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


    Contractors and Owners Will Have an Easier Time Identifying Regulated Wetlands Following Recent U.S. Supreme Court Opinion

    U.S. Construction Value Flat at End of Summer

    Texas Supreme Court Authorizes Exception to the "Eight-Corners" Rule

    Surety’s Several Liability Under Bonds

    Death, Taxes and Attorneys’ Fees in Construction Disputes

    ISO Proposes New Designated Premises Endorsement in Response to Hawaii Decision

    How to Build Climate Change-Resilient Infrastructure

    ASCE Statement On House Passage Of The Precip Act

    Florida Death Toll Rises by Three, Reaching 27 as Search Resumes

    DIR Public Works Registration System Down, Public Works Contractors Not to be Penalized

    Infrared Photography Illuminates Construction Defects and Patent Trolling

    Improvements to Confederate Monuments Lead to Lawsuits

    Fracking Fears Grow as Oklahoma Hit by More Earthquakes Than California

    The Courts and Changing Views on Construction Defect Coverage

    Georgia Supreme Court Limits Damages Under Georgia Computer Systems Protection Act

    Green Home Predictions That Are Best Poised to Come True in 2014 and Beyond (guest post)

    CGL Insurer’s Duty to Defend Insured During Pre-Suit 558 Process: Maybe?

    Construction Problem Halts Wind Power Park

    Expanded Virginia Court of Appeals Leads to Policyholder Relief

    Brazil Builder Bondholders Burned by Bribery Allegations

    Court Holds That Parent Corporation Lacks Standing to Sue Subsidiary’s Insurers for Declaratory Relief

    Don’t Sign a Contract that Doesn’t Address Covid-19 (Or Pandemics and Epidemics)

    Engineer and CNA Dispute Claim Over Dual 2014 Bridge Failures

    Hunton Offers Amicus Support in First Circuit Review of “Surface Water” Under Massachusetts Law

    Insurer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Earth Movement Exclusion Denied

    Sixth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Property Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Colorado’s Workers’ Compensation Act and the Construction Industry

    Proving & Defending Lost Profit Damages

    Forum Selection Provisions Are Not to Be Overlooked…Even On Federal Projects

    Maryland Contractor Documents its Illegal Deal and Pays $2.15 Million to Settle Fraud Claims

    Contractor Pleads Guilty to Disadvantaged-Business Fraud

    Arbitration: For Whom the Statute of Limitations Does Not Toll in Pennsylvania

    BP Is Not an Additional Insured Under Transocean's Policy

    What to Do Before OSHA Comes Knocking

    Sixth Circuit Rejects Claim for Reverse Bad Faith

    Research Project Underway to Prepare Water Utilities for Wildfire Events

    Rancosky Adopts Terletsky: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Sets Standard for Statutory Bad Faith Claims

    Storm Eunice Damage in U.K. Could Top £300 Million

    Modular Homes Test Energy Efficiency Standards

    Contractor Liable for Soils Settlement in Construction Defect Suit

    Mixing Concrete, Like Baking a Cake, is Fraught with Problems When the Recipe is Not Followed

    Recent Bad Faith Decisions in Florida Raise Concerns

    The Death of Retail and Legal Issues

    The Best Laid Plans: Contingency in a Construction Contract

    Ready, Fire, Aim: The Importance of Targeting Your Delay Notices

    New York's De Blasio Unveils $41 Billion Plan for Affordable Housing

    1 De Haro: A Case Study on Successful Cross-Laminated Timber Design and Construction in San Francisco

    Prevailing Payment Bond Surety Entitled to Statutory Attorneys’ Fees Even if Defended by Principal

    Reminder: Your Accounting and Other Records Matter

    Do Not Pass Go! Duty to Defend in a Professional Services Agreement (law note)
    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

    Alexis Crump Receives 2020 Lawyer Monthly Women in Law Award

    August 31, 2020 —
    Los Angeles Partner Alexis G. Crump has been recognized with a 2020 Lawyer Monthly "Women in Law Award." In receiving this honor, Ms. Crump joins an elite group of women from around the world who have influenced the legal profession with their experience and expertise. Lawyer Monthly’s "Women in Law Awards" emerged as one of the first industry awards to celebrate the achievements and contributions made by women working globally in the legal sector and in business. Recognizing women at all levels of seniority, the publication seeks to acknowledge the challenges that female legal professionals regularly overcome to serve their clients and perform at their best. “It is an honor to be recognized alongside so many outstanding and accomplished women. I look forward to continuing to support my colleagues in their work and participating in the global network of female attorneys,” Ms. Crump said. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Alexis Crump, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Crump may be contacted at Alexis.Crump@lewisbrisbois.com

    When “Substantially Similar” Means “Fundamentally Identical”: Delaware Court Enforces Related Claim Provision to Deny D&O Coverage for Securities Class Action

    August 10, 2021 —
    A company faces two class action lawsuits—filed by different plaintiffs, complaining of different allegedly wrongful conduct, asserting different causes of action subject to different burdens of proof, and seeking different relief based on different time periods for the alleged harm. Those facts suggest the suits are not “fundamentally identical,” but that is what a Delaware Superior Court recently concluded in barring coverage for a policyholder seeking to recover for a suit the court deemed “related” to an earlier lawsuit first made outside the policy’s coverage period. First Solar Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., No. N20C-10-156 MMJ CCLD (Del. Super. Ct. June 23, 2021). The decision, which is not on all fours with some of the authority upon which it relies, underscores the inherent unpredictability of “related” claim disputes and need for careful analysis of the policy language against the factual and legal bases of the underlying claims. Underlying Shareholder Class Actions and D&O Claims Shareholders of solar panel manufacturer First Solar sued the company and its directors and officers in a class action lawsuit (the “Smilovits Action”) for the class period April 2008 to February 2012. The Smilovits Action asserted federal securities violations arising from First Solar’s alleged misrepresentations about the company’s business strategies, product design, financial strength, and ability to offer solar electricity at comparable rates to conventional energy producers (i.e., achieving “grid parity”), artificially inflated stock price, insider trading, manipulation of solar power metrics, and violations of GAAP accounting standards. First Solar submitted a claim to its D&O insurer, National Union, which provided coverage for the Smilovits Action and exhausted the policy. Reprinted courtesy of Geoffrey B. Fehling, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Lawrence J. Bracken II, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Fehling may be contacted at gfehling@HuntonAK.com Mr. Bracken may be contacted at lbracken@HuntonAK.com Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Jason Poore Receives 2018 Joseph H. Foster Young Lawyer Award

    July 21, 2018 —
    Jason Poore, an associate in the General Litigation Group, recently received the 2018 Joseph H. Foster Young Lawyer Award during the Philadelphia Association of Defense Counsel’s annual meeting. The Joseph H. Foster Young Lawyer Award honors “a young lawyer who best exemplifies the qualities of professionalism and dedication as defense counsel in the practice of law and in the promotion of the highest ideals of justice in the community." Jason continues to make significant contributions to the local bar and community. In addition to serving on the Executive Committee of the Philadelphia Bar Association Young Lawyers Division, he is the creator and Chair of the PBA's Youth Courts Committee. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Poore, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Poore may be contacted at poorej@whiteandwilliams.com

    2017 Legislative Changes Affecting the Construction Industry

    July 13, 2017 —
    The 2017 Florida Legislative Session recently concluded, and a number of important construction-related House Bills (HB) and Senate Bills (SB) were presented during the Session, most notably SB 204/HB 377. These Bills may impact General Contractors and Construction Managers in a number of ways, not the least of which is the period of time that a cause of action may be initiated for the design, planning or construction of an improvement. The following construction-related Bills passed in both the House and Senate and will become law if approved by the Governor. Senate Bill (SB) 204/House Bill (HB) 377: Relating to the Statute of Repose for causes of action based on design, planning or construction of an improvement to real property. This bill passed both the House and the Senate and was approved by the Governor on June 14, 2017. This bill becomes effective on July 1, 2017. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melinda S. Gentile, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Ms. Gentile may be contacted at mgentile@pecklaw.com

    Why Is California Rebuilding in Fire Country? Because You’re Paying for It

    March 14, 2018 —
    After last year’s calamity, officials are making the same decisions that put homeowners at risk in the first place. At the rugged eastern edge of Sonoma County, where new homes have been creeping into the wilderness for decades, Derek Webb barely managed to save his ranch-style resort from the raging fire that swept through the area last October. He spent all night fighting the flames, using shovels and rakes to push the fire back from his property. He was even ready to dive into his pool and breathe through a garden hose if he had to. His neighbors weren’t so daring—or lucky. On a recent Sunday, Webb wandered through the burnt remains of the ranch next to his. He’s trying to buy the land to build another resort. This doesn’t mean he thinks the area won’t burn again. In fact, he’s sure it will. But he doubts that will deter anyone from rebuilding, least of all him. “Everybody knows that people want to live here,” he says. “Five years from now, you probably won’t even know there was a fire.” As climate change creates warmer, drier conditions, which increase the risk of fire, California has a chance to rethink how it deals with the problem. Instead, after the state’s worst fire season on record, policymakers appear set to make the same decisions that put homeowners at risk in the first place. Driven by the demands of displaced residents, a housing shortage, and a thriving economy, local officials are issuing permits to rebuild without updating building codes. They’re even exempting residents from zoning rules so they can build bigger homes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Flavelle, Bloomberg

    Idaho District Court Affirms Its Role as the Gatekeeper of Expert Testimony

    March 15, 2021 —
    Many subrogation claims involving fire losses rely heavily on expert testimony. Expert testimony is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 if it is both relevant and reliable. In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), whose standard has been incorporated into Federal Rule of Evidence 702, the Supreme Court instructed federal trial courts to act as a “gatekeeper” of expert testimony, giving them the power to exclude expert testimony that is not supported by sufficient evidence. In Maria Fernanda Elosu and Robert Luis Brace v. Middlefork Ranch Incorporated, Civil Case No. 1:19-cv-00267-DCN, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14449 (D. Idaho Jan. 22, 2021) (Brace), the United States District Court for the District of Idaho exercised its gatekeeper role when it granted in part and denied in part the defendant’s motion to exclude expert testimony pursuant to Daubert and Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Brace, involved a fire at a vacation cabin in McCall, Idaho. The cabin, owned by Maria Elosu (Elosu) and Robert Brace (Brace and collectively with Elosu, Plaintiffs) was part of a homeowner’s association called Middlefork Ranch, Incorporated (MFR). The cabin had a “wrap around” deck with a propane-fired refrigerator on the north side. On the day before the fire, Brace stained the deck using an oil-based stain. That night, Elosu smoked cigarettes on the deck. The next morning, Plaintiffs used rags to clean up excess oil from the deck and an MFR employee changed the propane on the refrigerator and relit the pilot light. At 4:00 p.m., a fire started in or around the cabin while no one was home. The fire was discovered by a group of contractors who testified that the fire was isolated to the east side of the cabin when they first arrived. Importantly, one witness testified that there was no fire and no flames around the propane-fired refrigerator. The fire destroyed the cabin and the contents within. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Kenney, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Kenney may be contacted at kenneyme@whiteandwilliams.com

    Selected Environmental Actions Posted on the Fall 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulator Actions

    November 06, 2018 —
    The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, housed in the Office of Management and Budget, has issued the Fall 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions to be taken over the next several months by federal executive departments and agencies. This report will highlight some of the environmental actions, to be proposed or finalized soon by these agencies. Eventually, the Agenda will be published in the Federal Register. 1. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) EPA, of course, has listed by far the largest number of actions. For instance, EPA’s agenda lists 92 separate actions to be taken under its Clean Air Act (CAA) authority. As an example, EPA reports that it will issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in May 2019 of its proposals to increase consistency and true transparency in considering the cost benefit of its proposed rules, and review the standards of performance for new, modified, and reconstructed sources of greenhouse gas emissions by means of an NPRM to be issued in November 2018. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    No Rest for the Weary: Project Completion Is the Beginning of Litigation

    June 18, 2019 —
    In today’s environment, most construction projects end up in some form of litigation. Construction is full-time employment for lawyers – from contract negotiation to project management, lien and payment issues. Years after project completion, a company still can face construction defect litigation and be served with a Notice of Opportunity to Repair, which in most states is now codified into statute. This is the beginning of what most likely will become a lawsuit, involving many of the subcontractors. Watch Out for the Construction Contract Blame Game The first phase of post construction litigation involves the review of contract and insurance policy language in an attempt to transfer responsibility in the litigation to other parties. Before construction began, contract negotiation focused on budget and timeline. In the post-construction phase, two less noticed provisions of the contract are critical – indemnity and insurance. Reprinted courtesy of Albert Li & Bob Fitzsimmons, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Fitzsimmons may be contacted at rfitzsimmons@rumberger.com Mr. Li may be contacted at ali@rumberger.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of