BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildings
    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


    Home Prices Up in Metro Regions

    FIFA Inspecting Brazil’s World Cup Stadiums

    Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Denied

    Weslaco, Texas Investigating Possible Fraudulent Contractor Invoices

    What to do When the Worst Happens: Responding to a Cybersecurity Breach

    Yellen Has Scant Power to Relieve U.S. Housing Slowdown

    The 2023 Term of the Supreme Court: Administrative and Regulatory Law Rulings

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Motion for Remand

    Testimony from Insureds' Expert Limited By Motion In Limine

    New Spending Measure Has Big Potential Infrastructure Boost

    Drywall Originator Hopes to Sell in Asia

    Chinese Millionaire Roils Brokers Over Shrinking Mansion

    Difficult Task for Court to Analyze Delay and Disorder on Construction Project

    Law Firm Settles Two Construction Defect Suits for a Combined $4.7 Million

    DIR Public Works Registration System Down, Public Works Contractors Not to be Penalized

    Motion to Strike Insurer's Expert Opinion Granted

    Construction Insurance Rates Up in the United States

    Construction Law Alert: Unlicensed Contractors On Federal Projects Entitled To Payment Under The Miller Act

    When is a Contract not a Contract?

    Hunton Insurance Recovery Partner Michael Levine Quoted on Why Courts Must Consider the Science of COVID-19

    How to Build a Water-Smart City

    Federal Contractors – Double Check the Terms of Your Contract Before Performing Ordered Changes

    Fee Simple!

    Stormy Skies Ahead? Important News Regarding a Hard Construction Insurance Market

    Industry Groups Decry Jan. 6 Riot; DOT Chief Chao Steps Down in Protest

    2023 Construction Law Update

    Want a Fair Chance at a Government Contract? Think Again

    How Construction Contracts are Made. Hint: It’s a Bit Like Making Sausage

    The Impact of Sopris Lodging v. Schofield Excavation on Timeliness of Colorado Construction Defect Claims

    Failing to Pay Prevailing Wages May Have Just Cost You More Than You Thought

    Insured's Testimony On Expectation of Coverage Deemed Harmless

    Rights Afforded to Employees and Employers During Strikes

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Business Interruption, COVID-19 Claims Under Pollution Policy Fails

    Ninth Circuit Holds Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Applies Beyond All-Risk Policies

    Disaster-Relief Bill Stalls in Senate

    Changes to Pennsylvania Mechanic’s Lien Code

    Read Before You Sign: Claim Waivers in Project Documents

    Insurer Unable to Declare its Coverage Excess In Construction Defect Case

    Golf Resorts Offering Yoga, Hovercraft Rides to the Green

    Ten Years After Colorado’s Adverse Possession Amendment: a brief look backwards and forwards

    Construction Defects Are Not An Occurrence Under New York, New Jersey Law

    EEOC Focuses on Eliminating Harassment, Recruitment and Hiring Barriers in the Construction Industry

    Australians Back U.S. Renewables While Opportunities at Home Ebb

    Water Seepage, Ensuing Mold Damage Covered by Homeowner's Policy

    New Jersey Strengthens the Structural Integrity of Its Residential Builds

    New Becker & Poliakoff Attorney to Expand Morristown Construction Litigation Practice

    Several Lewis Brisbois Partners Recognized by Sacramento Magazine in List of Top Lawyers

    Top 10 Take-Aways: the ABA Forum's 2024 Mid-Winter Meeting

    Nevada’s Construction Defect Law

    Colorado Abandons the “Completed and Accepted Rule” in Favor of the “Foreseeability Rule” in Determining a Contractor’s Duty to a Third Party After Work Has Been Completed
    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

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured In Northern California Super Lawyers 2021!

    July 25, 2021 —
    Wilke Fleury is proud to announce that 15 of our astounding attorneys were featured in the Annual List of Top Attorneys in the 2021 Northern California Super Lawyers magazine. Super Lawyers rates attorneys in each state using a patented selection process; they also publish a yearly magazine issue that regularly produces award-winning features on selected attorneys. 1 of 15, Michael Polis, was also recognized on Page 9. Polis’ second job as a farmer was highlighted with a column and some neat photos. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wilke Fleury LLP

    “For What It’s Worth”

    October 21, 2024 —
    The legal doctrine of quantum meruit is essentially referring to recovering “for what it’s worth,” incorporating the Latin phrase for “as much as one has deserved.” Quantum meruit recovery occurs when there is no contract between parties for the particular item for which recovery is sought. Hence, quantum meruit recovery is generally a means of last resort to endeavor to make oneself whole. So, it was for a subcontractor seeking nearly $14,000,000 for work it performed on a construction project in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. The subcontractor sued on contract as well as quantum meruit/unjust enrichment. The court initially dismissed the quantum meruit/unjust enrichment claims – because there was a contract claim – whereupon the contract claim was dismissed on summary judgment: the subcontractor failed to timely submit change proposals and, consequently, “lost contract remedies available to recover amounts it sought in the change proposals.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    America’s Factories Weren’t Built to Endure This Many Hurricanes

    November 05, 2024 —
    America’s factories aren’t built for the current cascade of extreme weather events. Dozens of industrial sites were in the zone of impact as Hurricane Milton slammed into Florida’s West Coast this week, including several concrete plants, speed boat manufacturing operations and facilities owned by Honeywell International Inc., Johnson Controls International Plc, General Electric Co. and Illinois Tool Works Inc., among others. Meanwhile, a Baxter International Inc. facility in Marion, North Carolina, that makes 60% of the intravenous fluids used in hospitals around the country was shuttered because of damage from Hurricane Helene just two weeks ago. Mines responsible for producing more than 80% of the world’s supply of commercial high-purity quartz in nearby Spruce Pine were also affected by severe flooding, raising the risk of disruptions to semiconductor production, which relies on the material. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brooke Sutherland, Bloomberg

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

    October 30, 2023 —
    In State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Guevara, 2023 IL App (1st) 221425-U, P2, the Illinois First District Court of Appeals addressed an insurance carrier’s duty to defend under a homeowners insurance policy. The underlying suit stemmed from an alleged injury suffered at a residence located in Berwyn, Illinois and owned by named insured Luz Melina Guevara, a defendant in the suit. After Guevara tendered the suit, State Farm filed a complaint for declaratory judgment seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify Guevara because Guevara did not “reside” at the insured premises. The policy defined the "insured location" as the "residence premises," and residence premises was defined as "the one, two, three or four-family dwelling, other structures, and grounds or that part of any other building; where you reside and which is shown in the Declarations." In response to the underlying lawsuit, Guevara had filed an answer and affirmative defenses in which Guevara denied the allegation that "At all relevant times, [Guevara] resided in Berwyn, Cook County, Illinois." Guevara admitted that she owned the Berwyn property but denied that she "resided in, maintained and controlled the property". The declaratory judgment complaint alleged (among other things) that, based on admissions by Guevara in her answer, the Berwyn residence was not an "insured location" under the State Farm policy. State Farm moved for summary judgment at the trial court level on this ground and summary judgment was granted in State Farm’s favor. An appeal ensued wherein the parties disagreed as to whether there is a genuine issue of material fact that, under the language of the policy, State Farm had no duty to defend because the Berwyn property was not an "insured location" because she did not "reside" there. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James M. Eastham, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Eastham may be contacted at jeastham@tlsslaw.com

    Suit Against Broker for Securing Inadequate Coverage Dismissed on Statute of Limitations Grounds

    April 11, 2018 —
    The insured's suit against his broker for securing a policy with insufficient policy limits was dismissed when filed more than two years after the alleged professional negligence occurred. Pritchard v. Andy Houghton Ins. Agency, 2018 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1160 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 20, 2018). Pritchard requested coverage for replacement of his property in the event of a total loss by fire. He obtained a policy from Houghton. 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

    Classify Workers Properly to Avoid Expensive Penalties

    April 25, 2022 —
    Business owners must carefully consider how the people working for them are classified. There is a fine line between being identified as a contractor or employee on the job. Owners must know the difference to avoid being penalized. Worker classification determines if an employer must withhold income taxes and pay Social Security, Medicare taxes and unemployment tax on wages paid to an employee. Businesses do not have to withhold or pay any taxes on payments to independent contractors. The earnings of a person working as an independent contractor are subject to self-employment tax. There are federal and state rules for determining if a person is an employee or contractor. Employers must follow both sets of guidelines when classifying workers. Reprinted courtesy of Martin C. McCarthy, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. McCarthy may be contacted at marty.mccarthy@mcc-cpas.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    North Carolina Federal Court Holds “Hazardous Materials” Exclusion Does Not Bar Duty to Defend Under CGL Policy for Bodily Injury Claims Arising Out of Direct Exposure to PFAs

    December 07, 2020 —
    On October 19, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina held that a “hazardous materials” exclusion contained in a CGL policy did not preclude a duty to defend the insured against claims alleging bodily injury resulting from direct exposure to perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), which are man-made chemicals within the group of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAs).[1] In Colony Insurance Company v. Buckeye Fire Equipment Company, the insured was named a defendant in hundreds of underlying suits relating to its manufacture of fire equipment containing aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), a fire suppressant.[2] The underlying plaintiffs alleged that: (a) the AFFF contained PFOS and PFOA; (b) PFOA and PFOS are highly carcinogenic; and (c) exposure to AFFF contained in the defendants’ products caused bodily injury or property damage. Around a third of the underlying complaints alleged harm from both direct exposure to the foam and exposure through the environment. Representative language from those complaints was: “[d]uring [underlying plaintiff’s] employment as a firefighter and firefighter instructor, he was significantly exposed to elevated levels of PFOS and PFOA in their concentrated form as a result of regular contact with [d]efendant’s AFFF products and through PFOS and PFOA having contaminated the FireCollege well system.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Paul A. Briganti, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Briganti may be contacted at brigantip@whiteandwilliams.com

    BHA Attending the Construction Law Conference in San Antonio, TX

    February 18, 2015 —
    Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc. (BHA) is proud to be joining with the State Bar of Texas, Construction Law Section as a sponsor and exhibitor at the event, and is excited to announce that they will also be sponsoring a raffle for a $100 Nordstrom gift card to given away at the Conference. Just stop by the BHA booth, and drop your card in the bowl for a chance to win. With offices in San Antonio and Houston, BHA offers the experience of over 20 years of service to carriers, defense counsel, and insurance professionals as designated experts in nearly 5,500 cases. BHA’s staff encompasses a broad range of licensed and credentialed experts in the areas of general contracting and specialty trades, as well as architects, civil and structural engineers, and has provided services on behalf of developers, general contractors and subcontractors across the state of Texas. BHA’s experience covers the full range of construction defect litigation, including single and multi-family residential (including high-rise), institutional (schools, hospitals and government buildings), commercial, and industrial claims. BHA also specializes in coverage, exposure, and delay claim analysis. Download the seminar brochure and register... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of