BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering 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


    Not a Waiver for All: Maryland Declines to Apply Subrogation Waiver to Subcontractors

    Administrative and Environmental Law Cases Decided During the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2017-2018 Term

    Ninth Circuit Clears the Way for Review of Oregon District Court’s Rulings in Controversial Climate Change Case

    Back to Basics – Differing Site Conditions

    London Shard Developer Wins Approval for Tower Nearby

    Nebraska Court Ruling Backs Latest Keystone XL Pipeline Route

    Parking Reform Takes Off on the West Coast

    Dispute Among Joint Venture Partners and Joint Venture Agreement

    Insurance Agent Sued for Lapse in Coverage after House Collapses

    Best Practices in Construction– What are Yours?

    Inside New York’s Newest Architectural Masterpiece for the Mega-Rich

    Four Ways Student Debt Is Wreaking Havoc on Millennials

    Protecting Your Business From Liability Claims Stemming From COVID-19 Exposure

    Contractor Owed a Defense

    Colorado Senate Bill 13-052 Dies in Committee

    Ambiguous Application Questions Preclude Summary Judgment on Rescission Claim

    Mississippi exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    New Illinois Supreme Court Trigger Rule for CGL Personal Injury “Offenses” Could Have Costly Consequences for Policyholders

    Carin Ramirez and David McLain recognized among the Best Lawyers in America© for 2021

    Safe and Safer

    OSHA Begins Enforcement of its Respirable Crystalline Silica in Construction Standard. Try Saying That Five Times Real Fast

    Acceptable Worksite: New City of Seattle Specification Provisions Now In Effect

    White and Williams Earns National "Best Law Firm" Rankings from US News

    Contractor Sues Construction Defect Claimants for Defamation

    Blackouts Require a New Look at Backup Power

    Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal Secured by Lewis Brisbois in Coverage Dispute Involving San Francisco 49ers’ Levi Stadium

    Massachusetts SJC Clarifies “Strict Compliance” Standard in Construction Contracts

    Navigating Threshold Arbitration Issues in Construction Contracts

    Indirect Benefit Does Not Support Unjust Enrichment Claim Against Prime Contractor

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Tightens Requirements for Co-Worker Affidavits in Asbestos Cases

    Power & Energy - Emerging Insurance Coverage Cases of Interest

    Economic Loss Rule Bars Claims Against Manufacturer

    House Passes Bill to Delay EPA Ozone Rule

    The Great Fallacy: If Builders Would Just Build It Right There Would Be No Construction Defect Litigation

    Wichita Condo Association Files Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Hunton Insurance Recovery Lawyers Ranked by Chambers as Top Insurance Practitioners

    Chicago Debt Document Says $8.5B O'Hare Revamp May Be Delayed

    Nevada Update: Nevada Commissioner of Insurance Updates Burning Limits Statute with Emergency Regulation

    Compliance Doesn’t Pay: Compliance Evidence Inadmissible in Strict Liability Actions

    Traub Lieberman Partners Ryan Jones and Scot Samis Obtain Affirmation of Final Summary Judgment

    Traub Lieberman Partner Eric D. Suben and Associate Laura Puhala Win Summary Judgment in Favor of Insurer, Determining it has No Duty to Defend

    Google, Environmentalists and University Push Methane-Leak Detection

    Las Vegas Team Obtains Complete Dismissal of a Traumatic Brain Injury Claim

    Remodel Leads to Construction Defect Lawsuit

    ASCE Statement on Calls to Suspend the Federal Gas Tax

    Sales of New U.S. Homes Rose More Than Forecast to End 2014

    No Coverage for Foundation Collapse

    Design Immunity Defense Gets Special Treatment on Summary Judgment

    No Coverage for Building's First Collapse, But Disputed Facts on Second Collapse

    Indemnity Provision Prevails Over "Other Insurance" Clause
    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

    Chicago Cubs Agree to Make Wrigley Field ADA Improvements to Settle Feds' Lawsuit

    December 03, 2024 —
    Major League Baseball’s Chicago Cubs have entered into a settlement with the U.S. Dept. of Justice over renovations to Wrigley Field, federal and Cubs officials announced Oct. 31. As part of the settlement, the team agreed to update Wrigley Field with more accessibility options for people with disabilities. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, ENR
    Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com

    Disappointment on an Olympian Scale After Rio 2016 Summer Games

    February 23, 2017 —
    The single word to describe the sports infrastructure created for the Rio 2016 Olympic Games is abandonment. Uncertainty over the future of the dilapidated sports stadiums and arenas threatens the legacy of the Olympics, which ended five months ago. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Augusto Diniz, O Empreiteiro, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    At Long Last, the Colorado Legislature Gets Serious About Construction Defect Reform – In a Constructive Way

    February 12, 2024 —
    On February 5th, Senators Zenzinger and Coleman, along with Representative Bird, introduced Senate Bill 24-106 into the Colorado Legislature. The bill has been assigned to the Senate Committee on Local Government and Housing. What follows are the various portions of the bill I believe to be the most impactful, as described in the bill summary, along with my commentary thereon: Sections 3 and 6 – A True Right to Repair Sections 3 and 6 create a right for a construction professional to remedy a claim made against the construction professional by doing remedial work or hiring another construction professional to perform the work. The following applies to the remedy:
    • The construction professional must notify the claimant and diligently make sure the remedial work is performed; and
    • Upon completion, the claimant is deemed to have settled and released the claim, and the claimant is limited to claims regarding improper performance of the remedial work.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Title II under ADA Applicable to Public Rights-of-Way, Parks and Other Recreation Areas

    June 29, 2017 —
    Plaintiff Ivana Kirola, who suffers from cerebral palsy, sued the City and County of San Francisco, in a class action contending certain public areas, including rights-of-way, pools, parks and other recreation areas, did not meet the mandate of Title II of the American With Disabilities Act (Kirola v. City and County of San Francisco, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 14-17521, 2017 DJDAR 5982). Title II provides that no qualified individual with a disability “shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” Title II’s implementing regulations mandate that each facility constructed after January 26, 1992 be “readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.” And, for each facility “altered after January 26, 1992,” the altered portion must, “to the maximum extent feasible,” be likewise accessible. The Federal Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board creates nonbinding Americans With Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) to ensure compliance with Title II, and that the Department of Justice (DOJ) adopt its own binding regulations, consistent with the ADAAG standards. Here, the District Court interpreted ADAAG standards as not applying to public rights-of-way, parks, and playground facilities. The District Court concluded that none of Kirola’s experts were reliable in their interpretation of the standards and how the standards applied to the public rights-of-way, etc. Conversely, the District Court concluded that all of the city’s experts were reliable. It thus disregarded and discarded every ADAAG violation identified by Kirola’s experts, accepting only the small number of violations identified by the city’s experts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard E. Morton, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
    Mr. Morton may be contacted at rmorton@hbblaw.com

    Texas Windstorm Insurance Agency Under Scrutiny

    April 05, 2011 —

    Representative Larry Taylor has introduced a bill in the Texas Legislature (HB 2818) that would further regulate the Texas Windstorm Insurance Agency (TWIA). According to Taylor, “In order to be adequately prepared for future hurricane seasons, it is imperative that TWIA be operating at maximum efficiency, that the Reserve Trust Fund be solvent and that the agency have adequate management measures in place to protect consumers and ensure that claims are paid in a timely manner. House Bill 2818 is an important step in the right direction toward restoring public confidence in TWIA.”

    HB 2818 includes measures that would create an expert panel that would advise the commissioner on how to evaluate loss from the storm, and a greater transparency of TWIA Board meetings and actions.

    In addition, the Texas Department of Insurance (TDI) has placed TWIA on Administrative Oversight. According to TDI, “While under Administrative Oversight, the Department may require its prior review and approval of executive decisions, certain expenditures, and other transactions. The insurer is required to fully cooperate with the Department and provide complete and timely disclosure of all information responsive to Department requests.”

    Read the full story (Rep. Taylor’s Press Release)...

    Read the full story (Texas Department of Insurance’s Press Release)...

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

    Homebuilding Down in North Dakota

    October 30, 2013 —
    Only eleven new homes have been started this year in the Pierre area in North Dakota. Last year saw 35 homes built in the same area. Brad Lawrence, the Fort Pierre Director of Public Works, blamed last year’s Hurricane Sandy in New Jersey, stating that “superstorm Sandy has just devoured a tremendous amount of building projects.” Area builders did say that some building materials went up in price after the storm, describing it as an “availability scare,” but some prices went down during the summer of 2013. Susan Ogan, of Neil Ogan Construction said that “our biggest thing is that people cannot find a lot they can afford and still say within their budget for the overall project.” Although single-family homes aren’t being built, apartments are. “We’ve got a 24-unit apartment going in as we speak,” said Mr. Lawrence. That, some feel, may be responsible for the lack of demand for single-family homes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Illinois Federal Court Applies Insurer-Friendly “Mutual Exclusive Theories” Test To Independent Counsel Analysis

    November 09, 2020 —
    Insureds often request independent counsel when insurers agree to provide a defense subject to a reservation of rights, pursuant to which an insurer takes the position that certain damages may not be indemnifiable. Requests for independent counsel are often rooted in fear that a defense attorney who has a relationship with the insurer may be incentivized to defend the insured in a way that maximizes the potential for the insurer to succeed on its coverage defenses. As explained by the Illinois Supreme Court in Maryland Cas. Co. v. Peppers, 355 N.E.2d 24 (Ill. 1976), when a conflict of interest arises between an insurer and its insured, the attorney appointed by the insurer is faced with serious ethical questions and the insured is entitled to its own attorney. Illinois courts generally follow the rule that an insured is entitled to independent counsel upon a showing of an actual conflict. In Builders Concrete Servs., LLC v. Westfield Nat’l Ins. Co., No. 19 C 7792, 2020 WL 5518474 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 14, 2020), the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois recently addressed a dispute between an insurer and its insured about independent counsel. Westfield insured Builders Concrete Services (BCS). Focus Construction hired BCS as a subcontractor to perform concrete work on a new apartment building. BCS’ work included pouring concrete for structural columns, one of which buckled and failed. BCS sued Focus Construction for withholding payment, and Focus Construction counter-sued for breach of contract and negligence relating to BCS’ alleged faulty work that caused the column to fall. Focus Construction’s counterclaim alleged that the column failure damaged other parts of the building on which Builders did not perform work. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy S. Macklin, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Macklin may be contacted at jmacklin@tlsslaw.com

    Insurance Company’s Reservation of Rights Letter Negates its Interest in the Litigation

    November 12, 2019 —
    The Colorado Court of Appeals held that an insurance company, which issues a reservation of rights letter to its insured, loses its interest in the litigation, pursuant to C.R.C.P. 24(a)(2), when the insured settles the claims and assigns the bad faith action against the insurance company to the plaintiff. Bolt Factory Lofts Owners Association, Inc. v. Auto-Owners Insurance Company, 2019WL 3483901(Colo. App. 2019). In a 2016 lawsuit in Denver District Court, 2016CV3360, the Bolt Factory Loft Owners Association, Inc. (“Association”) asserted construction defect claims against six contractors. Two of those contractors then asserted claims against other subcontractors, including Sierra Glass Co., Inc. (“Sierra Glass”). After multiple settlements, the only remaining claims were those the Association, as assignee of the two contractors, asserted against Sierra Glass. Auto-Owners Insurance Company (“AOIC”) issued policies to Sierra Glass and defended it under a reservation of rights. The policy afforded AOIC the right to defend Sierra Glass, and it required Sierra Glass to cooperate in the defense of the legal action. The Association presented a settlement demand of $1.9 million to Sierra Glass, which AOIC refused to pay. To protect itself from an excess judgment that AOIC might not have paid, Sierra Glass entered into an agreement with the Association whereby Sierra Glass would refrain from offering a defense at trial and assign its bad faith claim against AOIC to the Association in exchange for the Association’s promise that it would not pursue recovery against Sierra Glass of any judgment entered against it at trial. Such agreements, known as Bashor or Nunn Agreements, are allowed in Colorado. Nunn v. Mid-Century Insurance Co., 244 P.3d 116 (Colo. 2010). Therefore, Sierra Glass was entitled to protect itself in the face of AOIC’s potential denial of coverage and refusal to settle. Bolt Factory Lofts, at ¶ 15. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Frank Ingham, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Ingham may be contacted at ingham@hhmrlaw.com