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


    South Carolina Supreme Court Finds that Consequential Damage Arise From "Occurrence"

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

    Newark Trial Team Secures Affirmance of ‘No Cause’ Verdict for Nationwide Housing Manager & Developer

    The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities From Scratch

    Hawaii Building Codes to Stay in State Control

    What to Expect From the New Self-Retracting Devices Standard

    NY Project Produces America's First Utility Scale Wind Power

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    Cybersecurity on Your Project: Why Not Follow National Security Strategy?

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- The Claim

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Wins Summary Judgment in Favor of Third-Party Defendant

    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara LLP Attorneys to Speak at the 2016 National Construction Claims Conference

    U.S. Housing Starts Exceed Estimates After a Stronger December

    OSHA Releases COVID-19 Guidance

    Automated Weather Insurance Could Offer Help in an Increasingly Hot World

    DC Circuit Rejects Challenge to EPA’s CERCLA Decision Regarding Hardrock Mining Industry

    Two Years, Too Late: Time-Barred Hurricane Loss is Timely Reminder to Insureds

    Haight Ranked in 2018 U.S. News - Best Lawyers "Best Law Firms" List

    Harmon Tower Construction Defects Update: Who’s To Blame?

    Court Retained Jurisdiction to Enforce Settlement Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6 Despite Dismissal of Complaint

    Pancakes Decision Survives Challenge Before Hawaii Appellate Court

    John Aho: Engineer Pushed for Seismic Safety in Alaska Ahead of 2018 Earthquake

    Palo Alto Proposes Time Limits on Building Permits

    Excess-Escape Other Insurance Provision Unenforceable to Avoid Defense Cost Contribution Despite Placement in Policy’s Coverage Grant

    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    Insurance Company Must Show that Lead Came from Building Materials

    Environmental Regulatory Provisions Embedded in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    New York State Legislature Reintroduces Bills to Extend Mortgage Recording Tax to Mezzanine Debt and Preferred Equity

    Hawaii Federal Court Grants Insured's Motion for Remand

    Bert L. Howe & Associates Celebrates 21-Year Success Story

    Construction Defect Litigation in Nevada Called "Out of Control"

    Three Steps to a Safer Jobsite

    Understanding the California Consumer Privacy Act

    You Need to be a Contractor for Workers’ Compensation Immunity to Apply

    What You Don’t Know About Construction Law Can Hurt Your Engineering Firm (Law Note)

    Empire State Building Owners Sue Photographer for Topless Photo Shoot

    David M. McLain named Law Week Colorado’s 2015 Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants

    COVID-19 Business Interruption Lawsuits Begin: Iconic Oceana Grill in New Orleans Files Insurance Coverage Lawsuit

    Ambush Elections are Here—Are You Ready?

    New Recommendations for Healthy and Safe Housing Conditions

    New Defendant Added to Morrison Bridge Decking Lawsuit

    Connecticutt Class Action on Collapse Claims Faces Motion to Dismiss

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Stuck on You”

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

    Additional Insured Status Survives Summary Judgment Stage

    Distinguishing Hawaii Law, New Jersey Finds Anti-Assignment Clause Ineffective

    Contractor Succeeds At the Supreme Court Against Public Owner – Obtaining Fee Award and Determination The City Acted In Bad Faith

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorney Casey Quinn Selected to the 2017 Mountain States Super Lawyers Rising Stars List

    No Retrofit without Repurposing in Los Angeles

    Fire Consultants Cannot Base Opinions on Speculation
    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

    First Circuit Limits Insurers’ Right to Recoup Defense Costs or Settlement Payments

    April 02, 2024 —
    Weighing in on an issue that has divided courts nationwide, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has ruled that an insurer under Massachusetts law has no right to recoup defense costs, or amounts the insurer pays in settlement – even if the insurer reserves rights prior to payment and obtains a ruling, after the fact, that no defense or indemnity was owed. Berkley Natl. Ins. Co. v. Atlantic-Newport Realty LLC, No. 22-1959, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 4115 (1st Cir. Feb 22, 2024) (“Granite Telecomm"). However, the First Circuit rested its ruling on narrow procedural grounds, which may prolong the controversy rather than resolve it. The insureds in Granite Telecomm owned a company cafeteria. They were sued by a food service worker who suffered a foot infection after being exposed to bacteria during a sewage backup. They sought coverage from their insurer, Berkley. Berkley argued that coverage was barred by a fungus and bacteria exclusion in the policy. The insureds disagreed. They threatened suit under M.G.L. ch. 93A, and demanded that Berkley defend the case. Reprinted courtesy of Eric Hermanson, White and Williams LLP, Austin Moody, White and Williams LLP and Victoria Ranieri, White and Williams LLP Mr. Hermanson may be contacted at hermansone@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Moody may be contacted at moodya@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Ranieri may be contacted atranieriv@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    How AI and Machine Learning Are Helping Construction Reduce Risk and Improve Margins

    November 28, 2018 —
    The construction industry is often characterized as high risk and low margin. According to a McKinsey report, almost 98 percent of projects incur cost overruns or delays. Meanwhile, the construction productivity curve has remained flat when compared to other industries. In the last decade, with the advent of cloud and mobile technologies, industry leaders have been focused on digitizing construction workflows. This has resulted in improved efficiencies, but also has created an explosion of new data sources in the construction industry. Project teams are now capturing and documenting data on mobile devices, site progress is documented via drones and sensors are used to create a connected jobsite. Reprinted courtesy of Manu Venugopal, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    What Is a Construction Defect in California?

    October 25, 2013 —
    William Naumann answers that question for the site SuperLawyers. Mr. Naumann notes that a construction defect “is a deficiency in the design or construction of a building or structure,” with specific examples of including “significant cracks in the slab and/or foundation; unevenness in floor slabs caused by abnormal soils movement; leaky roofs, windows, or door,” though he admits that he has not provided an all-inclusive list. He also discusses the deadlines for various types of construction defects, which in California range from 1 year to 10 years, depending on what the defect is. Untreated wood posts only get two years, while steel fences must be free of defects for four. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (08/15/23) – Manufacturing Soars with CHIPS Act, New Threats to U.S. Infrastructure and AI Innovation for One Company

    September 25, 2023 —
    In our latest roundup, wildfires wreak havoc in Maui, JLL unveils an AI specifically for commercial real estate, the lasting effects of the CHIPS ACT, and more!
    • So far, 11,000 JLL employees have used the company’s new proprietary large language model that has generative AI capabilities specifically for the commercial real estate industry. (Lindsey Wilkinson, Construction Dive)
    • Since the enactment of the CHIPS Act, manufacturing activity has boomed with a nearly 80% increase from June 2022. (Sebastian Obando and Julia Himmel, Construction Dive)
    • Construction-tech-focused investors among others have poured $35 million into an Israeli startup that develops leakage detection technology using artificial intelligence to prevent water damage. (Sharon Wrobel, Times of Israel)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    California’s Labor Enforcement Task Force Continues to Set Fire to the Underground Economy

    February 16, 2016 —
    If you’re a fan of the Hunger Games trilogy, either the books or the movies, you’re likely familiar with “The Hob,” the black market in District 12 where people buy and sell banned items. It’s where bow-wielding protagonist Katniss Everdeen and her childhood friend Gale Hawthorne sell their poached game and where, in the movie but not the book (what can we say, we’re fans), Katniss obtains the “mockingjay” pin which she is later associated with. While The Hob is largely ignored by soldiers of the totalitarian “Capitol,” in the third book Catching Fire, the Hob is reduced to a pile of rubbish and ash by the Capital as an example to punish the insurrectionists led by Katniss. The Labor Enforcement Task Force (LETF), a joint task force composed of several of California’s agencies including the Contractors State License Board, Department of Industrial Relations and Employment Development Department is also setting fire, at least figuratively, to California’s underground economy. See our earlier post Joint Labor Task Force Targets Underground Economy for further background on LETF. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Evelin Y. Bailey, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Ms. Bailey may be contacted at ebailey@wendel.com

    The Fifth Circuit, Applying Texas Law, Strikes Down Auto Exclusion

    July 11, 2022 —
    Penn-America Ins. Co. v. Tarango Trucking, LLC, 30 F.4th 440 (5th Cir. 2022), involved a coverage dispute over Penn-America Insurance Company’s (“Penn-America”) duty to defend and indemnify third-party claims against Tarango Trucking, LLC (“Tarango”) for a fatal accident on its property. At the time of the accident, Penn-America insured Tarango under a commercial general liability policy, which included an “Auto Exclusion” and “Parking Exception” provision. The Auto Exclusion stated the policy did not apply to bodily injury or property damage arising out of the use of any automobile, including the operation and loading or unloading. The Parking Exception stated the Auto Exclusion did not apply to parking an auto on Tarango’s premises. The main issues on appeal were whether the Parking Exception restored coverage otherwise precluded by the Auto Exclusion, and whether the district court prematurely decided Penn-America’s duty to indemnify. The appellate court answered yes to both. On March 2, 2020, a truck driver employed by WS Excavation, LLC (“WS”), parked his tractor-trailer on Tarango’s property and proceeded to inspect and off-load heavy equipment. While operating the hydraulic lift, the tractor’s braking system disengaged. The tractor rolled back and struck the WS driver and his personal vehicle, resulting in his death and significant property damage. Notably, WS allegedly failed to properly maintain the tractor’s electronic and braking systems, and Tarango allegedly failed to maintain a level parking and loading facility compliant with industry standards and guidelines. 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

    California Supreme Court Adopts “Vertical Exhaustion” in the Long-Storied Montrose Environmental Coverage Litigation

    June 08, 2020 —
    On April 6, 2020, the California Supreme Court issued a decision that held a policyholder is entitled to access available excess coverage under any excess policy once it has exhausted directly underlying excess policies for the same policy period in Montrose Chemical Corporation v. the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Supreme Court of California, case number S244737. In its unanimous decision adopting this “vertical exhaustion” requirement, the court rejected the “horizontal exhaustion” rule urged by the policyholder’s excess insurers, under which the policyholder would have been able to access an excess policy only after it had exhausted other policies with lower attachment points from every policy period in which the environmental damage resulting in liability occurred. In 1990, Montrose sought coverage under primary policies and multiple layers of excess policies issued for periods from 1961 through 1985 for environmental damage liabilities arising from its production of insecticide in the Los Angeles area between 1947 and 1982. The ongoing dispute currently arises out of Montrose’s Fifth Amended Complaint which was filed in 2015 seeking declarations concerning exhaustion and the manner in which Montrose may allocate its liabilities across the policies. Each of the excess policies at issue contained a requirement of exhaustion of underlying coverage. The various policies described the applicable underlying coverage in four main ways: (1) some policies contained a schedule of underlying insurance listing all of the underlying policies in the same policy period by insurer name, policy number, and dollar amount; (2) some policies referenced a specific dollar amount of underlying insurance in the same policy period and a schedule of underlying insurance on file with the insurer; (3) some policies referenced a specific dollar amount of underlying insurance in the same policy period and identified one or more of the underlying insurers; and (4) some policies referenced a specific dollar amount of underlying insurance that corresponds with the combined limits of the underlying policies in that policy period. The excess policies also provided, in various ways, that “other insurance” must be exhausted before the excess policy can be accessed. Reprinted courtesy of Gregory S. Capps, White and Williams LLP and Michael E. DiFebbo, White and Williams LLP Mr. Capps may be contacted at cappsg@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. DiFebbo may be contacted at difebbom@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Eleventh Circuit Set to Hear Challenge to Florida Law Barring Foreign Citizens From Buying Real Property

    April 22, 2024 —
    Fort Lauderdale, Fla. (April 2, 2024) - This month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit will hear a challenge to a recently-enacted Florida law, Senate Bill 264, which restricts foreign ownership or investment in Florida real property from specific countries and imposes a near ban on property purchases by Chinese, Russian and other foreign nationals. On July 1, 2023, Senate Bill 264 [codified under Fla. Stat. Ann. §§ 692.201 to 692.205] took effect. The bill, titled “Interests of Foreign Countries,” prohibits Chinese nationals and nationals from other countries, including Russia, from buying real property unless they are American citizens or permanent residents. Prior to the new law's effective date, on May 22, 2023, four Chinese citizens who hold nonimmigrant visas and reside in Florida, along with a Florida-based real estate firm, sued the state of Florida in federal district court, alleging that the new law is unconstitutional and discriminatory, and that it violates the Fair Housing Act [Shen v. Simpson, Case No. 4:23-cv-208]. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Gnesin, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Gnesin may be contacted at Michael.Gnesin@lewisbrisbois.com