BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut construction experts
    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


    Meet the Forum's Neutrals: TOM DUNN

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

    Legal Battle Kicks Off to Minimize Baltimore Bridge Liabilities

    No Jail Time for Disbarred Construction Defect Lawyer

    Oregon to Add 258,000 Jobs by 2022, State Data Shows

    Non-compliance With Endorsement Means No Indemnity Coverage

    Malerie Anderson Named to D Magazine’s 2023 Best Lawyers Under 40

    Sarah P. Long Expands Insurance Coverage Team at Payne & Fears

    Gehry-Designed Project Seen Bringing NYC Vibe to L.A.

    Labor Intensive

    Florida Self-Insured Retention Satisfaction and Made Whole Doctrine

    You Cannot Always Contract Your Way Out of a Problem (The Case for Dispute Resolution in Mega and Large Complex Construction Projects)

    Atlantic City Faces Downward Spiral With Revel’s Demise

    Tariffs, Supply Snarls Spur Search for Factories Closer to U.S.

    Florida Courts Say that Developers Are Responsible for Flooding

    The “Program Accessibility” Exception for Public Entities Under the ADA

    Builder Waits too Long to Dispute Contract in Construction Defect Claim

    New York Appellate Court Addresses “Trigger of Coverage” for Asbestos Claims and Other Coverage Issues

    Ivanhoe Cambridge Plans Toronto Office Towers, Terminal

    Pandemic-Related Construction Materials Pricing Poses Challenges in Construction Lawsuits

    WCC and BHA Raised Thousands for Children’s Cancer Research at 25th West Coast Casualty CD Seminar

    Timber Prices Likely to Keep Rising

    San Francisco Museum Nears $610 Million Fundraising Goal

    Smart Contracts Poised to Impact the Future of Construction

    Anchoring Abuse: Evolution & Eradication

    “Professional Best Efforts” part 2– Reservation of Rights for Engineers who agree to “best” efforts? (law note)

    Green Investigations Are Here: U.S. Department of Justice Turns Towards Environmental Enforcement Actions, Deprioritizes Compliance Assistance

    2016 Updates to CEB’s Mechanics Liens and Retail Leasing Practice Books Now Available

    Toll Plans to Boost New York Sales With Pricing, Incentives

    Hirer Not Liable Under Privette Doctrine Where Hirer Had Knowledge of Condition, but not that Condition Posed a Concealed Hazard

    Montana Theater Threatened by Closure due to Building Safety

    Construction in Indian Country – What You Need To Know About Sovereign Immunity

    Basement Foundation Systems’ Getting an Overhaul

    San Diego County Considering Updates to Green Building Code

    Nondelegable Duty of Care Owed to Third Persons

    Court Finds That $400 Million Paid Into Abatement Fund Qualifies as “Damages” Under the Insured’s Policies

    ASCE Statement on Congress Passage of National Debt Limit Suspension

    Reminder: Your Accounting and Other Records Matter

    Construction Contractor “Mean Tweets” Edition

    No Coverage for Foundation Collapse

    Coverage for Injury to Insured’s Employee Not Covered

    First Circuit Finds No Coverage For Subcontracted Faulty Work

    Repairs to Hurricane-damaged Sanibel Causeway Completed in 105 Days

    Construction Law Job Opps and How to Create Them

    The Sensible Resurgence of the Multigenerational Home

    Creative Avenue for Judgment Creditor to Collect a Judgment

    What is Toxic Mold Litigation?

    Judge Gives Cintra Bid Protest of $9B Md. P3 Project Award New Life

    Residential Mortgage Lenders and Servicers Beware of Changes to Rule 3002.1

    EEOC Sues Schuff Steel, J.A. Croson in New Racial Harassment Cases
    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

    Appraisal Process Analyzed

    August 19, 2015 —
    The California Court of Appeal offered a primer in the appraisal process in reversing the trial court's confirmation of the appraisal award. Lee v. California Capital Ins. Co., 2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 530 (Cal. Ct. App. June 18, 2015). A fire damaged an apartment building owned by the insured. The fire started in unit 3 on the ground floor. The insurer argued the fire did not extend beyond unit 3. The insured claimed that the fire damaged six of the 12 apartments with fire or smoke. The insured's public adjuster submitted a claim to the insurer that exceeded $800,000. The statement of loss included costs for cleaning, asbestos abatement, reconstruction of affected apartments, and loss of rent. The public adjuster said the loss consisted of burn damage to unit 3 and some damage to the "common" walls located between the apartments on the two floors above unit 3. All of the interior rooms of five apartments other than unit 3 would need to be completely dismantled and then replaced. 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

    Without Reservations: Fourth Circuit Affirms That Vague Reservation of Rights Waived Insurers’ Coverage Arguments

    January 09, 2023 —
    The Fourth Circuit recently affirmed insurance coverage for a South Carolina policyholder based on the “axiomatic principle” that an insurer which fails to fully and fairly articulate its potential coverage defenses in a reservation of rights letter loses the right to contest coverage on those grounds. Stoneledge at Lake Keowee Owner’s Assoc. v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., No. 19-2009, 2022 WL 17592121 (4th Cir. 2022) (quoting Harleysville Group Insurance v. Heritage Communities, Inc., 803 S.E.2d 288 (S.C. 2017)). More particularly, in Stoneledge, the Fourth Circuit affirmed per curiam a South Carolina District Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of a homeowners association that had successfully sued its general contractors for construction defects and was seeking to recover the damages owed from the contractors’ insurers. The Fourth Circuit agreed that the insurers’ vague reservation of rights letters failed to reserve the defenses on which the insurers purported to deny coverage. The question before the court in Stoneledge was whether the two insurers that had each agreed to defend their respective general-contractor insureds in the homeowner association’s underlying litigation had sufficiently informed their policyholders of their coverage positions. Specifically, the court considered whether the insurers provided notice of their intention to challenge coverage on specific bases and explained why those bases applied in their respective reservation of rights letters. Both of the insurers’ letters followed the typical approach of identifying various policy provisions and exclusions and outlining the general mechanics of those provisions, but they fell short of applying the provisions or exclusions to the facts in the case at hand. Further, the letters stated that the insurers would reevaluate how the provisions applied as the underlying case progressed. One of the insurer’s letters expressed doubt as to coverage but did not offer any analysis on the reasons for the prospective coverage denial. Reprinted courtesy of Lara Degenhart Cassidy, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Matthew J. Revis, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Cassidy may be contacted at lcassidy@HuntonAK.com Mr. Revis may be contacted at mrevis@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Napa Quake Seen Costing Up to $4 Billion as Wineries Shut

    August 27, 2014 —
    The earthquake that struck northern California yesterday will lead to economic losses of as much as $4 billion, fueled by damaged wineries and shuttered businesses that rely on tourists. Insurers will probably cover about $2.1 billion, according to an estimate from Kinetic Analysis Corp., which projected total losses of about twice that sum. Costs borne by the industry may be limited because many homeowners don’t have earthquake coverage, according to the Insurance Information Institute. “The main source of claims could well be commercial claims, those coming from wineries and vineyards and other commercial interests,” Robert Hartwig, the institute’s president, said in an interview today. “It will take a while for the business owners to sort this out.” Mr. Marois may be contacted at mmarois@bloomberg.net; Mr. Tracer may be contacted at ztracer1@bloomberg.net; Mr. Hart may be contacted at dahart@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael B. Marois, Zachary Tracer and Dan Hart, Bloomberg

    Virtual Jury Trials of Construction Disputes: The Necessary Union of Both Sides of the Brain

    May 17, 2021 —
    Bart Smith is the Senior Project Manager for Simply Best, a general contracting firm. He has been assigned to serve as the liaison with outside counsel in a lawsuit against Holly’s Harleys, a project owner who contracted with Best for the construction of a motorcycle showroom. Best filed suit in federal court for additional project costs it incurred, which it contends were caused by the specification of incompatible materials by Holly’s design firm. The coronavirus pandemic is still raging as the trial date approaches. Courthouse facilities are closed so civil trials are conducted using remote technology, if they occur at all. Bart negotiated the prime contract with Holly’s, and he regrettably allowed Best’s binding arbitration and jury trial waiver clauses in the prime contract to be deleted. Bart worries about how the intricacies of Best’s case can be adequately explained to a jury in a remote trial. His concern approaches panic when Best’s trial counsel explains how the trial will be conducted with none of the parties—their attorneys, the judge, the witnesses or the jury—present in the same location. Reprinted courtesy of John Dannecker, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Defect Claims Called “Witch Hunt”

    November 20, 2013 —
    Saying that “it was blatantly obvious that LAWA’s airport maintenance has culpability in this matter,” Tutor-Saliba Corp is claiming that the recent lawsuit from Los Angeles World Airports, the operators of LAX, is “an apparent witch hunt.” The airport has claimed that Tutor-Saliba’s work in building the runway was defective. The firm notes in response that their warranty against defects expired in 2009 and claims that some of the areas with problems are areas they did work. Instead of defective workmanship, Tutor-Saliba has suggested that the problems with the runway are due to poor maintenance. Their suggestion is that LAX review its maintenance procedures. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Excess Policy Triggered Once Retention Paid, Even if Loss Not Covered By Excess

    July 23, 2014 —
    The Fifth Circuit determined that the Umbrella policies took effect once the primary insurance was exhausted by claims not covered by the Umbrella policies. Indem. Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. W&T Offshore, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 11775 (5th Cir. June 23, 2014). W&T had primary and Umbrella/Excess coverage to protect its offshore oil rigs from hurricane damage. The primary policies covered property damage and third party claims. The Umbrella policies only covered third-party claims. All policies covered Removal of Debris (ROD). In September 2008, Hurricane Ike caused damage to 150 offshore platforms in which W&T had an interest. W&T submitted over $150 million in claims for property damage to the primary carriers. The primary policies had a $10 million self-insured retention (SIR). The primary policies covered $150 million in coverage over the $10 million SIR. Anticipating that W&T would submit all of its ROD claims, which were estimated to exceed $50 million, the Umbrella carriers filed suit for a declaratory judgment. 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

    Flexible Seattle Off-Ramp Would Retain Shape in Quake

    November 23, 2016 —
    Moving from the lab to the field, a highway off-ramp bridge under construction in Seattle features memory-retaining metal rods and bendable concrete designed to provide the structure with flexibility sufficient to withstand a major seismic event. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tim Newcomb, Engineering News-Record
    Engineering News-Record may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Apple to Open Steve Jobs-Inspired Ring-Shaped Campus in April

    February 23, 2017 —
    Apple Inc. co-founder Steve Jobs’ last public event in 2011 was a city council meeting in Cupertino, California, where he presented plans for a sprawling new campus with a spaceship-shaped building and tree-filled park. Apple announced Wednesday that it will begin moving employees into the 2.9 million-square-foot facility in April. Apple said a new 1,000-seat auditorium at the facility will be named the Steve Jobs Theater in honor of its co-founder, who died four months after his city council presentation and would have turned 62 on Feb. 24. As with many large-scale construction projects, Apple faced budget overruns and delays. The building cost an estimated $5 billion (though Apple has never said how much), and the opening date had initially been set for 2015. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Adam Satariano, Bloomberg
    Mr. Satariano may be followed on Twitter @satariano