BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnesses
    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


    Application of Set-Off When Determining Prevailing Party for Purposes of Attorney’s Fees

    Century Communities Acquires Dunhill Homes Las Vegas Operations

    No Coverage for Negligent Misrepresentation without Allegations of “Bodily Injury” or “Property Damage”

    Homebuilders Leading U.S. Consumer Stocks: EcoPulse

    The Air in There: Offices, and Issues, That Seem to Make Us Stupid

    Remediation Work Caused by Installation of Defective Tiles Not Covered

    Contractor Disputes Report Amid Amazon Warehouse Collapse Lawsuit

    National Lobbying Firm Opens Colorado Office, Strengthening Construction Defect Efforts

    Texas Supreme Court Holds Anadarko’s $100M Deepwater Horizon Defense Costs Are Not Subject To Joint Venture Liability Limits

    The Hazards of Carrier-Specific Manuscript Language: Ohio Casualty's Off-Premises Property Damage and Contractors' E&O Endorsements

    What Types of “Damages Claims” Survive a Trustee’s Sale?

    Just Because You Caused it, Doesn’t Mean You Own It: The Hooker Exception to the Privette Doctrine

    California Court of Appeal Provides Clarity On What Triggers Supplemental Analysis Under California Environmental Quality Act

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers!

    Watchdog Opens Cartel Probe Into Eight British Homebuilders

    Amos Rex – A Museum for the Digital Age

    Subsurface Water Exclusion Found Unambiguous

    “Bound by the Bond”

    Edward Beitz and William Taylor Recognized by US News – Best Lawyers as a "Lawyer of the Year"

    Federal Court Again Confirms No Coverage For Construction Defects in Hawaii

    'Regluing' Oregon State's Showcase for Mass Timber

    Brookfield Wins Disputed Bid to Manage Manhattan Marina

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in 2022 Northern California Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    MGM Begins Dismantling of the Las Vegas Harmon Tower

    Beam Fracture on Closed Mississippi River Bridge Is at Least Two Years Old

    Reminder: In Court (as in life) the Worst Thing You Can Do Is Not Show Up

    Famed NYC Bridge’s Armor Is Focus of Suit Against French Company

    Illinois Appellate Court Affirms Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case

    Construction Defect Disputes: Know Your Measure of Damages!!!!!

    'Right to Repair' and Fixing Equipment in a Digital Age

    The EEOC Targets Construction Industry For Heightened Enforcement

    Presidential Memorandum Promotes Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West

    Cal/OSHA Approves COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards; Executive Order Makes Them Effective Immediately

    Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review Regarding Necessary Parties in Lien Foreclosure Actions

    How Technology Reduces the Risk of Façade Defects

    District Court Allows DBE False Claims Act Case to Proceed

    What You Need to Know About the Recently Enacted Infrastructure Bill

    Ex-Construction Firm That Bought a $75m Michelangelo to Delist

    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

    Dispute Resolution in Your Construction Contract

    Court of Federal Claims: Upstream Hurricane Harvey Case Will Proceed to Trial

    New World Cup Stadiums Failed at their First Trial

    Happenings in and around the 2016 West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Hawaii Building Codes to Stay in State Control

    Court of Appeal Holds That Higher-Tiered Party on Construction Project Can be Held Liable for Intentional Interference with Contract

    Potential Construction Liabilities Contractors Need to Know

    The Buck Stops Over There: Have Indemnitors Become the Insurers of First and Last Resort?

    Happy New Year from CDJ

    Nevada Lawmakers Had Private Meetings on Construction Defects

    What is the Effect of an Untimely Challenge to the Timeliness of a Trustee’s Sale?
    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

    Fire Fears After Grenfell Disaster Set Back Wood Building in UK

    May 29, 2023 —
    This article is part of the Bloomberg Green series Timber Town, which looks at the global rise of timber as a low-carbon building material. To get fire department approval for their six-story London office project made of strong engineered wood known as mass timber, Theo Michell and Richard Walker had to build a full-scale section of it in the UK, ship it to Poland and attempt to set it on fire. The mockup was set alight “with enough material that replicates the fire load that you get from furniture and carpets and desks, and all the rest of it, and you see how that structure performs,” says Michell. “It was cool,” adds Walker. “It looked amazing.” Their building, called Paradise, passed the fire test and is under construction, though not without a significant drag on their budget and time. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Olivia Rudgard, Bloomberg

    Nevada’s Changing Liability Insurance Landscape—State Insurance Regulator Issues Emergency Regulation and Guidance Addressing Controversial “Defense-Within-Limits” Legislation

    August 28, 2023 —
    We recently posted about Nevada becoming the first state to prohibit defense-within-limits provisions in liability insurance policies. Defense-within-limits provisions—resulting in what is called “eroding” or “wasting” policies—reduce the policy’s applicable limit of insurance by amounts the insurer pays to defend the policyholder against a claim or suit. In response to uncertainty and industry concern about the potential effects the new law may have on the state’s insurance marketplace, Nevada’s Division of Insurance issued an Emergency Regulation and Guidance to Insurers on the new law to minimize disruption to the marketplace. After noting that the new law “has the potential to eliminate or greatly reduce the availability of certain policies of liability insurance and significantly increase their costs, which will affect all types of Nevada businesses, non-profit entities, and state and local governments,” Nevada’s Division of Insurance addressed three issues relating to the new law in the Emergency Regulation:
    1. The meaning of the term “policy of liability insurance,” as used in the new law.
    2. The insurers to which the new law does not apply.
    3. How defense coverage is required to be made available.
    Reprinted courtesy of Geoffrey B. Fehling, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Andrew S. Koelz, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Fehling may be contacted at gfehling@HuntonAK.com Mr. Koelz may be contacted at akoelz@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Eighth Circuit Rejects Retroactive Application of Construction Defect Legislation

    September 17, 2014 —
    The Eighth Circuit refused to retroactively apply an Arkansas statute establishing coverage for faulty workmanship. J-McDaniel Const. Co., Inc. v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 14911 (8th Cir. Aug. 4, 2014). The homeowners sued J-McDaniel for faulty workmanship in constructing their home. The defective construction work was performed by subcontractors. Mid-Continent refused to defend or indemnify J-McDaniel. The insured sued Mid-Continent. The district court dismissed the claim pursuant to Essex Ins. Co. v. Holder, 261 S.W. 3d 456, 460 (Ark. 2008). In Essex, the Arkansas Supreme Court held that defective workmanship resulting in damages only to the work product itself was not an occurrence. Although The Arkansas legislature overruled Essex by statute, the district court found that the Arkansas case law barred retroactive application of the statute. 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

    D.R. Horton Profit Beats Estimates as Home Sales Jumped

    January 28, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- D.R. Horton Inc., the largest U.S. homebuilder by revenue, reported fiscal first-quarter earnings that beat estimates as sales jumped. The shares rose the most since October. Net income was $142.5 million, or 39 cents a share, for the three months ended Dec. 31, compared with $123.2 million, or 36 cents, a year earlier, the Fort Worth, Texas-based company said Monday in a statement. The average of 14 analyst estimates was 35 cents a share, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Results for the quarter included $6 million in inventory and land option charges, according to the statement. Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg reporters Prashant Gopal and John Gittelsohn Mr. Gittlesohn may be contacted at johngitt@bloomberg.net; Mr. Gopal may be contacted at pgopal2@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    An Occurrence Under Builder’s Risk Insurance Policy Is Based on the Language in the Policy

    April 03, 2023 —
    Builder’s risk insurance coverage is a vital property insurance coverage during the course of construction. Builder’s risk insurance is not a one-size-fits-all product so please make sure you are working with your insurance broker to procure this product that factors in and covers risk associated with the project. Builder’s risk insurance is typically an occurrence-based policy. No different than other occurrence-based policies (such as commercial general liability), a dispute may arise as to the occurrence. This could be due to the triggering of the actual policy during the coverage period or it could be due deductible obligations, as in the case discussed below. When dealing with a builder’s risk insurance policy–again, no different than any policy–the language in the policy matters. Definitions used in the policy to define specific terms matter and, in numerous cases, the ordinary dictionary meanings of terms matter. But it all starts with the policy language. In KT State & Lemon, LLP v. Westchester Fire Insurance Co., 2023 WL 2456499 (M.D.Fla. 2023), a builder’s risk policy provided coverage from April 2018 through the end of November 2019. There was a $50,000 per occurrence deductible for loss caused by or from water damage. An extension to the builder’s risk policy was negotiated through the end of January 2020 that increased this water damage deductible to $250,000 per occurrence. During construction and the testing of the fire suppression (sprinkler) system, leaks started to occur resulting in water damage. Two leaks occurred in September 2019, one leak in October 2019, one leak in November 2019, and two leaks in December 2019 (during the extension and higher water damage deductible period). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    New York's Highest Court Says Asbestos Causation Requires Evidence Of Sufficient Exposure To Sustain Liability

    May 10, 2022 —
    On April 26, 2022, the New York Court of Appeals described that in toxic tort cases a plaintiff can only establish liability-creating causation for an adverse health effect with “expert testimony based on generally accepted methodologies.” See Francis Nemeth v. Brenntag North America (N.Y. Apr. 26, 2022). The suit involved alleged asbestos exposure from talc. The plaintiff alleged liability for talc contaminated with asbestos that was ultimately used in a commercial talcum powder, Desert Flower, which the decedent applied daily from 1960 to 1971. At trial, the plaintiff proffered two expert witnesses, a geologist, Sean Fitzgerald, who testified about the “glove box test” and a doctor of internal medicine, Dr. Jacqueline Moline. Fitzgerald’s glove box test consisted of agitating a sample of Desert Flower in a Plexiglas chamber. Fitzgerald concluded that the asbestos fibers in the sample of Desert Flower were “significantly releasable” and that the decedent was exposed to thousands to trillions of fibers through repeated use. Dr. Moline concluded Desert Flower was “a substantial contributing factor” to the decedent’s peritoneal mesothelioma. The jury returned a verdict in the plaintiff’s favor. Reprinted courtesy of Rafael Vergara, White and Williams and Jhonattan N. Gonzalez, White and Williams Mr. Vergara may be contacted at vergarar@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Gonzalez may be contacted at gonzalezj@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Prison Contractors Did Not Follow the Law

    October 15, 2013 —
    Under Iowa law, nearly ninety-percent of the construction workers for the new state prison in Fort Madison should have been Iowa residents. But according to reports obtained by the Des Moines Register, about fifty percent of the workers were from other states. The law responds to a similar one in Illinois that requires that most workers on public projects must be Illinois residents. Many of the out-of-state employees live on the other side of the Mississippi River and, according to Ryan Drew of the Southeast Iowa Building and Construction Trades Council, are part of a broader Illinois-Iowa community, shopping at Iowa retailers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    In Supreme Court Showdown, California Appeals Courts Choose Sides Regarding Whether Right to Repair Act is Exclusive Remedy for Homeowners

    August 10, 2017 —
    Earlier, we wrote about an appellate court split concerning the Right to Repair Act (Civil Code sections 895 et seq.) which applies to construction defects in newly constructed residential properties including single-family homes and condominiums (but not condominium conversions) sold after January 1, 2003. The California Court of Appeals for the Fourth District, in Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 98, held that the Right to Repair Act does not provide the exclusive remedy when pursing claims for construction defects involving “actual” property damage (e.g., a defectively constructed roof causing actual physical damage due to water intrusion as opposed to a defectively constructed roof that while constructed improperly does not cause actual physical damage). However, the California Court of Appeals for the Fifth District, in McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court (2015) 239 Cal.App.4th 1132, which is currently pending before the California Supreme Court, held that the Right to Repair Act does in fact provide the exclusive remedy when pursuing claims for construction defects whether they involve “actual” property damage or merely “economic” damages. For homeowners, they would prefer the option of pursuing remedies under either or both the Right to Repair Act (which includes detailed pre-litigation procedures and statutory construction standards) or under common law claims such as negligence (which do not include pre-litigation procedures and have more flexible standards of care). The California Court of Appeals for the Third District has now thrown its hat into the ring . . . on the side of McMillan. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com