BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction 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


    Navigating the Hurdles of Florida Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Improvements to AIA Contracts?

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

    Water Backup Payment Satisfies Insurer's Obligation to Cover for Rain Damage

    Proving Impacts to Critical Path to Defeat Liquidated Damages Assessment

    The Argument for Solar Power

    There is No Claims File Privilege in Florida, Despite What Insurers Want You to Think

    No Coverage for Installation of Defective Steel Framing

    Solutions To 4 Common Law Firm Diversity Challenges

    Contractor Suffolk's Hospital Project Is on Critical List After Steward Health Care Bankruptcy

    Construction Site Blamed for Flooding

    A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: KATE GOLDEN

    OSHA Joins the EEOC in Analyzing Unsafe Construction Environments

    Nine Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Recognized as Southern California Super Lawyers

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolution Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    Bidders Shortlisted as Oroville Dam Work Schedule is Set

    Ten ACS Lawyers Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    Actual Cost Value Includes Depreciation of Repair Labor Costs

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Give a Little Extra …”

    I.M. Pei, Architect Who Designed Louvre Pyramid, Dies at 102

    California Superior Court Overrules Insurer's Demurrer on COVID-19 Claim

    New York Public Library’s “Most Comprehensive Renovation” In Its History

    Ex-Turner Exec Gets 46 Months for Bloomberg Construction Bribes

    Aurora Joins other Colorado Cities by Adding a Construction Defect Ordinance

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

    NY Is Set To Sue US EPA Over ‘Completion’ of PCB Removal

    Boilerplate Contract Language on Permits could cause Problems for Contractors

    Does Stricter Decertification Mean More “Leedigation?”

    Be Proactive, Not Reactive, To Preserve Force Majeure Rights Regarding The Coronavirus

    $17B Agreement Streamlines Disney World Development Plans

    How the New Dropped Object Standard Is Changing Jobsite Safety

    Flooded Courtroom May be Due to Construction Defect

    Denial of Coverage for Bulge in Wall Upheld

    Four Common Construction Contracts

    Do Not Forfeit Coverage Under Your Property Insurance Policy

    Home Prices Up in Metro Regions

    New Defendant Added to Morrison Bridge Decking Lawsuit

    With Trump's Tariff Talk, Time to Negotiate for Escalation Clauses in Construction Contracts

    ¡AI Caramba!

    New York Developer gets Reprieve in Leasehold Battle

    Surety's Settlement Without Principal's Consent Is Not Bad Faith

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at Slower Pace in May

    "Your Work" Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Immigrants' Legal Status Eyed Over Roles in New York Fake Injury Lawsuits

    Project Labor Agreements Will Now Be Required for Large-Scale Federal Construction Projects

    Crane Firm Pulled Off NYC Projects Following Multiple Incidents

    Five Pointers for Enforcing a Non-Compete Agreement in Texas

    Plaza Construction Negotiating Pay Settlement for Florida Ritz-Carlton Renovation

    Making the Construction Dispute Resolution Process More Efficient and Less Expensive, Part 2
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Do You Have the Receipt? Pennsylvania Court Finds Insufficient Evidence That Defendant Sold the Product

    December 23, 2024 —
    In State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Coway USA, Inc., No. 22-cv-3516, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192849, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (District Court) considered whether the plaintiff produced sufficient evidence to establish that the defendant sold and/or marketed a product and, thus, could be held liable for an alleged defect in the product. The plaintiff, a subrogating insurance carrier, brought strict product liability and breach of warranty claims against the defendant—the installer of a bidet in its insured’s home—claiming that the defendant also marketed and sold the bidet. The sole evidence to support a finding that the defendant sold the bidet was the homeowner’s testimony that she bought the product from the installer. The court found that the insured’s testimony, without any documentation or other corroborating evidence, was insufficient to establish that the defendant sold the product. Since proof of a sale is a required element for strict product liability and breach of warranty claims, the District Court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, dismissing the case. This case involved a water loss to the Pennsylvania residence of Mikyung Kim and her husband Adrian Kim (collectively, the Kims) that was discovered in April 2021. An investigation revealed that the water loss originated from the failure of a bidet for a toilet in the second-floor bathroom. The Kims alleged that defendant, Coway USA, Inc. (Coway), sold the bidet and installed it around 2010. An employee of the plaintiff’s liability expert, a materials engineer, opined that a T-connector—a plastic valve that regulates the flow of water to and through the bidet—failed due to overtightening of the connector during the manufacturing process. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Drowning of Two Boys Constitutes One Occurrence

    August 06, 2014 —
    When two boys drowned at a summer camp, the issue arose as to whether there were one or two occurrences. Fellowship of Christian Athletes v. AXIS Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 13176 (8th Cir. July 11, 2014). The two boys could not swim, and their camp permission forms indicated that they were non-swimmers. One night, the Fellowship of Christian Athletes (FCA) had a pool party. After the party, the FCA staff realized the two boys were missing. They had drowned, and their bodies were found lying side-by-side at the bottom of the deep end of the pool. The death certificate for one boy listed the time of death as 10:44 p.m., while the other boy's time of death was listed as 10:42 p.m. The FCA was insured under three policies. AXIS Insurance Company insured FCA under a CGL policy with $1 million limits per occurrence and $5 million in the aggregate. The FCA also had two umbrella policies, one issued by Ironshore Speciality Insurance Company, which provided up to $10 million in coverage in excess of Axis's policy. Under the second umbrella policy, RSUI Indemnity Company covered up to $5 million in excess of the Axis and Ironshore policies. 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

    Georgia Federal Court Says Fact Questions Exist As To Whether Nitrogen Is An “Irritant” or “Contaminant” As Used in Pollution Exclusion

    May 20, 2019 —
    The Southern District of Georgia recently ruled that Evanston Insurance Company is not entitled to summary judgment on whether its policies’ pollution exclusion bars coverage for the release of nitrogen into a warehouse. The case stems from an incident at Xytex Tissue Services, LLC’s warehouse, where Xytex stored biological material at low temperatures. Xytex used an on-site “liquid nitrogen delivery system” to keep the material properly cooled. This system releases liquid nitrogen, which would vaporize into nitrogen gas and cool the biological material. On February 5, 2017, a Xytex employee, Deputy Greg Meagher, entered the warehouse to investigate activated motion detectors and burglar alarms. Deputy Meagher was overcome by nitrogen gas and died as a result. Following Deputy Meagher’s death, his heirs filed suit against Xytex and other defendants. Evanston denied coverage based on the pollution exclusion in its policy. Evanston then brought a declaratory judgment action to confirm its coverage position. In denying Evanston’s summary judgment motion, the Southern District of Georgia reasoned that the type of injury sustained is essential in analyzing whether the pollution exclusion applies. Specifically, Xytex argued, and the court agreed, that the underlying lawsuit alleged that the bodily injury was caused by a lack of oxygen, not exposure to nitrogen. The court also distinguished prior decisions, explaining that injury caused by a lack of oxygen is not a contamination or irritation of the body in the same way as injury resulting from exposure to carbon monoxide or lead. The court also found that Xytex “reasonably expected that liability related to a nitrogen leak would be insured.” Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys Lawrence J. Bracken II, Michael S. Levine and Alexander D. Russo Mr. Bracken may be contacted at lbracken@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Russo may be contacted at arusso@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Cybercrime Is On the Rise

    May 26, 2019 —
    At the end of April, just as St. Ambrose Roman Catholic Church in Brunswick, Ohio, neared the close of a five-month-long, $5.5-million renovation, Father Bob Stec, the parish pastor, was surprised to hear that the contractor, Marous Brothers Construction, Willoughby, Ohio, had not received a $1.7- million payment. Reprinted courtesy of Tom Sawyer, Engineering News-Record and Jeff Rubenstone, Engineering News-Record Mr. Sawyer may be contacted at sawyert@enr.com Mr. Rubenstone may be contacted at rubenstonej@enr.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Washington State Updates the Contractor Registration Statute

    June 17, 2015 —
    Ryan W. Sternoff of Ahlers & Cressman PLLC, analyzed SHB 1749, which recently amended RCW 18.27.010, Washington State’s legislature’s contractor’s registration statute. According to Sternoff, “a broad reading of the contractor’s registration statute, RCW Ch. 18.27, would require just about any person or entity, other than a residential homeowner, who is involved at any level in improving real property to be registered as a ‘Contractor,’ irrespective if that person or entity hired a licensed contractor to perform work on real property that they own.” SHB 1749 amended the statute “so that those who ‘offer to sell their property without occupying or using the structures, projects, developments or improvements’ are excluded from the definition of ‘contractor’ and not required to be registered, provided that the person or entity ‘contracts with a registered general contractor and does not superintend the work.’” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The G2G Year in Review: 2021

    January 24, 2022 —
    With 2021 now behind us, we wanted to share our top five most-read articles of 2021 from Gravel2Gavel. The most-read blog posts covered real estate and construction industry trends ranging from Proptech, smart construction, COVID-eviction moratoriums, and blockchain tokenization. Throughout the year, G2G posts provided deep industry insight and summarized hot topics addressing the legal implications and disruptions that affected the market, and we will continue to expand on these insights in 2022. Our 2021 roundup:
    1. Blockchain Innovations and Real Estate: NFTs, DeFis and dApps by Craig A. de Ridder
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    New York Governor Expected to Sign Legislation Greatly Expanding Recoverable Damages in Wrongful Death Actions

    June 20, 2022 —
    New York, N.Y. (June 3, 2022) - The New York Senate and Assembly recently passed Bill S74A, also known as the Grieving Families Act, and it is expected that Governor Hochul will likely sign the bill into law. If passed, the law would significantly expand the damages available in wrongful death actions in a number of ways. First, Section 1 would amend EPTL section 5-4.1 to extend the statute of limitations to commence a wrongful death action from two years to three years and six months, a significant increase that will permit many more wrongful death cases to go forward. Second, Section 2 amends EPTL section 5-4.3, to allow recovery for emotional damages if a tortfeasor is found liable for causing a death. The current law only allows recovery of economic damages, such as economic hardship caused by a loss of parental guidance. The old law did not permit recovery of damages for grief, sympathy, and loss of companionship or consortium (see, e.g., Liff v. Schildkrout, 49 N.Y.2d 622 (1980); Bumpurs v. New York City Hous. Auth., 139 A.D.2d 438, 439 (1st Dept. 1988)), but that would change with passage of the new bill. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas P. Hurzeler, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Hurzeler may be contacted at Nicholas.Hurzeler@lewisbrisbois.com

    CDJ’s #9 Topic of the Year: Nevada Supreme Court Denies Class Action Status in Construction Defect Case

    December 31, 2014 —
    According to Sean Whaley of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, “The Nevada Supreme Court has rejected a request for class action status for claims of damaged stucco from faulty construction by Del Webb Communities involving nearly 1,000 Sun City Summerlin residents.” However, “the court upheld the award of damages to 71 homeowners following a jury trial in Clark County District Court in 2008.” Whaley reported that this construction defect case was touted as the largest in Nevada history. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of