BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut 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


    U.S. Navy Sailors Sue Tokyo Utility Company Over Radiation Poisoning

    Texas Couple Claim Many Construction Defects in Home

    California Clarifies Its Inverse Condemnation Standard

    The DOL Claims Most Independent Contractors Are Employees

    Nondelegable Duty of Care Owed to Third Persons

    SCOTUS, Having Received Views of Solicitor General, Will Decide Whether CWA Regulates Indirect Discharge of Pollutants Into Navigable Water Via Groundwater

    Seventh Circuit Remands “Waters of the United States” Case to Corps of Engineers to Determine Whether there is a “Significant Nexus”

    How BIM Can Serve Building Owners

    Contractors Must Register with the L&I Prior to Offering or Performing Work, or Risk Having their Breach of Contract Case Dismissed

    How Do You Get to the Five Year Mark? Some Practical Advice

    Washington Supreme Court Sides with Lien Claimants in Williams v. Athletic Field

    Developer Pre-Conditions in CC&Rs Limiting Ability of HOA to Make Construction Defect Claims, Found Unenforceable

    Steel Component Plant Linked to West Virginia Governor Signs $1M Pollution Pact

    Statute of Limitations and Bad Faith Claims: Factors to Consider

    Montana Federal Court Holds that an Interior Department’s Federal Advisory Committee Was Improperly Reestablished

    MapLab: Why More Americans Are Moving Toward Wildfire

    Housing Affordability Down

    Beam Fracture on Closed Mississippi River Bridge Is at Least Two Years Old

    The Status of OSHA’s Impending Heat Stress Standard

    Judge Gives Cintra Bid Protest of $9B Md. P3 Project Award New Life

    New York Developers Facing Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Why Builders Should Reconsider Arbitration Clauses in Construction Contracts

    Tesla Finishes First Solar Roofs—Including Elon's House

    The Pandemic, Proposed Federal Privacy Regulation and the CCPA

    Private Statutory Cause of Action Under Florida’s Underground Facility Damage Prevention and Safety Act

    Colorado Supreme Court Rules that Developers Retain Perpetual Control over Construction Defect Covenants

    White House Seeks $310M To Fix Critical San Diego Wastewater Plant

    One Word Makes All The Difference – The Distinction Between “Pay If Paid” and “Pay When Paid” Clauses

    Blackstone Said to Sell Boston Buildings for $2.1 Billion

    ConsensusDOCS Updates its Forms

    Reminder: Just Being Incorporated Isn’t Enough

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2022 “Atlanta 500” List

    Brazil World Cup Soccer Crisis Deepens With Eighth Worker Death

    Two Worthy Insurance Topics: (1) Bad Faith, And (2) Settling Without Insurer’s Consent

    Illinois Supreme Court Finds Construction Defect Claim Triggers Initial Grant of Coverage

    Warren Renews Criticism of Private Equity’s Role in Housing

    Missouri Protects Subrogation Rights

    Burg Simpson to Create Construction Defect Group

    Massachusetts Appellate Court Confirms Construction Defects are Not Covered Under Commercial General Liability Policies

    A Top U.S. Seller of Carbon Offsets Starts Investigating Its Own Projects

    Construction Defect Attorneys Call for Better Funding of Court System

    Flood Sublimits Do Not Apply to Loss Caused by Named Windstorm

    Seyfarth Shaw’s Construction Group Receives Top Tier Recognition from Legal 500

    Court of Appeals Upholds Default Judgment: Serves as Reminder to Respond to Lawsuits in a Timely Manner

    Subcontract Requiring Arbitration Outside of Florida

    No Duty to Indemnify When Discovery Shows Faulty Workmanship Damages Insured’s Own Work

    Federal Contractors Should Request Debriefings As A Matter Of Course

    EPA Seeks Comment on Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification Rule

    Significant Ruling in PFAS Litigation Could Impact Insurance Coverage

    Insurance Policy to Protect Hawaii's Coral Reefs
    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

    U.S. Construction Spending Rose in 2017 by Least in Six Years

    February 07, 2018 —
    Even with solid U.S. economic growth, construction spending rose in 2017 by the least in six years, as nonresidential building slowed and outlays by governments declined. The value of construction put in place increased 3.8 percent to $1.23 trillion last year, according to Commerce Department figures released Thursday in Washington. That’s the smallest gain since a 2.6 percent drop in 2011. Spending for December was up 0.7 percent from the previous month, exceeding the median estimate of economists for a 0.4 percent increase. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott Lanman, Bloomberg

    Winning Attorney Fees in Litigation as a California Construction Contractor or Subcontractor

    December 27, 2021 —
    The General Rule in California: The Winner Does NOT Receive Attorney Fees and Costs: There is a common misconception that court decisions require the loser in a lawsuit to reimburse the winner for the fees and costs incurred during the lawsuit. Reliance on this misconception in developing a legal strategy for dealing with disputes is a serious strategic error. Where the legal issue is, for example, “breach of contract,” the general rule in California is that there are only two methods by which the winning litigant will be awarded the attorney fees and costs incurred in bringing or defending the lawsuit. The first of these is if the contract in question contains an effective attorney fee clause specifically providing that the prevailing party will recover their attorney fees and costs. The second is if there is a statute on point which provides that the prevailing party will be awarded those fees and costs. The general rule in California is that each party pays their own attorney fees and costs, unless there is an independent legal basis that provides otherwise. This is known as the “American Rule,” used throughout most of the country. The Issue is Important Because Spending More Money Than You Can Be Awarded is a Losing Strategy: The importance of whether the prevailing party in a lawsuit will be awarded their fees and costs cannot be underestimated. The party contemplating whether to bring a lawsuit must seriously consider whether it is even worth the trouble. In many cases, unless the one bringing the lawsuit (the “plaintiff”) is entitled to be reimbursed for the considerable attorney fees and costs incurred in bringing the case, it is just not worth doing so. There is no point spending $50,000 on attorneys on a $40,000 claim unless the plaintiff can be awarded both the $40,000 and the $50,000 if the plaintiff wins. Unless fees and costs are awarded, the plaintiff will still be out $10,000 in the very best of cases. For a party sued (the “defendant”) a similar situation arises in that the defendant faces the reality that it may be less expensive to just pay on a frivolous or false claim than to fight it. Either scenario is unsatisfactory. On the whole, it is beneficial to have an attorney fee clause in a contract when either a plaintiff or a defendant must vindicate its rights. Both deserve to be fully compensated to achieve justice. It is also beneficial to have an attorney fee clause in a contract to encourage the one who is at fault to resolve the case rather than risk paying the fees and costs of the other party who is likely to win the case. In either case, the presence of an attorney fee clause facilitates the party in the right and encourages resolution outside of litigation. These are admirable societal goals. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Federal Court Dismisses Coverage Action in Favor of Pending State Proceeding

    October 12, 2020 —
    The federal district court declined to exercise jurisdiction over the coverage action that was parallel to a case pending in state court involving the same parties and same issues pending. Navigators Ins, Co. v. Chriso's Tree Trimming, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129711 (E.D. Calif. July 22, 2020). Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) entered into a tree, brush and wood removal contract with Mount F Enterprises, Inc. Mountain F subsequently entered into a subcontractor agreement with Chriso Tree Trimming, Inc. for work to be performed for PG&E. In August 2017, Chriso attempted to remove a tree, but the tree accidentally fell in the wrong direction and knocked down nearby powerlines. The powerlines came into contact with surrounding brush and started the "Railroad Fire." The fire was eventually contained on September 15, 2017, after 12, 407 acres were burned and 7 structures and 7 homes were destroyed. Five subrogation lawsuits were filed in state court against Chriso and Mountain F by various insurance companies that paid for the damage caused by the Railroad Fire. A policy limits demand to settle all claims against Chriso and Mountain F was made. Navigators insured Chriso for $9 million through a Commercial Excess Liability Policy, payable once all other insurance was exhausted. The policy included a "Professional Services Endorsement" (PSE Exclusion) that excluded coverage of "professional services." "Professional services" was defined through a list of 12 non-exclusive professions and services that generally referred to activities involving specialized knowledge or skill that was predominantly mental or intellectual in nature rather than physical or manual. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Regional US Airports Are Back After Years of Decay

    September 23, 2024 —
    The ski resorts near Gunnison and Crested Butte, Colorado, are so close to Aspen, you’d think the area wouldn’t need its own airport. Their glitzier neighbor is just 48 miles north as the crow flies, though that’s roughly 150 miles by road. But people flocking to Crested Butte’s laid back town, extreme ski slopes and epic mountain biking have a new reason to bypass farther-away Aspen: the destination’s gleaming new airport, which debuted in January 2023. Not only is the Gunnison-Crested Butte Regional Airport terminal easy to get across quickly, at just 40,000 square feet, it's also heated and cooled with geothermal energy and uses triple glazed windows to keep travelers warm in a town known to be one of the coldest places in the US. And Crested Butte isn’t the only small town airport receiving an upgrade. All across the US, at least a dozen small and medium-size facilities are being renovated and, in some cases, entirely rebuilt—typically on budgets that stretch eight and nine figures. That contradicts a long-held belief among aviation industry pros that these regional facilities were destined to gather dust and die out. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lebawit Lily Girma, Bloomberg

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions

    May 25, 2020 —
    White and Williams is pleased to announce the election of Vincent Barbera and James Burger to the partnership. The firm has also promoted Victoria Fuller, Phyllis Ingram, William Johnston, Eric Porter, Gus Sara, Jenifer Scarcella, Lian Skaf and Brett Tishler from associate to counsel. The newly elected partners and promoted counsel represent the wide array of practices that White and Williams offers its clients, including education, finance, financial lines, insurance coverage, labor and employment, litigation, real estate, and subrogation. These accomplished lawyers have earned this advancement based on their contributions to the firm and their practices. “We are pleased to elect these two lawyers to the partnership and promote eight exceptional associates to counsel. The group demonstrates the legal talent and breadth of services White and Williams offers clients,” said Patti Santelle, Managing Partner of the firm. “The contributions of these lawyers have enhanced the growth and reputation of our firm and reflect our deep commitment to clients. We look forward to their continued success.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    Bad Faith in the First Party Insurance Context

    December 15, 2016 —
    In a previous article I discussed bad faith when it comes to an insurance claim. Recently, in Barton v. Capitol Preferred Insurance Co., Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2736b (Fla. 5th DCA 2016), the court discussed bad faith in the first-party insurance context (i.e., a property / homeowners insurance policy). In this case, homeowners, as the insured, sued their homeowners insurance carrier for sinkhole coverage. The homeowner filed a Civil Remedy Notice of Insurer Violation (also known as a Civil Remedy Notice) against their insurer with the Florida Department of Insurance in accordance with Florida Statute s. 624.155. This Civil Remedy Notice is a prerequisite to initiating such a bad faith claim; the notice specifies the statutory violations committed by the insurer and gives the insurer 60 days to cure the violation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@katzbarron.com

    Considering Stormwater Management

    March 26, 2014 —
    Amanda Voss discusses stormwater and erosion control in a recent article published in Big Builder. “Stormwater and erosion control regulations are expanding their reach in the building industry,” Voss stated. “Now, even some remodeling programs have them.” Voss presented various ideas to assist builders with stormwater management. First, she says, to identify potential pollutants: “You’ve got to pay attention not just to what you bring on to a site, but also to what leaves it—think erosion control and existing sediment.” Factors to consider include “site topography,” “materials brought in and out,” and the “staging area.” Voss also suggested to “[m]ake sure that your stormwater strategy dovetails with a drainage plan,” and finally, to “[e]nlist the inspector as an ally.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    More Reminders that the Specific Contract Terms Matter

    January 24, 2022 —
    If there is a theme I have pounded upon here at Construction Law Musings in the over 13 years of posting, it is that the specific terms of your construction contracts will make a huge difference. While there have been reminders galore, a case from the Eastern District of Virginia presented another wrinkle on this theme. The wrinkle? A factoring company. In CJM Financial, Inc. v. Leebcor Services, LLC et. al., the Court examined this scenario (though it went into more detail than I will here): Leebcorp hired a subcontractor, Maston Creek Services to provide certain construction services under two separate contracts. Maston then hired CJM, a factoring company, and assigned CJM its receivables and the right to collect those receivables. We wouldn’t be discussing this case if all had worked out as planned, so you likely anticipate at least some of what came next. The short story is that Matson failed to pay some of its suppliers and Leebcorp exercised its termination rights under those contracts when Matson refused to cure. In the interim, CJM had paid part of certain payment applications to Matson in compliance with the factoring agreement. When Leebcorp failed to pay CJM for Matson’s work, CJM exercised its assigned rights to collect the receivables and sued Leebcorp for breach of contract. In response, Leebcorp counterclaimed for, among other counts including civil conspiracy, breach of contract based on Matson’s failure to perform. CJM moved to dismiss the counterclaims. 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