BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut stucco 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


    New Jersey Courts Speed Up Sandy Litigation

    Dispute Resolution Provision in Subcontract that Says Owner, Architect or Engineer’s Decision Is Final

    Owner Bankruptcy: What’s a Contractor to Do?

    Pollution Exclusion Prevents Coverage for Injury Caused by Insulation

    The Little Ice Age and Delay Claims

    Asbestos Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Beyond Inverse Condemnation in Wildfire Litigation: An Oregon Jury Finds Utility Liable for Negligence, Trespass and Nuisance

    4 Lessons Contractors Can Learn From The COVID-19 Crisis

    How Berger’s Peer Review Role Figures In Potential Bridge Collapse Settlement

    Let the 90-Day Countdown Begin

    First Trump Agenda Nuggets Hit Construction

    Traub Lieberman Partner Michael K. Kiernan and Associate Brandon Christian Obtain Dismissal with Prejudice in Favor of Defendant

    Insurer Not Required to Show Prejudice from an Insured’s Late Notice When the Parties Contract for a Specific Reporting Period

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    Did You Get a Notice of Mechanic’s Lien after Project Completion? Don’t Panic!

    Dave McLain named Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants for 2019

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Named 2019 Super Lawyers

    Celebrities Lose Case in Construction Defect Arbitration

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (2/21/24) – Fed Chair Predicts More Small Bank Closures, Shopping Center Vacancies Hit 15-year Low, and Proptech Sees Mixed Results

    Kentucky Supreme Court Creates New “Goldilocks Zone” to Limit Opinions of Biomechanical Experts

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in “The Best Lawyers in America” & “Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch” 2025 Editions

    The Greenest U.S. Cities & States

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions, Four Attorneys Promoted to Partner and One Attorney Promoted to Counsel

    Washington State Enacts Law Restricting Non-Compete Agreements

    Auburn Woods Homeowners Association v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    Progress, Property, and Privacy: Discussing Human-Led Infrastructure with Jeff Schumacher

    Texas Jury Awards $5.3 Million to Company Defamed by Union: Could it work in Pennsylvania?

    Insurance Company Prevails in “Chinese Drywall” Case

    The Complex Insurance Coverage Reporter – A Year in Review

    Improper Means Exception and Tortious Interference Claims

    Louisiana District Court Declines to Apply Total Pollution Exclusion

    Construction Defect Claim Must Be Defended Under Florida Law

    The “Ugly” Property Next Door is Ruining My Property Value

    How to Protect a Construction-Related Invention

    The Murky Waters Between "Good Faith" and "Bad Faith"

    Water Alone is Not Property Damage under a CGL policy in Connecticut

    Recent Environmental Cases: Something in the Water, in the Air and in the Woods

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

    Contractor’s Claim for Interest on Subcontractor’s Defective Work Claim Gains Mixed Results

    Connecting Construction Project Information: Open Technology Databases Improve Project Communication, Collaboration and Visibility

    Deadlines. . . They’re Important. Project Owner Risks Losing Claim By Failing to Timely Identify “Doe” Defendant

    Reports of the Death of SB800 are Greatly Exaggerated – The Court of Appeal Revives Mandatory SB800 Procedures

    Changes To Commercial Item Contracting

    Clean Energy and Conservation Collide in California Coastal Waters

    Vincent Alexander Named to Florida Trend’s Legal Elite

    Flow-Down Clauses Can Drown Your Project

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (8/21/24) – REITs Show Their Strength, Energy Prices Increase Construction Costs and CRE Struggles to Keep Pace

    The Impact of the Russia-Ukraine Conflict on the Insurance Industry, Part One: Coverage, Exposure, and Losses

    New Jersey Supreme Court Holding Impacts Allocation of Damages in Cases Involving Successive Tortfeasors

    The Value of Photographic Evidence in Construction Litigation
    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

    Insurers' Motion to Void Coverage for Failure to Attend EUO Denied

    January 04, 2023 —
    The insurer's motion for summary judgment and disposal of the insureds' claim due to failure to attend an examination under oath (EUO) was denied. Perkins v Syndicate 4242 of Lloyd's of London, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 196922 (W.D. La. Oct. 28, 2022). The insureds' home suffered damage from Hurricane Laura on August 27, 2020, and Hurricane Delta on October 9, 2020. The insureds reported damage after Hurricane Laura under the homeowners policy. They filed suit in August 2021, alleging that Lloyds failed to adequately inspect their claims. The court issued a Case Management Order (CMO) that governed initial disclosures and the parties' participation in a streamlined settlement process for hurricane claims. The dispute did not settle, however, so the matter was set for a bench trial. 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

    Three Reasons Lean Construction Principles Are Still Valid

    February 27, 2019 —
    When lean principles were first introduced to the construction industry five years ago, project managers raced to implement the production method. The internet was rife with content about how to easily overhaul a jobsite and transform it into the picture of efficiency. However, the number of lean construction critics have multiplied significantly in recent months. They claim concepts are near impossible to implement or, even worse, automation eliminates the need for deliberate human processes. These ideas are misleading. Lean principles are still valid for a few key reasons. 1. Lean involves seeing things from the customer’s point of view One of the defining principles of lean construction is understanding value from the customer’s point of view. The concept encourages stakeholders, including the owner, contractor and supplier, to come together during the early planning stage of the project. The significant level of trust created from this exercise can’t be replicated by machinery. It involves compassion, collaboration and a sense of creativity that artificial intelligence is yet to possess. Moreover, the rapport gained through this service-oriented exercise is worth the time investment. Reprinted courtesy of Kevin Clary, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Three's a Trend: Second, Fourth and Ninth Circuits Uphold Broad "Related Claims" Language

    February 23, 2016 —
    The hallmark of a claims-made insurance policy is that the policy only provides coverage for claims that are “first made” during the policy period. As noted by the Texas Supreme Court, “for the insurer, the inherent benefit of a claims-made policy is the insurer's ability to close its books on a policy at its expiration and thus to attain a level of predictability unattainable under standard occurrence policies.”[1] To ensure this “level of predictability,” claims-made insurance policies contain provisions stating that all “Related Claims” will be treated as a single claim deemed first made at the time the earliest of such claims was made. The “Related Claims” provision is an issue that comes up time and again – claims can span years, especially in the context of regulatory investigations, which often culminate in enforcement proceedings and litigation. This inevitably leads to disputes regarding whether later claims can be related back to the earlier claim, an issue that becomes even thornier when different insurers participate on different policy years. Over time, case law on “Related Claims” has been mixed and somewhat inconsistent, with each case tending to hinge on its own unique set of facts, making it difficult to identify a clear standard for determining whether claims are related. However, three recent decisions out of the Second, Fourth and Ninth Circuits show that courts are increasingly deferring to the plain language of the policy and applying these provisions broadly. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Greg Steinberg, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Steinberg may be contacted at steinbergg@whiteandwilliams.com

    A Court-Side Seat: A FACA Fight, a Carbon Pledge and Some Venue on the SCOTUS Menu

    November 02, 2020 —
    In this summary of recent developments in environmental and regulatory law, venues are challenged, standing is upheld, statutory exemption is disputed and more. THE U.S. SUPREME COURT Change Must Come from Within … Maryland? As the new term begins, the Court has agreed to review BP PLC v. Mayor and City Council of Maryland, a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit which held that a climate change damages case filed against many energy companies must be heard in the state courts of Maryland and not the federal courts. The petitioners argue that the federal office removal statute authorizes such removal, and the Fourth Circuit’s contrary decision conflicts with rulings from other circuit courts. THE FEDERAL COURTS Where Is the Fund in That? On September 25,2020, in U.S. House of Representatives v. Mnuchin, et al., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held that the lower court should not have dismissed a lawsuit filed by the U.S. House of Representatives challenging the Executive Branch’s transferal of appropriated funds to the Department of Defense to build a physical barrier along the southern border of the United State. The case is More than $8 billion is at stake, a sum that had been transferred from various federal accounts not involved with building the wall. The appeals court held that the lower court should not have dismissed this lawsuit because the House of Representatives had standing to bring this lawsuit even if the U.S. Senate was not involved with this litigation. Accordingly, the case was returned to the lower court for additional findings, with the appeals court noting that the Constitution’s Appropriation’s Clause serves as an important check on the Executive Branch. 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

    Recycling Our Cities, One Building at a Time

    December 13, 2022 —
    Takumi Osawa kneels on the narrow balcony of a wooden house outside Tokyo and describes how, 140 years ago, workers would have hoisted baskets of mulberry leaves to the second floor to feed silkworms. When they ate, it sounded like rain.  Known in Japan as minka, these locally crafted structures with characteristic pitched roofs were built for hundreds of years to accommodate farmers, artisans and merchants. This one was originally constructed in 1879 and housed a family on the first floor who tended silkworms on the second and third. Minka are typically designed like an interlocking puzzle, without nails or screws, which allowed Osawa and a team of craftsmen to take the building apart, move it about 90 kilometers (56 miles) east and reassemble it closer to Tokyo, where a couple now live in it. The number of empty homes in Japan is rising as the population shrinks and younger generations gravitate toward the city. Government data suggests as many as 8 million houses, many built during a post-World War II construction boom that lasted into the 1980s, now lie unoccupied. Reprinted courtesy of Aaron Clark, Bloomberg and Erica Yokoyama, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Competitive Bidding Statute: When it Applies and When it Does Not

    April 15, 2024 —
    The University of Washington (UW), a public university, aimed to secure a real estate developer for a new building on its campus. The proposal involved an 80-year ground lease (the “Lease”), and developers submitted bids. The selected developer would demolish an existing building, construct a new one, own it during the Lease at its own cost, and UW would lease back a portion, with ownership reverting to UW at the Lease’s end. Alexandria Real Equities, Inc. (ARE) was a finalist but ultimately was not selected, and the Lease was awarded to Wexford Science and Technology, LLC (Wexford). As a result, ARE filed suit against UW asserting three claims: 1) UW lacked authority to execute the Lease, 2) UW didn’t follow required competitive bidding procedures, and 3) UW’s developer selection process was arbitrary and capricious. None of these claims were successful and ARE appealed. Division II of the Washington Court of Appeals affirmed in Alexandria Real Estate Equities Inc. v. Univ. of Wash., __ Wn. App. __, 539 P.3d 54 (2023), a published decision. The Court concluded, based on the facts in that case, that because construction was not publicly funded, UW did not have to follow competitive bidding requirements that were laid out in a statute relevant to state universities. Still, the Court applied the “bright-line cutoff point” that prohibits disappointed bidders from challenging an award once a contract has been executed. See Dick Enterprises, Inc. v. Metro. King County, 83 Wn. App. 566, 572, 922 P.2d 184 (1996). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mason Fletcher, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Fletcher may be contacted at mason.fletcher@acslawyers.com

    Paycheck Protection Program Forgiveness Requirements Adjusted

    June 29, 2020 —
    On June 5, 2020, the President signed into law the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act of 2020, amending portions of the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”). Most importantly, the PPP Flexibility Act adjusted the forgiveness requirements for PPP loans. The CARES Act allowed borrowers to apply for forgiveness of loan amounts used for payroll and other covered costs during an eight-week period beginning on the date of origination, or by June 30, 2020, whichever came first. The CARES Act also allowed borrowers to use the loan funds by June 30 to restore employee and payroll levels that had been reduced as a result of COVID-19. The Small Business Administration instructed borrowers that at least 75% of the loan funds had to be used to cover payroll costs during the covered period to be eligible for forgiveness. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jacob W. Scott, Smith Currie
    Mr. Scott may be contacted at jwscott@smithcurrie.com

    Consequential Damages Flowing from Construction Defect Not Covered Under Florida Law

    November 17, 2016 —
    Interpreting Florida law, the United States District Court found there was no duty to defend a contractor against construction defect claims. Evanston Ins. Co. v. Dimmucci Dev. Corp. of Ponce Inlet, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123678 (M.D. Fla. Sept 13, 2016). The insured built condominiums and townhomes. It held three successive CGL policies issued by Evanston. The "your work" exclusion in the policies barred coverage as follows:
    "Property Damage" to "your work" arising out of it or any part of it and included in the "products-completed operations hazard." This exclusion does not apply if the damaged work or the work out of which the damage arises was performed on your behalf by a subcontractor.
    The insured constructed the Towers Grande Condominium. In 2012 the Towers Grande Condominium Association, Inc. initiated the underlying action alleging that the insured's failure to construct the Towers Grande properly resulted in building defects and deficiencies. Damage to the roof, generator exhaust pipe, and HVAC system was alleged. Further, water intrusion and decking/structural issues were claimed. In addition to the construction defects, the Association also alleged that the insured's faulty work led to additional damages. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com