BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim 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


    California Ballot Initiative Seeks to Repeal Infrastructure Funding Bill

    Know and Meet Your Notice Requirements or Lose Your Payment Bond Claims

    Rattlesnake Bite Triggers Potential Liability for Walmart

    Indemnification Against Release/“Disposal” of Hazardous Materials

    Big Builder’s Analysis of the Top Ten Richest Counties

    Aecmaster’s Digital Twin: A New Era for Building Design

    Sinking Floor Does Not Meet Strict Definition of Collapse

    Pensacola Bridge Repair Plan Grows as Inspectors Uncover More Damage

    Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case Triggered by Complaint's Allegations

    What If an Irma-Like Hurricane Hit the New York City Metro Area?

    Crane Firm Pulled Off NYC Projects Following Multiple Incidents

    California Court Broadly Interprets Insurance Policy’s “Liability Arising Out of” Language

    Following Pennsylvania Trend, Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Construction Defect

    Fifth Circuit Requires Causal Distinction for Ensuing Loss Exception to Faulty Work Exclusion

    Cerberus, Blackstone Loosening Credit for U.S. Landlords

    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

    Builders Can’t Rely on SB800

    Court Affirms Duty to Defend Additional Insured Contractor

    Beyond the Statute: How the Colorado Court Upheld Modified Accrual in Construction Contracts

    What a Difference a Day Makes: Mississippi’s Discovery Rule

    Endorsements Preclude Coverage for Alleged Faulty Workmanship

    Virtual Reality for Construction

    NY Appeals Court Ruled Builders not Responsible in Terrorism Cases

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Partner John Van Vlear Named to Board Of Groundwater Resources Association Of California

    Sixth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Under Kentucky Law

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

    Alleged Damage to Personal Property Does Not Revive Coverage for Construction Defects

    Columbus, Ohio’s Tallest Building to be Inspected for Construction Defects

    Single-Family Home Gain Brightens U.S. Housing Outlook: Economy

    Construction Industry Survey Says Optimism Hits All-Time High

    Arbitration is Waivable (Even If You Don’t Mean To)

    How to Survive the Insurance Claim Process Before It Starts –Five Tips to Keep Your Insurance Healthy

    Picketing Threats

    Senate Committee Approves Military Construction Funds

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

    The Biggest Trials Coming to Courts Around the World in 2021

    Pollution Exclusion Found Ambiguous

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

    Federal Court Rejects Insurer's Argument that Wisconsin Has Adopted the Manifestation Trigger for Property Policy

    Summary Judgment for Insurer Reversed Based on Expert Opinion

    Judgment for Insured Upheld After Insurer Rejects Claim for Hurricane Damage

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Climate Change Lawsuit Barred by “Pollution Exclusion”

    Can a Lease Force a Tenant's Insurer to Defend the Landlord?

    What Is a Construction Defect in California?

    Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Duty to Defend When Case Law is Uncertain

    Ex-Turner Exec Gets 46 Months for Bloomberg Construction Bribes

    Balestreri Potocki & Holmes Attorneys Named 2020 Super Lawyers and Rising Star

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Who Needs Them”

    Pennsylvania Finds Policy Triggered When Property Damage Reasonably Apparent

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Clarifies Standard for Imposing Spoliation Sanctions
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Forget Palm Springs—Santa Fe Is the New Mecca for Modern Architecture

    November 19, 2021 —
    The writer Helen Thompson had been a lifelong visitor to Santa Fe, but when she arrived at Georgia O’Keeffe’s home at Ghost Ranch 30 years ago, “I was shocked,” Thompson says. “Everything there was modern: Her furniture was modern; her light fixtures were modern; her art, of course, was modern. And in this rustic setting, the landscape is so powerful, it was all so elemental. That shock stayed with me.” It was an experience, Thompson says, that led her to the conclusion that Santa Fe, long understood as a city filled with vernacular, decorative architecture, was ripe for a rethinking. “I kept wondering, why does something like that look so right here?” she says. “The landscape is so distinctive, and so not-modern, and yet these very precise pieces of furniture looked so right.” Now, with her new book Santa Fe Modern: Contemporary Design in the High Desert (Monacelli, $50), Thompson has cracked the code. “Modern ideas are site-specific, and tied into what’s right for the landscape and the environment,” she says. Naturally, she continues, this conceptual framework works well in a place like New Mexico, where the dramatic horizon meets an even more dramatic sky. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James Tarmy, Bloomberg

    Henkels & McCoy Pays $1M in Federal Overtime-Pay Case

    July 19, 2021 —
    In a consent judgment in a federal labor case, major specialty contractor Henkels & McCoy Inc. has paid about $1.1 million in back pay and damages for allegedly not paying required overtime wages to 362 current and former workers in five states, the U.S. Dept. of Labor says. Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    What is the Effect of an Untimely Challenge to the Timeliness of a Trustee’s Sale?

    April 13, 2017 —
    Ever wonder what happens if a person challenges the timeliness of a trustee’s sale after the sale already occurred? Waiver of the argument of course! And, in the case of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Waltner, the affirmance of an eviction judgment. In the Waltner case, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee for WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-PR4 Trust (the “Bank”), purchased a residential property at a trustee’s sale in September 2015. The Bank gave the occupant of the house, Sarah Waltner (“Waltner”), notice to vacate the property, but she did not do so. Accordingly, the Bank filed a summary action to evict Waltner, which the trial court ultimately granted. After the trial court granted the Bank relief, Waltner filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to vacate the eviction judgment arguing, among other things, that the judgment was void because the Bank conducted the trustee’s sale after the statute of limitations expired. Both motions were denied, and Waltner appealed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ben Reeves, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Reeves may be contacted at breeves@swlaw.com

    A Classic Blunder: Practical Advice for Avoiding Two-Front Wars

    August 23, 2021 —
    “Ha ha! You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders – the most famous of which is ‘never get involved in a land war in Asia’ – but only slightly less well-known is this: ‘Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line.’”[1] Vizzini forgot to include “never fight a two-front war with your owner and a subcontractor” on his list of classic blunders, but it certainly belongs there. This article examines practical tips and tricks for general contractors to avoid the classic blunder of a two-front war, including recommended contract provisions and sound project documentation practices. Admittedly, general contractors face a wide array of obligations on a project. And perhaps one of the most delicate balancing acts is managing relationships with the owner and your subcontractors. But far too often general contractors find themselves in the difficult position of fighting a two-front war against one (or more) of their subcontractors and the project owner. But this does not always have to be the case—there are ways for general contractors to reduce the risk of finding themselves in a two-front war. And every project does not have to devolve in a circular firing squad with you in the middle. That said, this article comes with the caveat that a general contractor cannot avoid a two-front war in every instance, nor does this article examine every imaginable way to reduce the risk of a two-front war (see e.g. https://www.consensusdocs.org/pass-through-subcontractor-claims-liquidating-agreements-and-avoiding-a-two-front-war/). But this article will provide an overview of several key tools that can be used to minimize the risk of falling into a classic blunder. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William Underwood, Jones Walker LLP
    Mr. Underwood may be contacted at wunderwood@joneswalker.com

    Pollution Exclusion Prevents Coverage for Injury Caused by Insulation

    March 30, 2016 —
    In a per curiam decision, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's holding that the pollution exclusion barred coverage for bodily injury caused by the insured's insulation. Evanston Ins. Co. v. Lapolla Industries, Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 22552 (5th Cir. Dec. 23, 2015). The homeowners' contractors installed spray polyurethane foam (SPF) insulation as part of a renovation project in the home. Lapolla manufactured the SPF. Shortly after the insulation was installed, the homeowners smelled strong odors and suffered respiratory distress, causing them to leave the home. The homeowners sued the contractor and various subcontractors for negligence and breach of contract. A third party complaint was filed against Lapolla. The homeowners also amended their complaint to assert a products-liability claim against Lapolla. 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

    Ongoing Operations Exclusion Bars Coverage

    December 09, 2019 —
    The insurer denied the insured contractor's claim seeking a defense for faulty workmanship based upon the ongoing operations exclusion. PJR Constr. of N.J. v. Valley Forge Ins. Co., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127973 (D. N. J. July 31, 2019). PJR Construction was the general contractor to build a swim club and pavilion building for Cambridge Real Property, LLC. PJR began construction on May 29, 2012, and was to complete the construction by March 1, 2013. The project took much longer than anticipated. PJR was denied access to the site on November 13, 2014. Cambridge contended PJR tolerated shoddy workmanship and breached the terms of the contract documents. Cambridge estimated that the project was between 55% and 74.3% complete. PJR and Cambridge went to arbitration. PJR sought a defense from the insurers. Coverage was denied based upon exclusions j (5) and j (6). Exclusion j (5), which the court referred to as the "Ongoing Operations Exclusion," provided the policy did not apply to,
    Property Damage to . . . [t]hat particular part of real property on which you or any contractors or subcontractors working directly or indirectly on your behalf are performing operations, if the property damage arises out of those operations.
    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

    New York’s Lawsky Proposes Changes to Reduce Home Foreclosures

    May 20, 2015 —
    New York’s banking regulator proposed changes to the foreclosure process to try to help borrowers in the state keep their homes. One reason New York has a high rate of foreclosures is that mandatory settlement meetings between borrowers and mortgage servicers typically don’t take place for months after a bank initiates a foreclosure, Benjamin Lawsky, superintendent of New York’s Department of Financial Services said in prepared remarks Tuesday. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jesse Westbrook, Bloomberg

    Product Defect Allegations Trigger Duty To Defend in Pennsylvania

    August 31, 2020 —
    The Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently concluded, in Nautilus Insurance Co. v. 200 Christian Street Partners, LLC., that a duty to defend is triggered when product-related allegations are pled in connection with a claim for defective construction. In Nautilus, the coverage dispute arose out of two independent underlying lawsuits in which homeowners alleged that the homes built by 200 Christian Street Partners (“Christian Street”) were defectively constructed. Christian Street tendered the claim to its insurer, Nautilus Insurance Co. (“Nautilus”), for defense and indemnity.1 Nautilus filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, seeking a declaration that it was not obligated to defend Christian Street in the underlying actions.2 Specifically, Nautilus asserted that it was not required to provide a defense in the underlying actions because Pennsylvania law does not consider faulty workmanship to constitute an “occurrence” and, therefore, to trigger the policy’s insuring agreement and the insurer’s duty to defend.3 Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stacy M. Manobianca, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Ms. Manobianca may be contacted at smm@sdvlaw.com