BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut institutional building Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut industrial building Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut housing Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut production housing Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut condominium Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut retail construction Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut tract home Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut casino resort Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut Medical building Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut custom homes Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut parking structure Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut office building Building Consultant Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Consultant Builders Information
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Connecticut Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Building Consultant 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 Consultant Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders & Remo Assn of Fairfield Co
    Local # 0780
    433 Meadow St
    Fairfield, CT 06824

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Eastern Connecticut
    Local # 0740
    20 Hartford Rd Suite 18
    Salem, CT 06420

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of New Haven Co
    Local # 0720
    2189 Silas Deane Highway
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Hartford Cty Inc
    Local # 0755
    2189 Silas Deane Hwy
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of NW Connecticut
    Local # 0710
    110 Brook St
    Torrington, CT 06790

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Connecticut (State)
    Local # 0700
    3 Regency Dr Ste 204
    Bloomfield, CT 06002

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Consultant 10/ 10


    Building Consultant News and Information
    For Fairfield Connecticut


    Texas Supreme Court Holds Anadarko’s $100M Deepwater Horizon Defense Costs Are Not Subject To Joint Venture Liability Limits

    Spa High-Rise Residents Frustrated by Construction Defects

    Alaska Supreme Court Finds Insurer Owes No Independent Duty to Injured Party

    What Contractors Can Do to Address Rising Material Costs

    Between Scylla and Charybids: The Mediation Privilege and Legal Malpractice Claims

    Lease-Leaseback Fight Continues

    Workers Compensation Insurance: Dangers of the Audit Process

    Iconic Seattle Center Arena Roof the Only Piece to Stay in $900-Million Rebuild

    California Restricts Principles of “General” Personal Jurisdiction

    Nobody Knows What Lies Beneath New York City

    PFAS and the Challenge of Cleaning Up “Forever”

    London's Walkie Talkie Tower Voted Britain's Worst New Building

    PSA: Virginia DOLI Amends COVID Workplace Standard

    DRCOG’s Findings on the Impact of Construction Defect Litigation Have Been Released (And the Results Should Not Surprise You)

    Pa. Contractor Pleads No Contest to Prevailing-Wage Charges, Pays Workers $20.7M

    Reminder: Always Order a Title Search for Your Mechanic’s Lien

    Ivanhoe Cambridge Plans Toronto Office Towers, Terminal

    Chinese Drywall Manufacturer Claims Product Was Not for American Market

    Colorado Chamber of Commerce CEO Calls for Change to Condo Defect Law

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Eliminates Loss from Hurricane

    CA Supreme Court Set to Rule on Important Occurrence Issue Certified by Ninth Circuit

    There’s the 5 Second Rule, But Have You Heard of the 5 Year Rule?

    Will Protecting Copyrights Get Easier for Architects?

    Caltrans to Speak before California Senate regarding Bay Bridge Expansion

    Eighth Circuit Rejects Retroactive Application of Construction Defect Legislation

    Homebuyers Aren't Sweating the Fed

    Too Late for The Blame Game: Massachusetts Court Holds That the Statute of Repose Barred a Product Manufacturer from Seeking Contribution from a Product Installer

    Sanctions Issued for Frivolous Hurricane Sandy Complaint Filed Against Insurer

    Structural Failure of Precast-Concrete Span Sets Back Sydney Metro Job

    Search in Florida Collapse to Take Weeks; Deaths Reach 90

    Reinventing the Building Envelope – Interview with Gordon A Geddes

    When Construction Contracts Go Sideways in Bankruptcy

    Seven Key Issues for Construction Professionals to Consider When Dealing With COVID-19

    Attorney Risks Disqualification If After Receiving Presumptively Privileged Communication Fails to Notify Privilege Holder and Uses Document Pending Privilege Determination by Court

    Motion to Dismiss COVID Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    Thinking About a Daubert Motion to Challenge an Expert Opinion?

    Alabama Appeals Court Rules Unexpected and Unintended Property Damage is an Occurrence

    Amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 – Expert Testimony

    Homeowners May Not Need to Pay Lien on Defective Log Cabin

    Good News on Prices for Some Construction Materials

    Office REITs in U.S. Plan the Most Construction in Decade

    AIA Releases Decennial 2017 Updates to its Contracts Suites

    Is it time for a summer tune-up?

    A Sample Itinerary to get the Most out of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar

    English v. RKK. . . The Rest of the Story

    Breach of Contract Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect Claim

    Labor Development Impacting Developers, Contractors, and Landowners

    Quarter Four a Good One for Luxury Homebuilder

    2018 California Construction Law Update

    Human Eye Resolution Virtual Reality for AEC
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING CONSULTANT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Consultant 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 Consultant News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    BWB&O is Recognized in the 2024 Edition of Best Law Firms®!

    November 16, 2023 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is honored to announce the firm has been recognized for its fourth consecutive year in the 2024 edition of Best Law Firms® and is ranked by Best Lawyers® regionally in three practice areas. To read the publication, please click here. Regional Tier 1 Las Vegas: Litigation – Construction Orange County: Litigation – Construction Regional Tier 2 Orange County: Family Law Regional Tier 3 Orange County: Commercial Litigation Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Embracing Generative Risk Mitigation in Construction

    February 12, 2024 —
    Project delays have long plagued the construction industry, with risk often identified as the primary culprit. However, finding effective solutions to mitigate risk on complex projects has remained daunting. Traditional methods for simulating risk primarily focus on extending project timelines, overlooking the diverse range of opportunities available for risk mitigation. With the construction industry’s digital transformation, generative methodologies have emerged to handle complex decision-making in uncertain situations. This article aims to shed light on the limitations of existing risk modeling and introduce a novel approach known as generative risk mitigation to enhance decision-making under deep uncertainty. According to McKinsey, 98% of megaprojects experience cost overruns exceeding 30%. Project delays have become so pervasive that the industry has grown accustomed to them. For example, in 2022, the UK government issued ‘The Green Book,’ which requires contingency funds in projects, such as a 44% contingency budget for standard civil projects. This implies that for a $100 million project, you should allocate $144 million to manage expected risks. There is no denying significant academic literature on the root cause of these delays: it is ‘risk,’ and there is an entire industry based on it. Conversations with project directors and risk experts reveal the same issue, different project. And that issue is that we cannot easily forecast risk, qualify the impacts or fully understand the opportunities that exist to mitigate risks and make timely decisions. A method that will finally help us overcome this has emerged within the industry. Reprinted courtesy of Georgia Stillwell, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Recent Developments in Legislative Efforts To Combat Climate Change

    October 30, 2023 —
    Governments across the United States have been increasingly integrating climate considerations into legislation affecting various sectors of the economy. The construction industry is no exception. Recent legislative developments at various levels of government are reshaping construction practices to mitigate the industries’ greenhouse gas emissions and vulnerability to climate-related risks. These developments include incentivizing eco-friendly construction projects, mandating stricter regulations to reduce carbon emissions, and enhancing building resilience to more severe weather events. Contractors must stay abreast of these developments to ensure compliance with new substantive and administrative requirements to remain competitive in a changing environment. Funding Greener Construction Projects: The Inflation Reduction Act The federal Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) enacted in August 2022 marked a significant milestone in the pursuit of greener construction. The IRA is widely considered to be the single largest investment into climate change in history, with potential ripple effects throughout the construction industry. The IRA allocates substantial funds for projects utilizing “low-carbon” materials, with an explicit focus on climate-conscious construction. This initiative aligns with the broader goal of curbing emissions from sectors like steel, concrete, and glass, which have been major contributors to the nation’s carbon footprint. Reprinted courtesy of Dominick Weinkam, Watt Tieder and Robert B. Cimmino, Watt Tieder Mr. Weinkam may be contacted at dweinkam@watttieder.com Mr. Cimmino may be contacted at rcimmino@watttieder.com Read the full story...

    Let’s Talk About a Statutory First-Party Bad Faith Claim Against an Insurer

    February 19, 2024 —
    Let’s talk about a statutory first-party bad faith claim against an insurer under Florida law. A recent opinion, discussed below, does a nice job providing a synopsis of a first-party statutory bad faith claim against an insurer: The Florida Legislature created the first-party bad faith cause of action by enacting section 624.155, Florida Statutes, which imposes a duty on insurers to settle their policyholders’ claims in good faith. The statutory obligation on the insurer is to timely evaluate and pay benefits owed under the insurance policy. The damages recoverable by the insured in a bad faith action are those amounts that are the reasonably foreseeable consequences of the insurer’s bad faith in resolving a claim, which include consequential damages. “[A] statutory bad faith claim under section 624.155 is ripe for litigation when there has been (1) a determination of the insurer’s liability for coverage; (2) a determination of the extent of the insured’s damages; and (3) the required [civil remedy] notice is filed pursuant to section 624.155(3)(a).” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Catching Killer Clauses in Contract Negotiations

    January 29, 2024 —
    Risk-management personnel who are in the business of reviewing and negotiating construction contracts have some simple tools at their disposal to make sure their edits are addressing all of the killer risk-shifting clauses in those contracts. One of those is the index to that document. But not all authors of construction contract documents are kind enough to include an exhaustive index in their form agreements. One of the most popular sets of general conditions, the A201 General Conditions published by the American Institute of Architects, includes one that is fairly comprehensive. It identifies the six terms that include a reference to indemnification, for example. On the other end of the spectrum are the innumerable custom forms created by public and private project owners, and these rarely have an index. Even more powerful than an index is the search or find functions that are available in word processing applications and now in Adobe, the publisher of documents in portable document format, more commonly known as PDF. But with PDF documents, one must be careful to make sure the document under review is in fact searchable. Because every letter counts, it is important to have full confidence in the integrity of the search. Reprinted courtesy of James T. Dixon, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Illinois Court Assesses Factual Nature of Term “Reside” in Determining Duty to Defend

    October 30, 2023 —
    In State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Guevara, 2023 IL App (1st) 221425-U, P2, the Illinois First District Court of Appeals addressed an insurance carrier’s duty to defend under a homeowners insurance policy. The underlying suit stemmed from an alleged injury suffered at a residence located in Berwyn, Illinois and owned by named insured Luz Melina Guevara, a defendant in the suit. After Guevara tendered the suit, State Farm filed a complaint for declaratory judgment seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify Guevara because Guevara did not “reside” at the insured premises. The policy defined the "insured location" as the "residence premises," and residence premises was defined as "the one, two, three or four-family dwelling, other structures, and grounds or that part of any other building; where you reside and which is shown in the Declarations." In response to the underlying lawsuit, Guevara had filed an answer and affirmative defenses in which Guevara denied the allegation that "At all relevant times, [Guevara] resided in Berwyn, Cook County, Illinois." Guevara admitted that she owned the Berwyn property but denied that she "resided in, maintained and controlled the property". The declaratory judgment complaint alleged (among other things) that, based on admissions by Guevara in her answer, the Berwyn residence was not an "insured location" under the State Farm policy. State Farm moved for summary judgment at the trial court level on this ground and summary judgment was granted in State Farm’s favor. An appeal ensued wherein the parties disagreed as to whether there is a genuine issue of material fact that, under the language of the policy, State Farm had no duty to defend because the Berwyn property was not an "insured location" because she did not "reside" there. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James M. Eastham, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Eastham may be contacted at jeastham@tlsslaw.com

    Appraisal Award for Damaged Roof Tiles Challenged

    December 04, 2023 —
    The district court denied Travelers' motion for summary judgment and granted the insureds' motion in part regarding replacement of roof tiles damaged in a hail storm. Bertisen v. Travelers Home & Marine Ins. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159649 (D. Colo. Sept. 8,2023). On May 8, 2017, the insureds' home was struck by a hailstorm that damaged their property. A Travelers inspector found damage to metal roof components, a deck, patio furniture and gutters. A partial payment of $6,381.04 was made. A further payment was made for personal property damaged by the storm. Travelers disputed that the hailstorm caused damage to all of the roof tiles. Travelers' adjustor reinspected the property and observed additional damages caused by hail and another payment of $6,605.22 was issued. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Federal Court Reiterates Broad Duty to Defend in Additional Insured Cases

    April 22, 2024 —
    In the recent case of Travelers Indem. Co. of Am. v. Accredited Sur. & Cas. Co., No. 21-CV-7189 (FB) (JRC), 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44634 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 13, 2024), the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of New York had occasion to consider an additional insured tender on behalf of a prime contractor, Archstone, to a subcontractor, Topline, who was named as a direct defendant in a New York labor law case. Even though Topline’s carrier put forth evidence that Topline was not negligent, the court held, under New York’s broad duty to defend, that Topline’s carrier owed a duty to defend the prime contractor. Initially, the court was satisfied that a purchase order, signed only by Topline and not Archstone, was binding on Topline. That purchase order specified that Topline agreed to name Archstone as an additional insured. With respect to the duty to defend, the court found that it was enough that the underlying plaintiff alleged that all defendants, including Topline, were negligent in permitting a ladder that plaintiff was on to remain in a defective condition and in failing to foresee the existence of a hazard from the condition of the subject ladder. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com