BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield 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


    The Best Lawyers in America© Peer Review Names Eight Newmeyer & Dillion Partners in Multiple Categories and Two Partners as Orange County’s Lawyers of the Year in Construction and Insurance Law

    The Reptile Theory in Practice

    Counsel Investigating Coverage Can be Sued for Invasion of Privacy

    Tenth Circuit Finds Insurer Must Defend Unintentional Faulty Workmanship

    NYC-N.J. Gateway Rail-Tunnel Work May Start in 2023

    Anti-Concurrent, Anti-Sequential Causation Clause Precludes Coverage

    Temporary Obstructions Are a Permanent Problem Under the Americans with Disabilities Act

    A Community Constantly on the Brink of Disaster

    Margins May Shrink for Home Builders

    Earthquake Hits Mid-Atlantic Region; No Immediate Damage Reports

    Construction Venture Sues LAX for Nonpayment

    Encinitas Office Obtains Complete Defense Verdict Including Attorney Fees and Costs After Ten Day Construction Arbitration

    The New Industrial Revolution: Rebuilding America and the World

    OPINION: Stop Requiring Exhibit Lists!

    Supreme Court Overrules Longstanding Decision Supporting Collection of Union Agency Fees

    Liability Coverage For Construction Claims May Turn On Narrow Factual Distinctions

    Utility Contractor Held Responsible for Damaged Underground Electrical Line

    Builder and County Tussle over Unfinished Homes

    Administration Launches 'Buy Clean' Construction Materials Push

    Being deposed—not just for dictators! Depositions in the construction lawsuit (Law & Order: Hard Hat files Part 5)

    Exclusion for Construction of Condominiums Includes Faulty Construction of Retaining Wall

    TOP TAKE-AWAY SERIES: The 2023 Annual Meeting in Vancouver

    Congratulations to Nicole Whyte, Keith Bremer, John Toohey, and Tyler Offenhauser for Being Recognized as 2022 Super Lawyers!

    Federal Court Requires Auto Liability Carrier to Cover Suit Involving Independent Contractor Despite “Employee Exclusion”

    How the Science of Infection Can Make Cities Stronger

    Survey Finds Tough Labor Market Top-of-mind for Busy Georgia Contractors

    A Call to Washington: Online Permitting Saves Money and the Environment

    Nobody Knows What Lies Beneath New York City

    Struggling Astaldi Announces Defaults on Florida Highway Contracts

    WATCH: 2023 Construction Economic Update and Forecast

    Green Buildings Could Lead to Liabilities

    California Appeals Court Says Loss of Use Is “Property Damage” Under Liability Policy, and Damages Can be Measured by Diminished Value

    Federal Energy Regulator Approves Rule to Speed Clean Energy Grid Links

    Nevada Supreme Court Holds That Insureds Can Use Extrinsic Evidence to Prove Duty to Defend

    Washington Court Denies Subcontractor’s Claim Based on Contractual Change and Notice Provisions

    Battle of Experts Cannot Be Decided on Summary Judgment

    Don’t Just Document- Document Right!

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Indeed, You Just Design ‘Em”

    City Covered From Lawsuits Filed After Hurricane-Damaged Dwellings Demolished

    The Impact of Nuclear Verdicts on Construction Businesses

    HOA Foreclosure Excess Sale Proceeds Go to Owner

    Insurers' Communications Through Brokers Not Privileged

    Tesla Finishes First Solar Roofs—Including Elon's House

    CGL Policy May Not Cover Cybersecurity and Data-Related Losses

    Building 47 Bridges in Two Years

    LAX Runway Lawsuit a Year Too Late?

    COVID-19 Business Interruption Lawsuits Begin: Iconic Oceana Grill in New Orleans Files Insurance Coverage Lawsuit

    NEHRP Recommendations Likely To Improve Seismic Design

    The Expansion of Potential Liability of Construction Managers and Consultants

    No Third-Quarter Gain for Construction
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Follow Up on Continental Western v. Shay Construction

    March 28, 2012 —

    Writing in Construction Law Colorado, Brady Iandiorio revisits the case Continental Western v. Shay Construction. He promises to continue to follow cases dealing with Colorado HB 10-1394.

    Recently the Court ruled on two Motions to Reconsider filed by Defendants Milender White and Shay Construction.

    Procedurally, the Motions to Reconsider were ruled on by the Honorable William J. Martinez, because the day after the motions were filed the action was reassigned to Judge Martinez. In the short analysis of the Motion to Reconsider, the court leaned on Judge Walker D. Miller’s ruling on the summary judgment and his analysis of the (j)(5) and (j)(6) exclusions.

    As a quick refresher regarding the grant of summary judgment, Judge Miller agreed with Continental Western’s argument that the asserted claims were excluded under the “damage to property” exclusion. The policy’s exclusions state: “(j) Damage to Property . . . (5) that particular part of real property on which you or any contractors or subcontractors working directly or indirectly on your behalf are performing operations, if the ‘property damage’ arises out of those operations; or (6) that particular part of any property that must be restored, repaired or replaced because ‘your work’ was incorrectly performed on it.” Judge Miller found that both exclusions (j)(5) and (6) applied to both Shay’s allegedly defective work.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Brady Iandiorio of Higgins, Hopkins, McClain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. Iandiorio can be contacted at iandiorio@hhmrlaw.com.

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

    Federal Court Finds Occurrence for Faulty Workmanship Under Virginia Law

    July 31, 2013 —
    The Federal District Court in Virginia found that allegations of faulty workmanship could arise from an occurrence. Nautilus Ins. Co. v. Strongwell Corp., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79163 (W. D. Va. June 4, 2013). Strongwell supplied certain fiberglass reinforced plastic materials to a subcontractor of Black & Veatch for a construction project at power plant. Black & Veatch subsequently sued Strongwell, claiming that numerous defects in Strongwell's materials and work were discovered after the project was completed. The complaint further alleged that as a result of the defects, there was widespread property damage to portions of the power plant. Nautilus defended under a reservation of rights. Nautilus also filed suit for a declaratory judgment that to establish it had no duty to defend or indemnify Strongwell. Strongwell moved to dismiss the complaint insofar as it requested a declaration that there was no duty to defend. Strongwell also filed a motion to stay the coverage action until the underlying case was completed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    When Does a Claim Against an Insurance Carrier for Failing to Defend Accrue?

    November 07, 2012 —
    The following is an update on our December 20, 2010 article regarding United States Fire Insurance Company v. Pinkard Construction Company, Civil Action No. 09-CV-01854-MSK-MJW, and its underlying dispute, Legacy Apartments v. Pinkard Construction Company, Case No. 2003 CV 703, Boulder County Dist. Ct. That article can be found here. The present action, St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co., et al. v. The North River Insurance Co., et al., Civil Action No. 10-CV-02936-MSK-CBS, encompasses the coverage battle that ensued between Pinkard’s insurers, Travelers Indemnity Company of America (“Travelers”) and United States Fire Insurance Company (“USFI”), following the settlement of Legacy’s construction defect claims against Pinkard. A short history of the underlying facts is as follows: In 1995, Pinkard constructed the Legacy Apartments housing complex in Longmont, Colorado. Following construction, Legacy notified Pinkard of water leaks associated with various elements of construction. Legacy ultimately filed suit against Pinkard in 2003, and would go on to clarify and amend its defect claims in 2004, 2006, and again in 2008. Following Pinkard’s notification of Legacy’s claims, USFI provided a defense to Pinkard, but Travelers refused to do so, on the purported basis that Legacy’s allegations did not implicate property damage under the terms of Travelers’ policy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain can be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Restrictions On Out-Of-State Real Estate Brokers Being Challenged In Nevada

    April 10, 2019 —
    For years, the Nevada Real Estate Division (“NRED”) and its sub-entity, the Nevada Real Estate Commission (“NREC”), have been tasked with administering the licensing procedures applicable to real estate professionals in Nevada, as well as enforcement of the regulations governing business practices, advertising, commissions, license maintenance, and a host of other dayto-day parameters within which the profession operates. Within the past five years, however, the NREC has tasked itself with the publicly stated goal of “protecting” Nevada real estate licensees and the commissions they earn from out-of-state real estate professionals seeking to do business in the Silver State. While efforts to preserve local real estate opportunities for local brokers might seem sound, an international brokerage firm is challenging the foundation of that structure. If they win, the outcome could have huge implications on the real estate industry in Nevada. Businesses, here’s a breakdown of the existing structure and what the challenge is all about. The Existing Regulatory Structure Through amending their own regulations, the NRED and NREC have created a regulatory structure that:
    • Prohibits any non-Nevada licensed real estate broker from representing any seller (Nevada based or non-Nevada based) of any Nevada real estate;
    • Prohibits any non-Nevada licensed real estate broker from representing any Nevada resident in the purchase of Nevada real estate; and
    • Allows non-Nevada licensed real estate brokers to represent non-Nevada purchasers of Nevada real estate only if the out-of-state broker formally affiliates (and therefore shares commissions with) a resident Nevada-licensed broker.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aaron D. Lovaas, Newmeyer & Dillion LLP
    Mr. Lovaas may be contacted at aaron.lovaas@ndlf.com

    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

    Revised Cause Identified for London's Wobbling Millennium Bridge After Two Decades

    December 20, 2021 —
    U.S. and British researchers claim to have found a better explanation for the wobble of London's River Thames Millennium pedestrian suspension bridge than the one prevailing for over 20 years. Alarming swaying of the bridge was caused not by synchronization of walkers' footsteps, as previously believed, but the negative damping effect of their efforts not to fall over. Reprinted courtesy of Peter Reina, Engineering News-Record Mr. Reina may be contacted at reina@btinternet.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Client Alert: Restaurant Owed Duty of Care to Driver Killed by Third-Party on Street Adjacent to Restaurant Parking Lot

    January 07, 2015 —
    In Annocki v. Peterson Enterprise, LLC, (Filed 11/14/2014, Certified for Publication 12/5/2014, No. B251434) the Court of Appeal, Second District, held a restaurant owed a duty of care to the driver of a motorcycle who died as a result of the negligent driving of a third party exiting the restaurant’s parking lot. Decedent, Joseph M. Annocki, was driving his motorcycle on Pacific Coast Highway in Malibu, when it collided with the vehicle operated by Terry Allen Turner, who was exiting the parking lot of “Geoffrey’s" restaurant, which was owned and operated by the Defendant, Peterson Enterprise, LLC (“Peterson”). The parents of the decedent (“Plaintiffs”) filed suit against Peterson, alleging Peterson failed to adequately staff the restaurant parking lot, which caused Turner to become confused and make an illegal left turn onto Pacific Coast Highway, thereby causing the accident that killed decedent. Plaintiffs further alleged Peterson knew, or should have known, that its parking lot and driveway were designed and in such condition as to create a danger of decreased visibility of the adjacent highway, and failed to adequately provide signage directing patrons that only right turns could be made onto Pacific Coast Highway. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys R. Bryan Martin, Lawrence S. Zucker II and Kristian B. Moriarty Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Mr. Moriarty may be contacted at kmoriarty@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    ASCE Report Calls for Sweeping Changes to Texas Grid Infrastructure

    March 28, 2022 —
    A just-released detailed analysis of the catastrophic 2021 Texas winter storm finds systemic flaws in the state's electric sector contributed to a “cascade of failures” that overwhelmed its power grid and left millions freezing in the dark. Reprinted courtesy of C.J. Schexnayder, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of