BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut stucco 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


    Florida Appellate Court Holds Four-Year Statute of Limitations Applicable Irrespective of Contractor Licensure

    Newmeyer Dillion Named 2021 Best Law Firm in Multiple Practice Areas by U.S. News-Best Lawyers

    Lewis Brisbois Launches New Practice Focusing on Supply Chain Issues

    PulteGroup Fires Exec Accused of Defamation By Founder’s Heir

    Join: Computer Science Meets Construction

    Specified Or Designated Operations Endorsement – Limitation of Insurance Coverage

    New World to Demolish Luxury Hong Kong Towers in Major Setback

    Marlena Ellis Makes The Lawyers of Color Hot List of 2022

    Attempt to Overrule Trial Court's Order to Produce Underwriting Manual Fails

    Carbon Sequestration Can Combat Global Warming, Sometimes in Unexpected Ways

    Newmeyer & Dillion Named as One of the 2018 Best Places to Work in Orange County for Seventh Consecutive Year

    When is Forum Selection in a Construction Contract Enforceable?

    'You're Talking About Lives': The New Nissan Stadium

    Massive Fire Destroys Building, Firefighters Rescue Construction Worker

    Condemnation Actions: How Valuable Is Your Evidence of Property Value?

    Delaware Supreme Court Won’t Halt Building

    7 Areas where Technology is Shifting the Construction Business

    Arizona Purchaser Dwelling Actions Are Subject to a New Construction

    The G2G Year in Review: 2020

    Florida's New Pre-Suit Notification Requirement: Retroactive or Prospective Application?

    EPA Can't Evade Enviro Firm's $2.7M Cleanup Site Pay Claim, US Court Says

    Insurer Has No Obligation to Cover Arbitration Award in Construction Defect Case

    Florida Self-Insured Retention Satisfaction and Made Whole Doctrine

    Superintendent’s On-Site Supervision Compensable as Labor Under Miller Act

    Revisiting OSHA’s Controlling Employer Policy

    Happy New Year from CDJ

    Contractor Pleads Guilty to Disadvantaged-Business Fraud

    Construction Contractors Must Understand Retainage In 2021

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (07/13/22)

    Stacking of Service Interruption and Contingent Business Interruption Coverages Permitted

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2020 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    The “Builder’s Remedy” Looms Over Bay Area Cities

    Ohio Supreme Court Holds No Occurence Arises from Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship

    2021 California Construction Law Update

    Wisconsin Court Enforces Breach of Contract Exclusion in E&O Policy

    U.S. Construction Value Flat at End of Summer

    Claims for Breach of Express Indemnity Clauses Subject to 10-Year Statute of Limitations

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    Manhattan Luxury Condos Sit on Market While Foreign Buyers Wait

    Study Finds Construction Cranes Vulnerable to Hacking

    Nevada Budget Remains at Impasse over Construction Defect Law

    Certain Private Projects Now Fall Under Prevailing Wage Laws. Is Yours One of Them?

    As Trump Visits Border, Texas Landowners Prepare to Fight the Wall

    Another (Insurer) Bites The Dust: Virginia District Court Rejects Narrow Reading of Pollution Exclusion

    Considerations in Obtaining a Mechanic’s Lien in Maryland (Don’t try this at home)

    Miller Act Claim for Unsigned Change Orders

    The Advantages of Virtual Reality in Construction

    Trump Tower Is Now One of NYC’s Least-Desirable Luxury Buildings

    “Positive Limiting Barriers” Are An Open and Obvious Condition, Relieving Owner of Duty to Warn

    The Project “Completion” Paradox in California
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    “Rip and Tear” Damage Remains Covered Under CGL Policy as “Accident”—for Now.

    September 01, 2016 —
    The Colorado Supreme Court has approved a settlement between the parties to an appeal of the 2012 Colorado Pool Systems v. Scottsdale Insurance Company Court of Appeals case, leaving that ruling intact. The ruling parses a fine line between uncovered costs of repairing defective work and covered costs of damage caused to nondefective work while repairing defective work. This nuanced opinion, which is now established Colorado law, is worth a second look. In Colorado Pool Systems, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance Company, the Colorado Court of Appeals determined that so-called “rip and tear” damage caused by a construction professional to nondefective work while correcting defective work is covered as an “accident” under standard Commercial General Liability insurance language. 317 P.3d 1262 (Colo. App. 2012). A pool company excavated and built a rebar frame in order to construct a pool, but it hired a subcontractor to pour the concrete. An inspector later noticed that some of the rebar was too close to the surface, and the pool company agreed to demolish and replace the pool after an agent of its insurer represented that this loss would be covered. But the agent was wrong, the insurer denied coverage, and litigation ensued. Reprinted courtesy of Michael Lindsay, Snell & Wilmer and Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer Mr. Lindsay may be contacted at mlindsay@swlaw.com Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Builder Pipeline in U.S. at Eight-Year High: Under the Hood

    August 26, 2015 —
    Here’s the takeaway from the Commerce Department’s report Tuesday in in Washington that showed sales of new homes in the U.S rebounded in July to a 507,000 annualized rate. The median forecast of 75 economists surveyed by Bloomberg projected 510,000. * Number of homes sold but not yet started climbed to a 192,000 annualized rate, the most since June 2007. * That means builders have a large pipeline of demand to fill, which will keep housing starts rising. * The number of homes under construction was the lowest since August 2014 and the number completed were the fewest since November. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sho Chandra, Bloomberg

    One World Trade Center Due to Be America’s Tallest and World’s Priciest

    February 10, 2012 —

    As One World Trade Center rises, so does the price tag. After construction delays and cost overruns, the cost of the building at the site of the September 11 attacks has risen to $3.8 billion. Part of the expense of the skyscraper is the heavily reinforced base of the building. The elevator shafts are also heavily reinforced, all part of guarding against future terrorist attacks.

    In comparison, the world’s tallest tower, the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, cost only $1.5 billion, less than half the cost of One World Trade Center. As a result, the Port Authority does not see the building as being profitable in near future. In order to fund it, the agency is raising tolls on bridge and tunnel traffic.

    Currently, about the half the unfinished building is leased. Construction is expected to conclude in 2013.

    Read the full story…

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

    California Rejects Judgments By Confession Pursuant to Civil Code Section 1132

    May 08, 2023 —
    The Elimination of Judgment by Confession Following in the footsteps of Massachusetts and Florida, California recently updated California Code of Civil Procedure section 1132 which renders judgments by confession unenforceable and inadmissible in any superior court, effective January 1, 2023. The bar is not retroactive, so judgments by confession obtained or entered before January 1, 2023 are still valid. Moving forward, consider the following. What is a Judgment By Confession? A judgment by confession, also known as a confession of judgment or "cognovit" clause, is a mechanism by which a debtor agrees that a creditor may summarily obtain a legal judgment against that debtor and enforce it in the event of the debtor's breach of contract or default. In other words, it is a private admission by a debtor that they are liable for a debt without the need for a trial, and consequently, agree to forfeit very important rights. Most importantly, parties agreeing to such clauses are waiving rights such as the right to notice of the judgment and the right to assert defenses against the creditor or third party's claims. Historically, without any judicial involvement, these types of out-of-court judgments would be enforceable. Reprinted courtesy of Drew M. Jorgenson, Newmeyer Dillion and Louis "Dutch" Schotemeyer, Newmeyer Dillion Mr. Jorgenson may be contacted at drew.jorgenson@ndlf.com Mr. Schotemeyer may be contacted at dutch.schotemeyer@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Maryland Finally set to Diagnose an Allocation Method for Progressive Injuries

    February 18, 2020 —
    Maryland’s highest court recently heard arguments regarding the proper method of allocation of the covered damages from a slowly progressing asbestos injury amongst insurance policies in place over a period of years. Rossello v. Zurich American Insurance Company, Case No. 2436 (Md. 2019). The court may also be forced to determine what the proper trigger of coverage is for latent bodily injury claims, although the plaintiff has not framed the issue in that manner. In Rossello, the plaintiff, Patrick Rossello, worked for a period of years for the now-defunct Lloyd E. Mitchell, Inc. (“Mitchell”), a construction company operating until 1976. In 1974 he was exposed to and inhaled asbestos fibers. He was ultimately diagnosed in 2013 with malignant mesothelioma as a result of that exposure. Rossello obtained a judgment for approximately $2,700,000 against Mitchell and secured the right to pursue its insurance. As relevant to this dispute, Mitchell carried liability insurance policies, which provide coverage for asbestos related claims, from 1974 to 1977. Rossello seeks to hold Zurich, as successor to Maryland Casualty Company, accountable for the full value of his award, based on the 1974 policy. Although this contention actually implicates two separate issues, plaintiff’s counsel passed over the initial trigger of coverage issue and focused instead on the issue of allocation of coverage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William S. Bennett, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Bennett may be contacted at wsb@sdvlaw.com

    Winners Announced in Seattle’s Office-to-Residential Call for Ideas Contest

    July 10, 2023 —
    On June 7, 2023, the City of Seattle announced three winners of its Office to Residential: Call for Ideas contest for which it received a total of 13 submissions. Hybrid Architecture, LLC, took first place; Gensler, Seattle Office Project Team took second; and the Miller Hull Partnership took third. Seattle’s Department of Construction and Inspections will study the submissions and determine what legislative and regulatory modifications would be necessary to support and further these proposals and other future office-to-residential conversion projects. Seattle will also be holding a series of exhibitions over the coming weeks where project submissions will be available to the public. On June 14, 2023, from 5:30 PM to 7:30 PM, a reception will be hosted by the Seattle Architecture Foundation and the City at the American Institute of Architects. The gallery will also be open to the public from 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM on June 21, 28, and July 5. After June 14, 2023, those interested can access contest submissions at the project website. Seattle’s primary goal with this contest was to provide a vision for the future of downtown and begin charting a concrete path to getting there. Since working from home has become more common following the COVID-19 pandemic, vacancy rates in many office buildings have risen sharply, while housing availability and affordability remain ongoing issues. If Seattle can show a realistic—and profitable—path to converting commercial office spaces into residences, it would be addressing both problems, killing two birds with one stone. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryanne Mathisen, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Ms. Mathisen may be contacted at ryanne.mathisen@acslawyers.com

    CA Supreme Court Finds “Consent-to-Assignment” Clauses Unenforceable After Loss Occurs During the Policy Period

    August 26, 2015 —
    In Fluor Corporation v. Superior Court (No. S205889; filed 8/20/15), the California Supreme Court overruled its earlier decision in Henkel Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. (2003) 29 Cal.4th 934, holding that notwithstanding the presence of a consent-to-assignment clause in a liability policy, Insurance Code section 520 bars an insurer from refusing to honor the insured’s assignment of coverage after a loss has taken place during the policy period. In Henkel, the Supreme Court limited the ability of corporate successors to obtain coverage under predecessors’ policies on a contract theory. The Henkel Court held that where a successor corporation contractually assumed liabilities of the predecessor corporation, the insurance benefits would not automatically follow. The Henkel Court ruled that if the predecessor company’s policy contains a consent-to-assignment clause, any assignment of insurance policy benefits to a successor corporation required the insurer’s consent. The Court said that policy benefits are not transferable choses in action unless at the time of corporate transfer they could be reduced to a monetary sum certain. The Court reasoned that historic product or environmental liabilities might not even be known to the predecessor at that time, much less reduced to a sum certain, so coverage for such risks could not be considered a transferable chose in action. Thus, where the liability was inchoate at the time of the corporate transaction, the Henkel Court said that coverage would not necessarily follow because the insurer’s duties had not yet attached. 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

    Towards Paperless Construction: PaperLight

    June 02, 2016 —
    I just toured the newly built headquarters of a financial corporation. Our guide, a M&A specialist, boasted that they have completely removed paper from their offices. Could paperless construction become feasible any time soon? PaperLight is a portable smart board that could replace paper drawings on many occasions. Rollout, Inc., the developer of PaperLight, says that 90% of contractors still use paper plans. AEC firms spend, on average, $1600 per employee on printing annually. Over 37 million construction drawings are printed every year. Finding a usable solution that reduces these numbers makes economic sense. Even more so if you consider all the costs of errors that result from using outdated paper drawings. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aarni@aepartners.fi