BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofing
    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


    Collaborating or Competing with Construction Tech Startups

    Surplus Lines Carriers Cannot Compel Arbitration in Louisiana

    Fifth Circuit Reverses Summary Judgment Award to Insurer on Hurricane Damage Claim

    OSHA ETS Heads to Sixth Circuit

    'Right to Repair' and Fixing Equipment in a Digital Age

    Industrialized Construction News 7/2022

    Haight Proudly Supports JDC's 11th Annual Bike-A-Thon Benefitting Pro Bono Legal Services

    The 2024 Colorado Legislative Session Promises to be a Busy One for the Construction Industry and its Insurers

    Construction Delays: Which Method Should Be Used to Calculate Delay?

    Going Digital in 2019: The Latest Technology for a Bright Future in Construction

    Federal Contractors – Double Check the Terms of Your Contract Before Performing Ordered Changes

    Identifying and Accessing Coverage in Complex Construction Claims

    No Entitlement to Reimbursement of Pre-Tender Fees

    Canada’s Largest Homebuilder Sets U.S. Growth Plan

    Cameron Pledges to Double Starter Homes to Boost Supply

    Self-Storage Magnates Cash In on the Surge in Real Estate

    Challenging and Defending a California Public Works Stop Payment Notice: Affidavit vs. Counter-Affidavit Process

    Court Orders City to Pay for Sewer Backups

    Does the Miller Act Trump Subcontract Dispute Provisions?

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 45 White and Williams Lawyers

    Construction Litigation Group Listed in U.S. News Top Tier

    A Court-Side Seat: As SCOTUS Decides Another Regulatory “Takings” Case, a Flurry of Action at EPA

    Collapse Claim Fails Due To Defectively Designed Roof and Deck

    A Survey of New Texas Environmental Laws

    Burden Supporting Termination for Default

    Decline in Home Construction Brings Down Homebuilder Stocks

    Nine Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Recognized as Southern California Super Lawyers

    Hake Law Attorneys Join National Law Firm Wilson Elser

    Champagne Wishes and Caviar Dreams. Unlicensed Contractor Takes the Cake

    New York State Trial Court: Non-Cumulation Provision in Excess Policies Mandates “All Sums” Allocation

    Factual Issues Prevent Summary Judgment Determination on Coverage for Additional Insured

    Preserving your Rights to Secure Payment on Construction Projects (with Examples)

    Florida Project Could Help Address Runoff, Algae Blooms

    Pollution Exclusion Does Not Apply To Concrete Settling Dust

    How to Build a Coronavirus Hospital in Ten Days

    The Shifting Sands of Alternative Dispute Resolution

    Homeowner may pursue negligence claim for construction defect, Oregon Supreme Court holds

    Charlotte, NC Homebuilder Accused of Bilking Money from Buyers

    Sean Shecter to Join American University Environmental and Energy Law Alumni Advisory Council

    Warranty Reform Legislation for Condominiums – Unfair Practices used by Developers and Builders to avoid Warranty Responsibility for Construction Defects in Newly Constructed Condominiums

    Congratulations to Wilke Fleury’s 2023 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!!

    Sometimes you Need to Consider the Coblentz Agreement

    Improper Classification Under Davis Bacon Can Be Costly

    Contract Disruptions: Navigating Supply Constraints and Labor Shortages

    Subcontractors on Washington Public Projects can now get their Retainage Money Sooner

    Property Insurance Exclusion for Constant or Repeated Leakage of Water

    California Home Sellers Have Duty to Disclose Construction Defect Lawsuits

    California Supreme Court Finds that When it Comes to Intentional Interference Claims, Public Works Projects are Just Different, Special Even

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

    Reminder: The Devil is in the Mechanic’s Lien Details
    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

    Third Circuit Follows Pennsylvania Law - Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship Does Not Arise from an Occurrence

    May 10, 2013 —
    The Third Circuit followed Pennsylvania law in determining that damage caused by faulty workmanship did not arise from an occurrence. Zurich Am. Ins. Co. v. R. M. Shoemaker Co., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 6093 (3d Cir. March 27, 2013). The County sued R. M. Shoemaker, alleging faulty construction of an addition to a correctional institution. The County alleged Shoemaker negligently supervised its subcontractor, thereby permitting the subcontractor to engage in willful misconduct, resulting in damage to structural elements of the correctional institution. The County alleged that Shoemaker's negligence permitted water to intrude, damaging the electrical systems, acoustic ceilings and miscellaneous equipment. Zurich sought a declaratory judgment that it was not required to defend or indemnify Shoemaker. The district court granted Zurich summary judgment. Relying on Pennsylvania law, the district court found that the allegations in the underlying action did not arise from an occurrence. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Judge Halts Sale of Brazilian Plywood

    June 06, 2022 —
    A permanent injunction was issued by Judge Roy Altman in a Ft. Lauderdale federal court on May 24th that requires the revocation of all PS 1 certificates that were issued by PFS-TECO to more than a dozen Brazilian mills that produced structural plywood for the U.S. market, reported Business Wire. “This case highlights how a few bad actors profited by essentially looking the other way while substandard, and potentially dangerous plywood was imported into the U.S. and used to build homes and businesses,” Michael Haglund, counsel representing the U.S. Structural Plywood Integrity Coalition, of Haglund Kelley, LLP, told Business Wire. Building codes throughout the U.S. require the use of PS 1 structural plywood in construction. "If product standards are not being met, there can be serious implications for all homes constructed using those substandard wood panel products," Tyler Freres, VP of Sales for Freres Engineered Wood, told CDJ. "Contractors and homeowners should be able to trust that U.S. certification agencies are doing their due diligence to accurately inspect panels, ensuring consumers' health and safety." The U.S. Structural Plywood Integrity Coalition, including nine family-owned U.S. plywood manufacturers, alleged that PFS-TECO falsely certified that plywood from Brazil met U.S. structural integrity requirements. This substandard plywood has been used throughout the U.S. In particular, it was used during the hurricane reconstruction efforts in Florida and Puerto Rico due to its cheaper price. In 2021, Brazilian plywood made up 11% of the U.S. supply with nearly 1.2 billion square feet sold. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Bright-Line Changes: Prompt Payment Act Trends

    September 16, 2024 —
    Untimely payment by the owner for contract work and additional work on construction projects can place an unfair financial burden on contractors and subcontractors. Most states have attempted to eliminate or mitigate this inequity in construction contracting through Prompt Payment Acts that govern payment deadlines and provide remedies for untimely payment. This article addresses the legislative trends aimed at minimizing the risk of non-payment, overdue payment, and withholding retainage in favor of downstream parties to a construction contract. Fortifying Contractor Protections with “Bright-Line” Language Over the last decade, states have been tightening prompt payment laws by replacing broad, general statutory language with bright-line rules. What is a bright-line rule? A specific or definite figure, a quantifiable marker—i.e., something owners, contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers should be aware of. Practically speaking, the more bright-line a prompt payment statute is, the greater the likelihood it will affect a construction project in your state. A standard form construction contract, if not reviewed carefully, can create conflicts or confusion if it gives a party more leeway on payment deadlines than the applicable Prompt Payment Act. For example, consider an owner-issued Construction Change Directive (“CCD”) that requires a contractor to commence additional work immediately while a formal change order is negotiated. Consequently, a CCD can push financial burdens downstream, whether inadvertently or not, and may conflict with statutory payment deadlines. Nevertheless, an owner can be justified in its utilization of a CCD to maintain the project schedule. How should the parties competing interests be resolved? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Peckar & Abramson, P.C.

    Insurance Alert: Insurer Delay Extends Time to Repair or Replace Damaged Property

    November 26, 2014 —
    In Stephens & Stephens XII v. Fireman's Fund Ins. (No. A135938, filed November 24, 2014), the plaintiffs obtained property insurance on a warehouse. Within a month, it was discovered to be stripped of all wiring and metal. Fireman's Fund paid for emergency repairs but nothing more, concerned that the damage had occurred outside the policy period. The policy provided for valuation of either "replacement cost," meaning the expenditure required to replace the damaged property with "new property of comparable material and quality," or "actual cash value," defined as the actual, depreciated value of the damaged property. For replacement cost, Fireman’s Fund was not required to pay "until the lost or damaged property is actually repaired ... as soon as reasonably possible after the loss or damage," and only "[t]he amount [the insured] actually spend[s]...." In the subsequent bad faith lawsuit, the jury awarded the full cost of repair, despite there being no repairs. The appeals court reversed, holding that there was no right to an immediate award for the costs of repairing the damage; however, the court nonetheless held that the insured was entitled to a "conditional judgment," awarding those costs if repairs were actually made. Reprinted courtesy of Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com; Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Lessons from the Sept. 19 Mexico Earthquake

    October 19, 2017 —
    On the 32nd anniversary of the magnitude-8.1 earthquake that devastated Mexico City on Sept. 19, 1985, 41 U.S. seismic experts were in a workshop near Los Angeles, polishing a new tool to identify “killer” buildings: non-ductile concrete structures that often perform poorly in quakes. Suddenly, the attendees started getting pager alerts from the U.S. Geological Survey: A magnitude-7.1 quake had struck about 120 kilometers from Mexico City. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, ENR
    Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 01/26/22

    February 07, 2022 —
    The future of traditional real estate skills for virtual land buys is questioned, China’s property sector might experience policy easing, U.S. commercial real estate sales set records in 2021, and more.
    • As the platforms and business case for virtual land buys mature, the future of traditional real estate skills remains unclear when it comes to managing virtual ownership and development. (Patrick Sisson, Bisnow)
    • China’s real estate sector is likely to see “significant easing” in the policies that govern it after stricter financing rules for property development set in 2020 were met with debt, causing a contraction in the market. (Reuters)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Comparing Contracts: A Review of the AIA 201 and ConsensusDocs - Part I

    March 22, 2018 —
    Here’s a helpful comparison of and analysis of some important contract sections in the AIA 201 (2007 and 2017 versions) and ConsensusDocs (2014 and 2017 versions). While not intended to be all inclusive, this summary comparison of the contract documents will run as a three-part series. Part I covers Financial Assurances, Design Risk, Project Management and Contract Administration. Part II will cover Schedule/Time, Consequential Damages/LDs, Claims and Disputes/ADR. Part III will cover Insurance and Indemnification and Payment. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
    • What assurances are there that the owner can pay for the project?
    • The Contractor should have the right to request and obtain proof that the Owner has funding sufficient to pay for the Work. The provision should also provide that the Contractor may terminate the Contract if the Owner refuses to allow a review of funding documents, or should the Contractor reasonably determine that the Owner does not have sufficient funds to pay for the Work.
    Relevant Sections:
    • A201 2007 Section 2.2.1; 2017 Section 2.2.1-2.2.2 A201
    • 2014 & 2017 ConsensusDocs 200: Section 4.2
    AIA:
    • Section 2.2.1 A201 2007 & 2017: Both editions require the Owner, upon Contractor’s written request, to provide, “reasonable evidence that the Owner has made financial arrangements to fulfill the Owner’s obligations under the Contract.” Thereafter, the Contractor may only request such evidence if (1) the Owner fails to make payments; (2) a change in the Work materially changes the Contract Sum; or (3) the Contractor identifies in writing a reasonable concern regarding the Owner’s ability to make payment when due. If the Owner does not comply, the Contractor may stop work.
    • Additionally, A201 2017 Section 2.2.2 awards costs to the Contractor for demobilization and remobilization.
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Sams , Kenney & Sams and Amanda Cox, Kenney & Sams Mr. Sams may be contacted at mpsams@KandSlegal.com Ms. Cox may be contacted at ajcox@KandSlegal.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa Rolle Wins Summary Judgment on Behalf of Contract Utility Company in Personal Injury Action

    April 25, 2023 —
    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa Rolle obtained summary judgment on behalf of a contract utility company (“Utility Company”) in a matter brought before the New York Supreme Court, Queens County. In the complaint, the Plaintiff alleged that she sustained injuries as a result of a trip and fall accident where the Plaintiff’s foot allegedly went into a hole in the grass strip abutting the sidewalk adjacent to a premises located in Queens, NY. The Plaintiff claimed that the defect in the sidewalk was caused by the removal of a utility pole at the curb strip that was not correctly backfilled. The Defendant Utility Company is in the business of inspecting, treating, and repairing utility and telecommunication structures, including wooden utility poles. TLSS was successfully able to establish that, three years prior to the accident, the Utility Company was retained to conduct a visual inspection of the subject pole. However, the Utility Company does not and has not owned, installed, removed or replaced in-service utility poles in New York or at the location of the alleged accident. Further, TLSS established that the Utility Company did not service or remove the subject pole at the accident site or backfill the curb strip. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lisa M. Rolle, Traub Lieberman
    Ms. Rolle may be contacted at lrolle@tlsslaw.com