BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window 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


    Wall Street Journal Analyzes the Housing Market Direction

    The OFCCP’s November 2019 Updated Technical Assistance Guide: What Every Federal Construction Contractor Should Know

    Miller Act Bond Claims Subject to “Pay If Paid”. . . Sometimes

    Hovnanian Reports “A Year of Solid Profitability”

    Architect Named Grand Custom Home Winner for Triangular Design

    No Coverage for Roof Collapse During Hurricane

    Congratulations to our 2019 Southern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars

    School District Settles Over Defective Athletic Field

    The Brexit Effect on the Construction Industry

    Texas and Georgia Are Paying the Price for Sprawl

    In Midst of Construction Defect Lawsuit, City Center Seeks Refinancing

    Paycheck Protection Program Forgiveness Requirements Adjusted

    Speeding up Infrastructure Projects with the Cloud

    Decline in Home Construction Brings Down Homebuilder Stocks

    Competition to Design Washington D.C.’s 11th Street Bridge Park

    Meet D1's Neutrals Series: KENNETH FLOREY

    DoD Issues Guidance on Inflation Adjustments for Contractors

    Suffolk Stands Down After Consecutive Serious Boston Site Injuries

    Colorado “occurrence”

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Two Recent Cases Address Copyright Protection for Architectural Works

    Constructive Changes – A Primer

    Home Repair Firms Sued for Fraud

    Suppliers of Inherently Dangerous Raw Materials Remain Excluded from the Protections of the Component Parts Doctrine

    AB5, Dynamex, the ABC Standard, and their Effects on the Construction Industry

    Motion for Summary Judgment Gets Pooped Upon

    Better Building Rules Would Help U.K.'s Flooding Woes, CEP Says

    Full Extent of Damage From Turkey Quakes Takes Shape

    What is a Subordination Agreement?

    Let’s Give ‘Em Sutton to Talk About: Tennessee Court Enforces Sutton Doctrine

    Heads I Win, Tails You Lose. Court Finds Indemnity Provision Went Too Far

    The Year 2010 In Review: Design And Construction Defects Litigation

    Stadium Intended for the 2010 World Cup Still Not Ready

    A New Perspective on Mapping Construction Sites with the Crane Camera System

    San Francisco Bay Bridge Tower Rod Fails Test

    Collapse Claim Fails Due To Defectively Designed Roof and Deck

    DoD Will Require New Cybersecurity Standards in 2020: Could Other Agencies Be Next?

    California Supreme Court Declines to Create Exception to Privette Doctrine for “Known Hazards”

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Faulty Workmanship Denied

    Biden Administration Issues Buy America Guidance for Federal Infrastructure Funds

    Safe Harbors- not just for Sailors anymore (or, why advance planning can prevent claims of defective plans & specs) (law note)

    Quick Note: Staying, Not Dismissing, Arbitrable Disputes Under Federal Arbitration Act

    McCarthy Workers Test Fall-Protection Harnesses Designed to Better Fit Women

    Recent Opinions Clarify Enforceability of Pay-if-Paid Provisions in Construction Contracts

    Don’t Waive Your Right to Arbitrate (Unless You Want To!)

    New York State Legislature Passes Legislation Expanding Wrongful Death Litigation

    Leftover Equipment and Materials When a Contractor Is Abruptly Terminated

    Florida’s Citizens Property Insurance May Be Immune From Bad Faith, But Is Not Immune From Consequential Damages

    Don’t Ignore the Dispute Resolution Provisions in Your Construction Contract

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    High Court Case Review Frees Jailed Buffalo Billions Contractor CEO
    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

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

    September 14, 2017 —
    Traditional bases for private nuisance claims include circumstances where noise, light, vibration, or odor emanating from a neighboring property harm the value of your property. Such bases can be objectively verified and quantified. Courts in various states depart, however, on the issue of whether pure unsightliness of a neighboring property, which diminishes the value of your property, supports a cognizable damages claim against the neighboring property owner under the law of nuisance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kevin J. Parker, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Parker may be contacted at kparker@swlaw.com

    Is There a Conflict of Interest When a CD Defense Attorney Becomes Coverage Counsel Post-Litigation?

    September 01, 2011 —

    In Weitz Co., LLC v. Ohio Cas. Ins. Co., the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado was asked to rule on a motion to disqualify counsel in an insurance coverage action. 11-CV-00694-REB-BNB, 2011 WL 2535040 (D. Colo. June 27, 2011). Motions to disqualify counsel are viewed with suspicion, as courts “must guard against the possibility that disqualification is sought to ‘secure a tactical advantage in the proceedings.’” Id. at *2 (citing Religious Technology Center v. F.A.C.T. Net, Inc., 945 F. Supp. 1470, 1473 (D. Colo. 1996).

    Weitz Company, LLC (“Weitz”) is a general contractor and defendant in an underlying construction defect suit which had concluded before the action bringing rise to this order. In the underlying action, Weitz made third-party claims against subcontractors, including NPW Contracting (“NPW”). Weitz was listed as an additional insured under NPW’s policies with both Ohio Casualty Insurance Company and Mountain States Mutual Casualty Company (collectively “the Carriers”). The Carriers accepted Weitz’s tender of defense under a reservation of rights. However, neither insurance carrier actually contributed to Weitz’s defense costs in the underlying action. At the conclusion of the construction defect action, the parties unsuccessfully attempted to apportion the attorney’s fees and costs. Eventually, Weitz brought suit against the recalcitrant carriers. The Lottner firm, which had previously represented Weitz in the underlying construction defect action, continued to represent Weitz in this coverage action. 

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. Johnson can be contacted at johnson@hhmrlaw.com

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

    Let it Shine: California Mandates Rooftop Solar for New Residential Construction

    May 16, 2018 —
    California. Birthplace of the Frisbee, skateboard, television, canned tuna and (yup) fortune cookies has added another first to the list: California has become the first state in the nation to mandate the use of solar panels for new residential construction. On May 9, 2018, the California Energy Commission (CEC) unanimously approved the state’s 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. The 2019 Energy Efficiency Standards update the California Building Standards Codes found at Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations which are updated every three years. The 2019 Energy Efficiency Standards go into effect on January 1, 2020. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    EEOC Focuses on Eliminating Harassment, Recruitment and Hiring Barriers in the Construction Industry

    September 09, 2024 —
    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), whose mission is to enforce the nation’s anti-discrimination laws, released new guidelines on June 18, 2024, entitled Promising Practices for Preventing Harassment in the Construction Industry. The guidelines are in support of its Strategic Enforcement Plan for the fiscal years 2024-2028 for combatting systemic harassment and eliminating barriers in recruitment and hiring in the construction industry. With these guidelines, the EEOC has identified harassment as an ongoing issue in the construction industry, and that immediate attention and resolution is required. The EEOC specifically recommends that the following five core principles that it has found effective in preventing and addressing harassment be implemented by construction industry employers:
    1. Committed and engaged leadership;
    2. Consistent and demonstrated accountability;
    3. Strong and comprehensive harassment policies;
    4. Trusted and accessible complaint procedures; and
    5. Regular, interactive training tailored to the audience and the organization.
    Reprinted courtesy of Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Stephen E. Irving, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com Mr. Irving may be contacted at sirving@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Effects of Amendment to Florida's Statute of Repose on the Products Completed Operations Hazard

    November 06, 2018 —
    Recent amendments to Florida’s Statute of Repose have resulted in concerns as to the scope of risk Florida homebuilders face as a result, and the availability of insurance coverage for such exposures. Previously, the statute provided for a strict, yet straightforward 10-year limitation for latent construction defect claims. Under that language, issues arose when suits were filed near expiration of the statute, because parties seeking to defend claims were given little time to effectively assert related claims. The amendment to the statute serves to lengthen the statute of repose to 11 years for certain cross-claims, compulsory counterclaims, and third-party claims, and in limited circumstances, potentially even longer. Most policies in the Florida marketplace serve to limit coverage under the products-completed operations hazard (“PCO”) to 10 years, and thus, in very limited circumstances, an insured contractor may be exposed to third-party claims under the revised statute. It is important to note, however, that coverage under most CGL policies is occurrence-based, meaning that the policy is triggered by property damage that occurs during the policy period, and therefore, any subsequent claims permitted under the amended statute will necessarily relate to the original property damage that occurred during the 10-year period, and thus, would be covered under the standard 10-year PCO extension. This paper will analyze the anticipated effect of the amendments upon coverage under a 10-year PCO extension. Reprinted courtesy of Richard W. Brown, Saxe Doernberger & Vita P.C. and Grace V. Hebbel, Saxe Doernberger & Vita P.C. Mr. Brown may be contacted at rwb@sdvlaw.com Ms. Hebbel may be contacted at gvh@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Limitation on Coverage for Payment of Damages Creates Ambiguity

    April 03, 2013 —
    Unable to discern the meaning of a provision stating that payment of damages would be made "through a trial but not any appeal", the court found an ambiguity.Parker v. Am. Family Ins. Co., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9085 (D. Ore. Jan. 23, 2013). The homeowners sued the general contractor for defective construction of their home. In November 2008, the homeowners reached a settlement through mediation with the general contractor. The general contractor's claims under its policies with American Family and Mid-Continent were assigned to the homeowners. The homeowners then sued both insurers for breach of insurance contract and/or equitable contribution. American Family moved for summary judgment, claiming the homeowners did not prove their damages claim against the general contractor "through a trial but not any appeal." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Skilled Labor Shortage Implications for Construction Companies

    July 15, 2019 —
    The construction industry is facing one of the most significant labor shortages it has ever seen. This labor shortage has far-reaching implications for worker safety and construction quality—both of which could adversely impact a company’s bottom line if investments are not made to address the issue. What’s causing the labor gap? There are two underlying trends driving this phenomenon:
    1. More experienced workers have either not returned to the industry after the Great Recession or are now retiring as they’ve concluded their careers.
    2. The construction industry has long struggled to attract new, younger workers to the industry, and this problem has only worsened as the broader economy boomed. As a result, construction firms must compete with other industries, such as health care, technology and engineering, for young talent.
    Reprinted courtesy of Tony James & Keith Maciejewski, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Duty to Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    April 15, 2014 —
    The Kansas Court of Appeals determined that the insurer must defend claims of negligent misrepresentation against its insured. Central Power Sys. & Servs. v. Universal Underwriters Ins. Co., 2014 Kan. App. LEXIS 9 (Kan. Ct. App. Feb. 21, 2014). Central Power contracted to furnish Eagle Well with 10 oil-rig engines and 10 oil-rig transmissions. Eagle Well alleged that Central Power informed them that the engines and transmissions would be operational without any additional components. As is turned out, the engines could not operate without a wiring harness. Eagle Well had to hire a third party to make wiring harnesses that would meet their needs and to install the wiring harnesses. Eagle Wells sued Central Power, alleging damages in the form of lost profits for the time it took to make the engines independently operational. Further, damages were incurred due to money needed for the costs of purchasing the wiring harnesses from the third party and attaching the harnesses to the engines. Claims asserted against Central Power included breach of contract, negligence and negligent misrepresentation. 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