BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimony
    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


    What the FIU Bridge Collapse Says About Peer Review

    Calling the Shots

    Additional Insured is Loss Payee after Hurricane Damage

    The Dog Ate My Exclusion! – Georgia Federal Court: No Reformation to Add Pollution Exclusion

    Revisiting OSHA’s Controlling Employer Policy

    Biden’s Solar Plans Run Into a Chinese Wall

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap - The Mediator's Proposal

    Portion of Washington State’s Prevailing Wage Statute Struck Down … Again

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2019

    A Court-Side Seat: Coal-Fired Limitations, the Search for a Venue Climate Change and New Agency Rules that May or May Not Stick Around

    Vacant Property and the Right of Redemption in Pennsylvania

    Liability Insurer’s Duty To Defend Insured Is Broader Than Its Duty To Indemnify

    Philadelphia Voters to Consider Best Value Bid Procurment

    Before Collapse, Communications Failed to Save Bridge Project

    UK Construction Output Rises Unexpectedly to Strongest Since May

    Federal Court Opinion Has Huge Impact on the Construction Industry

    Your Bad Faith Jury Instruction Against an Insurer is Important

    Navigating the New Landscape: How AB 12 and SB 567 Impact Landlords and Tenants in California

    City Development with Interactive 3D Models

    Feds Move To Indict NY Contractor Execs, Developer, Ex-Cuomo Aide

    Travelers’ 3rd Circ. Win Curbs Insurers’ Asbestos Exposure

    Athens, Ohio, Sues to Recover Nearly $722,000 After Cyber Attack

    Home Sales Topping $100 Million Smash U.S. Price Records

    Connecticut Appellate Court Breaks New Ground on Policy Exhaustion

    Fourth Circuit Confirms Scope of “Witness Litigation Privilege”

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Super Lawyers

    Billion-Dollar Power Lines Finally Inching Ahead to Help US Grids

    SIG Earnings Advance 21% as U.K. Construction Strengthens

    Ninth Circuit Finds Policy’s Definition of “Policy Period” Fatal to Insurer’s “Related Claims” Argument

    Recovering Time and Costs from Hurricane Helene: Force Majeure Solutions for Contractors

    Blackstone to Buy Cosmopolitan Resort for $1.73 Billion

    Forecast Sunny for Solar Contractors in California

    Rattlesnake Bite Triggers Potential Liability for Walmart

    Are “Green” Building Designations and Certifications Truly Necessary?

    Motion for Summary Judgment Gets Pooped Upon

    Biden Administration Issues Buy America Guidance for Federal Infrastructure Funds

    NLRB Hits Unions with One-Two Punch the Week Before Labor Day

    Force Majeure Under the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic

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

    Reconciling Prompt Payments and Withholding of Retention Payments

    Builder Waits too Long to Dispute Contract in Construction Defect Claim

    Did New York Zero Tolerance Campaign Improve Jobsite Safety?

    Delaware Supreme Court Choice of Law Ruling Vacates a $13.7 Million Verdict Against Travelers

    Is Your Contract “Mission Essential?” Recovering Costs for Performing During a Force Majeure Event Under Federal Regulations

    Florida Construction Defect Decision Part of Lengthy Evolution

    Heat Stress Deaths Show Europe Isn’t Ready for Climate Change

    Blackstone to Buy Chicago’s Willis Tower for $1.3 Billion

    Housing in U.S. Cools as Rate Rise Hits Sales: Mortgages

    Insured's Claim for Cyber Coverage Rejected

    Nevada State Senator Says HOA Scandal Shows Need for Construction Defect Reform
    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

    New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Coverage Gap Dispute

    October 26, 2017 —
    On Tuesday, October 24, the New Jersey Supreme Court heard arguments in a 17-year-old battle over whether Honeywell International Inc. (Honeywell) will have to help cover the costs of asbestos-related injury suits that were filed against it after insurers began to universally exclude coverage for asbestos-related liabilities. The Court considered the arguments made by two excess insurers, St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co. (St. Paul) and parent Travelers Casualty and Surety Co. (Travelers), that the Court should overturn a state appellate court’s ruling that Honeywell does not have to contribute to these costs. During the course of this case, Honeywell has sought coverage under more than 300 different policies, ultimately settling with all insurers except St. Paul and Travelers, who had issued a total of 10 excess policies to Honeywell’s predecessor, Bendix Corp. (Bendix) between 1968 and 1983. Honeywell has only sought coverage for claims made by individuals who allege that they were first exposed to asbestos prior to 1987. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Austin D. Moody, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Moody may be contacted at adm@sdvlaw.com

    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

    November 18, 2011 —

    Rebuilding an area of Midtown West that has been condemned for decades, the Gotham Organization has broken ground on a 1,200-unit project that will include housing for a variety of household incomes and a school. One unit of the project will be affordable housing for families of annual incomes up to $40,000. Another will be for middle-income households. Additionally, there will be a 31-story tower with 550 luxury units.

    The site CityBiz quotes Mayor Michael Bloomberg, as saying that the project “will grow our economy by creating 2,900 construction-related jobs.” The president of the Gotham Organization, David L. Picket notes that it will “create hundreds of new jobs, generate millions of dollars in revenue for the construction industry, contribute towards the building of a new primary, and provide homes to thousands of New Yorkers.”

    Read the full story…

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

    Intentional Mining Neighbor's Property is Not an Occurrence

    October 30, 2018 —
    The Kentucky Supreme Court determined there was no coverage when the insured was sued for mineral trespass. Am. Mining Ins. Co. v. Peters Farms, LLC, 2018 Ky. LEXIS 287 (Ky. Aug. 16, 2018). Beginning in 2007, Ikerd Mining. LLC removed 20,212 toms of coal from land belonging to Peters Farms, LLC. Of that amount, 10,012 tons were wrongfully mined under Ikerd's alleged mistaken belief as to the correct location of Peters' boundaries. The other 1,200 tons were mined by Ikerd knowing that the land thereunder belonged to Peters, but pursuant to a disputed oral lease agreement between the two. Peters claimed that the lease was an ongoing negotiation that was never finalized. 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

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

    January 14, 2015 —
    In Tincher v. Omega Flex, Inc., -- A.3d --, 2014 WL 6474923 (Pa. Nov. 19, 2014), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania discussed the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s products liability law and, overturning prior precedent, clarified the law. In particular, the Court, overturned Azzarello v. Black Brothers Company, 480 Pa. 547, 391 A.2d 1020 (1978), clarified the role of the judge and the jury in products liability cases and settled the question of whether Pennsylvania would adopt the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability §§ 1, et. seq. (Third Restatement) as the standard for deciding Pennsylvania products liability cases. The Tincher decision makes clear that Pennsylvania will continue to apply § 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts (Second Restatement) in products liability cases and that jurors, not the court, will decide the question of whether a product is in a defective condition. Plaintiffs may prove that a product is defective using either the consumer expectations test or the risk-utility test. Background The Tincher case arose out a fire that occurred at the home of Terrance and Judith Tincher on June 20, 2007. The Tinchers alleged that the fire started when a lightning strike near their home caused a small puncture in corrugated steel tubing (CSST) carrying natural gas to a fireplace located in their home. The defendant, Omega Flex, Inc. (Omega Flex) manufactured the CSST. Reprinted courtesy of William Doerler, White and Willams LLP and Edward Jaeger, Jr., White and Williams LLP Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com; Mr. Jaeger may be contacted at jaegere@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Condo Board Goes after Insurer for Construction Defect Settlement

    February 07, 2013 —
    The City Bella on Lyndale homeowners association settled with the high rise's developer and builder for $1.9 million over construction defects. The defects included structural deterioration in the project's pool area, extensive air and water leaks in the windows, and structural problems in the project's underground parking garage. City Bella consists of a 15-story tower and a four-story building on Lyndale Avenue in Minneapolis. They settled the lawsuit in 2011, but the homeowners association is still looking to the insurers to pay up. With legal fees and interest, the total rises to $2.82 million that Travelers could be paying the association. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Charges in Kansas Water Park Death

    March 28, 2018 —
    Caleb Schwab, a 10-year old boy was killed by decapitation on a water slide at a Kansas City water park, Schlitterbahn in 2016. Thirteen other people had suffered injuries on the ride prior to Caleb’s death ranging in severity from broken toes to concussions. Schlitterbahn employees have since claimed that park officials covered up past occurrences of water slide injuries. Three people have been indicted in this case according to a CNN report by Marlena Baldacci, Sheena Jones and Hollie Silverman. Jeffrey Henry, the co-owner of the Schlitterbahn water park, Tyler Austin Miles, the park’s former director of operations and John Schooley. Charges include second-degree murder, involuntary manslaughter, aggravated battery and aggravated child endangerment. Caleb suffered a fatal injury when the raft that he and the two women who were riding with him became airborne and contacted the netting attached overhead. Investigators have found maintenance issues and ride design flaws that violate safety standards leading to lack of prevention of rafts becoming airborne during the ride. Caleb’s family will receive nearly $20 million in the settlement. Caleb’s father Scott, released a statement about placing full trust in the Attorney General Derek Schmidt who is presiding over the investigation and indictments. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Hampshire’s Statute of Repose for Improvements to Real Property Does Not Apply to Product Manufacturers

    April 22, 2019 —
    In United Services Automobile Association v. Broan-Nutone, LLC, No. 218 2017 CV 01113, [1] the Superior Court of Rockingham County, New Hampshire recently considered whether the eight-year statute of repose for improvements to real property applied to the manufacturer of a ceiling ventilation fan that was installed in the property during its original construction. The court held that New Hampshire’s statute of repose did not apply to the manufacturer because it was not involved in incorporating its product into the property. In 2012, Chad St. Francis purchased a home in Northwood, New Hampshire. The home was originally constructed in 2008, at which time a Broan-Nutone ceiling ventilation fan was installed in the first-floor bathroom. In 2016, a fire occurred at the home. United Services Automobile Association (USAA) provided property casualty insurance for the home and paid Mr. St. Francis for the damage. In 2017, USAA filed a subrogation lawsuit against Broan-Nutone, alleging that its ceiling fan caused the fire due to a design defect within the product. Broan-Nutone filed a motion for summary judgment on grounds that USAA’s action was barred by New Hampshire’s statute of repose for improvements to real property. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Insurer Not Bound by Decision in Underlying Case Where No Collateral Estoppel

    February 25, 2014 —
    The Eleventh Circuit determined that the trial court did not err by refusing to give preclusive effect to findings made in the underlying state-court action because there was no collateral estoppel. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sharif, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 2114 (11th Cir. Feb. 4, 2014). Bashir's owned a grocery and was insured by Nationwide. The decedent was accidentally killed by a pistol stored under the cash register. The decedent's personal representative sued Bashir in state court. Nationwide declined to defend because it maintained that the employment exclusion applied to bar coverage. The personal representative argued two alternative claims, the first assuming the decedent was not an employee of Bashir's and the second assuming that he was. The state court granted a motion to dismiss the second claim that the decedent was an employee. In a subsequent trial, judgment was awarded against Bashir and another defendant in the amount of $950,000. 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