BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs 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


    New California Construction Laws for 2020

    Reinsurer Must Reimburse Health Care Organization for Settlement Costs

    Contractors’ Right to Sue in Washington Requires Registration

    Standard of Care

    Relying Upon Improper Exclusion to Deny Coverage Allows Bad Faith Claim to Survive Summary Judgment

    Out of the Black

    Fifth Circuit -- Damage to Property Beyond Insured’s Product/Work Not Precluded By ‘Your Product/Your Work Exclusion’

    Construction Defect Lawsuits May Follow Hawaii Condo Boom

    Roof Mounted Solar Panels: Lower Your Risk of Fire

    Safety Guidance for the Prevention of the Coronavirus on Construction Sites

    Traub Lieberman Partner Greg Pennington and Associate Kevin Sullivan Win Summary Judgment Dismissing Homeowner’s Claim that Presented an Issue of First Impression in New Jersey

    OSHA/VOSH Roundup

    Would You Trade a Parking Spot for an Extra Bedroom?

    Union Handbilling: When, Where, and Why it is Legal

    California Supreme Court Declares that Exclusionary Rule for Failing to Comply with Expert Witness Disclosures Applies at the Summary Judgment Stage

    National Infrastructure Leaders Visit Dallas' Able Pump Station to Tout Benefits of Water Infrastructure Investment

    Working Safely With Silica: Health Hazards and OSHA Compliance

    Event-Cancellation Insurance Issues During a Pandemic

    Transition Study a Condo Board’s First Defense against Construction Defects

    U.S. Housing Starts Top Forecast on Single-Family Homes

    Following Pennsylvania Trend, Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Construction Defect

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

    Homebuilding Held Back by Lack of Skilled Workers

    Construction Defect Not an Occurrence in Ohio

    New Jersey School Blames Leaks on Construction Defects, May Sue

    Affordable Housing, Military Contracts and Mars: 3D Printing Construction Potential Builds

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Could Cost $1B and Take One Year

    Trump Signs $2-Trillion Stimulus Bill for COVID-19 Emergency

    Distinguishing Hawaii Law, New Jersey Finds Anti-Assignment Clause Ineffective

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/06/21)

    French President Vows to Rebuild Fire-Collapsed Notre Dame Roof and Iconic Spire

    Thanks for My 6th Year Running as a Construction Litigation Super Lawyer

    Recent Bad Faith Decisions in Florida Raise Concerns

    Are Construction Defect Laws a Factor in Millennials Home Buying Decisions?

    Stacking of Service Interruption and Contingent Business Interruption Coverages Permitted

    Texas contractual liability exclusion

    Indiana Federal Court Holds No Coverage for $50M Default Judgment for Lack of Timely Notice of Class Action

    Washington, DC’s COVID-19 Eviction Moratorium Expires

    Domtar Update

    Couple Claims Contractor’s Work Is Defective and Incomplete

    Scientists found a way to make Cement Greener

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

    New York Appellate Division Reverses Denial of Landlord’s Additional Insured Tender

    How the Pandemic Pushed the Construction Industry Five Years Into the Future

    Panama Weighs Another Canal Expansion at Centennial Mark

    Trial Court Abuses Discretion in Appointing Unqualified Umpire for Appraisal

    Revisiting OSHA’s Controlling Employer Policy

    Kiewit Hired as EPC for Fire-Damaged Freeport Gas Terminal Fix

    U.S. Building Permits Soared to Their Highest Level in Nearly Eight Years

    OSHA’s Multi-Employer Citation Policy: What Employers on Construction Sites Need to Know
    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

    China Bans Tallest Skyscrapers Following Safety Concerns

    July 25, 2021 —
    China is prohibiting construction of the tallest skyscrapers to ensure safety following mounting concerns over the quality of some projects. The outright ban covers buildings that are taller than 500 meters (1,640 feet), the National Development and Reform Commission said in a notice Tuesday. Local authorities will also need to strictly limit building of towers that are more than 250 meters tall. The top economic planner cited quality problems and safety hazards in some developments stemming from loose oversight. A 72-story tower in Shenzhen was closed in May for checks following reports of unexplained wobbling, feeding concern about the stability of one of the technology hub’s tallest buildings. Construction of buildings exceeding 100 meters should strictly match the scale of the city where they will be located, along with its fire rescue capability, the commission said. “It’s primarily for safety,” said Qiao Shitong, an associate law professor at the University of Hong Kong who studies property and urban law. Extremely tall buildings “are more like signature projects for mayors and not necessarily efficient.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg

    Welcome to SubTropolis: The Massive Business Complex Buried Under Kansas City

    February 05, 2015 —
    The underground industrial park known as SubTroplis opened for business in 1964 in an excavated mine below Kansas City, Mo., attracting tenants with the lure of lower energy costs and cheap rents. The walls, carved out of 270-million-year-old limestone deposits, help keep humidity low and temperatures at a constant 68 degrees, eliminating the need for air conditioning or heating. Tenants have reported saving as much as 70 percent on their energy bills, says Ora Reynolds, president of SubTropolis landlord Hunt Midwest. Rents run about $2.25 per square foot, about half the going rate on the surface. "It's also a question of sustainability," says Joe Paris, vice president at Paris Brothers, a specialty foods packager that employs about 200 workers underground. In addition to Paris Brothers, 51 tenants have rented nearly 6 million square feet of space. Others include LightEdge Solutions, a cloud computing company that uses the mild climate to help cool servers, and an underground archive that contains the original film reels to Gone with the Wind and Wizard of Oz. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Clark, Bloomberg

    Get Your Contracts Lean- Its Better than Dieting

    January 13, 2020 —
    I recently took the AGC Lean Construction Educations Program Units 1-7. After studying diligently, I’m happy to say that I passed the exam and earned my CM-Lean credential. Surprisingly, this makes me the first attorney to earn this distinction out of over 1,200 CM-Lean holders. So why is a construction attorney learning about lean? After all, this was my first exam in 20 years since I took the bar. Well, according to McKinsey Global Institute, construction actually became less productive from 1995 through 2009. When it comes to efficiency, construction still lags significantly behind the manufacturing sector and the overall economy. Construction contracts – what we sign and the way in which we negotiate them, or lack thereof – is a principal reason why construction productivity is stagnant. Contracting under an integrated lean project delivery method (ILPD) and incorporating Lean construction tools is the most powerful means to increase efficiency and add-value to owners. Owners are the client’s end-users of construction projects. ConsensusDocs has taken a leadership role in publishing the first standard ILPD contract which is an integrated form of agreement (IFOA). The ConsensusDocs 300 Integrated Project Delivery (IPD™) provides an off-the-shelf solution to contract utilizing lean tools. Not every owner can or is comfortable using an IPD approach. Consequently, ConsensusDocs produced the ConsensusDocs 305 Construction Lean Construction Addendum last year to provide an option for contracting for lean on Construction Management at-Risk and design-build projects. Some people call this approach IPD-lite or IPD’ish. Some disfavor such terms, because those terms have been used loosely on projects that aren’t very Lean. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Perlberg, Esq., Executive Director and Senior Counsel of ConsensusDocs
    ConsensusDocs may be contacted at support@consensusdocs.org

    Termination of Construction Contracts

    November 30, 2020 —
    Lately, in view of the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a heightened concern that some construction projects will not proceed as planned. Therefore, it is important to review each party’s right to terminate a construction contract and to examine some of the resulting consequences. While the parties to a construction contract can, as always, agree to other mutually acceptable terms and provisions, in broad terms, a typical construction contract includes four triggering events that can lead to termination. First, an owner can terminate a construction contract if the contractor defaults and thereafter fails to cure such default, which may include, without limitation, the failure to remediate deficient work, the failure to meet the construction schedule, the failure to pay subcontractors and the failure to comply with applicable law. A contractor must be mindful of the fact that in the case of such termination by the owner for cause, the vast majority of construction contracts provide that the contractor will not be entitled to receive any further payment for work performed by the contractor until the work is finished. Reprinted courtesy of Stuart Rosen, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Rosen may be contacted at srosen@proskauer.com

    Roof's "Cosmetic" Damage From Hail Storm Covered

    August 19, 2015 —
    The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court's determination that cosmetic damage to the insured's roof was covered. Advance Cable Co., LLC v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 9805 (7th Cir. June 11, 2015). The insured submitted a claim to its insurer, Cincinnati, for damage to the metal roof of its building caused by a hail storm. The insured inspected the roof with a claims representative for Cincinnati. Dents were spotted, but there was little other evidence of damage. The loss was estimated at $1,894.74. A check for this amount was sent to the insured. Six months later, the insured considered selling the building. A potential buyer inspected the roof and found hail damage. At the request of the insured, Cincinnati conducted another inspection of the roof. Again, dents of approximately 1 inch in diameter were found. The inspector noted that the denting would not affect the performance of the roof panels or detract from their life expectancy. 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

    California Court Holds No Coverage Under Pollution Policy for Structural Improvements

    October 02, 2018 —
    In its recent decision in Essex Walnut Owner L.P. v. Aspen Specialty Ins. Co., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138276 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 15, 2018), the United States District Court for the Northern District of California had occasion to consider the issue of a pollution liability insurer’s obligation to pay for the redesign of a structural support system necessitated by the alleged presence of soil contamination. Aspen’s insured, Essex, owned a parcel of property it was in the process of redeveloping for commercial and residential purposes. The project required excavation activities in order to construct an underground parking lot, and as part of this process, Essex designed a temporary shoring system comprising tied-in retaining walls in order to stabilize the area outside of the excavation. During the excavation work, construction debris was encountered requiring removal. Aspen agreed to pay for a portion of the costs to remove and dispose the debris under the pollution liability policy it issued to Essex. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Margolies, Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
    Mr. Margolies may be contacted at bmargolies@tlsslaw.com

    Include Materials Price Escalation Clauses in Construction Clauses

    December 26, 2022 —
    The construction sector has been in a bull market for an unprecedented period of time. With the novel impacts from the coronavirus—and all the associated side effects, such as government moratoria, shipping delays and materials availability—we are now in a market of extreme volatility in pricing, inflation and increasing capital finance rates. And yet the construction sector continues to plow forward despite uncertainty, producing critical infrastructure, and much necessary housing, among other projects. The signs are that this trend will continue at least through Q1 of 2023, and likely beyond that, especially when you factor into the equation the many billions of dollars being placed into the market through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. It is not surprising, therefore, that the number one issue in construction contracts in 2022 is how parties handle inflation and materials cost escalations in existing contracts and in the negotiations for new contracts. There is no other issue more heavily negotiated, often disputed and hotly debated in the construction sector today. Reprinted courtesy of Robert Alfert Jr., Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Alfert may be contacted at robert.alfert@nelsonmullins.com

    Let’s Give ‘Em Sutton to Talk About: Tennessee Court Enforces Sutton Doctrine

    July 24, 2023 —
    In Patton v Pearson, No. M2022-00708-COA-RC-CV, 2023 Tenn. App. LEXIS 231, the Court of Appeals of Tennessee (Court of Appeals) considered whether the lower court erred in dismissing an insurance carrier’s lawsuit against its insured’s tenant for damages sustained in a fire. While the lawsuit was filed in the name of the landlord (i.e., the insured), discovery revealed that the lawsuit was actually a subrogation lawsuit, brought by the landlord’s insurance carrier. The lower court granted the tenant’s motion for summary judgment based on the Sutton Doctrine, holding that the tenant was an implied co-insured under the landlord’s policy. The Court of Appeals affirmed, finding that although the lease agreement did not reference insurance, the Sutton Doctrine applied, which barred the landlord’s carrier from subrogating against the tenant. In 2016, Anita Pearson (Ms. Pearson) signed a lease agreement to rent a home in Nashville, Tennessee, which was owned by John and Melody Patton (collectively, the Pattons). The lease stated that the Pattons were not responsible for the tenant’s personal property. The lease also stated that the tenant would be responsible for any damage caused by her negligence or misuse of the home. The lease was silent as to which party would maintain property casualty insurance and regarding implied co-insured status on any policy. Ms. Pearson purchased renter’s insurance for her personal property. The Pattons secured a property casualty insurance policy for the home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com