BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expert
    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


    Colorado Passes Construction Defect Reform Bill

    10 Haight Lawyers Recognized in Best Lawyers in America© 2023 and The Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch 2023

    Colorado House Bill 20-1290 – Restriction on the Use of Failure to Cooperate Defense in First-Party Claims

    Everyone’s Working From Home Due to the Coronavirus – Is There Insurance Coverage for a Data Breach?

    Personal Guarantor Cannot Escape a Personal Guarantee By…

    Under the Hood of U.S. Construction Spending Is Revised Data

    Union Handbilling: When, Where, and Why it is Legal

    Colorado Construction-Defects Reform Law Attempt Expected in 2015

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolution Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    Force Majeure Under the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic

    Wildfire Is Efficient Proximate Cause of Moisture Reaching Expansive Soils Under Residence

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Los Angeles Tier 1 “Best Law Firm” and Tier 2 for Los Angeles and Orange County by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2022

    Treasure Island Sues Beach Trail Designer over Concrete Defects

    Australia Warns of Multi-Billion Dollar Climate Disaster Costs

    The “Program Accessibility” Exception for Public Entities Under the ADA

    "Occurrence" May Include Intentional Acts In Montana

    Big Builder’s Analysis of the Top Ten Richest Counties

    BIOHM Seeks to Turn Plastic Waste into Insulation Material with Mushrooms

    Congratulations to San Diego Partner Alex Giannetto and Senior Associate Michael Ibach on Settling a Case 3 Weeks Into a 5-Week Trial!

    Time to Repair Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws?

    Jury Instruction That Fails to Utilize Concurrent Cause for Property Loss is Erroneous

    The ABCs of PFAS: What You Need to Know About Liabilities for the “Forever Chemical”

    Contractor Walks Off Job. What are the Owner’s Damages?

    Language California Construction Direct Contractors Must Add to Subcontracts Beginning on January 1, 2022, Per Senate Bill 727

    Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal Suggests Negligent Repairs to Real Property Are Not Subject to the Statute of Repose

    Supreme Court of Canada Broadly Interprets Exception to Faulty Workmanship Exclusion

    Broker for Homeowners Policy Has No Duty to Advise Insureds on Excess Flood Coverage

    Hawaii Federal District Court Remands Coverage Dispute

    The Preservation Maze

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolute Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    Denial of Coverage for Bulge in Wall Upheld

    Construction Industry on the Comeback, But It Won’t Be the Same

    Wall Street Is Buying Starter Homes to Quietly Become America’s Landlord

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Hundreds of Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Honors Four Partners as ‘Lawyers of the Year’

    New York Revises Retainage Requirements for Private Construction Contracts: Overview of the “5% Retainage Law”

    “Incidental” Versus “Direct” Third Party Beneficiaries Under Insurance Policies in Which a Party is Not an Additional Insured

    Contractors and Owners Will Have an Easier Time Identifying Regulated Wetlands Following Recent U.S. Supreme Court Opinion

    Colorado Court of Appeals Finds Damages to Non-Defective Property Arising From Defective Construction Covered Under Commercial General Liability Policy

    The Burden of Betterment

    The Reptile Theory in Practice

    House of Digital Twins

    Tick Tock: Don’t Let the Statute of Repose or Limitations Time Periods Run on Your Construction Claims

    My Construction Law Wish List

    Where Do We Go From Here?

    COVID-19 Could Impact Contractor Performance Bonds

    Jury Could Have Found That Scissor Lift Manufacturer Should Have Included “Better” Safety Features

    Strangers in a Strange Land: Revisiting Arbitration Provisions to Account for Increasing International Influences

    Second Circuit Certifies Question Impacting "Bellefonte Rule"

    Type I Differing Site Conditions Claim is Not Easy to Prove

    More Thoughts on “Green” (the Practice, not the Color) Building
    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

    Energy Company Covered for Business Interruption Losses Caused by Fire and Resulting in Town-Ordered Shutdown

    February 15, 2021 —
    In the case of NextSun Energy Littleton, LLC v. Acadia Ins. Co., the United States District Court of Massachusetts held that once direct physical damage from a covered peril causes a covered business interruption loss, any increase in the duration of such business interruption, due to the enforcement of an ordinance or law, extends the coverage period provided for lost income. The Court further held that a policy exclusion for business interruption due to the enforcement of any ordinance or law not in force at the time of the loss only applies when the ordinance or law itself, not the enforcement action that it authorizes, was not in force at the time of the loss. The case involved a solar panel company, NextSun Energy Littleton (NextSun), that operated solar panel arrays providing electricity to the town of Littleton, Massachusetts. Due to a fire, 88 of the solar panels were damaged, and the Town immediately issued a “red-tag” order halting all energy-generating activity pending a safety inspection. The plaintiff purchased insurance for its panels along with “Energy Generating Income” (EGI) coverage, from the defendant, Acadia Ins. Co. (Acadia). The EGI policy covered “direct physical loss or damage” to “renewable energy generating equipment” and also covered the actual loss of surplus power income incurred during the interruption period. However, it excluded interruption of energy-generating income “caused by the enforcement of any ordinance, law, or decree … not in force at the time of loss.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David G. Jordan, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Mr. Jordan may be contacted at DJordan@sdvlaw.com

    ASCE Statement on House Passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024

    August 05, 2024 —
    WASHINGTON — The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) commends the House of Representatives for passing H.R. 8812, the bipartisan Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) for 2024. The House WRDA 2024 bill will help improve America's ports and inland waterways, enhance flood risk management and storm risk reduction programs, and prioritize ecosystem restoration. While we urge the Senate to swiftly vote on its version of WRDA, we are encouraged that our nation's critical water resources infrastructure remains a congressional priority. The House version of WRDA includes several key provisions to enhance the safety of America's dams and levees, which each received a 'D' on the 2021 Report Card for America's Infrastructure, as well as provisions to modernize the nation's inland waterways system, which received a 'D+' in the 2021 Report Card. This includes one of ASCE's top legislative priorities for this year, the reauthorization of the National Dam Safety Program through 2028. But beyond the reauthorization, this bill reduces restrictions on the amount of funds states can receive in National Dam Safety Program State Assistance Grants; improves access to the High Hazard Potential Dam Rehabilitation Grant Program; and requires the incorporation of low-head dams into the National Inventory of Dams. Each of these provisions are critical to ensuring the long-term safety of our nation's dams and ASCE applauds the House for their inclusion. Furthermore, ASCE was pleased to see that the House legislation extends the National Levee Safety Program through 2033, which will help support the establishment of state levee safety programs, develop and publish national guidelines for levee safety, and enhance flood protection nationwide. While these measures are not included in the Senate version of WRDA, we encourage lawmakers to ensure they are included in a final conference version of the bill. We thank the House of Representatives for moving forward WRDA 2024 and strongly encourage the Senate to pass its version so that Congress can keep this vital water resources legislation on a biennial schedule and ensure our nation's dams, levees, ports, and inland waterways can support the American economy and protect public safety. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 160,000 civil engineers worldwide and is America's oldest national engineering society. ASCE works to raise awareness of the need to maintain and modernize the nation's infrastructure using sustainable and resilient practices, advocates for increasing and optimizing investment in infrastructure, and improve engineering knowledge and competency. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    For Smart Home Technology, the Contract Is Key

    June 07, 2021 —
    In our previous post we discussed the importance of conducting a thorough due diligence and procurement process with smart technology providers. Next up? The contract. The price of a procured product is always important, but equally important are other contractual terms that reflect the commercial agreement. Ultimately, the contract should answer the fundamental question of “What are you buying?” The product itself is not the only feature being purchased. A customer is also buying certainty, service performance, risk mitigation, flexibility, security, compliance, and other similar “intangible” items of value. The Price of Certainty As part of the price, the purchaser of smart technology is also buying certainty. What do we mean by that? Reprinted courtesy of James W. McPhillips, Pillsbury and Rachel Newell, Pillsbury Mr. McPhillips may be contacted at james.mcphillips@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Newell may be contacted at rachel.newell@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractor’s Coverage For Additional Insured Established by Unilateral Contract

    November 18, 2011 —

    The contractor was covered as an additional insured under the subcontractor’s policy even though the parties had never actually signed an agreement to add the contractor to the policy. Evanston Ins. Co. v. Westchester Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 20081 (9th Cir. Oct. 3, 2011).

    The policies held by Bellevue Master, the general contractor, required it to be an additional insured under any subcontractor’s liability policy. Northwest Tower Crane Services was a subcontractor. Bellevue Master LLC, faxed a message that Northwest could continue to be a subcontractor on the project if it complied with Bellevue Master’s insurance requirements. Northwest contacted its insurance broker and requested an insurance certificate be issued to Bellevue Master so that it would be an additional insured under Northwest’s policy.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    Drawing the Line: In Tennessee, the Economic Loss Doctrine Does Not Apply to Contracts for Services

    December 11, 2023 —
    In Commercial Painting Co. v. Weitz Co. LLC, No. W2019-02089-SC-R11-CV, 2023 Tenn. LEXIS 39 (Weitz), the Supreme Court of Tennessee (Supreme Court) considered whether the economic loss doctrine barred the plaintiff’s claims for fraud, negligent misrepresentation and punitive damages arising out of a contract with the defendant for construction services. The court held that the economic loss doctrine only applies to product liability cases and does not apply to claims arising from contracts for services. This case establishes that, in Tennessee, the economic loss doctrine does not bar tort claims in disputes arising from service contracts. In Weitz, defendant, Weitz Co. LLC (Weitz), was the general contractor for a construction project and hired plaintiff Commercial Painting Co. (Commercial) as a drywall subcontractor. Weitz refused to pay Commercial for several of its payment applications, claiming that the applications were submitted untimely and contained improper change order requests. Commercial filed a lawsuit against Weitz seeking over $1.9 million in damages, alleging breach of contract, unjust enrichment, enforcement of a mechanic’s lien, and interest and attorney’s fees under the Prompt Pay Act of 1991. Weitz filed a counterclaim for $500,000 for costs allegedly incurred due to Commercial’s delay and defective workmanship. In response, Commercial amended its complaint to add claims for fraud, intentional and negligent misrepresentation, rescission of the contract and $10 million in punitive damages. Commercial alleged that Weitz received an extension of the construction schedule but fraudulently withheld this information from Commercial and continued to impose unrealistic deadlines. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    How the New Dropped Object Standard Is Changing Jobsite Safety

    January 02, 2019 —
    In the United States, a dropped object injures a worker every 11 minutes—equating to nearly 50,000 cases every year. For those who seek medical treatment for these types of injuries, it can cost an average of $42,000. In fact, 5 percent of all fatalities on jobsites are due to falling objects, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. These statistics highlight the overwhelming importance of dropped object prevention. OSHA already identifies dropped object incidents under the category of “Struck by Object” in its widely recognized “Fatal Four” list of the four leading causes of fatalities in the construction industry. Reprinted courtesy of Derek Rose, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado statutory “property damage” caused by an “occurrence”

    August 04, 2011 —

    Colorado General Assembly House Bill 10-1394 was signed into law by the Governor on May 21, 2010, codified at Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-20-808 (2010)

    13-20-808. Insurance policies issued to construction professionals

    (1) (a) The general assembly finds and determines that:

    (I) The interpretation of insurance policies issued to construction professionals is of vital importance to the economic and social welfare of the citizens of Colorado and in furthering the purposes of this part 8.

    (II) Insurance policies issued to construction professionals have become increasingly complex, often containing multiple, lengthy endorsements and exclusions conflicting with the reasonable expectations of the insured.

    (III) The correct interpretation of coverage for damages arising out of construction defects is in the best interest of insurers, construction professionals, and property owners.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

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

    Indemnity Payment to Insured Satisfies SIR

    March 11, 2014 —
    In response to certified questions from the Eleventh Circuit, the Florida Supreme Court found that a contractual indemnity payment to the insured satisfied the policy's SIR requirement. Intervest Constr. of Jax v. Gen. Fid. Ins. Co., 2014 Fl. LEXIS 568 (Fla. Feb. 6, 2014). ICI Homes, Inc. a general contractor, hired Custom Cutting, Inc. to provide trim work, including installation of attic stairs in a residence ICI was building. Under the contract, Custom Cutting agreed to indemnify ICI for any damages resulting from Custom Cutting's negligence. The owner of the residence fell while using the attic stairs installed by Custom Cutting, injurying herself. The owner sued ICI, who sought indemnification from Custom Cutting. ICI's policy with General Fidelity had a $1 million SIR. The policy also had a transfer of rights clause granting the insurer some subrogation rights. The case was mediated. The parties agreed to a settlement of $1.6 million. Custom Cutting's insurer proposed paying $1 million to ICI to settle the indemnification claim. ICI, in turn, would pay that $1 million to the residence owner. A dispute arose over wither ICI or General Fidelity was responsible for paying the remaining $600,000. 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