BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildings
    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


    Changes To Commercial Item Contracting

    Massachusetts Business Court Addresses Defense Cost Allocation and Non-Cumulation Provisions in Long-Tail Context

    White House Seeks $310M To Fix Critical San Diego Wastewater Plant

    ConsensusDOCS Updates its Forms

    Agree to Use your “Professional Best"? You may Lose Insurance Coverage! (Law Note)

    Do Municipal Gas Bans Slow the Clean Hydrogen Transition in Real Estate?

    One Sector Is Building Strength Amid Slow Growth

    National Lobbying Firm Opens Colorado Office, Strengthening Construction Defect Efforts

    Insurers Can Sue One Another for Defense Costs on Equitable Indemnity and Equitable Contribution Basis

    Be Careful with Good Faith Payments

    Federal Judge Vacates CDC Eviction Moratorium Nationwide

    Construction Defect Litigation at San Diego’s Alicante Condominiums?

    Pillsbury Insights – Navigating the Real Estate Market During COVID-19

    Balancing Risk and Reward: The Complexities of Stadium Construction Projects

    Appetite for Deconstruction

    Indemnity Provision Provides Relief to Contractor; Additional Insured Provision Does Not

    The Evolution of Construction Defect Trends at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    President Trump Repeals Contractor “Blacklisting” Rule

    Wildfire Threats Make Utilities Uninsurable in US West

    For US Cities in Infrastructure Need, Grant Writers Wanted

    University of California Earthquake Report Provides List of Old Concrete Buildings in LA

    California Pipeline Disaster Brings More Scandal for PG&E

    BWB&O Senior Associate Kyle Riddles and Associate Alexandria Heins Obtain a Trial Victory in a Multi-Million Dollar Case!

    Huh? Action on Construction Lien “Relates Back” Despite Notice of Contest of Lien

    2025 Construction Law Update

    2023 Construction Law Update

    Formal Opinion No. 2020-203: How A Lawyer Is to Handle Access to Client Confidential Information and Anticipation of Potential Security Issues

    Court Finds That Limitation on Conditional Use Permit Results in Covered Property Damage Due to Loss of Use

    2024 Construction Law Update

    White and Williams Announces the Election of Five Lawyers to the Partnership and the Promotion of Five Associates to Counsel

    Contractors Board May Discipline Over Workers’ Comp Reporting

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

    Florida Appellate Courts Holds Underwriting Manuals are Discoverable in Breach of Contract Case

    Another Reminder that Your Construction Contract is Only as Good as Those Signing It

    Federal Miller Act Payment Bond Claim: Who Gets Paid and Who Does Not? What Are the Deadlines?

    Partner Jonathan R. Harwood Obtained Summary Judgment in a Case Involving a Wedding Guest Injured in a Fall

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment in Collapse Case Denied

    Texas Construction Firm Officials Sentenced in Contract-Fraud Case

    Federal Court Holds that Demolition Exclusion Does Not Apply and Carrier Has Duty to Defend Additional Insureds

    Environmental Law Violations: When you Should Hire a Lawyer

    Ninth Circuit: Speculative Injuries Do Not Confer Article III Standing

    The Nightmare Scenario for Florida’s Coastal Homeowners

    Balfour Taps Qinetiq’s Quinn as new CEO to Revamp Builder

    The 2023 Term of the Supreme Court: Administrative and Regulatory Law Rulings

    Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Clarifies Pennsylvania’s Strict Liability Standard

    Meet the Forum's Neutrals: TOM DUNN

    Excess Carrier's Declaratory Judgment Action Stayed While Underlying Case Still Pending

    BHA Sponsors the 9th Annual Construction Law Institute

    Pending Home Sales in U.S. Increase Less Than Forecast

    Continuity and Disaster Recovery Plans for Contractors: Lessons From the Past
    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

    Utah’s Highest Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Properly Commence an Action to Rely on the Relation-Back Doctrine to Overcome the Statute of Repose

    August 20, 2018 —
    Earlier this summer, in Gables & Villas at River Oaks Homeowners Ass’n v. Castlewood Builders LLC, 2018 UT 28, the Supreme Court of Utah addressed the question of whether the plaintiff’s construction defects claims against the general contractor for a construction project were timely-filed, or barred by the statute of repose. In Utah, the statute of repose requires that an action be “commenced within six years of the date of completion.” The plaintiff alleged that its 2014 amended complaint naming the general contractor as a defendant was timely-commenced because, before the date on which Utah’s statute of repose ran, a defendant filed a motion to amend its third-party complaint to name the general contractor as a defendant, and the defendant subsequently assigned its claims to the plaintiff. The plaintiff argued that the filing of its 2014 amended complaint related back[1] to the date of its original complaint. The Supreme Court disagreed, holding that an action is “commenced” by filing a complaint and that a motion for leave to amend does not count as “commencing” an action. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shannon M. Warren, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Warren may be contacted at warrens@whiteandwilliams.com

    U.S. Navy Sailors Sue Tokyo Utility Company Over Radiation Poisoning

    April 09, 2014 —
    In a one billion dollar lawsuit, U.S. Navy sailors contend that they “suffered massive doses of radiation” from the Fukushima Dia-ichi nuclear power plant in Toyko, Japan while stationed on the USS Ronald Reagan, reported the Orange County Register. A tsunami (caused by a 9.0 earthquake) flooded the plant, “cutting off electrical power and disabling backup generators.” The USS Reagan was sent to provide aid, but the plant then “blew up” before they arrived. “Sailors on the flight deck said they felt a warm gust of air, followed by a sudden snow storm: radioactive steam,” according to the Orange County Register. “Freezing in the cold Pacific air. Blanketing their ship.” However, the Orange County Register posed the question, “Could the Reagan – one of the most advanced nuclear aircraft carriers in the U.S. fleet – really not know that it was being showered with massive doses of radiation?” TEPCO, the company being sued by the sailors, answered that it’s “wholly implausible.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hollywood Legend Betty Grable’s Former Home for Sale

    June 30, 2014 —
    When it comes to Old Hollywood stars, Betty Grable was “the girl with the million-dollar legs.” She also lived in a million-dollar home just four blocks from the Hotel Bel-Air. Located at 1280 Stone Canyon Rd, the house is currently on the market for $13.295 million. “It’s a classic, Hollywood estate,” said listing agent Bjorn Farrugia of Hilton & Hyland. “It’s very picturesque — set back on one of the best streets in Bel-Air.” Grable moved in after the home was built in 1937, the same year she married actor Jackie Coogan (aka “Uncle Fester” in the 1960s sitcom The Addams Family). Soon after, in 1939, the couple appeared in “Million Dollar Legs,” a movie giving rise to the actress’ nickname. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Catherine Sherman – Bloomberg

    Housing Gains Not Leading to Hiring

    October 25, 2013 —
    Although construction spending has been rising steadily, the Labor Department noted that most of the 20,000 jobs added by the construction industry in September were for nonresidential construction. In a year that saw an 18% gain in residential construction spending, there was only an increase of 4.8% in employment. The lack of hiring seems to indicate a lingering lack of confidence in the homebuilding market. Employers are having workers do overtime, rather than employ additional people. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ Bill

    May 31, 2021 —
    The New York State Assembly is considering A07285, which creates a private right of action for bad faith “if the insurer unreasonably refuses to pay or unreasonably delays payment without substantial justification.” The bill was first introduced in 2013 but was reintroduced on May 3, 2021 and has received some recent attention. According to the bill, an insurer acts unreasonably when it (among other things):
    1. Fails to provide the claimant with accurate information regarding policy provisions relating to the coverage at issue; or
    2. Fails to effectuate in good faith a prompt, fair, and equitable settlement of a claim or portion of a claim and where the insurer failed to reasonably accord at least equal or more favorable consideration to its insured's interests as it did to its own interests, and thereby exposed the insured to a judgment in excess of the policy limits or caused other damage to a claimant; or
    3. Fails to provide a timely written denial of a claimant's claim, or portion thereof, with a full and complete explanation of such denial, including references to specific policy provisions wherever possible; or
    4. Fails to act in good faith by compelling such claimant to initiate a lawsuit to recover under the policy by offering substantially less than the amounts ultimately recovered in such suit; or
    5. Fails to timely provide, on request of the policy holder or the policy holder's representative, all reports or other documentation arising from the investigation of a claim; or
    6. Refuses to pay a claim without conducting a reasonable investigation prior to such refusal.
    Reprinted courtesy of Copernicus T. Gaza, Traub Lieberman, Robert S. Nobel, Traub Lieberman, Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman and Eric D. Suben, Traub Lieberman Mr. Gaza may be contacted at cgaza@tlsslaw.com Mr. Nobel may be contacted at rnobel@tlsslaw.com Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com Mr. Suben may be contacted at esuben@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas exclusions j(5) and j(6).

    April 27, 2011 —

    In Evanston Ins. Co. v. D&L Masonry of Lubbock, Inc., No. 07-10-00358-CV (Tex. Ct. App. April 18, 2011), insured masonry subcontractor D&L sued its CGL insurer Evanston to recover costs incurred by D&L for the replacement of window frames damaged by D&L while performing masonry work adjacent to the window frames. The trial court granted summary judgment for D&L.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    AAA Revises Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    July 22, 2024 —
    The American Arbitration Association (AAA) recently revised its Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures (“the Rules”). Several notable changes went into effect March 1, 2024, involving the scope of confidentiality, regular and fast track procedures, and updates to certain monetary thresholds. I. Revisions to Regular Track Procedures Rule 45: Confidentiality For the first time, confidentiality is now the default standard. Under Rule 45(a), arbitrators must keep all matters confidential unless otherwise required by law, court order or the agreement of the parties. Rule 45(b) allows a mediator to issue confidentiality orders and “take measures for protecting trade secrets and confidential information.” Rule 7: Consolidation and Joinder Under the new provisions, consolidation and joinder requests must be filed before confirmation of the Merits Arbitrator’s appointment. This language eliminates a previous option that allowed confirmation up to 90 days after filing of such requests. A failure to timely respond to a joinder request will result in a waiver of objections. Now, a party must establish both good cause and prejudice for a successful joinder request after confirmation of the arbitrator. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick McKnight, Fox Rothschild LLP
    Mr. McKnight may be contacted at pmcknight@foxrothschild.com

    The Law of Patent v Latent Defects

    March 19, 2015 —
    Candice B. Macario of Gordon & Rees LLP analyzed the case Delon Hampton & Associates, Chartered v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles, and stated that “[i]n his case, a design professional successfully challenged a construction defect lawsuit brought against them, on the basis that the defect complained of was open and obvious and the County had ran out of time to bring their action.” Macario recommended “as lawsuits are filed close to the ten year statute of repose, one area to explore in a single issue case is if you can eliminate a cause of action based on patent defects. Moreover, in multi-issue cases for several construction defects, parties should always be aware of analyzing whether issues can be identified as patent and perhaps used as a tool in negotiations, settlement discussions or pre-trial motions.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of