BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration 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


    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rise Most Since February 2006

    New California "Construction" Legislation

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected for the 2024 Edition of Best Lawyers and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch

    A “Supplier to a Supplier” on a California Construction Project Sometimes Does Have a Right to a Mechanics Lien, Stop Payment Notice or Payment Bond Claim

    Mitigation, Restructuring and Bankruptcy: Small Business Tools in the Era of COVID-19

    Court of Appeal Opens Pandora’s Box on Definition of “Contractor” for Forum Selection Clauses

    Insurer Wrongfully Denies Coverage When Household Member Fails to Submit to EUO

    But Wait There’s More: Preserving Claims on Commonwealth Projects

    Extreme Flooding Overwhelms New York Roadways, Killing 1 Person

    Reroof Blamed for $10 Million in Damage

    Flow-Down Clauses Can Drown Your Project

    Scientists Are Trying to Make California Forests More Fire Resilient

    Court Denies Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Collapse Claim

    Maximizing Contractual Indemnity Rights: Components of an Effective Provision

    Chattanooga Bridge Collapse Likely Resulted From Impact

    Estimate Tops $5.5B for Cost of Rebuilding After Maui Fires

    Florida Federal Court to Examine Issues of Alleged Arbitrator Conflicts of Interests in Panama Canal Case

    Progress, Property, and Privacy: Discussing Human-Led Infrastructure with Jeff Schumacher

    California Contractors – You Should Know That Section 7141.5 May Be Your Golden Ticket

    The Fair Share Act Impacts the Strategic Planning of a Jury Trial

    South Carolina Legislature Redefining Occurrences to Include Construction Defects in CGL Policies

    Justin Bieber’s Unpaid Construction Bill Stalls House Sale

    The Miller Act: More Complex than You Think

    White House Reverses Trump Administration NEPA Cutbacks

    U.S. Home Sellers Return for Spring as Buyers Get Relief

    Liquidating Agreements—Bridging the Privity Gap for Subcontractors

    Builder’s Be Wary of Insurance Policies that Provide No Coverage for Building: Mt. Hawley Ins. Co v. Creek Side at Parker HOA

    Facing Manslaughter Charges In Worker's 2021 Trench Collapse Death, Colorado Contractor Who Willfully Ignored Federal Law Surrenders To Police

    Specific Source of Water Not Relevant in Construction Defect Claim

    Federal District Court Dismisses Property Claim After Insured Allows Loss Location to Be Destroyed Prior to Inspection

    Failure to Meet Code Case Remanded to Lower Court for Attorney Fees

    GIS and BIM Integration Will Transform Infrastructure Design and Construction

    Groundbreaking on New Boulder Neighborhood

    You Can Now Build a Multi-Million Dollar Home via Your iPad

    Hurdles with Triggering a Subcontractor Performance Bond

    Subcontractor’s Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    Gene Witkin Joins Ross Hart’s Mediation Team at AMCC

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: Known Loss Doctrine & Interpretation of “Occurrence”

    Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 Not Just for Individual Homeowners Anymore?

    California’s Right to Repair Act not an Exclusive Remedy

    Avoid a Derailed Settlement in Construction

    Discussing Parametric Design with Shajay Bhooshan of Zaha Hadid Architects

    Settlement between IOSHA and Mid-America Reached after Stage Collapse Fatalities

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

    Congratulations Bryan Stofferahn, August Hotchkin, and Eileen Gaisford on Their Promotion to Partner!

    24/7 Wall Street Reported on Eight Housing Markets at All-Time Highs

    Introducing Nomos LLP!

    Pulling the Plug

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

    You’ve Been Suspended – Were You Ready?
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Want to Build Affordable Housing in the Heart of Paris? Make It Chic.

    November 01, 2022 —
    The project at 12 Rue Jean-Bart is a modest one, just eight units of affordable housing on a narrow lot in Paris near the Luxembourg Gardens. The social housing project nevertheless caused a stir with neighbors in the 6th arrondissement, one of the city’s more affluent areas. When local politicians backing the project came to visit the building during its construction, neighbors shouted from windows across the street that it was a shame to build social housing here, according to Jean-Christophe Quinton, the Paris-based architect who designed the small in-fill development. Local resistance was a persistent feature of the project throughout its three-year-long construction, Quinton says; the building regularly faced harsh scrutiny in local newspaper Le Parisien. Reprinted courtesy of Marie Patino, Bloomberg and Kriston Capps, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Additional Insured Coverage for Subcontractor's Work Outside Policy Period

    August 19, 2015 —
    In a dispute between two insurers, the district court determined that the contractor was not an additional insured under the subcontractor's policy. Navigators Spec. Ins. Co. v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79338 (N. D. Cal. June 17, 2015). McDevitt & McDevitt Construction Corporation was the general contractor for construction of a condominium complex. McDevitt was insured by Navigators Specialty Insurance Company. F&M was a subcontractor for the project for providing structural steel components. F&M's subcontract required it to obtain liability insurance and name McDevitt as an additional insured under a policy that was to be primary. F&M secured a policy with North American Capacity Insurance Company (NAC) which included an endorsement for additional insureds. The endorsement provided that an entity could be an additional insured only with respect to "occurrences resulting from work performed by you during the policy period, or occurrences resulting from the conduct of your business during the policy period." McDevitt and F&M were sued for construct defect claims. Navigators defended McDevitt and NAC defended F&M. Navigators tendered McDevitt's defense to NAC because McDevitt was an additional insured under NAC's policy. NAC disclaimed coverage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (08/24/22) – Local Law 97, Clean Energy, and IRA Tax Credits

    September 26, 2022 —
    This week’s round-up features the intersection of real estate and energy efficiency, including state efforts surrounding clean energy legislation, Inflation Reduction Act tax credits, hotel & hospitality sectors creating sustainable initiatives to reduce carbon emissions, and more.
    • In New York City, building owners try to figure out how to pay for upgrades needed to comply with regulations outlined in Local Law 97 that are intended to fight climate change. (Jane Margolies, The New York Times)
    • Maryland, Massachusetts, and New York approve clean energy legislation, enacting laws to promote electric vehicles as well as wind and solar energy. (ACEEE)
    • The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), signed into law by President Biden this week, includes expanded tax credits expected to pivot building owners and property developers to make upgrades geared towards energy efficiency. (Jack Rogers, Globe St.)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    New York Establishes a Registration Requirement for Contractors and Subcontractors Performing Public Works and Covered Private Projects

    January 17, 2023 —
    By December 30, 2023, contractors and subcontractors bidding on public contracts and performing work on covered private projects in New York must register with the NYS Department of Labor, Bureau of Public Works, pursuant to the newly enacted Labor Law Section 220-i. The DOL has until June 28, 2023 to establish regulations to carry out the new law. There will be an online system where registrations and disclosures are publicly available. The stated purpose of the law is to help enforce New York’s prevailing wage and other worker protection laws. The DOL will create an online system through which contractors and subcontractors will have to answer questions and submit documents about:
    • the business entity and its owners and officers
    • unemployment and workers’ compensation insurance
    • any outstanding wage assessments
    • debarment under New York or federal law, or any other state’s laws
    • final determinations of a violation of any labor laws, employment tax laws, or workplace safety standards (including OSHA)
    • association or signatory to an apprenticeship program
    If the DOL approves the submission, the contractor will receive a registration certificate that remains valid for two years. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher B. Kinzel, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., K. Greer Kuras, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Kinzel may be contacted at ckinzel@pecklaw.com Ms. Kuras may be contacted at gkuras@pecklaw.com Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York Appeals Court Rekindles the Spark

    March 16, 2017 —
    In John Trimble, et al. v. City of Albany, et al., 2016, 144 A.D.3d 1484; 42 N.Y.S. 3d 432 (N.Y. App. Div.), the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, addressed the issue of governmental immunity for municipal fire companies. The court held that the plaintiff, John Trimble (Trimble), had sufficient evidence related to the four-pronged test for establishing a “special relationship” between a municipality and a citizen for liability to attach. In addition, the court held that the defendants were not entitled to summary judgment on the issue of governmental immunity. Specifically, regarding the latter holding, the court stated that, when there is no actual choice made on the part of the government, the government’s actions cannot be considered discretionary and immunity will not apply. In the case at hand, a fire occurred at Trimble’s home on the evening of February 2, 2013. Trimble called 911 and the Department of Fire and Emergency Services for the City of Albany (the Department) responded. After extinguishing the fire, the Department conducted an investigation and cleared the home. The Department’s investigators then told Trimble that the fire was extinguished and it was safe to enter the home. Trimble did so, removing some items so that he could stay with relatives that night. Several hours later, there was a rekindle and the rekindled fire destroyed the home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lian Skaf, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Skaf may be contacted at skafl@whiteandwilliams.com

    Construction Venture Sues LAX for Nonpayment

    February 05, 2014 —
    Construction joint venture Walsh/Austin filed suit against the Los Angeles International Airport, claiming that “the airport failed to properly pay more than $2.4 million to an electrical subcontractor,” according to The Daily Breeze. Furthermore, SASCO, the electrical firm, alleged that they were “given inaccurate design documents that made it impossible for the company to carry out the work at the agreed-upon rate.” The complaint, as reported by The Daily Breeze, cited “other lawsuits brought by an Orange County plastering firm and a Buena Park door company” and suggested that “eventually, all the litigation tied to nonpayment at LAX will end up in the same courtroom.” Nancy Castles, a spokeswoman for Los Angeles World Airports, told The Daily Breeze that “the agency does not comment on pending litigation.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    United States Supreme Court Backtracks on Recent Trajectory Away from Assertions of General Jurisdiction in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern

    August 01, 2023 —
    Washington, D.C. (June 28, 2023) – On June 27, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a sharply divided opinion that appears to backtrack on the Court’s steady trajectory away from assertions of general jurisdiction in recent years, e.g. Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown, 564 U.S. 915, 919 (2011), Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S. Ct. 746 (2014), BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell, 2017, 137 S. Ct. 1549 (2017). Relying on a case from 1917, Pennsylvania Fire Ins. Co. of Philadelphia v. Gold Issue Mining & Milling Co., 243 U. S. 93 (1917), Justice Gorsuch, writing on behalf of the plurality, (Justices Gorsuch, Thomas, Sotomayor, and Jackson) (Justice Alito concurring) found that Norfolk Southern “consented” to jurisdiction in Mallory via 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. §5301(a)(2)(i),(b) by registering to do business in Pennsylvania. This statute, 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. §5301, specifically permits jurisdiction over a corporation “incorporat[ed] under or qualifi[ed]as a foreign corporation under the laws of this Commonwealth … for any cause of action that may asserted against him, whether or not arising from acts enumerated in this section.” In Pennsylvania Fire, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution in connection with a Missouri law that required an out-of-state insurance company desiring to transact any business in the state to file paperwork agreeing to (1) appoint a state official to serve as the company’s agent for service of process and (2) accept service on that official as valid in any suit. After more than a decade of complying with the law, Pennsylvania Fire was served with process and argued that the Missouri law violated due process. The Court unanimously found that there was “no doubt” that Pennsylvania Fire could be sued in Missouri because it had agreed to accept service of process in Missouri on any suit as a condition of doing business there. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Charles S. Anderson, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Anderson may be contacted at Charles.Anderson@lewisbrisbois.com

    Client Alert: Disclosure of Plaintiff’s Status as Undocumented Alien to Prospective Jury Panel Grounds for Mistrial

    February 05, 2015 —
    In Velasquez v. Centrome, Inc. (No. B247080, filed 1/30/2015) the Court of Appeal, Second District, held that a trial judge’s disclosure to the panel of prospective jurors of plaintiff’s status as an undocumented alien was prejudicial and grounds for a new trial. Plaintiff, Wilfredo Velasquez, brought suit against defendant, Centrome, Inc., alleging personal injuries related to on-the-job exposure to diacetyl, which was purportedly distributed by Centrome. Prior to trial, numerous motions in limine were filed with the trial court including a motion brought by Plaintiff to preclude Centrome from referring to or making any comments about Mr. Velasquez’s citizenship or immigration status. Plaintiff contended the information was not relevant (as no loss of earnings claim was asserted), and was substantially more prejudicial than probative. Defendant opposed the Motion arguing the information was relevant for the limited purpose of allowing expert testimony about Mr. Velasquez’s inability as an undocumented alien to participate in a lung transplant he claimed was needed. The Court deferred ruling on the motion. 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; and Mr. Moriarty may be contacted at kmoriarty@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of