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


    He Turned Wall Street Offices Into Homes. Now He Vows to Remake New York

    Crisis Averted! Pennsylvania Supreme Court Joins Other Courts in Finding that Covid-19 Presents No Physical Loss or Damage for Businesses

    Insured's Complaint Against Flood Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Supreme Court of Oregon Affirms Decision in Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, et al.

    Application Of Two Construction Contract Provisions: No-Damages-For-Delay And Liquidated Damages

    Insurer Must Defend Faulty Workmanship Claims

    Texas Court of Appeals Conditionally Grant Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Anderson

    Arctic Roads and Runways Face the Prospect of Rapid Decline

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (01/25/23) – Artificial Intelligence, Proptech Innovation, and Drone Adoption

    Risk Protection: Force Majeure Agreements Take on Renewed Relevance

    State Farm Unsuccessful In Seeking Dismissal of Qui Tam Case

    Evaluating Smart Home Technology: It’s About More Than the Bottom Line

    Working Safely With Silica: Health Hazards and OSHA Compliance

    Additional Elements a Plaintiff Must Plead and Prove to Enforce Restrictive Covenant

    Motion for Reconsideration Challenging Appraisal Determining Cause of Loss Denied

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: J. PAUL ALLEN

    City of Aspen v. Burlingame Ranch II Condominium Owners Association: Clarifying the Application of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act

    Pulte’s Kitchen Innovation Throw Down

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

    NCCER Celebrates Construction Education Programs and Products in 2024

    Facts about Chinese Drywall in Construction

    Notice of Claim Sufficient to Invoke Coverage

    New California "Construction" Legislation

    Don’t Put All Your Eggs in the Silent-Cyber Basket

    Work to Solve the Mental Health Crisis in Construction

    Commercial Real Estate in 2023: A Snapshot

    Bound by Group Builders, Federal District Court Finds No Occurrence

    How a 10-Story Wood Building Survived More Than 100 Earthquakes

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “That’s Not How I Read It”

    Washington Court Tunnels Deeper Into the Discovery Rule

    Hawaii Building Codes to Stay in State Control

    BE PROACTIVE: Steps to Preserve and Enhance Your Insurance Rights In Light of the Recent Natural Disasters

    How BIM Can Serve Building Owners

    Appellate Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    One More Statutory Tweak of Interest to VA Construction Pros

    Surfside Condo Collapse Investigators Have Nearly Finished Technical Work

    Word of the Day: “Contractor”

    When to Withhold Retention Payments on Private or Public Projects

    The Private Works: Preliminary Notice | Are You Using the Correct Form?

    Contractors Should be Aware of Homeowner Duties When Invited to Perform Residential Work

    Alabama Court Upholds Late Notice Disclaimer

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    Construction Lien Waiver Provisions Contractors Should Be Using

    Between Scylla and Charybids: The Mediation Privilege and Legal Malpractice Claims

    Fourteen Years as a Solo!

    Northern District of Mississippi Finds That Non-Work Property Damages Are Not Subject to AIA’s Waiver of Subrogation Clause

    General Liability Alert: A Mixed Cause of Action with Protected and Non-Protected Activity Not Subject to Anti-SLAPP Motion

    Harmon Tower Opponents to Try Mediation

    COVID-19 Business Closure and Continuity Compliance Resource
    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

    Punchlist: The News We Didn’t Quite Get To – May 2016

    May 12, 2016 —
    If you’re a solar contractor make sure you don’t get burned. The California Contractors State License Board (“CSLB”) is taking a closer look at solar contractors as the industry grows in the Golden State. Only contractors holding a Class “A” Engineering, Class “B” General Contractor, or Class C-46 Solar license can perform solar construction and installation. The CSLB has clarified that C-39 Roofing contractors can install installation as part of an overall roofing job. The CSLB considers such insulation work as “incidental and supplemental” under Section 831 of the California Code of Regulations and does not require a separate C-2 Insulation and Acoustical contractor license. 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

    Second Circuit Court Differentiates the Standard for Determining Evident Partiality for a Neutral Arbitrator and a Party-Appointed Arbitrator

    August 07, 2018 —
    On June 7, 2018, the Second Circuit Court in Certain Underwriting Members of Lloyds of London v. Fla., Dep’t of Fin. Servs.,1 held that a party-appointed arbitrator should not be held to the same standard as a neutral arbitrator. The Court vacated a district court’s order vacating an arbitral award in a reinsurance dispute between Insurance Company of Americas (“ICA”) and Certain Underwriting Members of Lloyds of London (“Underwriters”). The case was one of first impression for the Second Circuit on how to determine the standard of evident partiality challenged to a party-appointed arbitrator. Underwriters reinsured ICA under a series of treaties. The treaties each contained an arbitration clause requiring that disputes be adjudicated by an arbitration panel consisting of three members: one party-appointed arbitrator for each party, and a neutral. The clause required only that the arbitrators “be active or retired disinterested executive officers of insurance or reinsurance companies or Lloyd’s London Underwriters.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Celia B. Waters, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Waters may be contacted at cbw@sdvlaw.com

    U.S. Home Lending Set to Bounce Back in 2015 After Slump

    January 21, 2015 —
    The U.S. mortgage market hit bottom in 2014. Chief economists at Fannie Mae and Moody’s Analytics Inc. as well as the Mortgage Bankers Association all predicted a turnaround this year after a record decline in 2014. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kathleen M. Howley, Bloomberg
    Ms. Howley may be contacted at kmhowley@bloomberg.net

    Diggerland, UK’s Construction Equipment Theme Park, is coming to the U.S.

    January 22, 2014 —
    This summer, Sahara Sam’s Oasis, located in West Berlin, New Jersey, will open Diggerland Adventure Park, a new 14-acre construction equipment themed amusement park, according to Equipment World. The United Kingdom currently has Diggerlands in four locations: “There, the parks use primarily JCB backhoes, excavators, and skid steers in a variety of ways.” Machines are used as rides, including “Spindizzy, in which an excavator takes a bucket full of people on a 360 degree spin.” Diggerland is currently owned by Allsafety Ltd. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Industry Outlook: Building a Better Tomorrow

    July 25, 2021 —
    COVID-19 plunged the business world into one of the most challenging times not seen since the Great Depression. The construction industry, deemed an essential business, had to quickly innovate to find new ways of working to weather this storm. Several of these seemingly temporary solutions have spawned positive trends that are here to stay. Not Just Green, But Healthy Too The safety culture that exists on today’s jobsites helped contractors stay productive through the pandemic. However, because of the pandemic, project owners and construction firms are evaluating their sites from a new perspective. In a recent meeting, the construction head for a healthcare system stated he knows a safe jobsite but doesn’t know what he doesn’t know about a healthy site. Reprinted courtesy of Michael Alberico, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Alberico may be contacted at malberico@assuranceagency.com

    In a Win for Design Professionals, California Court of Appeals Holds That Relation-Back Doctrine Does Not Apply to Certificate of Merit Law

    December 20, 2017 —
    The year was 1995. The old guard was still in power in Sacramento. “Button-Down” Pete Wilson was Governor. Willie Brown, the self-nicknamed “Ayatollah of the Assembly,” was Speaker of the Assembly. And Bill “Huggy” Lockyer was Senate Pro Tem. Names that, for many reasons as of late, seem . . . well . . . let’s just say, “quaint.” Their time, however, was coming to an end. Three years earlier, California voters approved Proposition 140, which instituted term limits for the first time in California. And by 1996, the first slate of legislators would be “termed out.” The immediate impact: It was the time for making deals because you didn’t know who would be keeping house next. 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

    Indicted Union Representatives Try Again to Revive Enmons

    June 22, 2016 —
    The Boston Globe reports that the Massachusetts AFL-CIO has filed a friend of the court brief seeking to have the indictment of five members of the Teamsters Union in Boston dismissed. The Teamsters members are facing federal charges that they extorted non-union contractors and owners that employed non-union contractors. The Massachusetts AFL-CIO is arguing that under the Supreme Court’s 1972 decision in U.S. v. Enmons the Teamsters alleged conduct was in furtherance of a legitimate union objective and, therefore, no illegal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Supplemental Conditions
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    A Court-Side Seat: Guam’s CERCLA Claim Allowed, a “Roundup” Verdict Upheld, and Judicial Process Privilege Lost

    June 14, 2021 —
    This is a brief account of some of the important environmental and administrative law cases recently decided. THE U.S. SUPREME COURT BP PLC, et al. v Mayor and City of Baltimore The issue the court confronted was a procedural matter: Can the defendant energy companies use the federal removal statutes (see 28 USC Section 1442) to remove a state law climate change lawsuit to federal court? Here, a group of energy companies were sued by the mayor and city council of Baltimore in state court, where they alleged that the defendants had concealed the adverse environmental effects of the fossil fuel products they promoted and sold in Baltimore City. Several similar lawsuits have been filed in many state courts, where typically it is alleged that the defendants can be sued on various common law theories. Rather than defend these cases in state court, the defendants have sought to remove these cases to federal court because climate change liability appears to be an issue that should be settled at the federal level. These efforts have been unsuccessful, with most federal trial and appellate courts holding that the reasons cited for removal (oftentimes the federal officer removal statute) have not been persuasive. In this case, both the Maryland federal district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals held they had no jurisdiction to authorize removal, and thus returned the case to the state court. Noting that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled that a removal action could be countenanced under Section 1442, thus creating a circuit split, the Supreme Court held that a straightforward reading of the removal statute empowers the reviewing court to examine all theories for removal that a district court has rejected. Consequently, the Court remanded the case to the Fourth Circuit where it can decide, “in the first instance,” whether there actually exist grounds to remove this case to federal court. 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