BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code 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 Executive Orders Expedite the Need for Contractors to Go Green

    Connecticut Appellate Court Breaks New Ground on Policy Exhaustion

    Connecticut Supreme Court Again Asked to Determine the Meaning of Collapse

    NAHB Reports on U.S. Jobs Created from Home Building

    Construction Contract Language and Insurance Coverage Must Be Consistent

    School’s Lawsuit over Defective Field Construction Delayed

    WCC and BHA Raised Thousands for Children’s Cancer Research at 25th West Coast Casualty CD Seminar

    Measure Of Damages for Breach of Construction Contract

    No Coverage for Foundation Collapse

    Colorado homebuilders target low-income buyers with bogus "affordable housing" bill

    He Turned Wall Street Offices Into Homes. Now He Vows to Remake New York

    No Signature, No Problem: Texas Court Holds Contractual Subrogation Waiver Still Enforceable

    Unions Win Prevailing Wage Challenge Brought By Charter Cities: Next Stop The Supreme Court?

    Trends: “Nearshoring” Opportunities for the Construction Industry

    Digital Twins for a Safer Built Environment

    Exception to Watercraft Exclusion Does Not Apply

    Proposed California Legislation Would Eliminate Certain Obstacles to Coverage for Covid-19 Business Income Losses

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/17/23) – A Flop in Flipping, Plastic Microbes and Psychological Hard Hats

    New Recommendations for Healthy and Safe Housing Conditions

    Caltrans to Speak before California Senate regarding Bay Bridge Expansion

    Insurers' Motion to Knock Out Bad Faith, Negligent Misrepresentation Claims in Construction Defect Case Denied

    Court Affirms Summary Adjudication of Bad Faith Claim Where Expert Opinions Raised a Genuine Dispute

    The Future of Construction Defects in Utah Unclear

    Tennessee Court: Window Openings Too Small, Judgment Too Large

    'Perfect Storm' Caused Fractures at San Francisco Transit Hub

    Judge Tells DOL to Cork its Pistol as New Overtime Rule is Blocked

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Motion for Remand

    South Dakota Supreme Court Holds That Faulty Workmanship Constitutes an “Occurrence”

    Issue and Claim Preclusion When Forced to Litigate Similar Issues in Different Forums: White River Village, LLP v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland

    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    Wall Street Journal Analyzes the Housing Market Direction

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

    Appraiser Declarations Inadmissible When Offered to Challenge the Merits of an Appraisal Award

    Job Gains a Positive for Housing

    A Landlord’s Guide to the Center for Disease Control’s Eviction Moratorium

    Challenging a Termination for Default

    Texas “your work” exclusion

    Turkey to Start Building 200,000 Homes in March, Erdogan Says

    Mitigating FCRA Risk Through Insurance

    U.S., Canada, Mexico Set New Joint Clean-Energy Goal

    The Status of OSHA’s Impending Heat Stress Standard

    Liability Coverage For Construction Claims May Turn On Narrow Factual Distinctions

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

    Steel Makeover Under Way for Brooklyn's Squibb Footbridge

    Contract And IP Implications Of Design Professionals Monetizing Non-Fungible Tokens Comprising Digital Construction Designs

    Structural Problems May Cause Year-Long Delay Opening New Orleans School

    Getting U.S to Zero Carbon Will Take a $2.5 Trillion Investment by 2030

    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

    Court Finds Matching of Damaged Materials is Required by Policy

    Following My Own Advice
    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

    Nevada Budget Remains at Impasse over Construction Defect Law

    June 01, 2011 —

    Negotiations for the Nevada state budget have stalled over proposals to amend the state’s construction defect laws. Assembly Republicans had offered changes to the law to make it friendlier to contractors; however, after a state Supreme Court ruling that the state could not move a local government entity’s funds into state coffers, pressure has increased on the governor to lift the expiration dates of taxes approved in 2009.

    The Reno Gazette-Journal quotes John Madole, a construction industry lobbyist, “We agree with them that you have to address the issue of the attorney fees, and for all practical purposes, they are automatically awarded when anybody brings any kind of suit.”

    Speaker of the Assembly, John Oceguera, a Democrat, has proposed a bill that “makes it absolutely crystal clear that the only time you get attorney's fees is if you're the prevailing party.”

    Read the full story…

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

    New Jersey Courts Speed Up Sandy Litigation

    September 03, 2014 —
    In order to deal with the thousand plus property damage cases related to Hurricane Sandy the “U.S. District Chief Judge Jerome Simandle of the District of New Jersey, who sits in Camden, N.J., issued a standing order dated Aug. 13 that, in effect, cuts in half the amount of time that arbitrators and mediators will have to hear disputes over coverage and issue rulings,” the New Jersey Law Journal reported. “John O’Brien, chief deputy of operations for New Jersey’s federal courts, said that, as of Wednesday, 1,240 Sandy-related lawsuits had been filed in New Jersey and that 1,051 of those cases are still pending,” according to the New Jersey Law Journal. “Sixty of those pending cases have been referred to mediation and another six have been sent to arbitration panels, according to O’Brien.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

    March 04, 2011 —

    After five years of legal battles, the condo owners of the El Cortez Hotel building in downtown San Diego settled for $6.4 million, as reported by The San Diego Union-Tribune on March 28, 2011. The Homeowners Association will net just over $3 million from the settlement.

    The litigation may have had an adverse effect on the value of the condos within the El Cortez Hotel building. According to an article by Kelly Bennett of Voice of San Diego, “Many condos in the building originally sold for more than $600,000. Currently, the three units on the market are asking for just more than $200,000, the U-T said.”

    Andrew Berman, the owners’ attorney, told The San Diego Union-Tribune that the five years of litigation included six lawsuits, 200 depositions, and multiple construction tests.

    Read the full story... (San Diego Union Tribune)

    Read the full story... (Voice of San Diego)

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

    Arizona Supreme Court Confirms a Prevailing Homeowner Can Recover Fees on Implied Warranty Claims

    November 21, 2017 —
    Originally published by CDJ on August 30, 2017 On August 9th, in Sirrah Enterprises, L.L.C. v. Wunderlich, the Arizona Supreme Court settled the question about recovery of attorneys’ fees after prevailing on implied warranty claims against a residential contractor. The simple answer is, yes, a homeowner who prevails on the merits can recover the fees they spent to prove that shoddy construction breached the implied warranty of workmanship and habitability. Why? Because, as Justice Timmer articulated, “[t]he implied warranty is a contract term.” Although implied, the warranty is legally part of the written agreement in which “a residential builder warrants that its work is performed in a workmanlike manner and that the structure is habitable.” In other words, a claim based on the implied warranty not only arises out of the contract, the claim is actually based on a contract term. Since, in A.R.S. § 12-341.01, Arizona law provides for prevailing parties to recover their fees on claims “arising out of contract” and because the implied warranty is now viewed by the courts as a contract term, homeowners can recover their fees after successfully proving breach of the implied warranty. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rick Erickson, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr Erickson may be contacted at rerickson@swlaw.com

    China Construction Bank Sued in US Over Reinsurance Fraud Losses

    June 21, 2024 —
    China Construction Bank Corp., the nation’s third-largest commercial lender, was accused in a US lawsuit of enabling a massive fraud in the reinsurance industry that left companies with “monumental losses” and sinking stock prices. The bank allowed employees to conspire with Israeli insurance startup Vesttoo Ltd. to sell reinsurance policies that weren’t real, according to a complaint filed late Thursday by the Porch Group in Manhattan federal court. Vesttoo filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in August after it was accused of using some $2 billion of fraudulent letters of credit. The Porch Group said that its unit Homeowners of America Insurance Co. lost tens of millions of dollars when its purported $300 million letter of credit proved worthless. “Not only did HOA incur colossal losses, but news of its exposure to the fraud perpetrated by Vesttoo and CCB shocked the market and imposed severe losses on Porch Group’s shareholders as its stock price plummeted,” according to the suit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert Burnson, Bloomberg

    Appeals Court Finds Manuscript Additional Insured Endorsements Ambiguous Regarding Completed Operations Coverage for Additional Insured

    September 07, 2017 —
    In Pulte Home Corp. v. American Safety Indemnity Co. (No. D070478; filed 8/30/17), a California appeals court found that manuscript additional insured endorsements on construction subcontractors’ policies were ambiguous regarding additional insured coverage for the developer, and that substantial evidence supported a finding that the insurer’s refusal to defend the developer was in bad faith. The court also approved awarding punitive damages on a one-to-one basis with the general damages. But the appeals court remanded the case for a further determination on the amount of Brandt fees, based on the developer’s change from a contingency to an hourly agreement. The Pulte case arose from the development of two residential housing projects beginning in 2003 and sold in 2005-2006. Subcontractors were required to name Pulte as additional insured on their policies, some of them issued by American Safety. In 2013, homeowners sued Pulte based in part on the work of subcontractors insured by American Safety, which then denied coverage to Pulte because the construction had taken place years earlier. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Environmental Roundup – May 2019

    July 09, 2019 —
    Federal Courts of Appeal Dam Claims Collapse On May 7, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit decided the case of Navelski, et al. v. International Paper Company. After a major storm, a dam constructed by International Paper to serve the operations of its local paper mill, was breached, releasing millions of gallons of water into a nearby creek resulting in the flooding of many homes located downstream from the creek. IP was sued by the homeowners in a class action, alleging negligence and strict liability for conducting an abnormally dangerous activity. The trial court dismissed the strict liability claim, and the jury found IP was not negligent in the operation of the dam. On appeal, the court upheld the jury verdict, agreeing that the verdict was supported by the evidence heard by the jury. The appeals court also agreed that the strict liability claim was properly dismissed as a matter of law because the operation of this dam was not an abnormally dangerous activity under Florida law. The plaintiffs had also argued that the jury should not have been advised that the home county, Escambia County, has applied for a FEMA grant which apparently made the case that some of the downstream homes were naturally prone to flooding. A redacted version of the application was allowed to be shown to the jury, but the appeals court held that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated that the court ruling was prejudicial. 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

    Connecticut Appellate Court Breaks New Ground on Policy Exhaustion

    April 26, 2021 —
    The Connecticut Appellate Court recently issued a wide-ranging opinion, Continental Casualty Co. v. Rohr, Inc.,[1] which significantly extended the current restrictive view on when a general liability policy can be considered exhausted so as to trigger overlying excess coverage. The case marks a further step away from Judge Augustus Hand’s almost-century-old ruling in Zeig v. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co.,[2] which held that an underlying policy could be “exhausted” by a below-limits settlement as long as the insured was willing to “fill the gap” between the settlement amount and the limits of the policy.[3] In recent years, courts in California and elsewhere have increasingly walked back Zeig’s broad ruling – holding in Qualcomm v. Certain Underwriters,[4] for example, that an insured’s below-limits settlement with primary carriers does not exhaust the limits of primary coverage, or allow the insured to access overlying excess coverage.[5] Reprinted courtesy of Eric B. Hermanson, White and Williams and Austin D. Moody, White and Williams Mr. Hermanson may be contacted at hermansone@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Moody may be contacted at moodya@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of