BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projects
    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


    Triple Points to the English Court of Appeal for Clarifying the Law on LDs

    Engineering Report Finds More Investigation Needed of Balconies at New Jersey Condo

    Florida Governor Signs Construction Defect Amendments into Law

    Is Your Website Accessible And Are You Liable If It Isn't?

    The Difference Between Routine Document Destruction and Spoliation

    No Coverage For Construction Defect Under Illinois Law

    E-Commerce Logistics Test Limits of Tilt-Up Construction

    Drones Used Despite Uncertain Legal Consequences

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Gets Construction Defect Bill to Committee

    The Most Expensive Travel Construction Flops

    Effects of Amendment to Florida's Statute of Repose on the Products Completed Operations Hazard

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Tear Down This Wall!”

    What’s the Best Way to “Use” a Construction Attorney?

    Double-Wide World Cup Seats Available to 6-Foot, 221-Pound Fans

    Bright-Line Changes: Prompt Payment Act Trends

    Texas Central Wins Authority to Take Land for High-Speed Rail System

    'Regluing' Oregon State's Showcase for Mass Timber

    Firm Leadership – New Co-Chairs for the Construction Law Practice Group

    Partners Jeremy S. Macklin and Mark F. Wolfe Secure Seventh Circuit Win for Insurer Client in Late Notice Dispute

    A Lack of Sophistication With the Construction Contract Can Play Out In an Ugly Dispute

    Trump Order Waives Project Environment Rules to Push COVID-19 Recovery

    Denver Officials Clamor for State Construction Defect Law

    The Sensible Resurgence of the Multigenerational Home

    Is the Issuance of a City Use Permit Referable? Not When It Is an Administrative Act

    Massachusetts Judge Holds That Insurer Breached Its Duty To Defend Lawsuit After Chemical Spill

    Construction Law Breaking News: California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Beacon Residential Community Association

    Drafting a Contractual Arbitration Provision

    Structural Health Check-Ups Needed but Are Too Infrequent

    New York Federal Court Enforces Construction Exclusion, Rejects Reimbursement Claim

    Californians Swarm Few Listings Cuts to Affordable Homes

    WA Supreme Court Allows Property Owner to Sue Engineering Firm for Lost Profits

    West Coast Casualty’s Quarter Century of Service

    Payne & Fears LLP Recognized by U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers in 2023 “Best Law Firms” Rankings

    California Trial Court Clarifies Application of SB800 Roofing Standards and Expert’s Opinions

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (4/17/24) – Travel & Tourism Reach All-Time High, President Biden Emphasizes Housing in SOTU Address, and State Transportation Projects Under Scrutiny

    Conflict of Interest Accusations may Spark Lawsuit Against City and City Manager

    Make Your Business Great Again: Steven Cvitanovic Authors Construction Today Article

    Biden’s Buy American Policy & What it Means for Contractors

    The Leaning Tower of San Francisco

    Construction Executives Should Be Dusting Off Employee Handbooks

    Security on Large Construction Projects. The Payment Remedy You Probably Never Heard of

    Concurrent Causation Doctrine Applies Where Natural and Man-made Perils Combine to Create Loss

    School District Client Advisory: Civility is not an Option, It is a Duty

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    Texas Supreme Court Defines ‘Plaintiff’ in 3rd-Party Claims Against Design Professionals

    Coverage For Advertising Injury Barred by Prior Publication Exclusion

    Architect Named Grand Custom Home Winner for Triangular Design

    Defense Owed for Product Liability Claims That Do Not Amount to Faulty Workmanship

    Official Tried to Influence Judge against Shortchanged Subcontractor

    2015 California Construction Law Update
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Unravel the Facts Before Asserting FDUTPA and Tortious Interference Claims

    September 05, 2022 —
    CMR Construction and Roofing, LLC v. UCMS, LLC, 2022 WL 3012298 (11th Cir. 2022) is an interesting opinion where a contractor asserted a Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (known by its acronym “FDUTPA”) claim and tortious interference claims (with a contract and with an advantageous business relationship) against another contractor, i.e., a competitor, that were dismissed from the get-go. It is an opinion worthy of interest based on the claims asserted against a competitor. Throwing around FDUTPA and tortious interference may sound good from an intimidation standpoint, but pleading and then proving these claims are a lot different than loosely throwing around these claims. Before filing a lawsuit for FDUTPA and tortious interference, spend time unraveling the facts and the chronology. Do not rely on conclusory allegations simply to check the box regarding required elements to plead while ignoring the actual facts that support the allegations. These are fact-based claims and it is imperative the facts are fully known from on the onset so that they can be strategically pled and pursued. In this matter, a contractor, the plaintiff, was hired by a condominium association around April 2018 to repair damage caused by a hurricane which included roofing work. The association was going to have its insurer pay its contractor. In May 2020, the association hired a new contractor to perform the same work (the “new contractor”). The association then directed the plaintiff to cease work since it hired the new contractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Another Reminder that Your Construction Contract Language Matters

    June 06, 2018 —
    Here at Musings, I have often (some might say too often) discussed the fact that in Virginia (as well as other places), your construction contract language will be strictly enforced. I have also discussed the need for attorney fees provisions as well as other language in order to mitigate your risk as a contractor. A recent case from the City of Roanoke Circuit Court discussed both of these principals and their intersection. In LAM Enterprises, LLC v. Roofing Solutions, Inc., the Roanoke Court looked at a contract between LAM and Roofing Solutions, Inc. that contained two provisions of the construction contract between the parties. The first provision limited the liability of Roofing Solutions to the contract price. The second provision is a relatively typical “prevailing party” attorney fees provision in which the winner of any lawsuit would be entitled to collect its attorney fees. For the specific language of these provisions, I commend the opinion linked above for your reading. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Be Careful How You Terminate: Terminating for Convenience May Limit Your Future Rights

    January 19, 2017 —
    Many construction contracts contain a termination clause that allows a contractor to be terminated either for convenience or for cause. Termination for convenience and termination for cause clauses have been discussed previously on the blog here, here and here. The distinction between a termination for convenience or for cause is an important one. If a contractor is terminated for convenience, the rights of the party who has terminated the contractor for convenience could be limited in the future. This is specifically true as to any defects in the terminated contractor’s work that are discovered after the termination for convenience. This issue was addressed in an Oregon Court of Appeals case where a general contractor attempted to recover costs incurred in correcting a terminated subcontractor’s work after the subcontractor was terminated for convenience. Shelter Prods. v. Steel Wood Constr., Inc., 257 Or. App 382 (2013). In that case, the subcontractor sued the general contractor for its termination expenses. The general contractor asserted an offset/backcharge claim for damages incurred by the general contractor in correcting the subcontractor’s defective work. The general contractor had incurred the costs after it had terminated the subcontractor. The general contractor did not notify the subcontractor that its work was defective and did not give the subcontractor an opportunity to cure before the repairs were completed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brett M. Hill, Ahlers & Cressman, PLLC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at bhill@ac-lawyers.com

    Finding of No Coverage Overturned Due to Lack of Actual Policy

    March 18, 2019 —
    The Appellate Division overturned a verdict for the insurer when the actual policy was never introduced at trial. Pennsylvania Lumbermens Mut. Ins. Co. v. B&F Land Dev. Corp., 2019 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 264 (N.Y. App. Div. Jan 16, 2018). The decedent was killed when he fell through a skylight while working on a premises owned by B&F Land Development Corporation. The estate sued B&F for wrongful death. B&F tendered to its carrier, Pennsylvania Lumbermens Mutual (PLM). PLM issued a reservations of rights. It later denied coverage because the location of the loss was not a location listed on the policy, an exclusion barred coverage for bodily injury arising out of B&F's ongoing operations conducted by it or on its behalf, and the loss was not reported to PLM as soon as practicable. PLM sued B&F and the estate for a declaratory judgment that it had no duty to defend or indemnify. A default judgment was entered against B&F after it failed to answer. Trial proceeded against the estate 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

    Bridge Disaster - Italy’s Moment of Truth

    September 10, 2018 —
    The tragedy of modern Italy, so beautiful yet so decrepit, can be told through its bridges. Italians love to point to the Romans as the first engineers – the country boasts some of the world’s oldest viaducts. It’s a source of national pride that blinded the nation to the reality of today, where decades of neglect led to a moment of reckoning. The collapse of the Morandi bridge in Genoa, leaving 43 dead, was followed by the usual mud-slinging, including within a tenuous ruling coalition and more importantly, to soul-searching. Meant to last 100 years, the bridge was hated more than loved – everyone who crossed it felt unsafe. Reprinted courtesy of Flavia Krause-Jackson, Bloomberg and Kathleen Hunter, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Heads I Win, Tails You Lose. Court Finds Indemnity Provision Went Too Far

    May 25, 2020 —
    We all love David and Goliath stories. The underdog winning against the far stronger (and dastardly) opponent. Think Rocky Balboa versus Ivan Drago, the Star Wars Rebellion versus the Galatic Empire, Indiana Jones versus a good chunk of the Third Reich. And now, we have Margaret Williams. The Story of Margaret Williams and her LLC The story, told in Long Beach Unified School District v. Margaret Williams, LLC, Case No. B290069 (December 9, 2019), is about Margaret Williams. Ms. Williams (we’ll just call her “Margaret” going forward because it just sounds better when telling a story) worked for nearly ten years full-time for the Long Beach Unified School District, toiling day in and day out doing construction management and environmental compliance work, including work involving the clean up of material at a school construction site contaminated with arsenic. Although she worked full-time for the District for nearly ten years, she wasn’t an employee. Rather, she was a contractor. And, on top of it all, as a condition of working for the District, the District required that she form a company in order to contract with the District. According to Margaret, “In order to work with the District, I was directed . . . to form a corporation or partnership. This was the only way I could work for the District: I could not enter into a contract with the District as an individual.” So, in 2006, she formed a company, simply called Margaret Williams, LLC. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    2018 California Construction Law Update

    January 10, 2018 —
    The California State Legislature introduced 2,495 bills during the first year of the 2017-2018 Legislative Session. Of these, 859 were signed into law. While much political attention was focused on several California laws that could be viewed as California’s rebuke of Washington, including California’s legalization of marijuana, enactment of “sanctuary state” legislation, and bills focused on climate change, 2017 also saw the enactment of a package of bills intended to address the state’s housing affordability crises (for a great summary of these bills see Wendel Rosen’s Landuse Group’s recent article Slate of New Housing Bills Takes Effect January 1, 2018 ), as well as a range of other bills of interest to the construction industry including bills related construction financing, alternative project delivery methods, and solar construction. Each of the bills discussed below took effect on January 1, 2018, except as otherwise stated. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel, Rosen, Black, Dean, LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    The Future Looks Bright for Construction in 2015

    January 21, 2015 —
    Associated Builders and Contractors’ Construction Executive has painted a rosy outlook for the upcoming year. ABC’s Chief Economist predicts a 7.4 percent increase in total nonresidential spending for 2015. This is great news for a construction industry that has climbing out of the recession through fits and starts over the last several months. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com