BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expert
    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


    With No Evidence of COVID-19 Being Present, DC Trial Court Finds No Claim for Business Interruption

    You Are on Notice: Failure to Comply With Contractual Notice Provisions Can Be Fatal to Your Claim

    Firm Claims Construction Defects in Hawaiian Homes

    Court Rejects Efforts to Limit Scope of Judgment Creditor’s Direct Action Under Insurance Code Section 11580

    Minneapolis Condo Shortage Blamed on Construction Defect Law

    Construction on the Rise in Washington Town

    Working Safely With Silica: Health Hazards and OSHA Compliance

    Construction Contract Basics: Venue and Choice of Law

    The Biggest Trials Coming to Courts Around the World in 2021

    Equal Access to Justice Act Fee Request Rejected in Flood Case

    Steps to Defending against Construction Defect Lawsuits

    How to Survive the Insurance Claim Process Before It Starts –Five Tips to Keep Your Insurance Healthy

    What’s in a Name? Trademarks and Construction

    Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case Cannot Be Overturned While Facts Are Still in Contention in Related Cases

    The Looming Housing Crisis and Limited Government Relief—An Examination of the CDC Eviction Moratorium Two Months In

    Changes to Judicial Selection in Mexico Create a New Case for Contractual ADR Provisions

    Gen Xers Choose to Rent rather than Buy

    Construction Resumes after Defects

    The Roads to Justice: Building New Bridges

    Penn Station’s Revival Gets a $1.6 Billion Down Payment

    Determining Occurrence for Injury Under Commercial General Liability Policy Without Applying “Trigger Theory”

    Taking Advantage of New Tax Credits and Prevailing Wage Bonuses Under the Inflation Reduction Act for Clean Energy Construction Projects

    In One of the First Civil Jury Trials to Proceed Live in Los Angeles Superior Court During Covid, Aneta Freeman Successfully Prevailed on Behalf of our Client and Obtained a Directed Verdict and Non-Suit

    Breaking with Tradition, The Current NLRB is on a Rulemaking Tear: Election Procedures, Recognition Bar, and 9(a) Collective Bargaining Relationships

    Last Parcel of Rancho del Oro Masterplan Purchased by Cornerstone Communties

    Burden of Proof Under All-Risk Property Insurance Policy

    When an Insurer Proceeds as Subrogee, Defendants Should Not Assert Counterclaims Against the Insured/Subrogor

    How AI and Machine Learning Are Helping Construction Reduce Risk and Improve Margins

    California Supreme Court Holds that Design Immunity Does Not Protect a Public Entity for Failure to Warn of Dangerous Conditions

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolute Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    Builders Seek to Modify Scaffold Law

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

    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    Arctic Fires Are Melting Permafrost That Keeps Carbon Underground

    Macron Visits Notre Dame 2 Years After Devastating Fire

    5 Questions about New York's Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act

    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    California Supreme Court McMillin Ruling

    Foreclosure Deficiency: Construction Loan vs. Home Improvement Loan

    Building Group Has Successful 2012, Looks to 2013

    Facing Manslaughter Charges In Worker's 2021 Trench Collapse Death, Colorado Contractor Who Willfully Ignored Federal Law Surrenders To Police

    Hong Kong Property Tycoon Makes $533 Million Bet on Solar

    Making the Construction Industry a Safer place for Women

    Florida Supreme Court: Notice of Right to Repair is a CGL “Suit,” SDV Amicus Brief Supports Decision

    Why Employees Are Taking Ownership of Their Architecture Firms

    California Courts Call a “Time Out” During COVID-19 –New Emergency Court Rules on Civil Litigation

    It's a Wrap! Enforcing Online Agreements in Light of the CPRA

    Fine Art Losses – “Canvas” the Subrogation Landscape

    Construction Law Firm Opens in D.C.

    Improper Means Exception and Tortious Interference Claims
    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

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

    July 10, 2023 —
    Wilke Fleury is extremely proud that 18 of its incredible attorneys have been selected as 2023 Northern California Super Lawyers or Rising Stars! Super Lawyers rates attorneys in each state using a patented selection process and publishes a yearly magazine issue that produces award-winning features on selected attorneys. Congratulations to this talented group: Super Lawyers of 2023 David A. Frenznick Steven J. Williamson Matthew W. Powell Daniel L. Egan George A. Guthrie Michael G. Polis Daniel J. Foster Stephen K. Marmaduke Neal C. Lutterman Trevor L. Stapleton Ronald R. Lamb Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wilke Fleury LLP

    Hybrid Contracts for The Sale of Goods and Services and the Predominant Factor Test

    February 15, 2021 —
    Florida’s Uniform Commercial Code (also known as the UCC) applies to transactions for goods. “Goods” is defined by Article II of the UCC as “all things (including specially manufactured goods) which are movable at the time of identification to the contract for sale other than the money in which the price is to be paid, investment securities (chapter 678) and things in action.” Fla. Stat. s. 672.105(1). The UCC does NOT apply to transactions for services. Transactions for services are governed by common law. Oftentimes, transactions or contracts include BOTH goods and services. In this scenario, referred to as a hybrid contract, does the UCC or common law apply? In this scenario, courts apply the predominant factor test to determine whether the UCC or common law governs the transaction:
    Whether the UCC or the common law applies to a particular hybrid contract depends on “whether the[ ] predominant factor, the [ ] thrust, the[ ] purpose [of the contract], reasonably stated, is the rendition of service, with goods incidentally involved (e.g., contract with artist for painting) or is a transaction of sale, with labor incidentally involved (e.g., installation of a water heater in a bathroom).” In such instances, the determination whether the “predominant factor” in the contract is for goods or for services is a factual inquiry unless the court can determine that the contract is exclusively for goods or services as a matter of law. Allied Shelving & Equipment, Inc. v. National Deli, LLC, 154 So.3d 482, 484 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (citations omitted).
    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

    Maritime Law: An Albatross for Contractors Navigating Marine Construction

    January 03, 2022 —
    “Ah! Well a-day! When evil looks, Had I from old and young! Instead of the cross, the Albatross, About my neck was hung.” 1 Contractors and subcontractors performing construction over water may find themselves encountering maritime law for the first time. Like the ancient mariner’s encounter with an albatross in The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, a contractor may be able to use maritime law to safely guide it through rough seas, or, if not careful, a contractor may find itself with maritime law hung, like an albatross, around its neck. This article gives an overview of key maritime law issues to demystify this historical body of law and answers some basic questions. What is admiralty jurisdiction? The Constitution gives federal courts jurisdiction over all maritime cases. This jurisdiction gives litigants the opportunity to remove state court cases to federal court and to avoid a jury trial. The purpose of admiralty jurisdiction in federal court is to protect and ensure the uniform treatment of nationwide maritime commerce and extends to maritime contracts and accidents. Any contract which relates to the navigation, business, or commerce of the sea is a maritime contract. Even contracts with mixed obligations on land and sea can fall within admiralty jurisdiction – such as construction contracts with a waterborne component. Admiralty jurisdiction also extends to maritime accidents – those that occur on navigable waters and have a maritime nexus. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cindy Matherne Muller, Jones Walker LLP
    Ms. Muller may be contacted at cmuller@joneswalker.com

    President Trump Nullifies “Volks Rule” Regarding Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Recordkeeping Requirements

    April 13, 2017 —
    OSHA requires employers to maintain safety records for a period of five years. The Occupational Safety and Health Act contains a six month statute of limitations for OSHA to issue citations to employers for violations. In an effort to close the gap between the five years employers are required to keep records and the six month citation window, the Obama Administration implemented the “Volks Rule,” making recordkeeping requirements a “continuing obligation” for employers and effectively extending the statute of limitations for violations of recordkeeping requirements from six months to five years. On March 22, 2017, the Senate approved a House Joint Resolution (H.J. Res. 83) nullifying the “Volks Rule” and limiting the statute of limitations to six months for recordkeeping violations. President Trump signed the resolution nullifying the “Volks Rule” on April 3, 2017. The nullification appears to be in line with President Trump’s stated goal of generally eliminating governmental regulations. What Does This Mean for California Employers? California manages its own OSHA program, which generally follows the federal program, but is not always in lock-step with Federal OSHA. Cal/OSHA, under its current rules, may only cite employers for recordkeeping violations that occurred during the six months preceding an inspection or review of those records. To date, there has been no indication that California’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) has plans to adopt the “Volks Rule.” Barring a change, California employers will continue to operate under the status quo and be required to maintain safety records for five years, but will only be exposed to citations for recordkeeping violations occurring within the last six months. Current Cal/OSHA Recordkeeping Requirements Cal/OSHA form 300 (also known as the “OSHA Log 300”) is used to record information about every work-related death and most work-related injuries that cannot be treated with onsite first aid (specific requirements can be found in the California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Sections 14300 through 14300.48). Currently, California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 14300.33 requires employers to retain OSHA Log 300 for a period of five years following the end of the calendar year during which the record was created, despite the fact that Cal/OSHA can only cite employers for failing to maintain such records for up to six months preceding an inspection. Looking to the Future Cal/OSHA is working on regulations that would require electronic submission of OSHA Log 300 records in California. This would bring Cal/OSHA more in line with Federal OSHA, which already requires electronic submission. About Newmeyer & Dillion For more than 30 years, Newmeyer & Dillion has delivered creative and outstanding legal solutions and trial results for a wide array of clients. With over 70 attorneys practicing in all aspects of business, employment, real estate, construction and insurance law, Newmeyer & Dillion delivers legal services tailored to meet each client’s needs. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, with offices in Walnut Creek, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, Newmeyer & Dillion attorneys are recognized by The Best Lawyers in America©, and Super Lawyers as top tier and some of the best lawyers in California, and have been given Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review's AV Preeminent® highest rating. For additional information, call 949-854-7000 or visit www.ndlf.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Louis "Dutch" Schotemeyer, Newmeyer & Dillion LLP
    Mr. Schotemeyer may be contacted at dutch.schotemeyer@ndlf.com

    Maine Court Allows $1B Hydropower Transmission Project to Proceed

    August 31, 2020 —
    Maine’s Supreme Court cleared the way for construction to begin on the nearly $1-billion, 145-mile high voltage transmission line that will feed hydroelectric power from Quebec into the New England power grid. Mary B. Powers, 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

    Occurrence-Based Insurance Policies and Claims-Made Insurance Policies – There’s a Crucial Difference

    April 13, 2017 —
    I’ve yet to find reading through an insurance policy on anyone’s “bucket list.” But read them you should. Or have your attorney read through them (wink, wink). Because when you need to tender a claim there’s probably no more important document in the world. In Tidwell Enterprises, Inc. v. Financial Pacific Insurance Company, Inc., Case No. C078665 (November 29, 2016), a client whose attorney did read the policy, bested the insurer of a policy it issued. Tidwell Enterprises, Inc. In 2006 or 2007, Tidwell Enterprises, Inc. installed a fireplace at a single-family home located in Copperopolis, California. At the time, Tidwell had a general commercial liability policy issued by Financial Pacific Insurance Company, Inc. which expired in March 2010. 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

    2011 Worst Year Ever for Home Sales

    September 09, 2011 —

    So few new single-family homes have sold in 2011 that expectations are that this will be the worst year for new homes sales since the Commerce Department started tracking this in 1963. The Harford Courant notes that previously builders created a new supply to which was added homes under foreclosure.

    Ed Leamer, economist and director of UCLA’s Anderson Forecast, says that recovery would be driven by two sectors, manufacturing and construction. “It doesn’t look like there is going to be a big recovery in manufacturing,” he says. “It is going to have to come in housing.”

    The soft housing market, however, is leading to a loss of construction jobs, as reported by the Associated General Contractors of America. As a result, stock prices for the twelve largest publicly-traded home builders have declined 22.7 percent in a market that has declined 4.2 percent overall.

    Read the full story…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    NYC Building Explosion Kills Two After Neighbor Reports Gas Leak

    March 12, 2014 —
    Fifteen minutes after a New York City resident reported the pervasive smell of gas in her East Harlem neighborhood, a massive explosion destroyed two buildings, killing two people and injuring at least 18. Utility workers arrived too late. The explosion at 1644 and 1646 Park Ave., near 116th Street, reported about 9:30 a.m., was heard miles away and turned into a five-alarm fire. Windows were blown out as far as 10 blocks away, and cars across the street were wrecked. The blast sent debris onto adjacent elevated train tracks, halting commuter rail service in and out of Grand Central Terminal. Minor wounds were too numerous to count, said Frank Gribbon, a spokesman for the New York City Fire Department. “This is a tragedy of the worst kind,” Mayor Bill de Blasio said during a news conference near the scene. He said residents are still missing from the buildings, which had a total of 15 units, and crews would search for them when the fire is extinguished. Ms. Kaske may be contacted at mkaske@bloomberg.net; Mr. Goldman may be contacted at hgoldman@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michelle Kaske and Henry Goldman, Bloomberg