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


    Eleventh Circuit Reverses Attorneys’ Fee Award to Performance Bond Sureties in Dispute with Contractor arising from Claim against Subcontractor Performance Bond

    Denial of Coverage For Bodily Injury After Policy Period Does Not Violate Public Policy

    What You Need to Know About Additional Insured Endorsements

    Deference Given To Procuring Public Agency Regarding Material Deviation

    Nine Gibbs Giden Partners Listed in Southern California Super Lawyers 2022

    Weyerhaeuser Leaving Home Building Business

    California Court of Appeal: Inserting The Phrase “Ongoing Operations” In An Additional Endorsement Is Not Enough to Preclude Coverage for Completed Operations

    Negligent Misrepresentation in Sale of Building Altered without Permits

    Property Owner Found Liable for Injuries to Worker of Unlicensed Contractor, Again

    Montana Federal Court Upholds Application of Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause

    What Should Business Owners Do If a Customer Won’t Pay

    Read the Property Insurance Policy to be Sure You are Complying with Post Loss Obligations

    9th Circuit Closes the Door on “Open Shop” Contractor

    Beware: Hyper-Technical Labor Code Violations May Expose Employers to Significant Claims for Penalties under the Labor Code California Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA)

    More Broad-Based Expansion for Construction Industry Expected in 2015

    The Clock is Ticking: Construction Delays and Liquidated Damages

    Dear Engineer: Has your insurer issued a “Reservation of Rights” letter? (law note)

    Brad Pitt’s Foundation Sues New Orleans Architect for Construction Defects

    ASCE Statement On White House "Accelerating Infrastructure Summit"

    Contractors Battle Bitter Winters at $11.8B Site C Hydro Project in Canada

    Cal/OSHA-Approved Changes to ETS Will Take Effect May 6, 2022

    NYC’s Developers Plow Ahead With Ambitious Plans to Reshape City

    $109-Million Renovation Begins on LA's Willowbrook/Rosa Parks Station

    The Law of Patent v Latent Defects

    New Jersey’s Independent Contractor Rule

    ASCE Report Calls for Sweeping Changes to Texas Grid Infrastructure

    Can a Non-Signatory Invoke an Arbitration Provision?

    Insured Cannot Sue to Challenge Binding Appraisal Decision

    Rather Than Limit Decision to "That Particular Part" of Developer's Policy Necessary to Bar Coverage, 10th Circuit Renders Questionable Decision on Exclusion j(6)

    Claim Against Broker Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Arizona Rooftop Safety: Is it Adequate or Substandard?

    Parol Evidence can be Used to Defeat Fraudulent Lien

    Rescission of Policy for Misrepresentation in Application Reversed

    West Coast Casualty’s 25th Construction Defect Seminar Has Begun

    Self-Storage Magnates Cash In on the Surge in Real Estate

    History and Gentrification Clash in a Gilded Age Resort

    Determining the Cause of the Loss from a Named Windstorm when there is Water Damage - New Jersey

    Professional Malpractice Statute of Limitations in Construction Context

    Coping with Labor & Install Issues in Green Building

    Navigating the Construction Burrito: OCIP Policies in California’s Construction Defect Cases

    Haight Brown & Bonesteel Attorneys Named Super Lawyers in 2016

    NYC Shuts 9 Pre-Kindergartens for Health, Safety Issues

    Edison Utility Accused of Igniting LA Fire in Lawsuits

    Court Orders House to be Demolished or Relocated

    Are Construction Contract Limitation of Liability Clauses on the Way Out in Virginia?

    Potential Pitfalls Under the Contract Disputes Act for Federal Government Contractors

    Insurer's Appeal of Jury Verdict Rejected by Tenth Circuit

    The Fifth Circuit, Applying Texas Law, Strikes Down Auto Exclusion

    Colorado Drillers Show Sensitive Side to Woo Fracking Foes

    Potential Coverage Issues Implicated by the Champlain Towers Collapse
    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. Drawing 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

    Do Not Pass Go! Duty to Defend in a Professional Services Agreement (law note)

    April 03, 2019 —
    Recently a client asked me to review a contract for his Firm. The Owner, who had prepared the draft, had inserted a rather stringent “duty to defend” clause. As I told my client, a duty to defend clause is not a good idea for a couple of reasons. First, if you agree to provide a defense, what that means is that you are footing the bill for the Owner if the Owner is sued by another party. Think about that for a minute. You are paying legal fees for someone else’s legal defense. You may or may not be able to direct the litigation or have a say in who is hired. Can you say open check book? Secondly, and more importantly, the duty to defend is almost never insurable. What that means is that your professional liability carrier will not be footing the bill—your Firm will be doing it. This is not a case of adding the Owner as an additional insured, so do not confuse the two. Agreeing to a duty to defend is an extremely burdensome, and potentially costly, mistake. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    What Do I Do With This Stuff? Dealing With Abandoned Property After Foreclosure

    October 20, 2016 —
    You’ve successfully foreclosed on a commercial building in California, and, thankfully, the borrower moved out after foreclosure or after a period of tenancy. But the borrower left behind all sorts of property – furniture, filing cabinets, records, and other assorted property. While you may be tempted to just toss it all in the dumpster, doing so may subject you to liability. There are several statutes that you should consider when determining how to handle the abandoned property. Statutory Options for a Landlord A landlord-tenant relationship may arise following foreclosure if, for example, the owner of the property accepts rent from the former owner. If the tenant subsequently turns over possession of the commercial property but leaves personal property at the premises,[1] California Civil Code provides a landlord with statutory options to deal with “lost” (Cal. Civ. Code § 2080) or “abandoned” property (Cal. Civ. Code §1993). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lyndsey Torp, Snell & Wilmer
    Ms. Torp may be contacted at ltorp@swlaw.com

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

    December 20, 2012 —
    The former head of Orients Construction Company and of Melrose Construciton Company, Herlindo Garcia-Merlos, has entered a guilty plea to charges that the gave false informoation to his insurer, New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Group, for more than three years in order to lower his workers compensation payments. Mr. Garcia-Merlos was able to underpay by more than $315,000 as a result of this deception. Mr. Garcia-Merlos additionally failed to file tax returns for his companies and underreported his wages on his own tax returns. The State of New Jersey is seeking an eight-year prison term and restitution of more than $400,000. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Could Cost $1B and Take One Year

    September 18, 2023 —
    Hawaii Gov. Josh Green and Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) have estimated at $1 billion the cost of cleanup after the Maui wildfires—which started Aug. 8 and killed at least 115 people and destroyed more than 2,200 structures. Officials planning the rebuilding of the parts of West Maui devastated by the wildfires are emphasizing safety and residents’ wishes over speed. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Traub Lieberman Partner Katie Keller and Associate Steven Hollis Obtain Summary Judgment Based on Plaintiff’s Failure to Comply with Policy Conditions

    June 12, 2023 —
    Traub Lieberman Partner Katie Keller and Associate Steven Hollis obtained summary judgment on behalf of a major homeowners’ insurer in a breach of contract action in the Circuit Court for the Ninth Judicial Circuit in and for Osceola County, Florida. The underlying claim involved a water loss in the kitchen of the Plaintiff’s property allegedly resulting in substantial damage to the home necessitating renovations throughout the residence. The claim was reported seventeen days after the reported date of loss by Plaintiff’s counsel. The Plaintiff had retained counsel and two vendors before giving notice to the insurer. In addition, the insurer’s field adjuster was not provided the opportunity to inspect the plumbing materials which had been allegedly damaged. Specifically, the bottom panel of the sink kitchen cabinet box had been removed. The insurer retained an engineer, who concluded that the removal of the damaged property hindered the ability of the engineer to determine their conditions prior to removal or whether exposure from waste arm leakage occurred. It was later learned that the damaged plumbing fixtures and the bottom of the cabinets had been thrown out by the contractors, which all happened before the claim was reported to the insurer. The insured also failed to provide a signed, sworn proof of loss within sixty days after the loss. Reprinted courtesy of Kathryn Keller, Traub Lieberman and Steven A. Hollis, Traub Lieberman Ms. Keller may be contacted at kkeller@tlsslaw.com Mr. Hollis may be contacted at shollis@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Defendant Added to Morrison Bridge Decking Lawsuit

    March 26, 2014 —
    The Morrison Bridge in Multnomah County, Oregon, has added a new company to their lawsuit regarding problems with the slip-resistant FRP decking, according to The Oregonian. The county has already named the installer, the supplier, and the manufacturer. Now, they have added Hardesty & Hanover, LLP, the company “that contracted with the decking manufacturer to provide engineering and design for the project.” The Oregonian reported that “the county has identified a construction design professional who can testify that Hardesty & Hanover made errors that contributed to the Morrison Bridge's damage,” according to the amended complaint. First, Conway construction (the deck installer) filed suit against the decking manufacturer and supplier. Then, the “county inserted itself into the suit last fall,” stated The Oregonian, and “is seeking more than $2 million to repair or replace the decking, plus damages.” A trial is scheduled for February 2015. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Alert: AAA Construction Industry Rules Update

    June 07, 2021 —
    The American Arbitration Association has made some needed updates to their Construction Industry Arbitration and Mediation Rules, effective July 1, 2015. Among the changes listed at their website are:
    • A mediation step for all cases with claims of $100,000 or more (subject to the ability of any party to opt out).
    • Consolidation and joinder time frames and filing requirements to streamline these increasingly involved issues in construction arbitrations.
    • New preliminary hearing rules to provide more structure and organization to get the arbitration process on the right track from the beginning.
    • Information exchange measures to give arbitrators a greater degree of control to limit the exchange of information, including electronic documents.
    • Availability of emergency measures of protection in contracts that have been entered into on or after July 1, 2015.
    • Enforcement power of the arbitrator to issue orders to parties that refuse to comply with the Rules or the arbitrator’s orders.
    • Permissibility of dispositive motions to dispose of all or part of a claim or to narrow the issue in a claim.
    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

    Coverage Issues: When You Need Your Own Lawyer in a Construction Defect Suit

    October 16, 2013 —
    When an insurer hires an attorney on behalf of a client in a construction defect suit, that attorney is the client’s lawyer, but as Mike Curry writes on the website of Pendleton Wilson Hennessey & Crow, PC, a point may come when you need to hire your own additional attorney. Even though an insurance company client may refer to the lawyer as “the insurance carrier’s attorney,” Mr. Curry cites the words of the Colorado Bar Association’s ethics committee, “the insured is the client to whom the lawyer’s duty of loyalty is owed, regardless of any retention agreement the lawyer may have with the carrier.” Mr. Curry then offers the example of what happens when the insurance company advises its client that it may not cover. “You presumably call your attorney and ask him to explain what’s going on, what the letter means, and what to do next.” All the attorney can say is “I cannot offer legal advice on coverage issues.” This is the limitation of what Mr. Curry refers to as “the tripartite relationship.” The attorney has been retained for issues related to the construction defect dispute between the insured and the plaintiff. Not between the insurer and its insured. The attorney has, as he points out, a fiduciary obligation to the insurance company. When coverage issues arise, “an independent attorney — one you hire — can help you with the coverage issues that your insurance-assigned attorney simply cannot address.” He further notes that “personal counsel owes no fiduciary obligation to the insurance company,” and can be “utilized to persuade the carrier to provide coverage or settle the case.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of