BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut stucco 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


    No Repeal Process for Rejected Superstorm Sandy Grant Applications

    Wyncrest Commons: Commonly Used Progress Payments in Construction Contracts Do Not Render Them Installment Contracts

    California Enacts New Claims Resolution Process for Public Works Projects

    ASCE Statement on Devastating Tornado Damages Throughout U.S.

    BHA has a Nice Swing: Don’t Forget to Visit BHA’s Booth at WCC to Support Charity

    Construction Law- Where Pragmatism and Law Collide

    Updates to the CEQA Guidelines Have Been Finalized

    Ninth Circuit: Speculative Injuries Do Not Confer Article III Standing

    More on the VCPA and Construction

    Climate Change a Factor in 'Unprecedented' South Asia Floods

    Monitoring Building Moisture with RFID – Interview with Jarmo Tuppurainen

    Brown Paint Doesn’t Cover Up Construction Defects

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

    Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Vexed by Low Demand for Mortgages

    Energy Company Covered for Business Interruption Losses Caused by Fire and Resulting in Town-Ordered Shutdown

    Better Building Rules Would Help U.K.'s Flooding Woes, CEP Says

    DC Circuit Upholds EPA’s Latest RCRA Recycling Rule

    Drones Used Despite Uncertain Legal Consequences

    Foreman in Fatal NYC Trench Collapse Gets Jail Sentence

    Court of Appeals Discusses the Difference Between “Claims-Made” and “Occurrence-Based” Insurance Policies

    Texas “your work” exclusion

    Are COVID-19 Claims Covered by Builders Risk Insurance Policies?

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 3: Standard Form Policy Exclusions

    Does a No-Damage-for-Delay Clause Also Preclude Acceleration Damages?

    Colorado Homes Approved Despite being Too Close Together

    The EPA’s Renovation, Repair, and Painting Rule: Are Contractors Aware of It?

    What is Toxic Mold Litigation?

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says South Carolina High Court

    The Court-Side Seat: FERC Reviews, Panda Power Plaints and Sovereign Immunity

    The G2G Year-End Roundup (2022)

    2013 May Be Bay Area’s Best Year for Commercial Building

    California Senator Proposes Bill to Require Contractors to Report Construction Defect Cases

    L.A. Makes $4.5 Billion Bet on Olympics After Boston Backs Out

    Construction Defects Checklist

    Waive It Goodbye: Despite Evidence to the Contrary, Delaware Upholds an AIA Waiver of Subrogation Clause

    SB800 Is Now Optional to the Homeowner?

    Insurance Telematics and Usage Based Insurance Products

    Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case Triggered by Complaint's Allegations

    Partner Jonathan R. Harwood Obtained Summary Judgment in a Coverage Action Arising out of a Claim for Personal Injury

    FEMA Administrator Slams Failures to Prepare, Evacuate Before Storms

    Should a Subcontractor provide bonds to a GC who is not himself bonded? (Bonding Agent Perspective)

    2016 Hawaii Legislature Enacts Five Insurance-Related Bills

    Number of Occurrences Is On the Agenda at This Year's ICLC Seminar

    What You Need to Know About Enforcement Actions by the Contractors State License Board

    The Pandemic of Litigation Sure to Follow the Coronavirus

    New York Supreme Court Building Opening Delayed Again

    Texas Jury Awards $5.3 Million to Company Defamed by Union: Could it work in Pennsylvania?

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

    Economic Loss Not Property Damage

    Illinois Town Sues over Construction Defects at Police Station
    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

    Big Policyholder Win in Michigan

    January 05, 2017 —
    Jeremiah Welch and Michael Barrese recently had a big win in front of the Michigan Court of Appeals. The case (Skanska-Schweitzer v. Farm Bureau General Insurance Company of Michigan) involved Skanska’s claim for defense and indemnity from Farm Bureau Ins. Co. of Michigan for an injury to an elementary school student arising out of the removal of playground equipment by a landscaping company, Horrocks. Farm Bureau denied coverage because it claimed that the work was not part of Horrocks’ contract with the project owner and therefore Skanska, the construction manager, did not qualify as an additional insured on the policy. SDV argued that the AI endorsement did not specify that Horrocks’ work be performed as part of its contract with the owner; it only required that the work be performed “for Skanska.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremiah M. Welch, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Welch may be contacted at jmw@sdvlaw.com

    Lewis Brisbois Moves to Top 15 in Law360 2022 Diversity Snapshot

    August 15, 2022 —
    Los Angeles, Calif. (August 4, 2022) - Lewis Brisbois has ranked 13th in Law360’s 2022 Diversity Snapshot – a measure of the overall presence of individuals from underrepresented backgrounds in law firms of all sizes. Throughout Lewis Brisbois’ history, the firm has been recognized for high achievements in the areas of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Over the past year, its focus on capturing the full picture of its diversity has led to the firm’s rise in several diversity rankings – including the Law360 Diversity Snapshot. As described in the Law360 Pulse article, "Diversity Snapshot: Representation in the Ranks," the Diversity Snapshot serves as a “comprehensive ranking of law firms on their overall representation of minority attorneys,” providing “a picture of where firms are now, and where the future might lead.” Moreover, as explained in the main article of this special publication, "Diversity Snapshot: How Firms Stack Up," Law360 used its own historical surveys as well as data from the American Bar Association to evaluate the diversity in firm headcounts against benchmarks that reflected diversity in the potential marketplace of new hires. Lewis Brisbois’ efforts to capture its diversity numbers has led to a significant increase in the firm’s position from 58th to 13th. This year's Snapshot includes 291 law firms, with 75 in the 600+ attorneys category. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rima Badawiya, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Badawiya may be contacted at Rima.Badawiya@lewisbrisbois.com

    Farewell Capsule Tower, Tokyo’s Oddest Building

    April 25, 2022 —
    Anyone who has seen Tokyo's Nakagin Capsule Tower will remember it. Studded with grey cubes, the striking building carries an obvious architectural message: this is a modular habitat. Built half a century ago during Japan’s dizzying ascent as an economic power, the 140-unit complex has been left behind by the times, overshadowed by taller and sleeker skyscrapers that overlook the city of 14 million. Once demolition officially starts April 12, scaffolding will surround the two towers that make up the building. The capsules will then be plucked off one by one, most likely behind protective sheets of plastic because they contain asbestos. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Reed Stevenson, Bloomberg

    New York Regulator Issues Cyber Insurance Guidelines

    March 29, 2021 —
    From the rise of ransomware attacks to the recent SolarWinds-based cyber espionage campaign that struck at the very heart of the U.S. Government, it is apparent that cybersecurity is more critical than ever. COVID-19 and the remote workplace has only served to embolden cyber criminals, and cyber risk now permeates nearly every aspect of modern life from health care data to national security. Cyber insurance plays a critical role in managing cyber risk, and businesses increasingly rely on such coverage to minimize cyber losses. Because of surging cybercrime, it is estimated that the cyber insurance market will increase from $3.15 billion in 2019 to $20 billion by 2025. Having a robust cyber insurance market and ample available coverage is vital to U.S. businesses. In recognition of this reality, the New York Department of Financial Services recently issued the first guidance by a U.S. regulator on cyber insurance—a Cyber Insurance Risk Framework. A key premise of the Framework is to drive improved cybersecurity and cyber risk management, thereby reducing cyberattacks and ensuring that cyber insurance premiums do not spiral out of control. The Framework recognizes the importance of ensuring a healthy cyber insurance market, and applies to all property/casualty insurers that write cyber insurance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anne Kelley, Newmeyer Dillion
    Ms. Kelley may be contacted at anne.kelley@ndlf.com

    Reversing Itself, West Virginia Supreme Court Holds Construction Defects Are Covered

    July 31, 2013 —
    The West Virginia Supreme Court previously held that construction defects were not covered under a CGL policy. The Court, however, reversed itself in Cherrington v. Erie Ins. Prop. & Cas. Co., 2013 W.Va. LEXIS 724 (W.V. June 18, 2013). The underlying complaint against the general contractor alleged various defects in the plaintiff’s recently constructed house, including an uneven concrete floor, water infiltration through the roof and chimney joint, a sagging support beam, and numerous cracks in the drywall walls and partitions throughout the house. Erie Insurance denied coverage. The insured general contractor sued, but the trial court found that faulty workmanship was not sufficient to give rise to an “occurrence.” The West Virginia Supreme Court reversed its prior rulings determining there was no coverage for construction defects. The court recognized its prior position was in the minority, as is Hawaii's position on coverage for construction defects. See Group Builders Inc. v. Admiral Ins. Co., 123 Haw. 142, 148, 231 P.3d 67, 73 (Haw. Ct. App. 2010). Now joining the majority position, the West Virginia Supreme Court found that defective workmanship causing property damage was an “occurrence” under a CGL policy. Further, the homeowner had demonstrated that she sustained "property damage" as a result of the allegedly defective construction of her home. The trial court also determined that the business risk exclusions barred coverage. Again, the West Virginia Supreme Court disagreed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Client Alert: Restaurant Owed Duty of Care to Driver Killed by Third-Party on Street Adjacent to Restaurant Parking Lot

    January 07, 2015 —
    In Annocki v. Peterson Enterprise, LLC, (Filed 11/14/2014, Certified for Publication 12/5/2014, No. B251434) the Court of Appeal, Second District, held a restaurant owed a duty of care to the driver of a motorcycle who died as a result of the negligent driving of a third party exiting the restaurant’s parking lot. Decedent, Joseph M. Annocki, was driving his motorcycle on Pacific Coast Highway in Malibu, when it collided with the vehicle operated by Terry Allen Turner, who was exiting the parking lot of “Geoffrey’s" restaurant, which was owned and operated by the Defendant, Peterson Enterprise, LLC (“Peterson”). The parents of the decedent (“Plaintiffs”) filed suit against Peterson, alleging Peterson failed to adequately staff the restaurant parking lot, which caused Turner to become confused and make an illegal left turn onto Pacific Coast Highway, thereby causing the accident that killed decedent. Plaintiffs further alleged Peterson knew, or should have known, that its parking lot and driveway were designed and in such condition as to create a danger of decreased visibility of the adjacent highway, and failed to adequately provide signage directing patrons that only right turns could be made onto Pacific Coast Highway. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys R. Bryan Martin, Lawrence S. Zucker II and Kristian B. Moriarty Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Mr. Moriarty may be contacted at kmoriarty@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    January 28, 2014 —
    White and Williams attorneys scored a significant victory for the insurance industry on January 15, 2014, when a federal jury of four men and four women rejected a policyholder’s novel efforts to invalidate asbestos exclusions contained in insurance policies issued between February 1, 1979 and August 1, 1985. In General Refractories Co. v. First State Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 04-CV-3509 (E.D. Pa.), General Refractories Company contended that asbestos exclusions in insurance policies issued by various insurance companies in the late 1970s and 1980s had not been submitted to the Pennsylvania Department of Insurance for approval prior to use and, therefore, were unenforceable. Holding a failure to obtain approval, by itself, would not be sufficient to render the exclusions unenforceable, the Honorable Edmund Ludwig sent the matter to trial to determine whether the Pennsylvania Insurance Commissioner implemented a policy that was uniformly executed by the Insurance Department to disapprove all asbestos exclusions between February 1, 1979 and August 1, 1985, such that the exclusions violated a “dominant public policy.”

    Reprinted courtesy of Gregory LoCasale, White and Williams LLP

    and Patricia Santelle , White and Williams LLP

    Ms. Santelle may be contacted at santellep@whiteandwilliams.com and Mr. LoCasale may be contacted at locasaleg@whiteandwilliams.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Good Signs for Housing Market in 2013

    December 20, 2012 —
    Dan Green, a loan officer at Waterstone Mortgage, is optimistic about the construction market in 2013. He notes that the rise in building permit, housing starts, and housing completions are all good signs. Mortgage rates are still low, making these new homes attractive to buyers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of