BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering 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


    Bound by Group Builders, Federal District Court Finds No Occurrence

    Are Construction Defect Laws Inhibiting the Development of Attached Ownership Housing in Colorado?

    Project-Specific Policies and Products-Completed Operations Hazard Extensions

    ASCE Statement on Devastating Tornado Damages Throughout U.S.

    Nailing Social Media: The Key to Generating Leads for Construction Companies

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    Five Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers in America© 2021

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine’s 2023 Top Lawyers!

    Hunton Andrews Kurth’s Insurance Recovery Practice, Andrea DeField and Cary D. Steklof, Recognized as Legal Elite

    The Connecticut Appellate Court Decides That Construction Contractor Was Not Obligated To Continue Accelerated Schedule to Mitigate Its Damages Following Late Delivery of Materials by Supplier

    Contractors Set to Implement Air Quality Upgrades for Healthier Buildings

    Pre-Suit Settlement Offers and Construction Lien Actions

    Limiting Plaintiffs’ Claims to a Cause of Action for Violation of SB-800

    What Is the Best Way to Avoid Rezoning Disputes?

    The Law of Patent v Latent Defects

    Wisconsin High Court Rejects Insurer’s Misuse of “Other Insurance” Provision

    General Contractor Cited for Safety Violations after Worker Fatality

    Policy's Limitation Period for Seeking Replacement Costs Not Enforced Where Unreasonable

    The Condo Conundrum: 10 Reasons Why There's a 'For Sale' Shortage in Seattle

    SunTrust Will Pay $968 Million to Resolve Mortgage Probes

    Court Denies Insured's Motion to Dismiss Complaint Seeking to Compel Appraisal

    Colorado Trench Collapse Kills Two

    As Fracture Questions Remain, Team Raced to Save Mississippi River Bridge

    Does Your 998 Offer to Compromise Include Attorneys’ Fees and Costs?

    Federal Court Holds That Other Insurance Analysis Is Unnecessary If Policies Cover Different Risks

    High Court Case Review Frees Jailed Buffalo Billions Contractor CEO

    Will Superusers Future-Proof the AEC Industry?

    Construction Employment Rose in 38 States from 2013 to 2014

    Newmeyer & Dillion Appoints Partner Carol Zaist as General Counsel

    Homebuyers Aren't Sweating the Fed

    Thieves Stole Backhoe for Use in Bank Heist

    Sun, Sand and Stir-Fry? Miami Woos Chinese for Property: Cities

    Contractor’s Unwritten Contractual Claim Denied by Sovereign Immunity; Mandamus Does Not Help

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Indemnity Coverage For Damage Caused by Named Insured

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/11/23) – Millennials Struggle Finding Homes, Additional CHIPS Act Funding Available, and the Supreme Court Takes up Hotel Lawsuit Case

    Alabama Supreme Court States Faulty Workmanship can be an Occurrence

    Insurer Sued for Altering Policies after Claim

    Anthony Garasi, Jared Christensen and August Hotchkin are Recognized as Nevada Legal Elite

    The G2G Mid-Year Roundup (2022)

    Mitsui Fudosan Said to Consider Rebuilding Tilted Apartments

    2018 Update to EPA’s “Superfund Task Force Report”

    Grad Student Sues UC Santa Cruz over Mold in Residence

    How AI and Machine Learning Are Helping Construction Reduce Risk and Improve Margins

    Insurance Agent Sued for Lapse in Coverage after House Collapses

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/10/23) – Wobbling Real Estate, Booming (and Busting) Construction, and Eye-Watering Insurance Premiums

    Greystone on Remand Denies Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment To Bar Coverage For Construction Defects

    A Discussion on Home Affordability

    Condo Collapse Spurs Hometown House Member to Demand U.S. Rules

    Naughty or Nice. Contractor Receives Two Lumps of Coal in Administrative Dispute

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners
    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

    Massachusetts SJC Clarifies “Strict Compliance” Standard in Construction Contracts

    January 02, 2019 —
    In Massachusetts, it is well established that a contractor cannot recover damages from a construction contract without first showing that the contractor completely and strictly performed on all of the contract’s terms. Recently, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court narrowed the rule by concluding that complete and strict performance is only required for contract terms relating to the design and construction itself. The high Court explained that non-design / non-construction contract terms are governing by “ordinary contract principles, including the traditional Massachusetts materiality rule.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jacob Goodelman, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Mr. Goodelman may be contacted at jgoodelman@grsm.com

    Relief Bill's Highway Funds Could Help Construction Projects

    January 04, 2021 —
    Among the many provisions in the coronavirus relief bill, one key item is $10 billion to help state highway agencies make up for losses in state fuel taxes and other revenue due to the pandemic-caused falloff in traffic this year. Construction is one of a list of several eligible uses for the money—one of only a few construction funding provisions in the relief measure. Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    OSHA Issues Final Rule on Electronic Submission of Injury and Illness Data

    September 25, 2023 —
    The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has issued its final rule (Final Rule) on electronic submission of injury and illness information. The Final Rule applies to employers with 100 or more employees in certain high-hazard industries, including construction, and requires such employers to electronically submit injury and illness information to OSHA on a yearly basis. If you fall into that category, here’s what you need to know to comply: Who do the Final Rules apply to? The Final Rules apply to companies with 100 or more employees in certain high-hazard industries. This includes construction companies with 100 or more employees working on federal construction projects. The “100 or more employees” threshold applies to companies with 100 or more employees at any time during the previous calendar year. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    America’s Infrastructure Gets a D+

    March 16, 2017 —
    The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) has issued their 2017 Infrastructure Report Card, which assigns a letter grade to the nation’s infrastructure. Our country’s grade in 2017? A disappointing D+. Although, if you’re a glass half full kind of person (bless your soul) at least our grade didn’t fall since the last report card was issued in 2013, when our grade was a D+ as well. In short, we suck. Although, apparently, we don’t suck evenly across the board. ASCE has divided its cumulative GPA into grades for specific courses, if you will. Our transit systems received a grade of D-; our airports, dams, drinking water and waste water plants, inland waterways, levees and roads received a grade of D; our power plants, hazardous waste plants, public parks and schools received a grade of D+; our bridges, ports and solid waste plants a grade of C+, and our rail systems received a grade of B. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    CISA Guidance 3.1: Not Much Change for Construction

    June 22, 2020 —
    This week, the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) issued Version 3.1 of its Guidance on the Essential Critical Infrastructure Workforce. For the most part, CISA’s Guidance 3.1 did not change from Version 3.0 as it relates to construction. However, CISA added a few construction-related services to “Essential Critical Infrastructure”:
    • “Workers who support the construction and maintenance of electric vehicle charging stations.”
    • “Engineers performing or supporting safety inspections.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Laura Bourgeois LoBue, Pillsbury
    Ms. LoBue may be contacted at laura.lobue@pillsburylaw.com

    Deducting 2018 Real Property Taxes Prepaid in 2017 Comes with Caveats

    January 04, 2018 —
    Many clients and friends have inquired about accelerating the payment of their 2018 real property taxes as a result of the recent enactment of the federal Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Pursuant to that Act, the deduction for state and local income, real property and other taxes will be capped at $10,000 in tax years 2018 through 2025. The Act, moreover, specifically disallows a deduction in 2017 for 2018 state and local income taxes that are prepaid before year-end. The Act was not clear on whether a prepayment of 2018 real property taxes would be deductible in 2017. For certain taxpayers that are not subject to the alternative minimum tax, a prepayment of those 2018 real property taxes might be of current benefit to them. Yesterday, the IRS issued an advisory to taxpayers outlining which real property tax prepayments will be deductible in 2017 and which are not. The text of that advisory, together with the illustrative examples, is set out below for your consideration. IR-2017-210, DEC. 27, 2017 WASHINGTON - The Internal Revenue Service advised tax professionals and taxpayers today that pre-paying 2018 state and local real property taxes in 2017 may be tax deductible under certain circumstances. The IRS has received a number of questions from the tax community concerning the deductibility of prepaid real property taxes. In general, whether a taxpayer is allowed a deduction for the prepayment of state or local real property taxes in 2017 depends on whether the taxpayer makes the payment in 2017 and the real property taxes are assessed prior to 2018. A prepayment of anticipated real property taxes that have not been assessed prior to 2018 are not deductible in 2017. State or local law determines whether and when a property tax is assessed, which is generally when the taxpayer becomes liable for the property tax imposed. The following examples illustrate these points. Example 1: Assume County A assesses property tax on July 1, 2017 for the period July 1, 2017 – June 30, 2018. On July 31, 2017, County A sends notices to residents notifying them of the assessment and billing the property tax in two installments with the first installment due Sept. 30, 2017 and the second installment due Jan. 31, 2018. Assuming taxpayer has paid the first installment in 2017, the taxpayer may choose to pay the second installment on Dec. 31, 2017, and may claim a deduction for this prepayment on the taxpayer’s 2017 return. Example 2: County B also assesses and bills its residents for property taxes on July 1, 2017, for the period July 1, 2017 – June 30, 2018. County B intends to make the usual assessment in July 2018 for the period July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2019. However, because county residents wish to prepay their 2018-2019 property taxes in 2017, County B has revised its computer systems to accept prepayment of property taxes for the 2018-2019 property tax year. Taxpayers who prepay their 2018-2019 property taxes in 2017 will not be allowed to deduct the prepayment on their federal tax returns because the county will not assess the property tax for the 2018-2019 tax year until July 1, 2018. The IRS reminds taxpayers that a number of provisions remain available this week that could affect 2017 tax bills. Time remains to make charitable donations. See IR-17-191 for more information. The deadline to make contributions for individual retirement accounts - which can be used by some taxpayers on 2017 tax returns - is the April 2018 tax deadline. IRS.gov has more information on these and other provisions to help taxpayers prepare for the upcoming filing season. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William Hussey, White and Williams
    Mr. Hussey may be contacted at husseyw@whiteandwilliams.com

    Where Do We Go From Here?

    March 21, 2022 —
    Green Builder CoalitionFor this week’s Guest Post Friday, I welcome an old friend and past Guest Post Friday contributor, Mike Collignon. Mike is the Co-Founder and Executive Director of the Green Builder® Coalition. He engages in national and state-level advocacy and publishes regular content for Green Builder® Media. Mike is also the Chair of the WERS Development Group and has served as the moderator or host for Green Builder® Media’s Impact Series webinars from 2012– present. This post originally appeared on Green Builder® Media’s Code Watcher. Do you ever have a line from a song just pop into your head? I get that… a lot. It’s probably due to my lifelong love of music. Anyway, while I was researching this column, the line that cites the title of “Where Do We Go From Here?” by Filter started playing between my ears. You’ll see why in a couple of minutes. In case you didn’t read about it here or elsewhere, the IECC development process has undergone an overhaul. It is now following a standards process, yet it retains the word “code” in the name. The residential committee (which is the scope of this column) is now a consensus committee and has been greatly expanded. Proposals are still submitted, reviewed and voted on by the committee. On the surface, it doesn’t sound like much has changed. As they say, the devil is always in the details. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment in Pinellas County Circuit Court

    November 29, 2021 —
    On September 20, 2021, Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian secured summary judgment in Pinellas County Circuit Court in St. Petersburg, Florida, on behalf of a Homeowner who invited an acquaintance to his house to assist him with hanging a gutter on his roof. While he was assisting the Homeowner installing the gutter, the Plaintiff fell from a ladder and sustained a comminuted left intertrochanteric (hip) fracture. The Plaintiff was taken to the hospital, where he underwent open reduction, internal fixation of his left hip fracture. He was hospitalized for five days and released in wheelchair. He incurred more than $70,000 in medical bills and was confined to a wheelchair for two months. The Plaintiff filed a negligence action against the Homeowner alleging he improperly set up the ladder causing it to become unstable, thereby creating a dangerous condition on the premises which proximately caused his fall. The Plaintiff claimed the Homeowner breached the duty he owed the Plaintiff to provide safe and stable equipment for his use. After engaging in discovery, Mr. Guldalian moved for summary judgment arguing that because the Plaintiff could not explain in his deposition why he fell from the ladder, the Plaintiff could not establish—as a matter of law—the Homeowner was negligent, did anything, or failed to do something, that proximately caused his injury. In support of his argument, Mr. Guldalian submitted the affidavit of an investigator who inspected the ladder after the Plaintiff’s fall and found no defect in, on, or about the ladder, and affirmed that the area where the ladder was set up had no raised or defective areas which could have caused the ladder to become unstable. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bradley T. Guldalian, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Guldalian may be contacted at bguldalian@tlsslaw.com