BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation 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


    Avoid the Headache – Submit the Sworn Proof of Loss to Property Insurer

    New Jersey Judge Found Mortgage Lender Liable When Borrower Couldn’t Pay

    A Behind-the-Scenes Look at Substitution Hearings Under California’s Listing Law

    Nobody Knows What Lies Beneath New York City

    As Some States Use the Clean Water Act to Delay Energy Projects, EPA Issues New CWA 401 Guidance

    Time is Money. Unless You’re an Insurance Company

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in “The Best Lawyers in America” & “Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch” 2025 Editions

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2020 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Congratulations to Las Vegas Team on Their Successful Motion for Summary Judgment!

    Developer Boymelgreen Forced to Hand Over Financial Records for 15 Broad Street

    Manufacturer of Asbestos-Free Product May Still Be Liable for Asbestos Related Injuries

    United States Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in EEOC Subpoena Case

    Ivanhoe Cambridge Plans Toronto Office Towers, Terminal

    Applying Mighty Midgets, NY Court Awards Legal Expenses to Insureds Which Defeated Insurer’s Coverage Claims

    Why Federal and State Agencies are Considering Converting from a “Gallons Consumed” to a “Road Usage” Tax – And What are the Risks to the Consumer?

    Ohio “property damage” caused by an “occurrence.”

    Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Insurance Bad Faith Trials

    Unpaid Hurricane Maria Insurance Claims, New Laws in Puerto Rico, and the Lesson for all Policyholders

    Formaldehyde-Free Products for Homes

    Practical Pointers for Change Orders on Commercial Construction Contracts

    Disrupt a Broken Industry—The Industrial Construction Sandbox

    Another Way a Mechanic’s Lien Protects You

    Inspectors Hurry to Make Sure Welds Are Right before Bay Bridge Opening

    Property Insurance Exclusion for Constant or Repeated Leakage of Water

    New Insurance Case: Owners'​ Insurance Barred in Reimbursement Action against Tenant

    Expert Can be Questioned on a Construction Standard, Even if Not Relied Upon

    Super Lawyers Selects Haight Lawyers for Its 2024 Southern California Rising Stars List

    The BUILDCHAIN Project Enhances Data Exchange and Transparency in the EU Construction Industry

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Dining

    Quarter Four a Good One for Luxury Homebuilder

    Claims Made Insurance Policies

    Start-up to Streamline Large-Scale Energy Renovation

    California Supreme Court Protects California Policyholders for Intentional Acts of Employees

    Nevada Supreme Court Rejects Class Action Status, Reducing Homes from 1000 to 71

    Mitigate Construction Risk Through Use of Contingency

    How BIM Can Serve Building Owners

    Corps Spells Out Billions in Infrastructure Act Allocations

    Construction Managers, Are You Exposing Yourselves to Labor Law Liability?

    Mind Over Matter: Court Finds Expert Opinion Based on NFPA 921 Reliable Despite Absence of Physical Testing

    The California Privacy Rights Act Passed – Now What?

    DOE Abruptly Cancels $13B Cleanup Award to BWXT-Fluor Team

    Calling the Shots

    Insurer Need Not Pay for Rejected Defense When No Reservation of Rights Issued

    Panama Weighs Another Canal Expansion at Centennial Mark

    Illinois Insureds are Contesting One Carrier's Universal Denial to Covid-19 Losses

    Withdrawal of an Admission in California May Shift Costs—Including Attorneys’ Fees—Incurred in Connection with the Withdrawal

    Design Professional Asserting Copyright Infringement And Contributory Copyright Infringement

    Homeowner’s Policy Excludes Coverage for Loss Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (07/13/22)

    Look to West Africa for the Future of Green Architecture
    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

    Industry Groups Decry Jan. 6 Riot; DOT Chief Chao Steps Down in Protest

    January 11, 2021 —
    Industry and business groups and labor unions universally denounced the actions of rioters who broke into the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, with statements going as far as calling for President Donald Trump to step down but others taking a more measured response. Reprinted courtesy of Aileen Cho, Engineering News-Record and Pam Radtke Russell, Engineering News-Record Ms. Cho may be contacted at choa@enr.com Ms. Russell may be contacted at Russellp@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Jersey Supreme Court Issue Important Decision for Homeowners and Contractors

    September 08, 2016 —
    The lack of insurance coverage for a contractor’s faulty workmanship is the bane of both homeowners looking to recover damage for defective work and contractors seeking to defend against such claims. In many states, like Pennsylvania, courts hold that faulty workmanship is not an “occurrence” that is covered by a standard commercial general liability insurance policy. In other words, courts hold that CGL policies cover damage to other property not part of the construction project itself. This is problematic for both the homeowner and the insured. For the homeowner, the lack of a policy providing indemnification sometimes means the homeowner is left trying to collect against a defendant, who is otherwise but has little to no assets against which to collect a judgment. For the contractor, the lack of a policy providing coverage means that assets are at risk and it could be forced to spend significant sums in attorneys fees defending the case. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    San Francisco House that Collapsed Not Built to Plan

    February 14, 2014 —
    Last December, a San Francisco, California “developer’s Twin Peaks house collapsed and slid down a hill during renovations.” The San Francisco Chronicle reported that the house “was being supported by three reinforcing towers, rather than the nine required under its approved plans, according to documents provided to city building inspectors.” According to a report by Department of Building Inspection chief Tom Hui, developer Mel Murphy "’failed to follow and implement the approved plans and the sequence of construction’ in his permit,” as quoted by The San Francisco Chronicle. The report also stated that the work “was not independently inspected as required” though this is “vehemently disputed by Murphy.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court of Appeal Holds That Higher-Tiered Party on Construction Project Can be Held Liable for Intentional Interference with Contract

    December 07, 2020 —
    In Caliber Paving Company, Inc. v. Rexford Industrial Realty and Management, Inc., Case No. G0584406 (September 1, 2020), the 4th District Court of Appeal examined whether a higher-tiered party on a construction project can be held liable for intentional interference with contract when it interferes with the contract between lower-tiered parties even though the higher-tiered party has an economic interest in the contract between the lower-tiered parties. The Caliber Paving Case Project owner Rexford Industrial Realty and Management, Inc. owns and operates industrial property throughout Southern California. In 2017, Rexford hired contractor Steve Fodor Construction to perform repaving work at Rexford’s property in Carson, California. Fodor Construction in turn hired subcontractor Caliber Paving Company, Inc. to perform the repaving work. The subcontract divided the parking lot into four areas, with separate costs to repave each area, and Caliber completed its work in one area in June 2017. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Deterioration of Bridge Infrastructure Is Increasing Insurance Needs

    December 03, 2024 —
    As the world is taken by storm—literally, with increasing hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires and more—insuring construction projects and infrastructure is becoming more complicated yet more necessary. Sean Pender, senior vice president of construction and development at CAC Specialty, is a leading specialty insurance broker and advisor. As major-storm season for the Northern hemisphere rounds out, he speaks with Construction Executive about the potential risk and insurance implications to the process of ensuring proper repairs, replacements and other forms of maintenance to one of the country’s most pivotal pieces of infrastructure: bridges. What does insurance coverage look like for building bridges in various environments throughout the country? Insurance is essential to protect the entity that owns the bridge during construction. Bridges under construction are at the highest risk of collapse because they are not yet fully stabilized and are exposed to severe weather and natural disasters, which could cause significant damage to the structure or injury to workers and civilians. Therefore, comprehensive liability insurance programs—typically with coverage limits of $50 to $100 million or higher—are crucial, especially with activities on or over waterways. Reprinted courtesy of Grace Calengor, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Traub Lieberman Partners Lenhardt and Smith Obtain Directed Verdict in Broward County Failed Repair Sinkhole Trial

    September 03, 2019 —
    On Tuesday, July 16, 2019, Traub Lieberman Partners Michael Lenhardt and Burks Smith won a Directed Verdict at trial in a dispute over Sinkhole Loss coverage in Broward County Circuit Court. The lawsuit arose out of a claim for Breach of Contract involving an alleged “failed repair” of a 2005 sinkhole at the insureds’ property. The Plaintiffs argued that their Policy Limits did not apply because the carrier allegedly undertook the subsurface repairs, relying on Drew v. Mobile USA Ins. Co., 920 So.2d 832 (Fla. 4thDCA 2006). The Plaintiffs asserted that because the insurance company allegedly hired the below ground repair company, a “new contract” was formed, and the Plaintiffs should be entitled to limitless repairs to their home, notwithstanding the Policy Limits. This argument obviously presented the carrier with very significant exposure. Attorneys Lenhardt and Smith provided a vigorous defense for the insurance company at trial, during which they presented the jury with evidence that the carrier did not, in fact, hire the subsurface repair company. They further established to the jury that the insureds actually signed a contract with the repair company directly, and that the defendant did not invoke the Our Option repair clause of the Policy. After the Plaintiffs rested their case, Mr. Lenhardt and Mr. Smith moved the Court for entry of a directed verdict. The defense argued to the Court that the Plaintiffs could not prove their case to the jury based upon the facts presented as a matter of law, thus entitling the insurance company to a defense verdict. Reprinted courtesy of Michael Francis Lenhardt, Traub Lieberman and Burks A. Smith, III, Traub Lieberman Mr. Lenhardt may be contacted at mlenhardt@tlsslaw.com Mr. Smith may be contacted at bsmith@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Defect Settlement in Seattle

    June 28, 2013 —
    The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports that a settlement has been reached in the Mosler Lofts construction defect claim. The settlement received by the homeowners was for about $8.5 million, which will used for repairs of the construction defects and for paying their legal costs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Indemnity Coverage Where Insured Suffers No Loss

    November 05, 2014 —
    The insured subcontractor sought coverage under its Builder's Risk policy for loss despite already being paid under contract the amount sought under the policy. MKB Constr. v. Am Zurich Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136096 (W.D. Wash. Sept. 24, 2014). MKB contracted with the Lower Yukon School District (LYSD) to place gravel fill for a new building pad upon which a school building would be placed in Emmonak, Alaska. The project site was built on tundra that melted in the summer, becoming marshy and pocketed by pools of standing water. LYSD provided the bidding contractors with information stating that settlements of 3 to 9 inches could be expected in areas with 30 inches of fill. The contract was awarded to MKB, who subsequently realized it had under bid the amount of gravel fill that would be required. The estimated difference in the amount bid and the amount that would be needed was 6,583 cubic yards. LYSD refused to increase the contract price. 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