BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut building code 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


    Techniques for Resolving Construction Disputes

    Making the Construction Dispute Resolution Process More Efficient and Less Expensive, Part 2

    Energy Company Covered for Business Interruption Losses Caused by Fire and Resulting in Town-Ordered Shutdown

    SCOTUS, Having Received Views of Solicitor General, Will Decide Whether CWA Regulates Indirect Discharge of Pollutants Into Navigable Water Via Groundwater

    Courthouse Reporter Series: The Bizarre Case That Required a 117-Year-Old Expert

    FEMA Offers to Review Hurricane Sandy Claims

    12 Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2022 U.S. News Best Lawyers in Multiple Practice Areas

    Hawaii Supreme Court Reaffirms an "Accident" Includes Reckless Conduct, Finds Green House Gases are Pollutants

    Construction Law Firm Opens in D.C.

    Insurer Must Defend Faulty Workmanship Claims

    Complying With Data Breach Regulations in the Construction Industry

    Does the Miller Act Trump Subcontract Dispute Provisions?

    In Personal Injury Actions, Prejudgment Interest on Costs Not Recoverable

    Contractor Gets Green Light to Fix Two Fractured Girders at Salesforce Transit Center

    Court Grants Summary Judgment to Insurer in HVAC Defect Case

    Construction Defect Bill a Long Shot in Nevada

    Recent Developments with California’s Right to Repair Act

    Hawaii Federal Court Grants Insured's Motion for Remand

    Agile Project Management in the Construction Industry

    Time is of the Essence, Even When the Contract Doesn’t Say So

    First Circuit Rules Excess Insurer Must Provide Coverage for Fuel Spill

    Engineer at Flint Negligence Trial Details Government Water Errors

    New FAR Rule Mandates the Use of PLAs on Large Construction Projects

    Insurer's Daubert Challenge to Insured's Expert Partially Successful

    Tishman Construction Admits Cheating Trade Center Clients

    BWB&O is Recognized in the 2024 Edition of Best Law Firms®!

    Local Government’s Claims on Developer Bonds Dismissed for Failure to Pursue Administrative Remedies

    A Sample Itinerary to get the Most out of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar

    Federal Magistrate Judge Recommends Rescission of Policies

    Residential Construction Surges in Durham

    SNC-Lavalin’s Former Head of Construction Pleads Guilty to Bribery, Money Laundering

    Construction Feb. Jobs Jump by 61,000, Jobless Rate Up from Jan.

    It’s Not Just the Millennium Tower That’s Sinking in San Francisco

    Alexis Crump Receives 2020 Lawyer Monthly Women in Law Award

    Terms of Your Teaming Agreement Matter

    Negligence Claim Not Barred by Gist of the Action Doctrine

    The Contract Disputes Act: What Every Federal Government Contractor Should Know

    Safety, Compliance and Productivity on the Jobsite

    FAA Plans Final Regulation on Commercial Drone Use by Mid-2016

    Preserving Your Construction Claim

    Missouri Asbestos Litigation Reform: New Bill Seeks to Establish Robust Disclosure Obligations

    Delay Leads to Problems with Construction Defects

    Coverage Rejected Under Owned Property and Alienated Property Exclusions

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (09/21/22) – 3D Printing, Sustainable Design, and the Housing Market Correction

    Supreme Court Holds Arbitrator can Fully Decide Threshold Arbitrability Issue

    Traub Lieberman Partner Ryan Jones Provides Testimony Before Florida Senate Committees

    Litigation Counsel of America Honors Partner Victor Anderson with Peter Perlman Award

    EEOC Sues Schuff Steel, J.A. Croson in New Racial Harassment Cases

    Determination That Title Insurer Did Not Act in Bad Faith Vacated and Remanded

    Contractual Assumption of Liability Does Not Bar Coverage
    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

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    December 09, 2011 —

    A federal judge dismissed a coverage lawsuit brought by Mid Continent Casualty Company against its insured, Greater Midwest Builders Ltd.

    Plaintiff brought this declaratory judgment action in response to a suit filed in Johnson County District Court, seeking a judicial determination that it had no coverage obligation for claims asserted against its insured. This case was stayed until the state court action entered judgment against the insured. The prevailing parties then commenced a garnishment action against the plaintiff, and another insurance company, in state court in Missouri. The court was asked whether it should lift the stay and proceed with the case, or decline jurisdiction in favor of resolution in the Missouri state court.

    The court granted the motion to dismiss holding that proceeding with the case would lead to protracted, piecemeal litigation, while deferring to the Missouri state court would decide all the claims involved in the dispute.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    4 Steps to Take When a Worker Is Injured on Your Construction Site

    March 27, 2023 —
    The construction industry continues to be one of the fastest-growing labor trades. According to the Center for Construction Research and Training, since 2019, 11.4 million U.S. workers have been employed in construction, a 25% increase from 2011. Amid this growth, the industry has remained one of the most dangerous, and workers are often at higher risk of injuries and deaths due to occupational incidents. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are 150,000 injuries on construction work sites annually. Under Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) law, employers have a responsibility to provide a safe work environment. That includes providing a workplace that is free of serious recognized hazards. Despite best efforts in implementing risk-mitigation and safety protocols, employers must be prepared with an incident procedure should an incident occur on a jobsite. Taking immediate, clear actions can impact the severity and outcome of injuries from a workplace incident. With this in mind, employers should take the lead in implementing safety procedures for injuries on construction sites and should inform all safety site managers and workers of the steps that should be taken. Reprinted courtesy of Zachary Perecman, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    CDJ’s #9 Topic of the Year: Nevada Supreme Court Denies Class Action Status in Construction Defect Case

    December 31, 2014 —
    According to Sean Whaley of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, “The Nevada Supreme Court has rejected a request for class action status for claims of damaged stucco from faulty construction by Del Webb Communities involving nearly 1,000 Sun City Summerlin residents.” However, “the court upheld the award of damages to 71 homeowners following a jury trial in Clark County District Court in 2008.” Whaley reported that this construction defect case was touted as the largest in Nevada history. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    More on the VCPA and Construction

    February 01, 2023 —
    I have posted before regarding the intersection between the Virginia Consumer Protection Act (VCPA) and construction contracting in regard to residential construction projects. A case out of the Eastern District of Virginia District Court further discusses this intersection as it relates to design contracts that also include the procurement and installation of certain design elements post-design. The basic facts of Marcus v Dennis are as follows: In October of 2018, Defendant Marlene Dennis, the owner of Marlene Dennis Design, LLC (“MDD”), operating out of Virginia, entered into a contract to provide design services and the procurement and installation of certain design elements for the Plaintiffs, Gregory and Jamie Marcus, at their Maryland home. The Marcuses agreed to $175 per hour to Dennis with a cap of a total of $100,000.00 for design consultation and furniture selection and procurement. The Marcuses also agreed that they would pay no more than $250,000.00 for furnishings, rugs, artwork, decorative lighting, and accessories. In November 2020, Dennis sent an invoice for $68,000.00 and informed the Plaintiffs that the total contract fees would be more than the $100,000.00 cap. After paying $124,722.41 in design fees, the Plaintiffs received an invoice for $255,5560.72 in January of 2021. Despite the cap of $250,000.00, the Plaintiffs wired $255,000.00 to Dennis while requesting the backup invoices for the material charges. After much effort and a threat of litigation, the Plaintiffs received documents from Dennis showing that Dennis inflated the costs of the materials prior to passing the costs along to the Marcuses. The Plaintiffs’ home was unfurnished and empty as of April 10, 2021, and the Marcuses had to hire and pay another design team over $85,000.00 to finish Dennis’ work. Needless to say, the Marcuses sued both Dennis and her firm for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and for violation of the VCPA. Dennis moved to dismiss the Complaint. 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

    Real Estate Trends: Looking Ahead to 2021

    November 09, 2020 —
    2020 has been an unprecedented year, and, while there are likely more twists and turns to come before December 31, it is essential to look at how the real estate markets have changed this year and which trends are likely to continue into 2021. The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted nearly every industry, including commercial real estate, and its impact will continue to influence the market and commercial real estate long after the virus has been eradicated. Commercial Real Estate Loan Modifications As the United States’ economy stalled, shut down and slowly started to recover throughout 2020, many businesses were negatively impacted, and most property owners found themselves negotiating with both their lenders and tenants. As tenants were unable to pay rent, property owners were unable to service their debt, which led to a surge of loan modifications this year. This trend certainly will continue through the first half of 2021, as the economy continues to recover. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Adam Weaver, Pillsbury
    Mr. Weaver may be contacted at adam.weaver@pillsburylaw.com

    Resulting Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    April 06, 2016 —
    The court confirmed that there was no coverage for damage to the policyholder's building caused by a large volume of water. Praetorian Ins. Co. v. Arabia Shrine Ctr. Houston, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20186 (S.D. Texas Feb. 19, 2016). The damage occurred when water began seeping through the baseboards of the Shrine. Employees saw a large amount of water entering the building. Eventually, the city shut off a water main valve. It was later determined that an 8 inch diameter fire suppression metal pipe failed at the elbow, causing over one million gallons of water to be released into the building. Damages were estimated at nearly $1.7 million. Clean up and repair costs amounted to $237,156. 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

    Oregon to Add 258,000 Jobs by 2022, State Data Shows

    March 26, 2014 —
    Oregon expects to add 258,000 jobs by 2022, a 15 percent increase driven by the economic recovery in the construction industry and growth in health care, according to the Oregon Employment Department. Construction industry employment is projected to rise 29 percent, the fastest of any industry, though short of pre-recessionary growth, the agency said March 12 in a statement. The predictions “reflect several ongoing trends: continuing recovery from the Great Recession, particularly for the construction industry; a growing health-care sector, due in part to an aging population; continuing population growth; and the need for replacement workers due to baby-boomer retirements,” the agency said. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Alison Vekshin, Bloomberg
    Ms. Vekshin may be contacted at avekshin@bloomberg.net

    Domtar Update

    June 11, 2014 —
    On May 29, 2014, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted allocatur—i.e., the permission to appeal—in the controversial subrogation case, Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Domtar Paper Co., 77 A.3d 1282 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013). In its order granting the relief to Liberty Mutual, a workers’ compensation insurer, the Supreme Court set forth the narrow issue to be decided on appeal: “Does Section 319 of the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act, 77 P.S. § 671, allow the employer/insurer to step into the shoes of the insured employee to subrogate against the tortfeasor?” In Domtar, Liberty Mutual was caused to incur approximately $35,000 in compensation benefits which it paid on behalf of George Lawrence, an employee of Liberty Mutual’s insured, for injuries he sustained in a work-related accident. Mr. Lawrence chose not to file an independent personal injury lawsuit. As a result, in order to recover its lien interests, Liberty Mutual sued the third parties responsible for causing Mr. Lawrence’s work-related injuries directly, having become subrogated to the rights of Mr. Lawrence by virtue of Liberty Mutual’s workers’ compensation expenditure on his behalf. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert M. Caplan, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Caplan may be contacted at caplanr@whiteandwilliams.com