BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut civil engineer 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


    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (4/10/24) – Hotels Integrate AI, Baby-Boomers Stay Put, and Insurance Affects Housing Market

    Paycheck Protection Program Forgiveness Requirements Adjusted

    Experts Weigh In on Bilingual Best Practices for Jobsites

    Superior Court Of Pennsylvania Holds Curb Construction Falls Within The Scope Of CASPA

    Court Grants Partial Summary Judgment on Conversion Claim Against Insurer

    The EPA’s Renovation, Repair, and Painting Rule: Are Contractors Aware of It?

    The Fair Share Act Impacts the Strategic Planning of a Jury Trial

    St Louis County Approves Settlement in Wrongful Death Suit

    Partner John Toohey and Senior Associate Sammy Daboussi Obtain a Complete Defense Verdict for Their Contractor Client!

    The Independent Tort Doctrine (And Its Importance)

    Will Future Megacities Be a Marvel or a Mess? Look at New Delhi

    Texas “Loser Pays” Law May Benefit Construction Insurers

    Cause Still Unclear in March Retaining Wall Collapse on $900M NJ Interchange

    Commercial Construction Heating Up

    Barratt Said to Suspend Staff as Contract Probe Continues

    Insured Versus Insured Clause Does Not Bar Coverage

    Replacing Coal Plants with Renewables Is Cheaper 80% of the Time

    More Broad-Based Expansion for Construction Industry Expected in 2015

    Why Are Developers Still Pouring Billions Into Waterlogged Miami?

    New Evidence Code Requires Attorney to Obtain Written Acknowledgement that the Confidential Nature of Mediation has been Disclosed to the Client

    Coloradoans Deserve More Than Hyperbole and Rhetoric from Plaintiffs’ Attorneys; We Deserve Attainable Housing

    OSHA Updates: New Submission Requirements for Injury and Illness Records

    Bertha – The Tunnel is Finished, but Her Legacy Continues

    Court Concludes That COVID-19 Losses Can Qualify as “Direct Physical Loss”

    Construction Defect Coverage Barred Under Business Risk Exclusion in Colorado

    Reinsurer Must Reimburse Health Care Organization for Settlement Costs

    Are Construction Defect Laws Inhibiting the Development of Attached Ownership Housing in Colorado?

    Does a Contractor (or Subcontractor) Have to Complete its Work to File a Mechanics Lien

    Colorado Springs may be Next Colorado City to Add Construction Defects Ordinance

    How Does Weather Impact a Foundation?

    Blue-Sky Floods Take a Rising Toll for Businesses

    Congratulations to Karen Baytosh and August Hotchkin on Their Recognition as 2021 Nevada Legal Elites!

    OSHA Issues COVID-19 Guidance for Construction Industry

    How the Parking Garage Conquered the City

    One-Upmanship by Contractors In Prevailing Wage Decision Leads to a Bad Result for All . . . Perhaps

    Nevada Supreme Court Rejects Class Action Status, Reducing Homes from 1000 to 71

    Housing Markets Continue to Improve

    Appellate Court Endorses Discretionary Test for Vicarious Disqualification of Law Firms Due To New Attorney’s Conflict

    Florida Duty to Defend a Chapter 558 Right to Repair Notice

    Insurance Coverage Litigation Section to Present at Hawaii State Bar Convention

    CDJ’s #4 Topic of the Year: KB Home Greater Los Angeles, Inc. v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County

    Detect and Prevent Construction Fraud

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

    Will European Insurers’ Positive Response to COVID-19 Claims Influence US Insurers?

    Mold Due to Construction Defects May Temporarily Close Fire Station

    Substituting Materials and Failure to Comply with Contractual Requirements

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    Are You Taking Full Advantage of Available Reimbursements for Assisting Injured Workers?

    Governor Brown Signs Legislation Aimed at Curbing ADA Accessibility Abuses in California

    SB 939 Proposes Moratorium On Unlawful Detainer Actions For Commercial Tenants And Allows Tenants Who Can't Renegotiate Their Lease In Good Faith To Terminate Their Lease Without Liability
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Perez Broke Records … But Should He Have Settled Earlier?

    February 19, 2024 —
    In 2021, Mark Perez’ Labor Law 240(1) lawsuit made legal news by breaking the record of the highest appellate-sustained pain and suffering award in New York history. While that record was short-lived, it still maintains its place as New York’s highest-ever pain and suffering award for a brain injury. This January 17th, the Appellate Division, First Department revisited the litigation but, this time, in a dispute between Perez and his then-lawyer, Ben Morelli and the Morelli Law Firm. Mr. Perez claims breach of contract over a 10% additional contingency fee charge related to the Perez v. Live Nation appeal and breach of fiduciary duty by his counsel in failing to convey settlement offers during the lifetime of the case. The Morelli firm counters, among other things, that the prior settlement offers – a $30 million offer during the 2019 trial and intermediate sums during the appellate stage – were still lower than the ultimate $55 million settlement. No harm, Mr. Morelli argues, and thus no foul in failing to convey the offers. But is that so? Did Mark Perez ultimately receive more money in his $55 million settlement than from the $30 million settlement offer mid-trial? Despite the glaring $25 million difference, the surprising calculations show that Perez would have been financially better off taking the $30 million mid-trial settlement. Reprinted courtesy of Sofya Uvaydov, Kahana Feld and John F. Watkins, Kahana Feld Ms. Uvaydov may be contacted at suvaydov@kahanafeld.com Mr. Watkins may be contacted at jwatkins@kahanafeld.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ireland Said to Plan Home Loans Limits to Prevent Bubble

    October 01, 2014 —
    Ireland’s central bank plans to impose limits for the first time on how much banks can lend home buyers as real estate values soar again in the home of western Europe’s worst property collapse, two people with knowledge of the matter said. The regulator is preparing to publish a consultation paper on its proposals within weeks, said one of the people, who asked not to be named, as the matter is private. Banks and lobby groups will have a chance to comment on the plans, which center on introducing loan-to-value and loan-to-income restrictions. A spokesman for the central bank in Dublin declined to comment. Irish homes prices are surging even as banks grapple with the aftermath of mortgage crisis that forced the government to bail out most of the nation’s lenders. A quarter of the country’s owner-occupier home loans are in arrears or had their terms eased. Loans granted during the boom for more than 85 percent of the property value were most likely to default in the wake of the crash, central bank economists said today. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joe Brennan, Bloomberg
    Mr. Brennan may be contacted at jbrennan29@bloomberg.net

    Can I Be Required to Mediate, Arbitrate or Litigate a California Construction Dispute in Some Other State?

    September 19, 2022 —
    It is not uncommon in the construction industry for an out-of-state general contractor to include a provision in a subcontract requiring a California subcontractor to resolve disputes outside the state of California, even though the work is to be performed within California. Fortunately, most California subcontractors are immune from this tactic. California law generally prohibits clauses requiring subcontractors to travel outside California to resolve construction disputes. California Code of Civil Procedure Section 410.42, [CCP 410.42 Link] renders “void and unenforceable,” any provision in a contract that “purports to require any dispute to be litigated, arbitrated, or otherwise determined outside this state,” so long as the contract is “between the contractor and a subcontractor with principal offices in the state, for the construction of a public or private work of improvement in this state.” Similarly, this law voids any similar contractual term that might prevent the California subcontractor from commencing an action, obtaining a judgment, or resolving its dispute in the courts of California. 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

    Design-Build Contracting for County Road Projects

    September 19, 2022 —
    Effective July 1, 2022, counties may execute design-build contracts for transportation-related projects that include buildings, bridges and approaches, rail corridors, technology deployments, and limited- or controlled-access project, or projects that may be constructed within existing rights of way when the work is clearly defined or when significant savings may result in project delivery time.[1] Additionally, counties may combine any environmental services, utility-relocation services, right-of-way services, design services, and construction phases of a public road or other project into a single design-build contract. Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook Jr., Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Common Construction Contract Provisions: No-Damages-for-Delay Clause

    March 16, 2017 —
    In continuing our series on common contract provisions found in construction contracts, this post highlights no-damages-for-delay clauses. Parties to a contract – particularly a construction contract – may agree that the performance of the contract must occur within a set amount of time. When a party is delayed in performing a contract, it may incur additional costs due to the delay. In most circumstances, unless the parties agree otherwise, the delayed party would be entitled to an extension of time to perform the contract. But it may also seek to recover the additional costs resulting from the delay. A no-damages-for-delay clause attempts to prevent the delayed party from recovering those additional costs. In construction contracts, an upstream party, such as an owner or prime contractor, typically relies on a no-damages-for-delay clause when presented with a delay claim by a downstream party, such as a subcontractor. Reprinted courtesy of David Cook, Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP and Chadd Reynolds, Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com Mr. Reynolds may be contacted at reynolds@ahclaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increased 5% in Year to June

    August 26, 2015 —
    Home prices in 20 U.S. cities climbed 5 percent in June from the same month a year earlier, a sign of more progress in the housing market. The increase in the S&P/Case-Shiller index of property values matched the year-over-year gains in the prior three months, the group said Tuesday in New York. The median estimate of economists surveyed by Bloomberg called for a 5.1 percent year-over-year advance. Nationally, prices rose 4.5 percent. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michelle Jamrisko, Bloomberg

    Viewpoint: Firms Should Begin to Analyze Lessons Learned in 2020

    January 04, 2021 —
    If there’s one phrase that describes 2020, it was not “business as usual.” How AEC firms fared last year depended upon their strategies for navigating an uncertain landscape. While we talk about finding a new normal, company leaders in 2021 will have to think more expansively about what they want that “normal” to look like. Reprinted courtesy of Rich Friedman, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Recording “Un-Neighborly” Documents

    April 03, 2019 —
    In September 2018, in Baumgartner v. Timmins, 245 Ariz. 334, 429 P.3d 567, the Arizona Court of Appeals provided further clarification on what constitutes an “encumbrance” on a property for purposes of Arizona’s statutory scheme prohibiting the recording of “false documents.” The statute, A.R.S. § 33-420, prohibits the recording of documents that a person knows to be forged, are groundless, or that contain material misstatements (or false claims). A person who claims an “interest in, or a lien or encumbrance against” real property who records such documents can be held liable for $5,000 or treble the actual damages caused by the recording (whichever is greater), A.R.S. § 33-420(A), and perhaps even be found guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor, A.R.S. § 33-420(E). At issue in Baumgartner were neighbors fighting about CC&Rs—a typical neighborhood fight. In 2015, some of the neighbors filed suit against the Timminses for violating the CC&Rs. The Timminses did not contest the lawsuit, resulting in a default judgment. In what the Court of Appeals characterized as a lawsuit filed by the Timminses “in apparent response to the [first] lawsuit and resulting default judgment,” the Timminses created, signed, and recorded affidavits contending that the Plaintiffs in the original lawsuit were themselves “in violation of several provisions of the CC&Rs.” The Plaintiffs then filed suit again against the Timminses, this time contending that the Timminses had violated A.R.S. § 33-420 by recording the affidavits because the affidavits, the Plaintiffs contended, created encumbrances on their properties. The Apache County Superior Court agreed, and issued a final judgment nullifying the recorded documents and awarding the Timminses damages, along with their attorneys’ fees and costs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bob Henry, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Henry may be contacted at bhenry@swlaw.com