BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation 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


    Zoning Hearing Notice Addressed by Georgia Appeals Court

    Texas Law Bars Coverage under Homeowner’s Policy for Mold Damage

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute Stage 2- Increase the Heat

    Illinois Federal Court Applies Insurer-Friendly “Mutual Exclusive Theories” Test To Independent Counsel Analysis

    XL Group Pairs with America Contractor’s Insurance Group to Improve Quality of Construction

    South Carolina Homeowners May Finally Get Class Action for Stucco Defects

    London Is Falling Down and It's Because of Climate Change

    Fifth Circuit Holds Insurer Owes Duty to Defend Latent Condition Claim That Caused Fire Damage to Property Years After Construction Work

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

    Demonstrating A Fraudulent Inducement Claim Or Defense

    General Contractor Intervening to Compel Arbitration Per the Subcontract

    3 Common Cash Flow Issues That Plague The Construction Industry

    Brief Discussion of Enforceability of Anti-Indemnity Statutes in California

    Just How Climate-Friendly Are Timber Buildings? It’s Complicated

    Senate’s Fannie Mae Wind-Down Plan Faces High Hurdles

    Brazil's Detained Industry Captain Says No Plea Deals Coming

    The Pitfalls of Oral Agreements in the Construction Industry

    Construction defect firm Angius & Terry moves office to Roseville

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    Third Circuit Follows Pennsylvania Law - Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship Does Not Arise from an Occurrence

    First Circuit Limits Insurers’ Right to Recoup Defense Costs or Settlement Payments

    Violation of Prompt Payment Statutes is Not a Breach of Contract. But That’s Not the Most Interesting Part

    Eliminating Waste in Construction – An Interview with Turner Burton

    English v. RKK- There is Even More to the Story

    OSHA: What to Expect in 2022

    Newmeyer & Dillion Named a Best Law Firm in 2019 in Multiple Practice Areas by U.S. News-Best Lawyers

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

    When “Substantially Similar” Means “Fundamentally Identical”: Delaware Court Enforces Related Claim Provision to Deny D&O Coverage for Securities Class Action

    Tennessee Court of Appeals Holds Defendant Has the Burden of Offering Alternative Measure of Damages to Prove that Plaintiff’s Measure of Damages is Unreasonable

    Building and Landscape Standards Enacted in Response to the Governor's Mandatory Water Restrictions Dealing with the Drought and Possible Effects of El Niño

    Thanks for the Super Lawyers Nod for 2019!

    An Upward Trend in Commercial Construction?

    Search in Florida Collapse to Take Weeks; Deaths Reach 90

    Massive Danish Hospital Project Avoids Fire Protection Failures with Imerso Construction AI

    Update: Supreme Court Issues Opinion in West Virginia v. EPA

    Testing Your Nail Knowledge

    Construction Recovery Still Soft in New Hampshire

    Payment Bond Surety Entitled to Award of Attorneys’ Fees Although Defended by Principal

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    Decades of WCC Seminar at the Disneyland Resort

    1 De Haro: A Case Study on Successful Cross-Laminated Timber Design and Construction in San Francisco

    Subcontractors Eye 2022 with Guarded Optimism

    Insurers Must Defend Allegations of Faulty Workmanship

    Can Businesses Resolve Construction Disputes Outside of Court?

    Sixth Circuit Lifts Stay on OSHA’s COVID-19 Temporary Emergency Standards. Supreme Court to Review

    The ABCs of PFAS: What You Need to Know About Liabilities for the “Forever Chemical”

    Hawaii State Senate Requires CGL Carriers to Submit Premium Information To State Legislature

    Law Firm Fails to Survive Insurer's and Agent's Motions to Dismiss

    The California Privacy Rights Act Passed – Now What?

    The Law of Patent v Latent 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

    Court Sharpens The “Sword” And Strengthens The “Shield” Of Contractors’ License Law

    July 24, 2023 —
    Performing construction work without the necessary license can have significant repercussions on a contractor’s business. California in particular has become known for its imposition of “strict and harsh” penalties for a contractor’s failure to maintain proper licensure. In the realm of public works projects, any contract with an unlicensed contractor is deemed void. See Business & Professions Code Section 7028.15(e). On private projects, California’s Contractors’ License Law prohibits contractors from maintaining any action to recover payment for their work, and more severe, may require a contractor to disgorge all funds paid to it for performing unlicensed work. See Business & Professions Code Section 7031). These methods of deterrence are referred to as the “shield” and “sword” of the Contractors’ State License Law. Loranger v. Jones, 184 Cal. App. 4th 847, 854 (2010). In any discussion surrounding licensure, it is important to review the language of the Business and Professions Code (“Bus. & Prof.”). Section 7031(a) states:
    Except as provided in subdivision (e), no person engaged in the business or acting in the capacity of a contractor, may bring or maintain any action, or recover in law or equity in any action, in any court of this state for compensation for the performance of any act or contract where a license is required by this chapter without alleging that they were a duly licensed contractor at all times during the performance of that act or contract regardless of the merits of the cause of action brought by the person…
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kyle S. Case, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald LLP
    Mr. Case may be contacted at kcase@watttieder.com

    Blurred Lines: New York Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Privileged Documents in Connection with Pre-Denial Communications Prepared by Insurer's Coverage Counsel

    September 17, 2015 —
    In a recent decision, the New York Supreme Court clarified the scope of privileged documents with respect to communications prepared by an insurer’s counsel prior to issuing a denial of coverage letter. The coverage litigation at issue arose out of MF Global Inc.’s claims under fidelity bonds for losses incurred as a result of large trades made by former MF Global employee, Evan Dooley. The trades cost MF Global, Dooley’s former clearing firm, $141 million after it had to reimburse the CME Group, Inc. futures clearinghouse that handled the trade. The insurers that issued the fidelity bonds contested coverage and sued MF Global in 2009. The opinion underscores the fact that there is no “bright line” rule in New York with respect to disclosure of communications in the insurance context prior to the issuance of a coverage determination – the disclosure requirement will instead turn on what’s actually privileged. In addition, while retention of counsel may not serve as an automatic shield for all documents prepared prior to the coverage decision, insurers will not be required to disclose, among other things, communications which include an “indicia of the provision of legal services.” 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

    DoD Testing New Roofing System that Saves Energy and Water

    October 08, 2014 —
    Builder reported that the Department of Defense (DoD) is hosting a new “dynamic roofing system, installed at the Security Forces Building at Goodfellow Air Force Base in San Angelo, Texas,” which “uses a combination of technologies that heat and cool air and water, produce electricity, and collect rainwater.” If the project is successful, it “could be replicated at thousands of DoD buildings throughout the country in the near future.” Builder described the process: “A retrofitted metal roof is installed over the existing roof, which creates a cavity between the existing and new roofs. Within that cavity insulation, solar thermal heating systems and cooling of air and water for the building can be installed. The roofing, insulation, hydronic solar thermal systems, engineered air pathways, and photovoltaic cells are designed to work symbiotically.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Former NJ Army Base $2B Makeover is 'Buzzsaw' of Activity

    June 14, 2021 —
    Take a developed property the size of New York City’s Central Park with 5 million sq ft of building area, program in new construction or renovation over 20 years and across three dozen parcels for 1,600 housing units, 300,000 sq ft of civic or government space, 500,000 sq ft for retail and 2 million sq ft of offices, and you have a pretty ambitious undertaking. The $2-billion effort to redevelop Fort Monmouth, a decommissioned former U.S. Army base in the thick of New Jersey’s suburban sprawl, is all kinds of ambitious. Reprinted courtesy of Tom Stabile, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Alaska Supreme Court Finds Insurer Owes No Independent Duty to Injured Party

    December 14, 2020 —
    After the victim incurred injury inflicted by an insured party, the Alaska Supreme Court determined that the insurer owed no duty to the injured party. Martinez v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 2020 Alaska LEXIS 111 (Alaska Sept. 4, 2020). Joshua Martinez lost control of his truck and crashed into Charles Burnett's cabin. The cabin's heating fuel tank was damaged, and fuel drained onto the property and under the cabin. Burnett further alleged he suffered bodily injuries. Martinez was insured by GEICO under an auto policy. Two days after the accident, the state Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) advised GEICO to hire a qualified environmental consultant and crew to clean up the fuel spill. Burnett told GEICO he wanted to do the cleanup himself and offered to do so for $25,000, the approximate amount of the consultant retained by GEICO. DEC did not consider Burnett qualified to handle the cleanup. 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

    Nevada Assembly Passes Construction Defect Bill

    October 30, 2013 —
    The Nevada Speaker says that AB401 gives contractors what they want, but a contractors’ group has asked a Senate committee to kill the bill. Supporters of AB 401 say that it clarifies what qualifies as a construction defect and shortens the statute of limitations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Embattled SNC-Lavalin Files Ethics Appeal, Realigns Structure

    May 01, 2019 —
    Even as Montreal design-build giant SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. faces corporate bribery charges on old Libya contracts, the firm now seeks, in an April 4 federal court appeal, to reverse Canadian prosecutors’ 2018 rejection of a negotiated settlement. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Debra K. Rubin, ENR
    Ms. Rubin may be contacted at rubind@enr.com

    MDL for Claims Against Manufacturers and Distributors of PFAS-Containing AFFFs Focuses Attention on Key Issues

    July 05, 2021 —
    Claims against manufacturers and distributors of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)-containing aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) are hurtling forward. Two important developments in this opening salvo of PFAS-related claims against numerous defendants could have important ramifications not only on future PFAS litigation, but on insurance coverage for potential PFAS liabilities as well. First, ten bellwether cases are progressing closer to trial. Second, the key “government contractor defense” has been slated for briefing. In December 2018, the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation established a multi-district litigation (MDL 2873) for AFFF PFAS claims in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina. Unlike previous PFAS lawsuits (primarily against DuPont and/or 3M), the lawsuits in MDL 2873 target dozens of defendants who manufactured and distributed AFFF and its constituent chemicals. MDL 2873 now houses approximately 1,200 member cases, which include the following categories of claims: (i) claims for property damage asserted by water providers, (ii) claims for property damage asserted by property owners, (iii) bodily injury claims, and (iv) claims for medical monitoring for potential future injury. Reprinted courtesy of Gregory S. Capps, White and Williams LLP and Lynndon K. Groff, White and Williams LLP Mr. Capps may be contacted at cappsg@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Groff may be contacted at groffl@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of