BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design 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


    Residential Construction Rise Expected to Continue

    Thank You to Virginia Super Lawyers

    California Supreme Court Allows Claim Under Unfair Competition Statute To Proceed

    State Supreme Court Cases Highlight Importance of Wording in Earth Movement Exclusions

    Home Builder Doesn’t See Long Impact from Hurricane

    Common Law Indemnification - A Primer

    Manhattan Condo Resale Prices Reach Record High

    Purse Tycoon Aims at Ultra-Rich With $85 Million Home

    Sick Leave, Paid Time Off, and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act

    Nondelegable Duties

    Strict Rules for Home Remodel Contracts in California

    New Jersey Supreme Court Holding Impacts Allocation of Damages in Cases Involving Successive Tortfeasors

    County Elects Not to Sue Over Construction Defect Claims

    Arizona Supreme Court Holds a Credit Bid at a Trustee’s Sale Should Not be Credited to a Title Insurer Under a Standard Lender’s Title Policy To the Extent the Bid Exceeds the Collateral’s Fair Market Value

    Is a Violation of a COVID-19 Order the Basis For Civil Liability?

    M&A Representation and Warranty Insurance Considerations in the Wake of the Coronavirus Pandemic

    Proving Contractor Licensure in California. The Tribe Has Spoken

    The Three L’s of Real Estate Have New, Urgent Meaning

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    2023’s Bank Failures: What Contractors, Material Suppliers and Equipment Lessors Can Do to Protect Themselves

    GRSM Named Among 2025 “Best Law Firms” by Best Lawyers

    Eleventh Circuit Finds Professional Services Exclusion Applies to Construction Management Activities

    Reinventing the Building Envelope – Interview with Gordon A Geddes

    Ex-Ironworkers Local President Sentenced to Prison Term for Extortion

    Pulled from the Swamp: EPA Wetland Determination Now Judicially Reviewable

    Safeguarding the U.S. Construction Industry from Unfair Competition Abroad

    A Matter Judged: Subrogating Insurers Should Beware of Prior Suits Involving the Insured

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud

    Property Damage to Non-Defective Work Is Covered

    The Proposed House Green New Deal Resolution

    The Quiet War Between California’s Charter Cities and the State’s Prevailing Wage Law

    Owners and Contractors are Liable for Injuries Caused by their Independent Contractors under the “Peculiar Risk Doctrine”

    U.S. Judge Says Wal-Mart Must Face Mexican-Bribe Claims

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

    New York Court Holds Insurer Can Rely on Exclusions After Incorrectly Denying Defense

    Bad Faith Claim for Inadequate Investigation Does Not Survive Summary Judgment

    Structural Health Check-Ups Needed but Are Too Infrequent

    Fifth Circuit Confirms: Insurer Must Defend Despite Your Work/Your Product Exclusion

    North Carolina Soil & Groundwater Case to be Heard by U.S. Supreme Court

    Eminent Domain Bomb Threats Made on $775M Alabama Highway Project

    Locating Construction Equipment with IoT and Mobile Technology

    Contractors Can No Longer Make Roof Repairs Following Their Own Inspections

    Home Builders and Developers Beware: SC Supreme Court Beats Up Hybrid Arbitration Clauses Mercilessly

    Pennsylvania Homeowner Blames Cracks on Chipolte Construction

    Update to Washington State Covid-19 Guidance

    Appropriation Bill Cuts Military Construction Spending

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured In Northern California Super Lawyers 2021!

    New Survey Reveals Present-Day Risks of Asbestos Exposure in America - 38% in High-Risk Jobs, 47% Vulnerable through Second-Hand Exposure

    Gardeners in the City of the Future: An Interview with Eric Baczuk

    Last Call: Tokyo Iconic Okura Hotel Meets the Wrecking Ball
    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

    Terms of Your Teaming Agreement Matter

    February 11, 2019 —
    These days in construction, and other pursuits, teaming agreements have become a great method for large and small contractors to work together to take advantage of various contract and job requirements from minority participation to veteran ownership. With the proliferation of these agreements, parties must be careful in how they draft the terms of these agreements. Without proper drafting, the parties risk unenforceability of the teaming agreement in the evewnt of a dispute. One potential pitfall in drafting is an “agreement to agree” or an agreement to negotiate a separate contract in the future. This type of pitfall was illustrated in the case of InDyne Inc. v. Beacon Occupational Health & Safety Services Inc. out of the Eastern District of Virginia. In this case, InDyne and Beacon entered into a teaming agreement that provided that InDyne as Prime would seek to use Beacon, the Sub, in the event that InDyne was awarded a contract using Beacon’s numbers. The teaming agreement further provided:
    The agreement shall remain in effect until the first of the following shall occur: … (g) inability of the Prime and the Sub, after negotiating in good faith, to reach agreement on the terms of a subcontract offered by the Prime, in accordance with this agreement.
    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

    New Jersey School Blames Leaks on Construction Defects, May Sue

    January 28, 2013 —
    The Carlstadt Board of Education recently commissioned a investigation into the water leaks at Carlstadt Public School. The report has not been released in full, but redacted board minutes make reference to "a lack of waterproofing, drainage and clogged or buried weep holes." The investigation is ongoing and the board's business administrator, Pamela Baxley, states that its "ability to recover damages in potential litigation may be impacted should this information be released prior to the conclusion of their investigation." The building in question opened in April 2007, and the leaking began that October. The contractor has fixed leaks, but further leaks have occurred. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Harmon Tower Demolition on Hold Due to Insurer

    November 27, 2013 —
    Permission for CityCenter to demolish Harmon Tower over claims of dangerous construction defects have been withdrawn by the judge in the case after the building’s insurer said it needed more time to investigate. After they were granted permission to demolish the building on August 23, CityCenter filed a claim of total loss with their insurer FM Global on August 27. Now FM Global is saying that they need to further inspect the building. Meanwhile, a demolition contractor has already gained approval to start removing the exterior glass. And things stand, it looks as if that won’t be happening on the planned date of December 2. CityCenter contends that FM Global has already done their inspections, describing FM Global’s prior actions as “the most extensive investigation of anyone,” according to Mark Ferrario, an attorney for CityCenter. Also, the initial plan to implode the building has been rejected. Should demolition proceed, the building will be dismantled floor by floor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 38 White and Williams Lawyers

    September 13, 2021 —
    White and Williams is proud to announce that 30 lawyers were recognized in the 2022 edition of The Best Lawyers in America® 2022 and eight were recognized as “Ones to Watch.” Inclusion in Best Lawyers® is based entirely on peer-review. The methodology is designed to capture, as accurately as possible, the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical area and legal practice area. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    “It Just Didn’t Add Up!”

    November 05, 2024 —
    Overturning arbitration awards in court is difficult. One of the few bases for a challenge to an award (under the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. 10(a)(4), as well as most state arbitration laws) is where the arbitrator is alleged to have “exceeded [his/her] powers” afforded the arbitrator by whatever rules and agreements are in place for the arbitration. Obviously, this places a burden on the arbitrator to “color within the lines” when serving as arbitrator and issuing rulings in the case. “After extensive discovery and a 10-day hearing, the Tribunal rendered a 142-page” award, whereupon the parties both sought to have the arbitrators correct what the parties agreed was an error in the award – increasing the award by $47,710. One of the parties, however, went further, urging that the arbitrators “erroneously included damages for claims related to production revenue” that occurred before a certain date. According to the court, that party was urging that “the Tribunal erred by factoring into its award damages related to Claims 2 and 3, which the Tribunal never substantially addressed.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Baltimore Bridge Collapse Occurred After Ship Lost Power Multiple Times

    May 28, 2024 —
    The container ship that rammed into Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge in March lost power multiple times on both the day of the fatal accident and the day before, according to a preliminary report. The Dali, which sails under the flag of Singapore, lost power twice on March 26 before hitting the bridge and causing it to collapse, killing six construction workers who were on the structure at the time. The first blackout was caused when electrical breakers powering most of the vessel’s equipment and lighting unexpectedly tripped, the National Transportation Safety Board said in a report Tuesday. The crew eventually was able to restore electrical power, but then a second blackout occurred only 0.2 miles from the bridge. They regained power, but the ship lacked the propulsion needed to avoid striking the bridge, safety inspectors found. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Allyson Versprille, Bloomberg

    Discovery Requests in Bad Faith Litigation Considered by Court

    June 10, 2015 —
    The federal district court considered a variety of discovery requests by the insured in a bad faith case against State Farm. Stephens v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 2015 WL 1638516 (M.D. Pa. April 13, 2015). The insured plaintiff was a quadriplegic. His complaint alleged that he notified State Farm, through its agent, that he would have to leave his residence for medical treatment and intended to rent the home while he received care for his disabling condition. The complaint further alleged that the insured was told by State Farm's agent that his insurance would remain unaffected by his departure while he sought medical care. Nevertheless, when the insured reported loss due to vandalism and water damage at his home, State Farm relied upon his departure from the residence to cancel his insurance. In discovery, the insured requested three categories of documents from State Farm. First, he requested State Farm's claims manuals, guidelines and instructions materials relating to insurance claims like those made by this insured. Second, the plaintiff requested performance reviews and performance incentive programs for all of State Farm's employees who played a role in decisions in this case from 2009 to the present. Finally, the plaintiff demanded that State Farm compile information relating to other insurance lawsuits brought against State Farm involving theft, vandalism and water damage claims, as well as all lawsuits or complaints regarding the conduct of this particular claims adjuster. When the materials were not produced, plaintiff filed a motion to compel. 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

    The 2023 Term of the Supreme Court: Administrative and Regulatory Law Rulings

    December 03, 2024 —
    It is instructive to review the Supreme Court’s record in its most recent term, concentrating on regulatory and administrative law cases, which are usually back-burner issues. But not this term. The Supreme Court began the current term on October 7, 2024. The Court has already chosen many cases to review in the new term, and it promises to be as interesting as the 2023 term, which produced several significant rulings affecting regulatory and administrative law, chiefly the Loper Bright Enterprises ruling. Loper Bright overturned the Court’s landmark administrative law ruling of Chevron, USA v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984). The Background to Loper Bright In 1984, the Supreme Court decided Chevron USA, Inc. v. National Resource Defense Council. (See 467 U.S. 839 (1984).) The unanimous decision, written by Justice Stevens, reversed then-D.C. Circuit Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s ruling that set aside EPA’s Clean Air Act “bubble policy,” which was intended to provide regulatory relief from certain EPA permitting requirements. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com