BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut construction forensic 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


    Preliminary Notices: Common Avoidable But Fatal Mistakes

    Wall Street’s Palm Beach Foray Fuels Developer Office Rush

    Can Your Small Business Afford to Risk the Imminent Threat of a Cyber Incident?

    Haight’s Kristian Moriarty Selected for Super Lawyers’ 2021 Southern California Rising Stars

    No Bad Faith In Filing Interpleader

    Type I Differing Site Conditions Claim is Not Easy to Prove

    2015 California Construction Law Update

    Kahana Feld LLP Senior Attorney Rachael Marvin and Partner Dominic Donato Obtain Complete Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Labor Law Claims on Summary Judgment

    Fifth Circuit Certifies Questions to Texas Supreme Court on Concurrent Causation Doctrine

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: ERIN CANNON-WELLS

    The “Unavailability Exception” is Unavailable to Policyholders, According to New York Court of Appeals

    Homebuyers Get Break as Loan Rates Defy Fed Tapering: Mortgages

    Hurricane Damage Not Covered for Home Owner Not Named in Policy

    When is a “Notice of Completion” on a California Private Works Construction Project Valid? Why Does It Matter for My Collection Rights?

    Construction Defect Settlement in Seattle

    Significant Victory for the Building Industry: Liberty Mutual is Rejected Once Again, This Time by the Third Appellate District in Holding SB800 is the Exclusive Remedy

    Does Stricter Decertification Mean More “Leedigation?”

    Hunton Andrews Kurth Associate Cary D. Steklof Selected to Florida Trend’s Legal Elite Up & Comers List for 2019

    Selected Environmental Actions Posted on the Fall 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulator Actions

    Carillion Fallout Affects Major Hospital Project in Liverpool

    One Insurer's Settlement with Insured Does Not Bar Contribution Claim by Other Insurers

    Pennsylvania Reconstruction Project Beset by Problems

    Your Construction Contract

    Contractual “Pay if Paid” and “Pay when Paid” Clauses? What is a California Construction Subcontractor to Do?

    Insurer's Bad Faith is Actionable Tort for Purposes of Choice of Law Analysis

    Plaintiffs Not Barred from Proving Causation in Slip and Fall Case, Even With No Witnesses and No Memory of Fall Itself

    Massachusetts Federal Court Rejects Adria Towers, Finds Construction Defects Not an “Occurrence”

    "Damage to Your Product" Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Preserving your Rights to Secure Payment on Construction Projects (with Examples)

    2015-2016 California Labor & Employment Laws Affecting Construction Industry

    Professional Services Exclusion Bars Coverage After Carbon Monoxide Leak

    Renters Who Bought Cannot Sue for Construction Defects

    Plehat Brings Natural Environments into Design Tools

    Policyholders' Coverage Checklist in Times of Coronavirus

    The One New Year’s Resolution You’ll Want to Keep if You’re Involved in Public Works Projects

    New York Court Enforces Construction Management Exclusion

    Florida Law: Interplay of SIR and the Made-Whole Doctrine

    Pinnacle Controls in Verano

    Kumagai Drops Most in 4 Months on Building Defect: Tokyo Mover

    North Dakota Supreme Court Clarifies Breadth of Contractual Liability Coverage

    It’s All a Matter of [Statutory] Construction: Supreme Court Narrowly Interprets the Good Faith Dispute Exception to Prompt Payment Requirements in United Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron & Steel Co.

    Can an Owner Preemptively Avoid a Mechanics Lien?

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/22/24) – Federal Infrastructure Money, Hotel Development Pipelines, and Lab Space Construction

    Court Orders City to Pay for Sewer Backups

    Home-Building Climate Warms in U.S. as Weather Funk Lifts

    New 2021 ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey Standards Effective February 23, 2021

    Hurricane Ian: Florida Expedites Road Work as Damage Comes Into Focus

    Ahead of the Storm: Preparing for Irma

    White and Williams Recognizes Women’s History Month: Remembering Virginia Barton Wallace

    Courts Favor Arbitration in Two Recent Construction Dispute Cases
    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 York Court Discusses Evidentiary Standards for Policy Rescission Based on Material Misrepresentation

    August 10, 2020 —
    On July 27, 2020, in the case of Mt. Hawley Ins. Co. v. AKI Renovations Group, Inc., (Sup. Ct. NY Co. 2020), Index No. 159421/2017 (unpublished), the trial court issued an Order granting summary judgment permitting rescission of a CGL policy based upon material misrepresentations in a policy application. The insured submitted an application in which it failed to disclose its demolition operations despite specific questions seeking this information. Mt. Hawley issued a primary and excess policy for the period of December 29, 2016 to December 29, 2017 (collectively, the policy). Subsequently, the insured sought coverage for a claim in which it was alleged that the insured was acting as a general contractor for demolition of a three-story building when the plaintiff was injured. The insurer advised the defendants that it was rescinding the policy ab initio, and also returned defendants’ premium in its entirety. The insurer asserted that it would not have issued the policy had defendants disclosed their demolition operations, then filed the coverage action seeking a judicial declaration ratifying its rescission of the policy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert S. Nobel, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Nobel may be contacted at rnobel@tlsslaw.com

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: The Duty to Defend

    February 28, 2022 —
    This post in our Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series discusses the Montana Supreme Court’s consideration of an insurer’s duty to defend in National Indemnity Co. v. State, 499 P.3d 516 (Mont. 2021). For 67 years, W.R. Grace & Company’s mining operations spread asbestos through the town of Libby, Montana, causing elevated rates of asbestosis and asbestos-related cancer in Libby residents – even among those who never worked in the mine. The Environmental Protection Agency deemed the Libby Mine the “most significant single source of asbestos exposure” in US history. In 2000, Libby residents began filing lawsuits against the State of Montana, alleging that the State had failed to warn them about the mine’s danger, and this failure contributed to their bodily injuries. Id. at 521-22. The Libby plaintiffs’ asbestos exposures and related injuries had occurred decades earlier, and so the State searched its storage units for records of any potentially applicable insurance policies. Reprinted courtesy of Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Patrick M. McDermott, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Rachel E. Hudgins, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Mr. McDermott may be contacted at pmcdermott@HuntonAK.com Ms. Hudgins may be contacted at rhudgins@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Committee Hosts a Hearing on Deadly Berkeley Balcony Collapse

    April 28, 2016 —
    According to Mercury News, state Senators Jerry Hill and Loni Hancock scheduled the hearing in Sacramento with state and local agencies to discuss their response to the Berkeley, California balcony collapse incident that killed three people and severely injured seven others. The agencies also testified regarding “best practices and disclosure requirements for licenses.” Hill and Hancock are the sponsors of Senate Bill 465 that “would require companies to report certain settlements to the Contractors State License Board, and in some cases to the public.” Investigators of the Berkeley balcony incident alleged “that crews applied waterproofing to wet wood during construction. Water was trapped inside, which led to severe dry rot and the catastrophic collapse,” reported Mercury News. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment Based Upon Vandalism Exclusion

    June 18, 2014 —
    The court denied the insurer's motion for summary judgment on plaintiff's breach of contract claim because there was a disputed issue of fact regarding the applicability of the vandalism exclusion. Poole v. Untied Servs. Auto. Assn., 2014 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2394 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. May 16, 2014). The plaintiff rented a residence to tenants. The tenants performed repairs to the residence which resulted in damage in excess of $126,000. The tenants vacated the residence. The plaintiff submitted a claim to USAA for benefits under her homeowners' policy. USAA denied coverage based upon exclusions for damage caused by, among other things, faulty workmanship, renovation and remodeling. Plaintiff sued and USAA moved for summary judgment. 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

    Party Loses Additional Insured Argument by Improper Pleading

    September 20, 2017 —
    The Archdiocese failed to plead breach of contract against the County for failure to name the Archdiocese as an additional insured under the liability policy. Pachella v. Archdiocese of Philadelphia, 2017 Pa. Commw. Unpub. LEXIS 595 (Pa. Commw. Ct. Aug. 14, 2017). Richard and Pachella filed a complaint against the Archdiocese, alleging that Mrs. Pachella was injured when she tripped and fell on the sidewalk outside of St. Patrick's Parish. At the time, the County was leasing St. Patrick's premises for use as an election polling place. The Archdiocese filed a third party complaint alleging negligence and breach of contract claims under a Lease Agreement between St. Patrick's and the County. 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

    What Construction Contractors Should Know About the California Government Claims Act

    May 28, 2024 —
    If you work on state or local public works projects in California you should have at least a basic understanding of the Government Claims Act formerly known as the Tort Claims Act (Govt. Code §§ 900 et seq.). In the event of a dispute with a public entity, the Government Claims Act will usually apply, absent contractual provisions providing otherwise (Govt. Code §§930, 930.2) (e.g., in a construction contract), and requires that a “claim” first be presented to a “public entity” before a claimant files a lawsuit against the public entity. Failure to comply with the Government Claims Act can serve as a bar to maintaining a lawsuit against a public entity. What types of claims does the Government Claims Act apply to? The Government Claims Act broadly applies to most claims against state and local public entities. This is not limited to construction projects and includes all claims for “money or damage” arising from death, personal injury, breach of contract, and damage to real and personal property, wrongful death, or breach of contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Perovskite: The Super Solar Cells

    July 23, 2014 —
    “Embedding solar cells into buildings has always been more of a nice idea instead of an economical approach,” according to Gigaom, however they reported that a new kind of solar cell developed by a researcher at Oxford University might change things. Henry Snaith and his research team through experimentation discovered “perovskites,” which increase the amount of sunlight converted to electricity by 17 percent over other solar cells. Solar cells currently used have, at times, proved inefficient. “Solar cells that won’t obstruct the view that a window offers historically have done poorly in converting much sunlight into electricity,” Gigaom reported. “Other types of solar cells have been too expensive to make. Plus, they won’t produce as much electricity when they line one side of a building rather than its rooftop, where they get sun for longer hours each day.” Currently, Oxford PV, the perovskite start-up company, is pushing into commercializing its solar technology, and “is looking at opening an office in Silicon Valley.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer’s Broad Duty to Defend in Oregon, and the Recent Ruling in State of Oregon v. Pacific Indemnity Company

    January 02, 2024 —
    Oregon law mandates a broad duty to defend, requiring insurers to provide legal representation to their policyholders whenever there is a potential for coverage under the policy. The significance of this broad interpretation means that an insurer has a duty to defend an insured even in situations where the alleged facts only imply a covered claim, and even in situations where the underlying claim is ultimately not covered by the policy. The insurer’s duty to defend is triggered if the allegations of the complaint, reasonably interpreted, could result in the insured being held liable for damages covered by the policy. This is referred to as the “four-corners” rule; it is also sometimes referred to as the eight-corners rule (for the four corners of the complaint plus the four corners of the policy). Oregon’s adoption of a broad interpretation of the duty to defend affirmatively places the onus on insurers to err on the side of coverage. This broad duty to defend is based on the principle that an insured should not have to bear the expense of defending a lawsuit that the insurer may ultimately have to pay for. The duty to defend is also important because it helps ensure that insureds have access to legal representation when faced with a lawsuit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Keith Sparks, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Sparks may be contacted at keith.sparks@acslawyers.com