BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimony
    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


    Washington Trial Court Narrows Definition of First Party Claimant, Clarifies Available Causes of Action in Commercial Property Loss Context

    How Mushrooms Can Be Used To Make Particle Board Less Toxic

    Port Authority Reaches Deal on Silverstein 3 World Trade

    Substantial Completion Explained: What Contractors & Owners Should Know

    Safety Accusations Fly in Dispute Between New York Developer and Contractor

    NTSB Cites Design Errors in Fatal Bridge Collapse

    Reinsurer's Obligation to Provide Coverage Determined Under English Law

    NYC Condo Skyscraper's Builder Wins a Round -- With a Catch

    Deck Police - The New Mandate for HOA's Takes Safety to the Next Level

    Congratulations to our 2019 Southern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars

    Incorporate Sustainability in Building Design to Meet Green Construction Goals

    Massive Redesign Turns Newark Airport Terminal Into a Foodie Theme Park

    Fracking Fears Grow as Oklahoma Hit by More Earthquakes Than California

    An Expert’s Qualifications are Important

    Economic Damages Cannot be Based On Speculation

    Stay of Coverage Case Appropriate While Court Determines Arbitrability of Dispute

    Federal Judge Vacates CDC Eviction Moratorium Nationwide

    California Supreme Court Holds Insured Entitled to Coverage Under CGL Policy for Negligent Hiring

    Utah Becomes First State to Enact the Uniform Commercial Real Estate Receivership Act

    Cybersecurity “Flash” Warning for Construction and Manufacturing Businesses

    ASCE Statement on Hurricane Milton and Environmental Threats

    Contractor Owed a Defense

    Changes to Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act in New York Introduced

    Know Your Obligations Under Both the Prime Contract and Subcontract

    Florida Court Gives Parties Assigned a Subrogation Claim a Math Lesson

    California Senator Proposes Bill to Require Contractors to Report Construction Defect Cases

    U.S. Construction Value Flat at End of Summer

    Court of Appeal Confirms Privette Doctrine as Applied to Passive Conduct of Property Owner

    Eleventh Circuit Asks Georgia Supreme Court if Construction Defects Are Caused by an "Occurrence"

    Las Vegas Partner Sarah Odia Named a 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyer Rising Star

    Design-Build Contracting for County Road Projects

    EPA Seeks Comment on Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification Rule

    Recent Third Circuit OSHA Decision Sounds Alarm for Employers and Their Officers

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Who Needs Them”

    Federal Government Partial Shutdown – Picking Up the Pieces

    Living Not So Large: The sprawl of television shows about very small houses

    A Year After Fatal Genoa Viaduct Collapse, Replacement Takes Shape

    Understanding the Details: Suing Architects and Engineers Can Get Technical

    Is Equipment Installed as Part of Building Renovations a “Product” or “Construction”?

    Jason Feld Awarded Volunteer of the Year by Claims & Litigation Management Alliance

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (01/11/23) – Construction Tech, Housing Market Confidence, and Decarbonization

    Nevada Assembly Bill Proposes Changes to Construction Defect Litigation

    Federal Court Opinion Has Huge Impact on the Construction Industry

    Excess Carrier's Declaratory Judgment Action Stayed While Underlying Case Still Pending

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected for the 2024 Edition of Best Lawyers and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch

    No Coverage for Hurricane Sandy Damage

    Preparing for the 2015 Colorado Legislative Session

    Builder’s Risk Coverage—Construction Defects

    Best Lawyers Honors 48 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Recognizes Four Partners as 'Lawyers of the Year'

    Specification Challenge; Excusable Delay; Type I Differing Site Condition; Superior Knowledge
    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

    Statute of Limitations Bars Lender’s Subsequent Action to Quiet Title Against Junior Lienholder Mistakenly Omitted from Initial Judicial Foreclosure Action

    October 19, 2020 —
    A recently issued opinion by the Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District tells a cautionary tale regarding a lender’s failure to name a junior lienholder in its initial judicial foreclosure action. In Cathleen Robin v. Al Crowell, — Cal.Rptr.3d —-, 2020 WL 5951506, plaintiffs sued defendant, a junior lienholder, for quiet title, having failed to name him in the initial judicial foreclosure action. Defendant raised the statute of limitations defense, but the trial court found in favor of plaintiffs. The court of appeal reversed, holding that the 60-year statute of limitations which the trial court applied only applied to a nonjudicial trustee’s sale, and the trial court could not exercise the trustee’s power of sale after the expiration of the statute of limitations on a judicial action to foreclose. In 2006, plaintiffs loaned Steve and Marta Weinstein (the “Weinsteins”) $450,000, secured by a deed of trust on one parcel of the Weinstein’s property. In 2007, the Weinsteins and defendant Al Crowell (“Crowell”) recorded a second deed of trust on the property, securing a promissory note executed by the Weinsteins in 2004. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lyndsey Torp, Snell & Wilmer
    Ms. Torp may be contacted at ltorp@swlaw.com

    Perrin Construction Defect Claims & Trial Conference

    June 11, 2018 —
    Richard Glucksman, Esquire, Partner of the Los Angeles firm Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger, will be moderating the panel, “Green Building/LEED: An Overview and Claims Discussion” at the Perrin Construction Defect Claims & Trial Conference in Las Vegas, Nevada. The panel will be discussing the following topics:
    • Risk and claims case studies including solar and SIPs (Structural Insulated Panels)
    • Green Building/LEED and The Law: Review of National Claims/Lawsuits
    • AIA Documents for Sustainable Projects
    Thursday, June 21st, 2018 Four Seasons Hotel 3960 S Las Vegas Blvd Las Vegas, NV 89119 Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar Announced for 2014

    October 30, 2013 —
    Organizers describe the even as “America’s largest, America’s favorite, America’s best construction defect seminar.” And in 2014, they will hold the twenty-first of these annual construction defect seminars. As for size, last year’s event comprised 1,614 attendees, travelling not only from across the county, but from outside the United States as well. West Coast Casualty is beginning to line up its speakers for next May’s seminar. The organizers are asking speakers to submit proposed topics by November 25 and the list will be finalized on December 15. The theme for the event will be “Back to Business … Working Smarter … Not Harder.” While West Coast Casualty is looking for topics that focus on the central theme, they are also interested in presentations on emerging trends in construction defect litigation. In addition to seminars, there will be booths for many of the companies in the construction defect resolution industry, demonstrating products and services of use to professionals in the field. This gives attendees a chance for less-structured interaction than is possible within a seminar. Continuing education credits were granted for the 2013 seminar by a lengthy list of organizations, which included the Bar Associations of 22 states and the Departments of Insurance of 35. The 2014 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar will be held May 15 and 16 at the Disneyland Hotel and Resort. During the seminar comes the awarding of the prestigious Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence, named in honor of the late Judge Jerrold S. Oliver, who was known for his skills as a mediator. In 2013, the “Ollie” was awarded to Margie Luper in acknowledgement of her contributions to the betterment of the construction defect resolution field. The recipients of the Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence are selected by the votes of about 6,000 industry professionals. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Jersey Federal Court Examines And Applies The “j.(5)” Ongoing Operations Exclusion

    October 07, 2019 —
    In PJR Construction of N.J. v. Valley Forge Insurance Company, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127973 (D.N.J. July 31, 2019) (PJR Construction), a New Jersey federal court held that the “j.(5)” “Ongoing Operations Exclusion” applied to bar coverage for property damage to property on which a construction company allegedly performed faulty work. The court’s opinion follows prior New Jersey state court precedent, including Ohio Casualty Insurance Company v. Island Pool & Spa, Inc., 12 A.3d 719 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2011) (Island Pool), but also provides additional guidance on the elements which can make the Ongoing Operations Exclusion applicable to exclude coverage. In PJR Construction, a commercial property owner engaged a construction company to build a 26,000 square foot swim club and related 3,000 square foot pavilion building in New Jersey. After about 75% of the work was completed, the property owner fired the construction company and denied it access to the property. The owner later sued the construction company in New Jersey state court alleging “shoddy workmanship” in, among other things, sealants, flashing, water resistant barriers, masonry and the handicap ramps. The construction company sought coverage from its CGL insurer, which denied coverage based on, among other things, the j.(5) Ongoing Operations Exclusion. After the denial of coverage, the company sued the insurer in New Jersey federal court seeking a declaration of coverage. Reprinted courtesy of Anthony L. Miscioscia, White and Williams LLP and Timothy A. Carroll, White and Williams LLP Mr. Miscioscia may be contacted at misciosciaa@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Carroll may be contacted at carrollt@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Does a Contractor (or Subcontractor) Have to Complete its Work to File a Mechanics Lien

    January 10, 2018 —
    Yes. There seems to be common misconception that a contractor, subcontractor, or supplier, has six months from its last day of work on the project to file a mechanics lien. I frequently see mechanics liens whereby the claimant states “Claimants last day of work on the project was X.” However, Section 1502 (49 P.S. Section 1502) of the Pennsylvania Mechanics Lien is clear that a lien must be filed within six month of “the completion of his work.” Under the Lien Law, “completion of the work” is a defined term and means “means performance of the last of the labor or delivery of the last of the materials required by the terms of the claimant’s contract or agreement, whichever last occurs.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    Builder and County Tussle over Unfinished Homes

    November 13, 2013 —
    Rivard, Florida has been trying to get rid of a group of unfinished homes destroyed. Now Hernando County officials have decreed that the partially-built homes are unsafe and must be demolished. However, after the building permits were withdrawn, Costa Homes filed a lawsuit asking that they be reinstated. The county had given the builder a deadline to file new permits, but were met with a lawsuit. Costa Homes seeks to be relived of the county’s requirement that each of the six homes be provided with $10,000 bond and also finds the county’s completion schedule to be “so short it constitutes a prescription for failure.” Building officials had declared the structures unsafe in August and had stipulated that they had to be made safe. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer Could Not Rely on Extrinsic Evidence to Circumvent Its Duty to Defend

    February 14, 2023 —
    In First Mercury Insurance Co. v. First Florida Building Corp., et al., a federal district court ordered that an insurer had a duty to defend its insured against an underlying personal injury lawsuit. 2023 WL 23116, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 3, 2023). First Mercury is a cautionary tale about how insurers may try to circumvent their obligations by improperly considering extrinsic evidence when determining whether they have a duty to defend their insureds. First Mercury is a coverage dispute over an underlying personal injury lawsuit that was filed against the insured, a construction company, for injuries the claimant allegedly sustained at a construction site. Id. The claimant alleged that he was at the construction site as an invitee who was “working with” the insured. Id. The insurer agreed to defend the insured against the personal injury lawsuit under a reservation of rights. Id. However, the insurer filed a coverage action seeking a declaration that coverage for the personal injury lawsuit was excluded under the policy. Id. Specifically, the insurer, on summary judgment, argued that the claimant was an employee of the insured who was injured in the course of his employment, thus falling within the employer’s liability and workers’ compensation exclusions in the policy. Id. Although the insurer acknowledged that the personal injury complaint against the insured triggered its duty to defend under the policy, the insurer argued that those exclusions relieved its duty to defend or indemnify the insured. Id. Reprinted courtesy of Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Yaniel Abreu, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Mr. Abreu may be contacted at yabreu@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Florida Court Gives Parties Assigned a Subrogation Claim a Math Lesson

    August 04, 2021 —
    Although the focus of most subrogation cases is usually on proving liability, determining the appropriate measure of damages is just as important. Sometimes turning on a nuanced argument for recoverability, an adverse holding can significantly boost or reduce the total damages in a case. The Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District (Court) recently decided such an issue in a case involving subrogation, holding that the defendants owed much more than they originally anticipated. In Five Solas v. Ram Realty Servs., No. 4D19-2211 2021, 2021 Fla. App. LEXIS 7546, the Court reviewed the appropriate setoff in damages that the defendants were entitled to when measuring the recoverable damages. The Court reversed the lower court’s holding, which held that the defendants were entitled to a setoff that limited the jury’s award to $104,481.75. Instead the Court held that the defendants were only entitled to a setoff equal to the excess recovery over replacement cost. The case involves, among other things, property damage sustained by building owner Five Solas (Owner) and its lessee William Price, P.A. from a collapsed wall originating from the property of the defendants, Ram Realty Services, LLC and Sodix Fern, LLC d/b/a Alexander Lofts (collectively referred to as Defendants). Owner’s carrier, Foremost Insurance Company (Foremost), paid out its policy limit of $430,518.25 to Owner for damage to the building. Owner then pursued its claim against the tortfeasors for the remaining damages not paid by its carrier.[1] Foremost also pursued a subrogation claim, but settled its subrogation claim with Defendants, assigning its subrogation rights to Defendants. 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