BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating 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


    Amid the Chaos, Trump Signs Executive Order Streamlining Environmental Permitting and Disbands Infrastructure Council

    Disputes Will Not Be Subject to Arbitration Provision If There Is No “Significant Relationship”

    The Biggest Change to the Mechanics Lien Law Since 1963

    Determining the Cause of the Loss from a Named Windstorm when there is Water Damage - New Jersey

    Cincinnati Goes Green

    Pennsylvania Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Hacking Claim Under E&O Policy

    Seattle’s Tallest Tower Said Readying to Go On the Market

    A Survey of Trends and Perspectives in Construction Defect Decisions

    South Carolina Homeowners May Finally Get Class Action for Stucco Defects

    ASCE Statement on House Passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024

    DC Circuit Upholds EPA’s Latest RCRA Recycling Rule

    Insured Fails to Provide Adequate Proof of Water Damage Through Roof

    What is an Alternative Dispute Resolution?

    Who Will Pay for San Francisco's $750 Million Tilting Tower?

    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

    Insurer Rejects Claim on Dolphin Towers

    Ten-Year Statute Of Repose To Sue For Latent Construction Defects

    COVID-19 Response: Essential Business Operations: a High-Stakes Question Under Proliferating “Stay at Home” Orders

    Quarter Four a Good One for Luxury Homebuilder

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

    Attention Contractors: U.S. Department of Labor Issues Guidance on Avoiding Discrimination When Using AI in Hiring

    Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case Cannot Be Overturned While Facts Are Still in Contention in Related Cases

    Analysis of the “owned property exclusion” under Panico v. State Farm

    Texas Federal Court Finds Total Pollution Exclusion Does Not Foreclose a Duty to Defend Waterway Degradation Lawsuit

    CDJ’s #6 Topic of the Year: Does Colorado Need Construction Defect Legislation to Spur Affordable Home Development?

    Who's Who Legal Recognizes Two White and Williams Lawyers as Thought/Global Leaders in Insurance and Reinsurance

    Did New York Zero Tolerance Campaign Improve Jobsite Safety?

    Understanding Indiana’s New Home Construction Warranty Act

    These Pioneers Are Already Living the Green Recovery

    New Jersey Legislation Would Bar Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause in Homeowners' Policies

    Insurer's In-House Counsel's Involvement in Coverage Decision Opens Door to Discovery

    Wilke Fleury and Attorneys Recognized as ‘Best Law Firm’ and ‘Best Lawyers’ by U.S. News!

    DC Wins Largest-Ever Civil Penalty in US Housing Discrimination Suit

    New Spending Measure Has Big Potential Infrastructure Boost

    Acquisition, Development, and Construction Lending Conditions Ease

    Hirers Must Affirmatively Exercise Retained Control to be Liable Under Hooker Exception to Privette Doctrine

    The Independent Tort Doctrine (And Its Importance)

    New California "Construction" Legislation

    It’s a Bird, It’s a Plane . . . No, It’s a Drone. Long Awaited FAA Drone Regulations Finally Take Flight

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Abandons "Integrated Systems Analysis" for Determining Property Damage

    Quick Note: Can a Party Disclaim Liability in their Contract to Fraud?

    Connecticut Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C" Grade

    Vaccine Mandate Confusion Continues – CMS Vaccine Mandate Restored in Some (But Not All) US States

    Judgment for Insured Upheld After Insurer Rejects Claim for Hurricane Damage

    More Clear, But Not Yet Crystal: Virginia Amends its Prompt Payment Law and Legislation Banning “Pay-If-Paid Clauses in Construction Contracts Effective July 1, 2023

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

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight Rated as One of the Top 50 in a Survey of Construction Law Firms in the United States

    Burg Simpson to Create Construction Defect Group

    Unfair Risk Allocation on Design-Build Projects

    CA Senate Report States Caltrans ‘Gagged and Banished’ its Critics
    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

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    January 29, 2024 —
    Haight attorneys have been selected to the 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers list. Congratulations to:
    • Bruce Cleeland
    • Peter A. Dubrawski
    • Angela S. Haskins
    • Gary L. LaHendro
    • Denis J. Moriarty
    • Jennifer K. Saunders
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

    Washington State Updates the Contractor Registration Statute

    June 17, 2015 —
    Ryan W. Sternoff of Ahlers & Cressman PLLC, analyzed SHB 1749, which recently amended RCW 18.27.010, Washington State’s legislature’s contractor’s registration statute. According to Sternoff, “a broad reading of the contractor’s registration statute, RCW Ch. 18.27, would require just about any person or entity, other than a residential homeowner, who is involved at any level in improving real property to be registered as a ‘Contractor,’ irrespective if that person or entity hired a licensed contractor to perform work on real property that they own.” SHB 1749 amended the statute “so that those who ‘offer to sell their property without occupying or using the structures, projects, developments or improvements’ are excluded from the definition of ‘contractor’ and not required to be registered, provided that the person or entity ‘contracts with a registered general contractor and does not superintend the work.’” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Indemnification Provisions Do Not Create Reciprocal Attorney’s Fees Provisions

    November 21, 2018 —
    In a good, recent decision, the Eleventh Circuit in International Fidelity Insurance Co. v. Americabe-Moriarity, JV, 2018 WL 5306683 (11th Cir. 2018), held that Florida Statute s. 57.105(7) cannot be used to shift attorney’s fees in a contractual indemnification clause in a dispute between a general contractor and subcontractor’s performance bond surety, when the dispute does not involve an actual indemnification claim stemming from a third-party. In this case, a prime contractor terminated a subcontractor and looked to the subcontractor’s performance bond surety to pay for the completion work. The subcontractor had a standard AIA A312 performance bond that requires the prime contractor to comply with the terms of the bond, as well as the incorporated subcontract, in order to trigger the surety’s obligations under the bond. The surety filed an action for declaratory relief against the prime contractor arguing that the prime contractor breached the terms of the performance bond through non-compliance thereby discharging the surety’s obligations. The trial court agreed and the surety moved for attorney’s fees. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Connecticut Supreme Court to Review Several Issues in Asbestos Coverage Case

    November 08, 2017 —
    On October 18, 2017, in R.T. Vanderbilt Company v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, the Connecticut Supreme Court certified four issues for appeal, which relate to trigger, allocation, pollution exclusions, and the occupational disease exclusion in the context of asbestos bodily injury claims. This post identifies the issues the Connecticut Supreme Court will decide on appeal and sets forth the Appellate Court’s ruling on each issue. Issue 1: Whether a “continuous trigger” theory of coverage applies to asbestos-related disease claims and whether expert medical testimony on the timing of injury should be precluded The Appellate Court applied a continuous trigger, and found that the trial court properly excluded testimony from medical experts the insurers had proffered to prove that the asbestos disease process did not support a continuous trigger. Reprinted courtesy of Ciaran Way, White and Williams LLP and Robert Walsh, White and Williams LLP Ms. Way may be contacted at wayc@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Walsh may be contacted at walshr@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/1/24) – Hybrid Work Technologies, AI in Construction and the Market for Office Buildings

    November 05, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, commercial mortgage bond market in trouble, commercial real estate investments, pressure on mortgage REITs, and more!
    • Short-term issues facing U.S. commercial real estate have made it an investment opportunity and values have bottomed out. (CNBC)
    • As organizations report plans to shake up their real estate portfolios, the flight to quality spurs interest in space planning, amenities and hybrid work technologies. (Joe Burns, Facilities Dive)
    • The conversation about AI’s potential benefits and risks has been a common refrain in construction recently. (Matthew Thibault, Construction Dive)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Bel Air Mansion Construction Draws Community Backlash

    December 17, 2015 —
    According to the New York Times, a Bel Air hillside mansion in Los Angeles has outraged neighbors who refer to the unfinished, 30,000 square foot and almost 70 feet high building as “the Starship Enterprise.” Despite legal violations such as tearing down the original structure without the city’s permission, the height being twice the legal limit, and digging into the hillside though the site is an “earthquake-induced landslide area,” the case has not progressed much in four years because the actual owner is a shell company. The New York Times summarized the issues at 901 Strada Vecchia as follows: “After the unapproved teardown and leveling of the hillside, the construction team did ask permission to grade the hill but used a survey that made it appear that workers had not already removed significant loads of dirt. Then they joined two buildings that were supposed to be separate and built so high that they drastically violated the city’s height limit.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Top 10 Cases of 2019

    February 10, 2020 —
    In the 2019 edition of SDV’s Top Ten Insurance Cases, we probe wiretapping claims under an armed security services policy, delicately sniff out E&O coverage for a company using cow manure to create electricity, scour the earth for coverage for crumbling foundation claims, and inspect D&O policies for government investigation coverage. In addition, we preview some important and exciting decisions due in 2020. Without further ado, SDV raises the curtain on the most informative and influential insurance coverage decisions of 2019.1 1. ACE American Ins. Co. v. American Medical Plumbing, Inc., 206 A.3d 437 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2019) April 4, 2019 Is waiver of subrogation language in a standard AIA201 contract sufficient to bar an insurer’s subrogation rights? The New Jersey Supreme Court held that it was. Equinox Development obtained a comprehensive blanket all-risk policy with limits of $32 million per occurrence from ACE American Ins. Co. (“ACE”). The policy covered Equinox’s new project in Summit, New Jersey. Equinox hired Grace Construction as GC, who in turn subcontracted the plumbing scope of work to American Medical Plumbing, Inc. (“American”). After completion of the work under the subcontract, a water main failed and flooded the entire project. ACE paid the limits of the policy and subrogated against American to recover its losses. American argued that there was a waiver of subrogation in the AIA201 contract that barred the suit. ACE challenged the validity of the AIA provision, arguing that it applied only to claims before completion of construction and that it only applied to damage to the work itself and not to adjacent property. The court rejected both arguments, finding that the AIA provision effectively barred ACE’s subrogation claim. This decision provides guidance on a frequently used contract form for contractors across the country. Reprinted courtesy of Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. attorneys Jeffrey J. Vita, Grace V. Hebbel and Andrew G. Heckler Mr. Vita may be contacted at jjv@sdvlaw.com Ms. Hebbel may be contacted at gvh@sdvlaw.com Mr. Heckler may be contacted at agh@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nondelegable Duties

    June 04, 2024 —
    Have you heard the expression “nondelegable duty”? The issue of a nondelegable duty comes into play when a party hires an independent contractor and the independent contractor commits negligence, primarily in the personal injury context. In other words, a plaintiff wants to hold a defendant liable for the injuries caused by the defendant’s independent contractor. A nondelegable duty is one that “may be imposed by statute, contract, or the common law. In determining whether a duty is nondelegable, the question is whether the responsibility at issue is so important to the community that an employer should not be allowed to transfer it to a third party.” Garcia v. Southern Cleaning Service, Inc., 360 So.3d 1209, 1211 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (internal citation omitted). When it comes to CONTRACTUAL duties:
    [S]pecifically the principle that one who undertakes by contract to do for another a given thing cannot excuse himself to the other for a faulty performance by showing that he hired someone else to perform the task and that other person was the one at fault. In other words, where the contracting party makes it her or his duty to perform a task, that party cannot escape liability for the damage caused to the other contracting party by the negligence of independent contractors hired to carry out the task.
    Gordon v. Sanders, 692 So.2d 939, 941 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com