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


    Quick Note: Independent Third-Party Spoliation Of Evidence Claim

    Wells Fargo Shuns Peers’ Settlement in U.S in Mortgage

    Tech Focus: Water Tech Getting Smarter

    Cross-Motions for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings for COVID-19 Claim Denied

    In Search of Cement Replacements

    Carwash Prosecutors Seek $1.6 Billion From Brazil Builders

    Commonwealth Court Strikes Blow to Philly Window and Door Ordinance

    Tacoma Construction Site Uncovers Gravestones

    Ohio “property damage” caused by an “occurrence.”

    Before Collapse, Communications Failed to Save Bridge Project

    Multisensory Marvel: Exploring the Innovative MSG Sphere

    Subcontractor Not Liable for Defending Contractor in Construction Defect Case

    There’s the 5 Second Rule, But Have You Heard of the 5 Year Rule?

    Ninth Circuit Finds Policy’s Definition of “Policy Period” Fatal to Insurer’s “Related Claims” Argument

    Nevada Senate Rejects Construction Defect Bill

    Court Calls Lease-Leaseback Project What it is: A Design-Bid-Build Project

    Bill Taylor Co-Authors Chapter in Pennsylvania Construction Law Book

    Hunton Insurance Partner Syed Ahmad Named to Benchmark Litigation’s 2019 40 & Under Hot List

    Pennsylvania: Searching Questions Ahead of Oral Argument in Domtar

    Court Grants Partial Summary Judgment on Conversion Claim Against Insurer

    Construction Defect Coverage Summary 2013: The Business Risks Shift To Insurers

    Proving Contractor Licensure in California. The Tribe Has Spoken

    Everybody Is Going to End Up Paying for Texas' Climate Crisis

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 3: Standard Form Policy Exclusions

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

    Construction Defect Suit Can Continue Against Plumber

    Motion to Dismiss COVID Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    Tighter Requirements and a New Penalty for Owners of Vacant or Abandoned Storefronts in San Francisco

    Feds Outline Workforce Rules for $39B in Chip Plant Funding

    Builders Arrested after Building Collapses in India

    Fargo Shows Record Home Building

    Second Circuit Affirms Win for General Contractor on No Damages for Delay Provision

    20 Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2020 Top Lawyers!

    Patent or Latent: An Important Question in Construction Defects

    The Louvre Abu Dhabi’s Mega-Structure Domed Roof Completed

    The Final Nail: Ongoing Repairs Do Not Toll the Statute of Repose

    CA Homeowners Challenging Alternate Pre-Litigation Procedures

    Illinois Lawmakers Approve Carpenters Union's Legislation to Help Ensure Workers Are Paid What They're Owed

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

    BHA has a Nice Swing: Firm Supports CDCCF Charity at 2014 WCC Seminar

    Latin America’s Biggest Corporate Crime Gets a Worthy Epic

    Court of Appeals Finds Additional Insured Coverage Despite “Care, Custody or Control” Exclusion

    Supreme Court Holds That Prevailing Wage Statute is Constitutional

    Court’s Ruling on SB800 “Surprising to Some”

    Builder Pipeline in U.S. at Eight-Year High: Under the Hood

    North Miami Beach Rejects as Incomplete 2nd Engineering Inspection Report From Evacuated Condo

    Fire Tests Inspire More Robust Timber Product Standard

    Connecticut Answers Critical Questions Regarding Scope of Collapse Coverage in Homeowners Policies in Insurers’ Favor

    Partner Jonathan R. Harwood Obtained Summary Judgment in a Case Involving a Wedding Guest Injured in a Fall

    The Dog Ate My Exclusion! – Georgia Federal Court: No Reformation to Add Pollution Exclusion
    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

    Trump Soho May Abandon Condos to Operate Mainly as Hotel

    January 28, 2015 —
    Lower Manhattan’s Trump Soho, the five-year-old tower that was seized in a foreclosure amid slow sales of its condominiums, may drop its focus on part-time residences and operate most of the property solely as a hotel. The building’s new owner, Los Angeles-based CIM Group, is “stepping away” from marketing the roughly two-thirds of condos that remain unsold, said Gary Schweikert, the building’s managing director. The company is considering converting the unsold units at the tower permanently into hotel rooms, he said. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadja Brandt, Bloomberg
    Ms. Brandt may be contacted at nbrandt@bloomberg.net

    Three-Year Delay Not “Prompt Notice,” But Insurer Not “Appreciably Prejudiced” Either, New Jersey Court Holds

    November 04, 2019 —
    In Harleysville Preferred Insurance Company v. East Coast Painting & Maintenance, LLC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135295 (D.N.J. Aug. 12, 2019) (East Coast Painting), the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey held that an insurer, which received notice of a bodily injury accident three years after it happened, was not “appreciably prejudiced” by such late notice, even as the court acknowledged notice three years later did not satisfy the policy’s “prompt notice” condition. The court also held that the policy’s “Operational Exclusion,” which excluded coverage for bodily injury arising out of the operation of “cherry pickers and similar devices,” did not apply because the accident arose out of the use of a “scissor lift,” which is not a device similar to a cherry picker. East Coast Painting arose out of a Queens, New York bridge-painting project, during which an employee of the insured, East Coast Painting and Maintenance LLC was injured while “standing on a scissor lift mounted to the back of a truck,” owned and operated by East Coast. The employee sued various project-related entities which, in turn, joined East Coast as a defendant. East Coast sought coverage under its business auto policy, and the insurer agreed to defend the insured under a reservation of rights. The insurer subsequently sought a declaration that it did not owe coverage based on, among other things, the policy’s “Operational Exclusion,” and the insured’s failure to satisfy the policy’s “prompt notice” condition. The insurer moved for summary judgment on both of those bases, but the court in East Coast Painting denied the motion. As for the insurer’s “prompt notice” defense, the court in East Coast Painting concluded that, the insured’s notice to the insurer was not prompt because it did not receive notice until three years after the accident. But, the court added, the inquiry does not end there. “[T]his Court must determine whether [the insurer] was appreciably prejudiced by that delay.” Reviewing the facts, the court held that the insurer was not “appreciably prejudiced,” even though during the three-year delay the lift truck was “not properly maintained” or “in the same condition it was at the time of the Accident.” The court observed that the insurer had “ample other evidence with which it can defend itself,” such as experts who inspected the lift truck and opined about the cause of the accident.” [Emphasis added.] Further, “there are multiple contemporaneous accident reports,” “a list of the East Coast employees on site at the time,” “photographs of the lift truck and its location when [the employee] was injured,” and “depositions of [the employee] and others regarding the events at issue.” Thus, the court held, the insurer was not prejudiced and summary judgment was inappropriate. Reprinted courtesy of Anthony L. Miscioscia, White and Williams LLP and Timothy A. Carroll, White and Williams LLP Mr. Miscioscia may be contacted at misciosciaa@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Carroll may be contacted at carrollt@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Another Setback for the New Staten Island Courthouse

    January 13, 2014 —
    The new Staten Island Courthouse received another setback when James McDonough filed suit stating unsafe work conditions, according to Frank Donnelly writing for Silive. The completion date for the new multistory, $230 million complex has been rescheduled four times so far. Fifty-eight year old James McDonough, resident of Ridgewood Queens, became injured after a fall down a shaft, and he subsequently “sued the city, state Dormitory Authority, the state Office of Court Administration and various contractors,” Donnelly reported. A total of ten defendants have been named in the suit. According to Silive, the Office of Court Administration, Dormitory Authority and the Law Department would not comment on the pending litigation further except to say that papers have been filed and the case is under review. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Yes, Indeedy. Competitive Bidding Not Required for School District Lease-Leasebacks

    October 01, 2014 —
    Remember when you discovered that the tooth fairy wasn’t real? It was kind of a bummer on one hand learning that it wasn’t a fairy that magically appeared to swap your tooth for cold hard cash, but rather your mom or, visual horrors, dad. At the same time, it was, to your nearly-halfway-to-a-decade-on-this-planet-wizened-six-year-old mind, confirmation of what you had a sneaking suspicion was the case in any event. And, so it is with the next case. Lease-Leasebacks In California, most public school construction projects are built using the traditional design-bid-build project delivery method in which a design professional designs the project, the project is put out for competitive bid and the selected contractor builds the project. But not all school construction projects are built this way. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@kmtg.com

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    June 28, 2013 —
    The federal district court assumed there was "property damage" caused by an "occurrence," but found the business risk exclusions barred coverage for construction defect claims. Hubbell v. Carney Bros. Constr., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68331 (D. Colo. May 13, 2013). The plaintiffs entered a construction contract with the insured general contractor to build a home. After the project was one-third completed, plaintiffs terminated the contract. Experts hired by plaintiffs found a failure to properly site the residence, as the house was constructed 48 feet from the intended location; violations of county height restrictions; failure to follow building plans, which were themselves deficient; and an improperly poured foundation. The experts estimated that the costs of repairing the property to be between $1.3 and $1.5 million, and that the cost of demolishing the structure and rebuilding it would be between $1.1 and $1.3 million. After plaintiff filed suit, a stipulated judgment of $1.952 million was entered. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Viewpoint: Firms Should Begin to Analyze Lessons Learned in 2020

    January 04, 2021 —
    If there’s one phrase that describes 2020, it was not “business as usual.” How AEC firms fared last year depended upon their strategies for navigating an uncertain landscape. While we talk about finding a new normal, company leaders in 2021 will have to think more expansively about what they want that “normal” to look like. Reprinted courtesy of Rich Friedman, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    How Palm Beach Balances Mansion Politics Against Climate Change

    July 05, 2021 —
    It feels like a precipice moment for Palm Beach, a Florida town in the throes of a waterfront mansion-building mania just as the impacts of climate change start pushing in. At the town council’s regular meeting this past week, officials talked about the need to raise the grade of a beloved bike trail—and, at the same time, somehow add height to the privately-owned seawalls running alongside it. Raising both together would help preserve views and accessibility. But if individual sections of the public bikeway and the mansion-fronting seawalls are raised piecemeal and go out of sync, it would weaken the defense against flooding and make for uneven pedaling. As the town’s director of public works Paul Brazil put it, “We don't want our bike trail to become a mountain bike trail.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Amanda L. Gordon, Bloomberg

    ABC, Via Construction Industry Safety Coalition, Comments on Silica Rule

    February 18, 2020 —
    The Construction Industry Safety Coalition (CISC) has responded to OSHA’s request for information regarding changes to the “Occupational Exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica – Specified Exposure Control Methods Standard,” also known as the silica rule. Specifically, OSHA requested comments in mid-August on potential changes to Table 1, which designates compliance actions for a range of conditions and tasks exposing workers to respirable crystalline silica. CISC, comprised of 26 members including Associated Builders and Contractors, has formally requested that OSHA expand compliance options. “Expanding Table 1 and otherwise improving compliance with the rule is of paramount importance to member associations and contractors across the country,” CISC tells OSHA Principal Deputy Loren Sweatt. “Based upon feedback from contractors, both large and small, compliance with the rule remains challenging.” Reprinted courtesy of Rachel O'Connell, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of