BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design 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


    Construction Goes Green in Orange County

    Spreading Cracks On FIU Bridge Failed to Alarm Project Team

    Companies Move to Houston Area and Spur Home Building

    Construction Contracts Fall in Denver

    Growing Optimism Among Home Builders

    Steps to Curb Construction Defect Actions for Homebuilders

    Homeowner may pursue negligence claim for construction defect, Oregon Supreme Court holds

    Newmeyer & Dillion Named a Best Law Firm in 2019 in Multiple Practice Areas by U.S. News-Best Lawyers

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Based Upon Exclusion for Contractual Assumption of Liability

    Insurer Must Cover Portions of Arbitration Award

    Appraisal Can Go Forward Prior to Resolution of Coverage Dispute

    West Coast Casualty’s 25th Construction Defect Seminar Has Begun

    Hunton Insurance Practice Receives Top (Tier 1) National Ranking by US News & World Report

    Elon Musk's Boring Co. Is Feuding With Texas Over a Driveway

    No Friday Night Lights at $60 Million Texas Stadium: Muni Credit

    Question of Parties' Intent Prevents Summary Judgment for Insurer

    Another Setback for the New Staten Island Courthouse

    World-Famous Architects Design $480,000 Gazebos for Your Backyard

    The Year 2010 In Review: Design And Construction Defects Litigation

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Where Underlying Claim is Strictly Breach of Contract

    Construction Defects not Creating Problems for Bay Bridge

    Keeping Detailed Records: The Best Defense to Constructive Eviction

    Ex-Detroit Demolition Official Sentenced for Taking Bribes

    Government Claims Act Does Not Apply to Actions Solely Seeking Declaratory Relief and Not Monetary Relief

    Contractor Definition Central to Coverage Dispute

    Homebuilding on the Rise in Nation’s Capitol

    CGL Policy May Not Cover Cybersecurity and Data-Related Losses

    San Francisco House that Collapsed Not Built to Plan

    Construction Project Bankruptcy Law

    California Supreme Court Adopts Vertical Exhaustion for Long-Tail Claims

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Denies Review of Pro-Policy Decision

    Dangerous Condition, Dangerous Precedent: California Supreme Court Expands Scope of Dangerous Condition Liability Involving Third Party Negligent/Criminal Conduct

    How the California and Maui Wildfires Will Affect Future Construction Projects

    New Opportunities for “Small” Construction Contractors as SBA Adjusts Its Size Standards Again Due to Unprecedented Inflation

    Navigate the New Health and Safety Norm With Construction Technology

    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

    Eight Ways to Protect a Construction Company Before a Claim Is Filed

    What Is a Construction Defect in California?

    When Do Hard-Nosed Negotiations Become Coercion? Or, When Should You Feel Unlucky?

    CSLB’s Military Application Assistance Program

    California Court Confirms Broad Coverage Under “Ongoing Operations” Endorsements

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Welcomes Quinlan Tom

    Williams v. Athletic Field: Hugely Important Lien Case Argued Before Supreme Court

    Introducing Nomos LLP!

    Elevators Take Sustainable Smart Cities to the Next Level

    On Rehearing, Fifth Circuit Finds Contractual-Liability Exclusion Does Not Apply

    Forget the Apple Watch. Apple’s Next Biggest Thing Isn’t for Sale

    The Double-Breasted Dilemma

    He Turned Wall Street Offices Into Homes. Now He Vows to Remake New York

    County Elects Not to Sue Over Construction Defect Claims
    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

    Investigators Explain Focus on Pre-Collapse Cracking in Florida Bridge

    June 06, 2018 —
    The National Transportation Safety Board's preliminary report on the fatal collapse in March of a pedestrian bridge at Florida International University in Sweetwater focuses attention on the widely discussed pre-collapse cracking in the main span. The report also confirms accounts about what the construction crew working on the bridge was doing before the structure fell. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Judy, ENR and Richard Korman, ENR Mr. Judy may be contacted at judys@enr.com Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    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

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    February 10, 2012 —

    The insurer unsuccessfully moved for summary judgment, contending it had no obligation to defend two related underlying construction defect cases. Amerisure Ins. Co. v. R.L.Lantana Boatyard, Ltd., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2466 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 9, 2012).

    An engineering report noted design construction defects and deficiencies in visible, physical improvements at The Moorings at Lantana Condominium. In two lawsuits, The Moorings sued the developer, R.L. Lantana Boatyard ("RLLB"), and the contractor, Current Builders of Florida.

    Current Builders was insured by Amerisure. RLLB was named as an additional insured under the Amerisure 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

    Additional Insured Prevails on Summary Judgment For Duty to Defend, Indemnify

    October 02, 2015 —
    On summary judgment, the insured general contractor prevailed not only on the duty to defend, but also the duty to indemnify. Wausau Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Old Republic Gen. Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103954 (S.D. N. Y. Aug. 7, 2015). 170 Broadway entered into a construction management agreement with McGowan Builders Inc. to serve as its construction manager for a hotel being built in Manhattan. Under the agreement, McGowan obtained a general liability policy from Old Republic naming 170 Broadway as an additional insured. 170 Broadway also secured its own policy from Wausau. Adam Burawski, an employee of a security company, came to the 170 Broadway site to meet with McGowan about provided security services for the project. Before the meeting, Burawski tripped and fell, sustaining a serious injury. 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

    Partner Lisa M. Rolle and Associate Vito John Marzano Obtain Dismissal of Third-Party Indemnification Claims

    December 22, 2019 —
    On June 1, 2019, Traub Lieberman partner Lisa M. Rolle and associate Vito John Marzano successfully secured dismissal of all third-party claims on behalf of a corporate entity and its principal in a third-party action in the New York State Supreme Court, County of Bronx. The underlying action concerned a trip and fall that occurred on a public sidewalk located in the Bronx. Plaintiff commenced suit against the corporation property owner and its principal. Defendants/third-party plaintiffs commenced the third-party action seeking contractual and common-law indemnification against three third-party defendants, the corporate tenant, another corporate entity that was not a party to the lease and its principal. Traub Lieberman represented the latter two third-party defendants. On behalf of the corporate entity that was not a party to the lease, Traub Lieberman moved for dismissal on the basis that the lease constitutes documentary evidence establishing as a matter of law that the non-tenant corporation cannot be held liable to third-party plaintiffs. On behalf of the principal, Traub Lieberman sought dismissal for failure to state a cause of action because the principal was shielded from liability by virtue of having incorporated his business, and the complaint did not allege a claim for piercing the corporate veil. In opposition, third-party plaintiffs sought to amplify their pleadings by alleging that a de facto merger had occurred between the non-tenant corporation and the tenant corporation. Third-party plaintiffs further argued that the corporate principal executed a guaranty to the lease, thus accepting liability on behalf of the tenant corporation. Reprinted courtesy of Lisa M. Rolle, Traub Lieberman and Vito John Marzano, Traub Lieberman Ms. Rolle may be contacted at lrolle@tlsslaw.com Mr. Marzano may be contacted at vmarzano@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Finding Highway Compromise ‘Tough,’ DOT Secretary Says

    May 05, 2014 —
    Divisions in Congress over boosting funding for bridge repairs and highway construction are making it difficult to pass a long-term measure in time to prevent a disruption in existing road projects, U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx said. “I would say that we have a tough, a tough challenge ahead of us that hasn’t been solved for a long time,” Foxx said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” airing this weekend. The Highway Trust Fund, financed by gasoline and diesel taxes, may soon not be able to meet its financial obligations, according to Foxx’s agency. The Obama administration on April 29 sent legislation to Congress proposing $302 billion for road and mass transit projects over four years, with part of the money coming from new taxes on company earnings overseas. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Alan Levin, Bloomberg
    Mr. Levin may be contacted at alevin24@bloomberg.net

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Causing Property Damage to Insured's Product Only

    October 07, 2016 —
    The Nebraska court found there was no coverage for rebar that did not meet specifications and did not cause property damage to other portions of the construction project. Drake-Williams Steel, Inc. v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 2016 Neb. LEXIS 116 (Neb. Aug. 5, 2016). The general contractor was hired by the city to build an arena. Drake-Williams Steel, Inc. (DWS) was hired to supply rebar for the arena. The rebar was improperly bent when it was fabricated by DWS and did not conform to the terms of the contract. The rebar was incorporated into three components of the arena: the columns, the grade beams, and the pile caps. The pile caps were made of concrete with reinforcing rebar and were installed below ground level on top of the concrete piles that extended to the bedrock. The grade beams were also made of concrete and rebar. The beams formed an oval around the arena and connected different pile caps together and were also installed below ground level. No corrections were made to the grade beams. 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

    Did You Really Accept That Bid? – How Contractors Can Avoid Post-Acceptance Bid Disputes Over Contract Terms

    July 28, 2016 —
    When California general contractors submit bids to an owner, can they force their subcontractors to honor their bids? Can they recover damages if the subcontractor later refuses to do so? While the general rule in California is that a general contractor who reasonably relies on a subcontractor’s bid may recover damages when the subcontractor reneges, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District recently held that there is a substantial and important exception to the general rule. In Flintco Pacific, Inc. v. TEC Management Consultants, Inc. (LASC No. YC067984), the Court of Appeal held that where a general contractor requires a subcontractor to enter into a “standard-form subcontract” which materially differs from the subcontractor’s bid, the general contractor has rejected the subcontractor’s bid and has instead issued a counteroffer. The subcontractor is thereafter free to walk, or accept the new terms. If the subcontractor walks, the general contractor may not seek to enforce the terms of the subcontract or seek reliance damages. Reprinted courtesy of David A. Harris, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Steven M. Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Harris may be contacted at dharris@hbblaw.com Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of