord’s policy. In Sheckler, the Shecklers hired Workman to fix a broken burner on a gas stove. Finding that additional parts were needed, Workman left while the Shecklers waited inside. While waiting—and despite the smell of gas filling the kitchen—Mr. Sheckler lit the stove. “Kaboom!” wrote the appellate court when describing the scene. A fire erupted and caused substantial damage to the apartment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryan Bennett, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Bennett may be contacted at bennettr@whiteandwilliams.com

    Intentional Mining Neighbor's Property is Not an Occurrence

    October 30, 2018 —
    The Kentucky Supreme Court determined there was no coverage when the insured was sued for mineral trespass. Am. Mining Ins. Co. v. Peters Farms, LLC, 2018 Ky. LEXIS 287 (Ky. Aug. 16, 2018). Beginning in 2007, Ikerd Mining. LLC removed 20,212 toms of coal from land belonging to Peters Farms, LLC. Of that amount, 10,012 tons were wrongfully mined under Ikerd's alleged mistaken belief as to the correct location of Peters' boundaries. The other 1,200 tons were mined by Ikerd knowing that the land thereunder belonged to Peters, but pursuant to a disputed oral lease agreement between the two. Peters claimed that the lease was an ongoing negotiation that was never finalized. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Texas Supreme Court Declines to Waive Sovereign Immunity in Premises Defect Case

    April 10, 2023 —
    Houston, Texas (March 30, 2023) – The Supreme Court of Texas recently upheld a Thirteenth Court of Appeals’ judgment finding that the plaintiffs in a premises defect case brought against the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) had failed to raise a fact issue regarding the creation of a dangerous condition and, consequently, failed to establish waiver of the defendant’s sovereign immunity. Daniel K. Christ and Nicole D. Salinas v. Tex. DOT, et al., No. 21-0728, 66 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 306, 2023 Tex. LEXIS 128, at *1 (Feb 10, 2023). Background Plaintiffs Daniel Christ and his wife, Nicole Salinas (the Christs), were riding their motorcycle through a construction zone when they collided with a vehicle that crossed into their lane. TxDOT’s traffic control plan for the related construction project called for the placement of concrete barriers between opposing travel lanes; however, once construction on the project began, TxDOT’s contractor determined there was not enough space for the concrete barriers and revised the traffic control plan to substitute yellow stripes and buttons for the concrete barriers. TxDOT never approved the revised traffic control plan in writing; however, TxDOT’s contractor contended TxDOT orally approved of the change. The Christs sued the driver of the other vehicle, TxDOT, and TxDOT’s contractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Starr M. Forster, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Forster may be contacted at Starr.Forster@lewisbrisbois.com

    Four Key Steps for a Successful Construction Audit Process

    May 03, 2021 —
    The implications of the audit provisions contained in construction agreements between owners and contractors owners extend far beyond post-completion bean counting, and can affect multiple aspects of a project, from project administration to relationships with key subcontractors. It is critically important that contractors give audits the attention they deserve by taking the following four steps. First, invest the time to negotiate the audit provisions that ultimately appear in contracts with the owner. Second, ensure that the project team and the owner’s project auditors engage in timely communication during construction. Third, make certain that post-completion audit administration is prompt and complete. And finally, carefully draft adequate “flow-down” provisions with subcontractors and vendors so that they understand and comply with their contractual obligations, as well as the expectations of the contractor and owner. All four aspects are critical, and if not addressed effectively can undermine the profitability of the contract, and contractors’ business relationships with both upstream and downstream parties. Negotiations At the outset of contract negotiations, a contractor must completely understand the owner’s audit process expectations. An owner’s understanding of the audit process and its potential pitfalls depends on their own experience, as well as the knowledge of their personnel, including internal audit members and external auditors. Negotiations, which like the audit itself need not be adversarial, can be educational for both the owner and any representatives involved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ronald L. Williams, Fox Rothschild LLP
    Mr. Williams may be contacted at rwilliams@foxrothschild.com

    Despite Feds' Raised Bar, 2.8B Massachusetts Offshore Wind Project Presses On

    November 04, 2019 —
    Developers of the 800-MW, 84-turbine Vineyard Wind offshore wind energy farm in Massachusetts, set to be the first and largest commercial-scale project in the U.S., say they are committed to pushing through its $2.8-billion construction despite a sudden Trump administration permitting setback. Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    April 17, 2019 —
    The Western Heritage Ins. Co. v. Frances Todd, Inc. (2019 Cal.App. LEXIS 299 / 2019 WL 1450731) case has potential implications for insurance carriers, policyholders, condominium associations, unit owners, landlords and tenants. The case involves a fire at a commercial condominium complex (the “Association”). The Association’s CC&Rs required the Association to purchase a master fire insurance policy for the benefit of the Association and owners, with a waiver of subrogation endorsement that stated the insurance company could not seek reimbursement from the Association, its officers, owners or occupants of the units in the event of a covered fire. The CC&Rs also prohibited individual owners from obtaining their own fire insurance. The Association purchased the required fire insurance policy from Western Heritage Insurance Company (“Western Heritage”). One of the owner’s tenants, Frances Todd, Inc. (“Frances Todd”), allegedly caused a fire that damaged several units. Although the unit owner was covered as an additional named insured under the Western Heritage fire policy, the tenant, Frances Todd, was not. Western Heritage paid for the common area fire damage caused by Francis Todd, and then sued Frances Todd in a subrogation action to recover the amounts paid. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason M. Adams, Gibbs Giden
    Mr. Adams may be contacted at jadams@gibbsgiden.com

    A Retrospective As-Built Schedule Analysis Can Be Used to Support Delay

    May 23, 2022 —
    Delay claims are part of construction. There should be no surprise why. Time is money. A delay claim should be accompanied by expert opinions that bolster evidence that gets introduced. The party against whom the delay claim is made will also have an expert – a rebuttal expert. Not surprisingly, each of the experts will rely on a different critical path as to relates to the same project. The party claiming delay will rely on a critical path that shows the actions of the other party impacted their critical path and proximately caused the delay. This will be refuted by the opposing expert that will challenge the critical path and the actions claimed had no impact on the critical path (i.e., did not proximately cause the delay). Quintessential finger pointing! This was the situation in CTA I, LLC v. Department of Veteran Affairs, CBCA 5826, 2022 WL 884710 (CBCA 2022), where the government terminated the contractor for convenience and the contractor claimed equitable adjustments for, among other things, delay. The contractor’s expert relied on an as-built critical path analysis by “retrospectively creating updates to insert between the contemporaneous updates.” Id., supra, n.3. The government’s expert did not do a retrospective as-built analysis and relied on only contemporaneous schedule updates. Id. 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

    Late Notice Bars Insured's Claim for Loss Caused by Hurricane

    October 24, 2022 —
    The court found that the failure to provide prompt notice of damage caused by Hurricane Irma barred plaintiff's claim for coverage. Garcia v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149312 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 18, 2022). On September 10, 2017, plaintiff's property allegedly suffered damage due to Hurricane Irma. Shortly thereafter, plaintiff observed a water stain on the ceiling of the bedroom which was painted over. She did not take any pictures of the water stain before repainting. Plaintiff reported to her experts that she observed other water stains in various areas in 2017, 2018 and 2019, and that she painted over them each time. She again observed water stains in several rooms in 2020, at which time she became aware of the magnitude of the problem and went to an attorney. Plaintiff did not report her claim until May 27, 2020. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com