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


    Construction Manager Has Defense As Additional Insured

    Quick Note: Independent Third-Party Spoliation Of Evidence Claim

    Canada's Ex-Attorney General Set to Testify About SNC-Lavalin Scandal

    Terms of Your Teaming Agreement Matter

    A Survey of New Texas Environmental Laws

    El Paso Increases Surety Bond Requirement on Contractors

    DoD Issues Guidance on Inflation Adjustments for Contractors

    Eleventh Circuit Set to Hear Challenge to Florida Law Barring Foreign Citizens From Buying Real Property

    Render Unto Caesar: Considerations for Returning Withheld Sums

    Lending Plunges to 17-Year Low as Rates Curtail Borrowing

    Firm Claims Construction Defects in Hawaiian Homes

    Seven Trends That Impact Commercial Construction Litigation in 2021

    South Carolina Homeowners May Finally Get Class Action for Stucco Defects

    School for Building Trades Helps Fill Need for Skilled Workers

    Read Before You Sign: Claim Waivers in Project Documents

    Federal Regulatory Recap: A Summary of Recent Rulemaking Actions Taken or Proposed Affecting the Energy Industry

    Boston Construction Bands With Health Care to Fight COVID-19

    Bright-Line Changes: Prompt Payment Act Trends

    Oregon agreement to procure insurance, anti-indemnity statute, and self-insured retention

    New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Insurers’ Bid to Overturn a $400M Decision

    Excess-Escape Other Insurance Provision Unenforceable to Avoid Defense Cost Contribution Despite Placement in Policy’s Coverage Grant

    Stacking of Service Interruption and Contingent Business Interruption Coverages Permitted

    Insurer Must Defend Contractor Against Claims of Faulty Workmanship

    EPA Issues New PFAS Standard, Provides $1B for Testing, Cleanup of 'Forever Chemicals'

    Estoppel Certificate? Estop and Check Your Lease

    Haight’s Stevie Baris Selected for Super Lawyers’ 2021 Northern California Rising Stars

    Nashville Stadium Bond Deal Tests Future of Spectator Sports

    Expanded Virginia Court of Appeals Leads to Policyholder Relief

    Canada Cooler Housing Market Boosts Poloz’s Soft Landing

    Bond Principal Necessary on a Mechanic’s Lien Claim

    Be Careful with Continuous Breach and Statute of Limitations

    Suing a Local Government in Land Use Cases – Part 1 – Substantive Due Process

    Repeated Use of Defective Fireplace Triggers Duty to Defend Even if Active Fire Does Not Break Out Until After End of Policy Period

    Workers Compensation Insurance: Dangers of the Audit Process

    The Regulations on the Trump Administration's Chopping Block

    Can’t Get a Written Change Order? Document, Document, Document

    Taking the Stairs to Human Wellness and Greener Buildings

    Know Your Obligations Under Both the Prime Contract and Subcontract

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

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Lost Productivity or Inefficiency Claim Can Be Challenging to Prove

    Blackstone Said to Sell Boston Buildings for $2.1 Billion

    Construction Costs Up

    Franchisors Should Consider Signing a Conditional Lease Assignment Rather Than a Franchisee’s Lease

    Engineering Report Finds More Investigation Needed of Balconies at New Jersey Condo

    Coverage Found for Faulty Workmanship Damaging Other Property

    New Home for the Aged Suffers Construction Defects

    Construction Companies Can Be Liable for “Secondary Exposure” of Asbestos to Household Members

    Apple to Open Steve Jobs-Inspired Ring-Shaped Campus in April

    Amazon HQ2 Puts Concrete on an Embodied Carbon Diet
    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

    Inside the Old Psych Hospital Reborn As a Home for Money Managers

    October 28, 2015 —
    It’s the most exclusive club for financiers in Dallas. With seven Jeffersonian-style buildings and manicured lawns, Old Parkland looks more like a college campus than a hive of private-equity firms, hedge funds, foundations and family offices. But the 9.5-acre site, where an abandoned hospital once stood, is now home to some of the city’s wealthiest investors. Old Parkland is the pet project of Harlan Crow, 66, a son of swashbuckling real estate developer Trammell Crow, whose empire was in tatters when he gave up control in the late 1980s. It’s also a symbol of a decades-long effort to rebuild the family’s legacy. Step inside any of the buildings and you might think you’re in a museum, with Rodin sculptures in the hallways, a 17th century antique sofa in a lobby and a piece of curtain Abraham Lincoln is said to have grabbed after being shot on display. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Simone Foxman, Bloomberg

    Georgia Federal Court Says Fact Questions Exist As To Whether Nitrogen Is An “Irritant” or “Contaminant” As Used in Pollution Exclusion

    May 20, 2019 —
    The Southern District of Georgia recently ruled that Evanston Insurance Company is not entitled to summary judgment on whether its policies’ pollution exclusion bars coverage for the release of nitrogen into a warehouse. The case stems from an incident at Xytex Tissue Services, LLC’s warehouse, where Xytex stored biological material at low temperatures. Xytex used an on-site “liquid nitrogen delivery system” to keep the material properly cooled. This system releases liquid nitrogen, which would vaporize into nitrogen gas and cool the biological material. On February 5, 2017, a Xytex employee, Deputy Greg Meagher, entered the warehouse to investigate activated motion detectors and burglar alarms. Deputy Meagher was overcome by nitrogen gas and died as a result. Following Deputy Meagher’s death, his heirs filed suit against Xytex and other defendants. Evanston denied coverage based on the pollution exclusion in its policy. Evanston then brought a declaratory judgment action to confirm its coverage position. In denying Evanston’s summary judgment motion, the Southern District of Georgia reasoned that the type of injury sustained is essential in analyzing whether the pollution exclusion applies. Specifically, Xytex argued, and the court agreed, that the underlying lawsuit alleged that the bodily injury was caused by a lack of oxygen, not exposure to nitrogen. The court also distinguished prior decisions, explaining that injury caused by a lack of oxygen is not a contamination or irritation of the body in the same way as injury resulting from exposure to carbon monoxide or lead. The court also found that Xytex “reasonably expected that liability related to a nitrogen leak would be insured.” Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys Lawrence J. Bracken II, Michael S. Levine and Alexander D. Russo Mr. Bracken may be contacted at lbracken@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Russo may be contacted at arusso@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Reasonableness of Liquidated Damages Determined at Time of Contract (or, You Can’t Look Back Again)

    October 05, 2020 —
    I’ve discussed the continuing litigation between White Oak Power Constructors v. Mitsubishi Hitachi Power Systems Americas, Inc. previously here at Construction Law Musings because the case was another reminder that your construction contract terms matter and will be interpreted strictly here in the Commonwealth of Virginia. The prior opinion in this case from the Eastern District of Virginia court the Court considered the applicability of a liquidated damages provision. In the latest opinion from the Court (PDF) the Court looked at when and how any liquidated damages would be calculated. In its June 22, 2020 opinion, the Court put the issue as follows:
    White Oak’s motion for partial summary judgment presents a narrow issue: whether courts may consider the damages actually sustained by a party as a result of a contract breach when deciding if liquidated damages required by a contract “grossly exceed” a party’s actual damages.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Ninth Circuit: Speculative Injuries Do Not Confer Article III Standing

    February 28, 2018 —
    As Dwight Schrute of hit NBC show “The Office” said, “identity theft is not a joke, Jim! Millions of families suffer every year!” In response, Congress has passed a variety of legislation over the years aimed at curbing identity theft. One such piece of legislation, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), as amended by corollary acts, prohibits the printing of more than the last 5 digits of the credit card number or the credit card number’s expiration date on any sales receipt. Anyone who “willfully fails to comply with [the requirements] is liable to that consumer” for statutory or actual damages, attorney’s fees and costs, and potential punitive damages. But is a statutory violation of the FCRA alone a sufficient injury to confer Article III standing? No, says the Ninth Circuit. Reprinted courtesy of Omar Parra, Haight, Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Lawrence S. Zucker II , Haight, Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Parra may be contacted at oparra@hbblaw.com Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Court of Appeal Finds Alleged Inadequate Defense by Insurer-Appointed Defense Counsel Does Not Trigger a Right to Independent Counsel

    January 11, 2022 —
    The California Second District Court of Appeal had occasion to examine an insurer’s duty to provide independent counsel (“Cumis counsel”) to its insured in a declaratory relief action entitled Nede Management, Inc. v. Aspen American Insurance Company. The action arose from a fire on a property covered by an insurance policy issued by Aspen American Ins. Co (“Aspen”). Aspen’s insureds were sued for wrongful death and negligence by tenants and squatters allegedly injured by the fire. Aspen defended three individual members of the family who owned the property and the family business, Nede Management, Inc. (“Nede”), which managed the property. The defense was subject to reservations of rights on the lack of an obligation to pay any judgment in excess of the $1 million policy limits and no coverage for punitive damages. Aspen appointed defense counsel to defend its insureds. The insureds sought independent counsel based on the assertion that defense counsel appointed by the insurer defended the action inadequately, failed to communicate an initial settlement demand within policy limits and failed to fully investigate the case. Aspen did provide Cumis counsel to Nede for a period but terminated the arrangement after revoking its reservation of rights to that entity. The underlying case eventually settled at no cost to the insureds. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert Dennison, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Dennison may be contacted at rdennison@tlsslaw.com

    Top 10 Construction Contract Provisions – Changes and Claims

    November 03, 2016 —
    This is the seventh post in our “Top 10 Construction Contract Provisions” series. Prior posts discussed Price and Payment, Liquidated Damages, Consequential Damages – Part I and Part II, Indemnity, Scope of Work, and Flow-Down Provisions. Today’s topic, Changes and Claims, is a contender for the top spot on our list, for both day-to-day impact on the job and importance in disputes. In fact, these provisions[i] are so variable and are involved in so many reported construction law decisions, that this post will not attempt to survey all their various forms, uses, or potential legal ramifications, but instead focuses on bottom line “best practices”—questions to consider as a general contractor, subcontractor, or owner when drafting, negotiating, or managing the Changes and Claims provisions of a contract. There is no “ideal” here, and the changes and claims procedures should be suited to the project, owner, contractor(s), likely issues, and other project-specific considerations. Key considerations include the following: 1. How prescriptive is the Change Order process? At one end of the spectrum, a Change Order provision may include requirements for written direction and request by the owner and formal response by the contractor, with pricing and specific supporting data or documentation, in addition to strict timelines for response, execution, and performance, precise methods to determine the resulting contract adjustment, limits on the type or extent of adjustment, or terms defining the effect of a signed Change Order, e.g. to what extent related claims or impacts might be extinguished. At the other end of the spectrum, the Change Order provision might simply recognize that the owner may direct changes, and the parties intend to document the directions and resulting compensation in a Change Order, with no further elaboration. There is no universal ideal on this spectrum. A highly defined and prescriptive process may be appropriate for a complex, high value, multi-stakeholder project on which significant changes are likely. The same process would be an inefficient waste of resources on a small and simple project where significant changes are unlikely and the parties would be unlikely to comply with more formal procedures. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James R. Lynch, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Mr. Lynch may be contacted at jlynch@ac-lawyers.com

    What You Need to Know About Additional Insured Endorsements

    August 30, 2017 —
    A well-drafted insurance clause is an integral part of a construction contract because it sets forth a subcontractor’s obligations to add the general contractor to its policies of insurance as an additional insured and identifies the manner by which the general contractor will qualify as an additional insured. In a typical construction contract, the general contractor will be an additional insured via a scheduled endorsement or a blanket endorsement. Scheduled Endorsements A scheduled endorsement contains a “schedule” in which the person or organization that is named in the schedule is added to the policy as an additional insured. The following scheduled endorsements are commonly used in construction contracts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gary Barrera, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Barrera may be contacted at gbarrera@wendel.com

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    October 31, 2010 —

    ATLANTA—Negligent construction that results in damage to surrounding property constitutes an occurrence under a commercial general liability policy, the Georgia Supreme Court has ruled.

    In a 6-1 opinion Monday in American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Co. Inc. vs. Hathaway Development Co. Inc., the Georgia high court upheld a lower court ruling that the general contractor’s claim for damage caused by a subcontractor’s faulty plumbing work was covered.

    The ruling on construction defects is the latest in number of such cases across the United States

    Read Full Story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Bradford of Business Insurance.

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