BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineer
    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


    Client Alert: Service Via Tag Jurisdiction Insufficient to Subject Corporation to General Personal Jurisdiction

    New Jersey’s Proposed Construction Defect Law May Not Cover Everything

    Contractor Prevails in Part Against CalOSHA in Valley Fever Case

    DA’s Office Checking Workers Comp Compliance

    Los Angeles Construction Sites May Be on Fault Lines

    It’s Getting Harder and Harder to be a Concrete Supplier in California

    With Vice President's Tie-Breaker, US Senate Approves Far-Reaching Climate Bill

    Appeals Court Upholds Decision by Referee in Trial Court for Antagan v Shea Homes

    Insurance Telematics and Usage Based Insurance Products

    6,500 Bridges in Ohio Allegedly Functionally Obsolete or Structurally Deficient

    Waiver Of Arbitration by Not Submitting Claim to Initial Decision Maker…Really!

    Cost of Materials Holding Back Housing Industry

    Be Careful How You Terminate: Terminating for Convenience May Limit Your Future Rights

    Chinese Millionaire Roils Brokers Over Shrinking Mansion

    2016 Updates to CEB’s Mechanics Liens and Retail Leasing Practice Books Now Available

    A Lien Might Just Save Your Small Construction Business

    Want to Make Your Jobsite Safer? Look to the Skies.

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    Development in CBF Green Building Case in Maryland

    Illinois Court Assesses Factual Nature of Term “Reside” in Determining Duty to Defend

    Trio of White and Williams Attorneys Named Top Lawyers by Delaware Today

    Updated Covid-19 Standards In The Workplace

    AAA Revises Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Charges in Kansas Water Park Death

    Interpreting Insurance Coverage and Exclusions: When Sudden means Sudden and EIFS means Faulty

    Connecticut Supreme Court Rules Matching of Materials Decided by Appraisers

    California Supreme Court Declares that Exclusionary Rule for Failing to Comply with Expert Witness Disclosures Applies at the Summary Judgment Stage

    The Future of Construction Tech Is Decision Tech

    The NAR asks FAA to Amend their Drone Rules for Real Estate Use

    “Rip and Tear” Damage Remains Covered Under CGL Policy as “Accident”—for Now.

    Guidance for Structural Fire Engineering Making Its Debut

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2020

    Dallas Home Being Built of Shipping Containers

    SFAA and Coalition of Partners Encourage Lawmakers to Require Essential Surety Bonding Protections on All Federally-Financed Projects Receiving WIFIA Funds

    Court Addresses HOA Attempt to Restrict Short Term Rentals

    Were Quake Standards Illegally Altered for PG&E Nuclear Power Plant?

    A License to Sue: Appellate Court Upholds Condition of Statute that a Contracting Party Must Hold a Valid Contractor’s License to Pursue Action for Recovery of Payment for Contracting Services

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/31/24) – International Homebuying Shrinks Commercial Real Estate Focus on Sustainability, and U.S. Banks Boost Provisions for Credit Losses

    New Report: Civil Engineering Salaries and Job Satisfaction Are Strong and Climbing at a Faster Rate Than Past Reports

    Velazquez Framing, LLC v. Cascadia Homes, Inc. (Take 2) – Pre-lien Notice for Labor Unambiguously Not Required

    No Occurrence Where Contract Provides for Delays

    The BUILDCHAIN Project Enhances Data Exchange and Transparency in the EU Construction Industry

    Important Information Regarding Colorado Mechanic’s Lien Rights.

    Revisiting the CMO; Are We Overusing the Mediation Privilege?

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Fires up a Case-By-Case Analysis for Landlord-Tenant, Implied Co-Insured Questions

    Farewell Capsule Tower, Tokyo’s Oddest Building

    'Perfect Storm' Caused Fractures at San Francisco Transit Hub

    New Notary Language For Mechanics Lien Releases and Stop Payment Notice Releases

    Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- A Wrap Up

    Gilroy Homeowners Sue over Leaky Homes
    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

    Florida trigger

    May 18, 2011 —

    In Johnson-Graham-Malone, Inc. v. Austwood Enterprises, Inc., No. 16-2009-CA-005750-XXXX-MA (Fla. 4th Cir. Ct. Duval County, April 29, 2011), insured JGM was the general contractor for an apartment project completed in 1998. In 2007, the project owner sued JGM seeking damages for defective construction resulting in moisture penetration property damage. JGM tendered its defense to Amerisure. Amerisure denied a defense. JGM defended and settled the underlying suit and then filed suit against Amerisure seeking recovery of defense and settlement costs. The trial court granted JGM’s motion for partial summary judgment. The court first addressed Amerisure’s duty to defend. Applying Florida law, the court held that, although the underlying complaint alleged that the property damage was not discovered until after expiration of the Amerisure policies

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

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

    And the Cyber-Beat Goes On. Yet Another Cyber Regulatory Focus for Insurers

    April 15, 2015 —
    Regulators and government agencies are sharpening their focus on the issues surrounding cyber risk. The number of pronouncements are too numerous to recite in a single client alert but the overarching message is clear – be prepared or be subject to attack. Attacks not only will come from hackers, customers, consumers and, ultimately the plaintiffs’ bar, but the regulators themselves. Vulnerability lies not only with cyber attacked companies but increasingly with the companies’ officers and directors who fail to adequately safeguard data. On March 26, 2015, the New York Department of Financial Services (DFS) announced that it would be expanding its information technology examination procedures to focus on cyber risk. This effort was a follow-up to its February 8, 2015 announcement of new cyber assessments (See "Not Just Another Client Alert about Cyber-Risk and Effective Cybersecurity Insurance Regulatory Guidance," March 24, 2015). Not to be outdone, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) proposed a comprehensive and mandatory filing for property casualty insurers that would give regulators a full range of information and data on cyber risk exposures issued by carriers in the insurance market. This proposal comes on the heels of President Obama’s proposal, just two months ago, to create the Cyber Threat Intelligent Integration Center (CTIIC), a new federal agency designed to fight cyber attacks, provide collaboration and encourage information sharing between the Federal government and private industry. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert Ansehl, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Ansehl may be contacted at ansehlr@whiteandwilliams.com

    Chambers USA 2020 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    June 15, 2020 —
    White and Williams is once again recognized by Chambers USA as a leading law firm in Pennsylvania for achievements and client service in the area of insurance law. In addition, four lawyers received individual honors – two for their work in insurance, one for his work in banking and finance and another for his work in commercial litigation. White and Williams is acknowledged for its renowned practice offering expert representation to insurers and reinsurers across an impressive range of areas including coverage, bad faith litigation and excess liability. The firm is recognized for its notable strength in transactional and regulatory matters, complemented by its adroit handling of complex alternative dispute resolution proceedings and is described as "reasoned and respectful." Chambers also acknowledged the firm's broad trial capabilities, including handling data privacy, professional liability and toxic tort coverage claims as well as its experience in substantial claims arising from bodily injury and wrongful death suits. White and Williams' cross-disciplinary team is also highlighted, characterized for "work[ing] well together and provid[ing] exceptional representation." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    California Supreme Court Allows Claim Under Unfair Competition Statute To Proceed

    October 16, 2013 —
    The California Supreme Court determined that insurance practices violating the state's Unfair Insurance Practices Act (UIPA) could support a claim under the state's unfair competition law (UCL). Zhang v. Superior Court, 57 Cal. 4th 353 (2013). Zhang purchased a CGL policy from California Capital Insurance Company. She sued California Capital in a dispute over coverage for fire damage to her commercial property. The complaint included causes of action for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and violation of the UCL. In her UCL claim, Zhang alleged that California Capital had "engaged in unfair, deceptive, untrue, and/or misleading advertising" by promising to provide timely coverage in the event of a compensable loss, when it had no intention of paying the true value of the insureds' covered claims. Zhang specifically alleged unreasonable delays causing deterioration of her property; withholding of policy benefits; refusal to consider cost estimates; misinforming her as to the right to an appraisal; and falsely telling her mortgage holder that she did not intend to repair the property, resulting in foreclosure proceedings. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    You’re Only as Good as Those with Whom You Contract

    April 17, 2019 —
    I have been beating the drum of the need to have a solid construction contract as the basis for your construction project and contractor/subcontractor/supplier relationships. I have also emphasized that communication early and often is one of the best ways to assure a smooth project. However, the sad truth is that even with the best contract drafted with the assistance of an experienced construction attorney, if the other party to the contract simply decides not to perform, whether that is through unjustified non-payment or simple refusal to complete a scope of work without reason, it will be an expensive proposition to force compliance or be compensated for the monetary damage caused by such actions. It is this often unmentioned truth relating to any contract, including those that construction professionals in Virginia deal with on a daily basis, that makes having a good knowledge of those with whom you plan to contract is key to a successful (read profitable) construction project. Of course be sure that any contractor or subcontractor you contract with has the basics of propoer insurance, the right experience and of course a contractor’s license with the proper specialty or specialties. These basics will get you most of the way to assuring that those that contract with you at least are responsible in business. Another key component, if you can find this information out, is the financial wherwithall of the other party. For a General Contractor, this means both sides of the equation: Owner and Subcontractors. For a Subcontractor, the key is the Contractor, but any other information you can get on the Owner is helpful (though this can be difficult) particularly in the face of a “pay if paid” clause. 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

    Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies the Meaning of "Living in the Same Household" for Purposes of Coverage Under a Homeowners Policy

    April 10, 2019 —
    As all insurance coverage attorneys know, how courts interpret certain words and phrases in insurance policies is significant since one word can make the difference between a claim being covered or not. On January 28, 2019, the Court of Appeal for Ontario, in the Ferro v. Weiner1 decision, clarified the jurisprudence on the meaning of “living in the same household” in the context of homeowners policies. Background Facts Ms. Enid Weiner owned a lakeside home which was insured under a homeowners policy through Intact Insurance Company (the “Intact Policy”). The Policy listed only Enid Weiner as the Named Insured, but provided coverage to her relatives “while living in the same household” for liability for unintentional bodily injury arising from an insured’s “personal actions anywhere in the world.” Although the lake house was used as a vacation home when Ms. Weiner’s children were small, it was her primary residence for about ten years before she moved into a nursing home. While she never permanently moved back, her three grown children and their families used the house as a cottage, with Enid occasionally accompanying them. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stella Szantova Giordano, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Giordano may be contacted at ssg@sdvlaw.com

    Don’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public Project

    June 21, 2017 —
    According to a quick Google search the term “holding the bag” comes from the mid eighteenth century and means be left with the onus of what was originally another’s responsibility. Nobody wants to be left holding the bag. But that is the situation our client (subcontractor) found themselves in when upon completion of a public project the general contractor went out of business before paying the remaining amount due and owing to our client. Under Nebraska law, liens are not allowed against public projects. Instead the subcontractor is to make a claim on the payment and performance bond secured by the general contractor at the start of the project. In our case, the general contractor never secured a bond on which to make a claim; consequently leaving our client holding the bag. Fortunately, we were able to hand the bag back to the State and obtain full payment for the services and materials provided. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sean Minahan, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Minahan may be contacted at sminahan@ldmlaw.com

    Third Circuit Holds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Despite Insured’s Expectations

    November 21, 2018 —
    In its recent decision in Frederick Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hall, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 31666 (3d Cir. Nov. 8, 2018), the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit had occasion to consider Pennsylvania’s doctrine of reasonable expectations in the context of a faulty workmanship claim. Hallstone procured a general liability policy from Frederick Mutual to insure its masonry operations. Notably, when purchasing the policy through an insurance broker, Hallstone’s principal stated that he wanted the “maximum” “soup to nuts” coverage for his company. Hallstone was later sued by a customer for alleged defects in its masonry work. While Frederick agreed to provide a defense, it also commenced a lawsuit seeking a judicial declaration that its policy excluded coverage for faulty workmanship. The district court agreed that the business risk exclusions applied, but nevertheless found in favor of Hallstone based on the argument that Hallstone had a reasonable expectation that when applying for an insurance policy affording “soup to nuts” coverage, it this would include coverage for faulty workmanship claims. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Margolies, Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
    Mr. Margolies may be contacted at bmargolies@tlsslaw.com