BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut architecture 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


    New York Shuts Down Majority of Construction

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (01/25/23) – Artificial Intelligence, Proptech Innovation, and Drone Adoption

    Lenders and Post-Foreclosure Purchasers Have Standing to Make Construction Defect Claims for After-Discovered Conditions

    Hurricane Laura: Implications for Insurers in Louisiana

    Drought Dogs Developers in California's Soaring Housing Market

    Sacramento’s Commercial Construction Market Heats Up

    Virtual Mediation – How Do I Make It Work for Me?

    Is it time for a summer tune-up?

    Couple Claims Poor Installation of Home Caused Defects

    A Word to the Wise about Construction Defects

    Timber Prices Likely to Keep Rising

    Policy Sublimit Does Not Apply to Business Interruption Loss

    Ex-San Francisco DPW Director Sentenced to Seven Years in Corruption Case

    XL Group Pairs with America Contractor’s Insurance Group to Improve Quality of Construction

    Dump Site Provider Has Valid Little Miller Act Claim

    Travelers Insurance Sues Chicago for $26M in Damages to Willis Tower

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Burks Smith and Katie Keller Win Daubert Motion Excluding Plaintiff’s Expert’s Testimony in the Middle District of Florida

    Limitations on the Ability to Withdraw and De-Annex Property from a Common Interest Community

    California Court of Appeal Holds a Tenant Owes No Duty to Protect a Social Guest From a Defective Sidewalk Leading to a Condominium Unit

    Texas Approves Law Ensuring Fair and Open Competition

    Randy Maniloff Recognized by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® as a "Lawyer of the Year"

    Subcontractor Sued for Alleged Defective Work

    Burden to Prove Exception to Exclusion Falls on Insured

    Allen, TX Board of Trustees Expected to Approve Stadium Repair Plans

    Smart Construction and the Future of the Construction Industry

    First Circuit Rules Excess Insurer Must Provide Coverage for Fuel Spill

    Type I Differing Site Conditions Claim is Not Easy to Prove

    In All Fairness: Illinois Appellate Court Finds That Arbitration Clause in a Residential Construction Contract Was Unconscionable and Unenforceable

    Property Insurance Exclusion: Leakage of Water Over 14 Days or More

    Lower Manhattan Condos Rival Midtown’s Luxury Skyscrapers

    Insurer Need Not Pay for Rejected Defense When No Reservation of Rights Issued

    California’s Right to Repair Act not an Exclusive Remedy

    Collapse of Underground Storage Cave Not Covered

    Florida Lawmakers Fail to Reach Agreement on Condominium Safety Bill

    Florida Condo Collapse Shows Town’s Rich, Middle-Class Divide

    Domtar Update

    N.J. Appellate Court Confirms that AIA Construction Contract Bars Insurer's Subrogation Claim

    New York Federal Court Enforces Construction Exclusion, Rejects Reimbursement Claim

    Think Twice About Depreciating Repair Costs in Our State, says the Tennessee Supreme Court

    ADP Says Payrolls at Companies in U.S. Increase 200,000

    Quick Note: Insurer’s Denial of Coverage Waives Right to Enforce Post-Loss Policy Conditions

    Do Not Lose Your Mechanics Lien Right Through a Subordination Agreement

    Ninth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Construction Defects Under California Law

    HB24-1014: A Warning Bell for Colorado Businesses Amid Potential Consumer Protection Changes

    Tacoma Construction Site Uncovers Gravestones

    The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

    U.S. Home Prices Climbed 0.1% in July as Gains Slowed

    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

    “But I didn’t know what I was signing….”

    Tokyo Building Flaws May Open Pandora's Box for Asahi Kasei
    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

    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

    Contractor’s Assignment of Construction Contract to Newly Formed Company Before Company Was Licensed, Not Subject to B&P 7031

    October 04, 2021 —
    Add one more to the Business and Profession Code section 7031 archives. In Manela v. Stone, Case No. B302660 (July 1, 2021), the 2nd District Court of appeal held that Section 7031 did not apply to a contractor licensed as a sole proprietor who assigned his contract to his newly formed company although at the time of the assignment the contractor’s individual contractor’s license had not yet been reissued to the incorporated company. The Manela Case On January 4, 2015, John Stone doing business as Stone Construction Company entered into a home remodeling contract with Yosef and Nomi Manela. At the time, Stone had held a contractor’s license since 1982. On February 11, 2015, after work on the project had begun, Stone formed JDSS Construction Company, Inc., and filed a fictitious business name using the same name Stone Construction Company. Stone applied to the Contractors State License Board to have his contractor’s license issued from himself personally to his new corporation. On March 15, 2015, while waiting for the CSLB to reissue his contractor’s license, Stone entered into an assignment agreement between himself and his new company assigning the Manela construction contract. The assignment agreement was signed by Stone in his personal capacity and as President of JDSS Construction. The assignment agreement was not signed by the Manelas. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    NCDOT Aims to Reopen Helene-damaged Interstate 40 by New Year's Day

    December 10, 2024 —
    Interstate 40, closed in late September when flooding from Hurricane Helene caused multiple landslides and washouts in the Pigeon River Gorge between North Carolina and Tennessee, is expected to partially reopen on New Year’s Day 2025, more than three months after the storm. Long-term reconstruction plans are still in early development. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Derek Lacey, ENR
    Mr. Lacey may be contacted at laceyd@enr.com

    New York Appeals Court Rekindles the Spark

    March 16, 2017 —
    In John Trimble, et al. v. City of Albany, et al., 2016, 144 A.D.3d 1484; 42 N.Y.S. 3d 432 (N.Y. App. Div.), the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, addressed the issue of governmental immunity for municipal fire companies. The court held that the plaintiff, John Trimble (Trimble), had sufficient evidence related to the four-pronged test for establishing a “special relationship” between a municipality and a citizen for liability to attach. In addition, the court held that the defendants were not entitled to summary judgment on the issue of governmental immunity. Specifically, regarding the latter holding, the court stated that, when there is no actual choice made on the part of the government, the government’s actions cannot be considered discretionary and immunity will not apply. In the case at hand, a fire occurred at Trimble’s home on the evening of February 2, 2013. Trimble called 911 and the Department of Fire and Emergency Services for the City of Albany (the Department) responded. After extinguishing the fire, the Department conducted an investigation and cleared the home. The Department’s investigators then told Trimble that the fire was extinguished and it was safe to enter the home. Trimble did so, removing some items so that he could stay with relatives that night. Several hours later, there was a rekindle and the rekindled fire destroyed the home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lian Skaf, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Skaf may be contacted at skafl@whiteandwilliams.com

    No Trial Credit in NJ Appellate Decision for Non-Settling Successive Tortfeasors – Must Demonstrate Proof of Initial Tortfeasor Negligence and Proximate Cause

    January 11, 2021 —
    Where an initial tortfeasor settles in a successive negligence case, the non-settling tortfeasors do not get a credit at trial, says the New Jersey Appellate Division. The court held in Glassman v. Friedel [1], that non-settling successive tortfeasors are not entitled to a pro tanto credit after the initial tortfeasor settles and its negligence is undetermined. Rather, successive tortfeasors have the burden at trial to demonstrate that (1) the initial tortfeasor was negligent, and (2) the initial tortfeasor’s negligence was the proximate cause of the second event. In Glassman, the plaintiff, as executor of his deceased wife’s estate, sued a restaurant and property owner of the site where his wife fell and fractured her ankle. Afterwards, the plaintiff added defendants including the doctors and the medical center that cared for his wife after she fractured her ankle. The plaintiff alleged that they had been negligent during his wife’s surgery, which led to postoperative complications and injuries to his wife’s leg, ultimately resulting in a fatal pulmonary embolism. Reprinted courtesy of Kevin C. Cottone, White and Williams LLP, Robert Wright, White and Williams LLP and Monica Doss, White and Williams LLP Mr. Cottone may be contacted at cottonek@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Wright may be contacted at wrightr@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Doss may be contacted at dossm@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    August 11, 2011 —

    In Continental Western Ins. Co. v. Shay Construction, Inc., No. 10-cv-02126 (D. Col. July 28. 2011), general contractor Milender White subcontracted with insured Shay for framing work.   Shay in turn subcontracted some of its work to others.  When Shay?s subcontractors filed suit against Shay and Milender White seeking payment for their work, Milender White cross-claimed against Shay for breach of contract alleging that,Milender White notified Shay during construction that some of Shay?s work was defective and that when Shay repaired its defective work, it damaged work performed by others.  Shay’s CGL insurer Continental Western filed suit against Milender White and Shay seeking a judicial declaration of no coverage.  The federal district trial court granted Continental Western?s motion for summary judgment.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

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

    Finding of No Coverage Overturned Due to Lack of Actual Policy

    March 18, 2019 —
    The Appellate Division overturned a verdict for the insurer when the actual policy was never introduced at trial. Pennsylvania Lumbermens Mut. Ins. Co. v. B&F Land Dev. Corp., 2019 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 264 (N.Y. App. Div. Jan 16, 2018). The decedent was killed when he fell through a skylight while working on a premises owned by B&F Land Development Corporation. The estate sued B&F for wrongful death. B&F tendered to its carrier, Pennsylvania Lumbermens Mutual (PLM). PLM issued a reservations of rights. It later denied coverage because the location of the loss was not a location listed on the policy, an exclusion barred coverage for bodily injury arising out of B&F's ongoing operations conducted by it or on its behalf, and the loss was not reported to PLM as soon as practicable. PLM sued B&F and the estate for a declaratory judgment that it had no duty to defend or indemnify. A default judgment was entered against B&F after it failed to answer. Trial proceeded against the estate Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Students for Fair Admissions: Shaking the Foundations of EEOC Programs and M/WBE Requirements

    October 16, 2023 —
    On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision, Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College, holding that race-based affirmative action programs in college admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. 143 S. Ct. 2141, 216 L. Ed. 2d 857 (2023). On July 13, 2023, thirteen state Attorney Generals, relying on Students for Fair Admissions, issued a joint letter to the CEOs of the Fortune 100 companies, urging the elimination of all race-based programs in EEOC and government and private contracting. On July 19, 2023, a Tennessee district court judge issued an injunctive order against the Small Business Administration’s 8(a) application program on the basis of the program’s race-based presumption of disadvantage. Ultima Servs. Corp. v. U.S. Dep't of Agric., No. 220CV00041DCLCCRW, 2023 WL 4633481 (E.D. Tenn. July 19, 2023). The message to be taken from these developments: all race-based programs and, by extension, potentially all gender-based programs—including ones that require or reward participation of Minority Business Enterprises (“MBE”) or Women Business Enterprise (“WBE”) in construction programs—currently stand on shaky ground. This post will explain the constitutional foundations at play, the decisions shaking things up, and why well-rounded dialogue is urgently needed to address the status of these programs before they’re dead in the water. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Denise Farris Scrivener, Farris Legal Services LLC
    Ms. Scrivener may be contacted at denise@farrislegal.net