BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultant
    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


    Ex-Construction Firm That Bought a $75m Michelangelo to Delist

    Seven Trends That Impact Commercial Construction Litigation in 2021

    Insurers Subrogating in Arkansas Must Expend Energy to Prove That Their Insureds Have Been Made Whole

    Home Prices Beat Estimates With 0.8% Gain in November

    Hurricane Handbook: A Policyholder's Guide to Handling Claims during Hurricane Season

    No Hiring Surge by Homebuilders Says Industry Group

    Top 10 Lessons Learned from a Construction Attorney

    Sustainability Is an Ever-Increasing Issue in Development

    Montana Significantly Revises Its Product Liability Laws

    Does the UCC Apply to the Contract for the Sale of Goods and Services

    New Home Permits Surge in Wisconsin

    Insurer Not Responsible for Insured's Assignment of Policy Benefits

    Top 10 Take-Aways: the ABA Forum's 2024 Mid-Winter Meeting

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    Yes, Virginia, Contract Terms Do Matter: Financing Term Offers Owner an Escape Hatch

    Pulled from the Swamp: EPA Wetland Determination Now Judicially Reviewable

    Real-Estate Pros Fight NYC Tax on Wealthy Absentee Owners

    Evolving Climate Patterns and Extreme Weather Demand New Building Methods

    North Carolina Supreme Court Addresses “Trigger of Coverage,” Allocation and Exhaustion-Related Issues Arising Out of Benzene-Related Claims

    Do Hurricane-Prone Coastal States Need to Update their Building Codes?

    Interior Designer Licensure

    Brown and Caldwell Team with AECOM for Landmark Pure Water Southern California Program

    U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments: Maritime Charters and the Specter of a New Permitting Regime

    Construction Law Client Alert: California’s Right to Repair Act (SB 800) Takes Another Hit, Then Fights Back

    Couple Claims Contractor’s Work Is Defective and Incomplete

    Best Practices: Commercial Lockouts in Arizona

    Delay In Noticing Insurer of Loss is Not Prejudicial

    Powering Goal Congruence in Construction Through Smart Contracts

    Insurance Agent Sued for Lapse in Coverage after House Collapses

    More on Duty to Defend a Subcontractor

    White and Williams Defeats Policyholder’s Attempt to Invalidate Asbestos Exclusions

    Avoid L&I Violations by Following Appropriate Safety Procedures

    Delaware State Court Holds that Defective Workmanship Claims do not Trigger Coverage by a Builder’s Commercial General Liability Policy

    Kumagai Drops Most in 4 Months on Building Defect: Tokyo Mover

    Tall and Sustainable Is Not an Easy Fix

    Craig Holden Named Top 100 Lawyer by Los Angeles Business Journal

    Construction Manager’s Win in Michigan after Michigan Supreme Court Finds a Subcontractor’s Unintended Faulty Work is an ‘Occurrence’ Under CGL

    First Look at Long List of AEC Firms Receiving PPP Loans

    White House’s New Draft Guidance Limiting NEPA Review of Greenhouse Gas Impacts Is Not So New or Limiting

    Vegas Hi-Rise Not Earthquake Safe

    Lucky No. 7: Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Issues Pro-Policyholder Decision Regarding Additional Insured Coverage for Upstream Parties

    Los Angeles Seeks Speedier Way to Build New Affordable Homes

    The Small Stuff: Small Claims Court and Limited Civil Court Jurisdictional Limits

    Quick Note: Lis Pendens Bond When Lis Pendens Not Founded On Recorded Instrument Or Statute

    Employee Handbooks—Your First Line of Defense

    White and Williams LLP Secures Affirmation of Denial to Change Trial Settings Based on Plaintiffs’ Failure to Meet the Texas Causation Standard for Asbestos Cases

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

    Denial of Coverage For Bodily Injury After Policy Period Does Not Violate Public Policy

    Alert: AAA Construction Industry Rules Update

    A Riveting (or at Least Insightful) Explanation of the Privette Doctrine
    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. Leveraging 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

    Courts Favor Arbitration in Two Recent Construction Dispute Cases

    November 21, 2018 —
    Recent court decisions have signaled the courts’ proclivity to prefer arbitration over full-fledged litigation when provisions in construction contracts are called into question. While the courts recognize a party’s constitutional right to a jury trial, the courts also lean strongly towards resolving disputes via arbitration as a matter of public policy, especially if a construction contract carves out arbitration as an alternative to litigation. In Avr Davis Raleigh v. Triangle Constr. Co., 818 S.E.2d 184 (N.C. App. 2018), the North Carolina Appeals Court reviewed the issue of whether the contracting parties selected binding arbitration as an alternative to litigation. The contract at issue was an AIA A201-2007 form document. Under the terms of the contract, the parties elected to arbitrate claims under $500,000 but to litigate claims over this amount. However, if there were several claims under $500,000 but the aggregate of all claims exceeded $500,000, then the contract implied that all claims would be arbitrated. Since the claims involved were an amalgamation of the two, the contracting parties disagreed about whether the arbitration provision would apply. The plaintiff interpreted this provision to mean litigation was mandatory when at least one claim exceeded $500,000 and that arbitration was mandatory when no single claim exceeded this amount. In contrast, the defendant interpreted this provision as meaning that when there were several claims worth less than $500,000 individually, but more than $500,000 aggregately, then all claims must be arbitrated. The trial court agreed with the plaintiff’s interpretation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Plaza, White & Williams LLP

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Fires up a Case-By-Case Analysis for Landlord-Tenant, Implied Co-Insured Questions

    February 03, 2020 —
    In Joella v. Cole, 2019 PA Super. 313, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania recently considered whether a tenant, alleged by the landlord’s property insurance carrier to have carelessly caused a fire, was an implied co-insured on the landlord’s policy. The court found that the tenant was an implied co-insured because the lease stated that the landlord would procure insurance for the building, which created a reasonable expectation that the tenant would be a co-insured under the policy. Since the tenant was an implied co-insured on the policy, the insurance carrier could not maintain a subrogation action against the tenant. This case confirms that Pennsylvania follows a case-by-case approach when determining whether a tenant was an implied co-insured on a landlord’s insurance policy. The Joella case stems from a fire at an apartment building in Northampton County, Pennsylvania. The landlord’s property insurance carrier paid the landlord $180,000 to repair the damages resulting from the fire. In March 2018, the insurer brought a subrogation action against Annie Cole, a tenant in the building, alleging that Ms. Cole’s negligent use of an extension cord caused the fire. Ms. Cole raised the affirmative defense that she was an implied co-insured on the landlord’s insurance policy. The subrogating insurer filed a partial motion for summary judgment seeking to dismiss Ms. Cole’s defense. In response, Ms. Cole filed a cross motion for partial judgment, arguing that because the lease specified that the landlord would maintain fire insurance for the building, there was a reasonable expectation that she would be a co-insured on that policy. The trial court found in favor of Ms. Cole, holding that the landlord’s insurer could not maintain a subrogation action against her because she was an implied co-insured of the landlord’s insurance policy under the terms of the lease. The landlord’s insurer filed an appeal with the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Contract Change #8: Direct Communications between Owners and Contractors (law note)

    March 28, 2018 —
    As the Engineer or Architect of Record, you probably have frequently experienced Owners and Contractors communicating directly, in direct contravention of the language of the contract that requires them to endeavor to route all communications through the design team. With the latest version of the 201, direct communication is now authorized, to recognize both the reality of what was happening on the ground and to recognize that sometimes Owners and Contractors may need to communicate without waiting for the design team. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Construction Law in North Carolina

    Single-Family Home Starts Seen Catching Up to Surging U.S. Sales

    May 07, 2015 —
    New single-family houses are selling fast enough in the U.S. that homebuilders will have to pick up the pace of starting them, according to Neil Dutta, head of U.S. economics at Renaissance Macro Research LLC. The attached chart compares annual growth rates in sales and starts, as compiled by the Commerce Department, during the past 25 years. The top panel shows the rates, while the bottom panel tracks the percentage-point gap between then. Last month’s sales of one-family homes totaled 510,000 at an annual rate, according on the average estimate of economists in a Bloomberg survey. The projection amounts to a 26.6 percent increase from a year ago. Builders began working on 2.7 percent fewer homes in March, according to data released yesterday. The 29.3-point differential would be the widest since July 1995. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Wilson, Bloomberg
    Mr. Wilson may be contacted at dwilson@bloomberg.net

    Five Years of Great Legal Blogging at Insurance Law Hawaii

    December 09, 2011 —

    Our congratulations to Tred Eyerly who has been blogging at Insurance Law Hawaii for five years now. Over the years, he has posted more than five hundred posts and has provided us all with fascinating insights into the laws on insurance coverage. He describes his blog as “a commentary on insurance coverage issues in Hawaii and beyond.” We are grateful that the “beyond” has just in the last few weeks included Colorado, Illinois, Washington, Minnesota, and Rhode Island (about as far from the island of Hawaii as you can get).

    You can read his blog at Insurance Law Hawaii.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2021 New York – Metro Super Lawyers®

    October 18, 2021 —
    Traub Lieberman is pleased to announce that six Partners from the Hawthorne, NY Office have been selected to the 2021 New York - Metro Super Lawyers list. 2021 New York – Metro Super Lawyers Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Traub Lieberman

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

    October 28, 2011 —

    After carefully dissecting the earth movement exclusion, the court denied the insurer’s motion for summary judgment. High Street Lofts Condominium Assoc., Inc. v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109043 (D. Colo. Sept. 26, 2011).

    The City of Boulder performed road repair work near High Street’s property, some of which involved the use of a vibrating compactor to compact and set the roadbed. High Street noticed damage to its building, such as cracks in walls, sloping of floors and separations of porches from the building itself. High Street contacted the City of Boulder, who forwarded the complaint to its contractor, Concrete Express, Inc.

    High Street also filed a claim with its business insurer, American Family, who denied the claim. American Family relied on an opinion letter by High Street’s engineer. The letter indicated that the damage was the result of "soil consolidation/settlement," in response to the construction activities. Based on this letter American Family concluded the claim was excluded under the policy’s earth movement exclusion.

    High Street sued American Family, who moved for summary judgment.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court of Appeals Invalidates Lien under Dormancy Clause

    January 05, 2017 —
    On October 27, 2016, the Georgia Court of Appeals determined whether the Dormancy Statute, which bars the enforcement of judgments after seven years, applied to a lienholder’s action to foreclose its lien. A property owner (“Owner”), contracted with a contractor Contractor (“Contractor”) to build a home in January 2006. Contractor purchased building materials from a supplier (“Supplier”). In September 2006, Contractor failed to pay for the materials, and Supplier filed a lien on Owner’s property in November 2006. Supplier filed a claim of lien and instituted a lien action against Contractor. In March 2007, a default judgment was entered in favor of Supplier for the lien amount. It was not until November 2014 that Supplier sued Owner, seeking a declaration of a special lien in the amount of $14,655.65. The trial court granted Supplier’s motion for summary judgment and awarded Supplier a special lien in the amount of $14,655.65 plus $8,305 in accrued interest. Owner appealed, arguing that the lien was rendered unenforceable by the Dormancy Statute. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Chadd Reynolds, Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Reynolds may be contacted at reynolds@ahclaw.com