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


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

    Request for Stay Denied in Dispute Over Coverage for Volcano Damage

    An Insurance Policy Isn’t Ambiguous Just Because You Want It to Be

    Cold Stress Safety and Protection

    Insured's Complaint for Breach of Contract and Bad Faith Adequately Pleads Consequential Damages

    Indicted Union Representatives Try Again to Revive Enmons

    Think Before you Execute that Release – the Language in the Release Matters!

    The Contractor’s Contingency: What Contractors and Construction Managers Need to Know and Be Wary Of

    Construction Defect Lawsuits May Follow Hawaii Condo Boom

    Construction Spending Had Strongest Increase in Four Years

    Consumer Product Safety Commission Recalls

    In Construction Your Contract May Not Always Preclude a Negligence Claim

    California Indemnity and Defense Construction Law Changes for 2013

    Issuing Judgment After Confirmation of Appraisal Award Overturned

    Preparing For and Avoiding Residential Construction Disputes: For Homeowners and Contractors

    No Coverage For Construction Defects When Complaint Alleges Contractual Damages

    Colorado Court of Appeals Enforces Limitations of Liability In Pre-Homeowner Protection Act Contracts

    Chambers USA 2021 Recognizes Five Partners and Two Practices at Lewis Brisbois

    Construction Professionals Could Face More Liability Exposure Following California Appellate Ruling

    California Federal Court Finds a Breach of Contract Exclusion in a CGL Policy Bars All Coverage for a Construction Defect Action

    No Duty To Defend Additional Insured When Bodily Injury Not Caused by Insured

    McGraw Hill to Sell off Construction-Data Unit

    Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Holds that Nearly All Project Labor Agreements are Illegal

    Maximizing Contractual Indemnity Rights: Components of an Effective Provision

    Catching Killer Clauses in Contract Negotiations

    Is Settling a Bond Claim in the Face of a Seemingly Clear Statute of Limitations Defense Bad Faith?

    How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6 Billion Embarrassment

    Hunton Andrews Kurth Insurance Attorney, Latosha M. Ellis, Honored by Business Insurance Magazine

    Lockton Expands Construction and Design Team

    Department of Transportation Revises Its Rules Affecting Environmental Review of Transportation Projects

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

    Is It Time to Digitize Safety?

    NYC Supertall Tower Condo Board Sues Over Alleged Construction, Design 'Defects'

    Forensic Team Finds Fault with Concrete Slabs in Oroville Dam Failure

    Flawed Welding Faulted in Mexico City Subway Collapse

    Congratulations 2016 DE, MA, NJ, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Plan Ahead for the Inevitable Murphy’s Law Related Accident

    District Court's Ruling Affirmed in TCD v American Family Mutual Insurance Co.

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

    The Future Has Arrived: New Technologies in Construction

    Short-Term Rental Legislation & Litigation On the Way!

    Patriarch Partners Decision Confirms Government Subpoenas May Constitute a “Claim” Under D&O Policy; Warns Policyholders to Think Broadly When Representing Facts and Circumstances to Insurers

    Proving & Defending Lost Profit Damages

    State And Local Bid Protests: Sunk Costs and the Meaning of a “Win”

    Third Circuit Limits Pennsylvania’s Kvaerner Decision; Unexpected and Unintended Injury May Constitute an “Occurrence” Under Pennsylvania Law

    A Brief Discussion – Liquidating Agreements

    Sinking Floor Does Not Meet Strict Definition of Collapse

    Subcontractors Found Liable to Reimburse Insurer Defense Costs in Equitable Subrogation Action

    Haight Welcomes Elizabeth Lawley

    Florida Federal Court to Examine Issues of Alleged Arbitrator Conflicts of Interests in Panama Canal Case
    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

    White and Williams Defeats Policyholder’s Attempt to Invalidate Asbestos Exclusions

    January 28, 2014 —
    White and Williams attorneys scored a significant victory for the insurance industry on January 15, 2014, when a federal jury of four men and four women rejected a policyholder’s novel efforts to invalidate asbestos exclusions contained in insurance policies issued between February 1, 1979 and August 1, 1985. In General Refractories Co. v. First State Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 04-CV-3509 (E.D. Pa.), General Refractories Company contended that asbestos exclusions in insurance policies issued by various insurance companies in the late 1970s and 1980s had not been submitted to the Pennsylvania Department of Insurance for approval prior to use and, therefore, were unenforceable. Holding a failure to obtain approval, by itself, would not be sufficient to render the exclusions unenforceable, the Honorable Edmund Ludwig sent the matter to trial to determine whether the Pennsylvania Insurance Commissioner implemented a policy that was uniformly executed by the Insurance Department to disapprove all asbestos exclusions between February 1, 1979 and August 1, 1985, such that the exclusions violated a “dominant public policy.”

    Reprinted courtesy of Gregory LoCasale, White and Williams LLP

    and Patricia Santelle , White and Williams LLP

    Ms. Santelle may be contacted at santellep@whiteandwilliams.com and Mr. LoCasale may be contacted at locasaleg@whiteandwilliams.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Chicago Makes First Major Update to City's Building Code in 70 Years

    August 06, 2019 —
    The City Council recently voted to adopt a major update to the Chicago Building Code, its first in 70 years, that will better align it with the International Code Council’s International Building Code. Mayor Rahm Emanuel (D) said the new code will spur and enhance building projects by adding more flexibility and options for construction materials. Engineering News-Record Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Supreme Court of Wisconsin Applies Pro Rata Allocation Based on Policy Limits to Co-Insurance Dispute

    February 18, 2019 —
    In its recent decision in Steadfast Insurance Company v. Greenwich Insurance Company, 2019 WL 323702 (Wis. Jan. 25, 2019), the Supreme Court of Wisconsin addressed the issue of contribution rights as among co-insurers. Steadfast and Greenwich issued pollution liability policies to different entities that performed sewer-related services for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) at different times. MMSD sought coverage under both policies in connection with underlying claims involving pollution-related loss. Both insurers agreed that MMSD qualified as an additional insured under their respective policies, but Greenwich took the position that its coverage was excess over the coverage afforded under the Steadfast policy, at least for defense purposes, and that as such, it had no defense obligation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Margolies, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Margolies may be contacted at bmargolies@tlsslaw.com

    Building Codes Evolve With High Wind Events

    November 14, 2018 —
    Designs for wind loads have been in building codes for a long time. Prior to the creation of the International Building Code, the three primary legacy codes had wind load provisions but they mostly dealt with wind loads on the building frame and had little load information about the building components or the exterior cladding. Since Hurricane Andrew in 1992, building codes include more wind design information that comes from disaster investigations and wind engineering research conducted primarily at the university level. In 2000, the legacy building codes were replaced with the International Building Code (IBC). Residential buildings must comply with the International Residential Code (IRC). Both of these building code documents reference the engineering load standard, ASCE 7 Minimum Design Loads and Other Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures. This load standard has also been in existence for a long time; it now is revised every six years and the building codes revised every three years (IBC and IRC) reference ASCE 7 so the provisions in ASCE 7 become part of the building code requirements. Reprinted courtesy of William L. Coulbourne, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Three's a Trend: Second, Fourth and Ninth Circuits Uphold Broad "Related Claims" Language

    February 23, 2016 —
    The hallmark of a claims-made insurance policy is that the policy only provides coverage for claims that are “first made” during the policy period. As noted by the Texas Supreme Court, “for the insurer, the inherent benefit of a claims-made policy is the insurer's ability to close its books on a policy at its expiration and thus to attain a level of predictability unattainable under standard occurrence policies.”[1] To ensure this “level of predictability,” claims-made insurance policies contain provisions stating that all “Related Claims” will be treated as a single claim deemed first made at the time the earliest of such claims was made. The “Related Claims” provision is an issue that comes up time and again – claims can span years, especially in the context of regulatory investigations, which often culminate in enforcement proceedings and litigation. This inevitably leads to disputes regarding whether later claims can be related back to the earlier claim, an issue that becomes even thornier when different insurers participate on different policy years. Over time, case law on “Related Claims” has been mixed and somewhat inconsistent, with each case tending to hinge on its own unique set of facts, making it difficult to identify a clear standard for determining whether claims are related. However, three recent decisions out of the Second, Fourth and Ninth Circuits show that courts are increasingly deferring to the plain language of the policy and applying these provisions broadly. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Greg Steinberg, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Steinberg may be contacted at steinbergg@whiteandwilliams.com

    April Rise in Construction Spending Not That Much

    June 28, 2013 —
    April saw an increase in construction spending that didn’t even break a half of a percent with just a 0.4% increase, although that’s better than March’s slight decrease of 0.8%, Both government and residential construction spending dropped, although government spending dropped only 1.2% and residential a miniscule 0.1%. This was slightly more than offset by the modest 2.2% increase in residential spending. Although the April gains were modest, they come after the first year to increase after five years of decline. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    There is No Claims File Privilege in Florida, Despite What Insurers Want You to Think

    June 17, 2024 —
    As Florida insurers continue their attempts to narrow protections for policyholders, it is imperative - now more than ever - that insureds be well-informed and know their rights. Most recently, in Florida, insurers are attempting to weaponize the death of Senate Bill 1726 and House Bill 1287 to limit the documents disclosed to policyholders. Specifically, the proposed bill, which required insurers to disclose their claims file to policyholders, hoped to thwart insurers from utilizing “claims file privilege” to obstruct justice for policyholders and help level the playing field. The goal of the proposed bill was to promote transparency of the claim adjustment process and undercut insurers’ attempts to dodge discovery of relevant and necessary information during litigation, forcing the insurers to fully and honestly justify their basis for withholding coverage . Unfortunately for policyholders, on March 8, 2024, the proposed legislation was not passed by the Insurance and Banking Subcommittee. While insurers want you to believe this is a significant victory and a free pass to continue withholding documents under a “claims file privilege,” this is not the case. The proposed bill merely codified current Florida law – simply put, the “claims file privilege” never existed, and still does not. Reprinted courtesy of Susana Arce, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Stephanie A. Giagnorio, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Arce may be contacted at SArce@sdvlaw.com Ms. Giagnorio may be contacted at SGiagnorio@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Summary Judgment for Insurer on Construction Defect Claim Reversed

    January 07, 2025 —
    The Fifth Circuit reversed the district court's granting of summary judgment to the insurer on a construction defect claim asserted against the insured. TIG Ins. Co. v. Woodsboro Farmers Cooperative, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 24003 (5th Cir. Sept. 20, 2024). In March 2013, Woodsboro Farmers Cooperative contracted with E.F. Erwin, Inc. to construct two Brock 105' diameter grain silos. Erwin hired subcontract AJ Constructors, Inc. (AJC) to construct the silos. Erwin was responsible for supervising the work. Brock silos were kits shipped by the manufacturer and then assembled according to the manufacturer's manuals and specifications. The silos are constructed section by section. AJC began erecting the silos in May 2013 and completed its work in June or early July. Erwin occasionally inspected the work and found the silos were structurally sound and not defective. AJC left the job site after completing the assembly. 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