BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope 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


    Texas Shortens Its Statute of Repose To 6 Years, With Limitations

    Improvements to Confederate Monuments Lead to Lawsuits

    Improper Means Exception and Tortious Interference Claims

    Nancy Conrad Recognized in Lehigh Valley Business 2024 Power in Law List

    ASCE Statement on Congress Passage of WRDA 2024

    A Court-Side Seat: As SCOTUS Decides Another Regulatory “Takings” Case, a Flurry of Action at EPA

    OSHA Announces Expansion of “Severe Violator Enforcement Program”

    Congratulations to Nicole Whyte, Keith Bremer, John Toohey, and Tyler Offenhauser for Being Recognized as 2022 Super Lawyers!

    What Construction Contractors Should Know About the California Government Claims Act

    NYC Landlord Accused of Skirting Law With Rent-Free Months Offer

    Builders Seek to Modify Scaffold Law

    Florida Adopts Daubert Standard for Expert Testimony

    Putting 3D First, a Model Bridge Rises in Norway

    Insurers' Communications Through Brokers Not Privileged

    Building a Case: Document Management for Construction Litigation

    The Burden of Betterment

    Velazquez Framing, LLC v. Cascadia Homes, Inc. (Take 2) – Pre-lien Notice for Labor Unambiguously Not Required

    Insurer Wrongfully Denies Coverage When Household Member Fails to Submit to EUO

    Southern California Super Lawyers Recognizes Four Snell & Wilmer Attorneys As Rising Stars

    URGENT: 'Catching Some Hell': Hurricane Michael Slams Into Florida

    Oregon Bridge Closed to Inspect for Defects

    Connecticut Federal District Court Again Finds "Collapse" Provisions Ambiguous

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (08/24/22) – Local Law 97, Clean Energy, and IRA Tax Credits

    I’m Sorry Ms. Jackson, I [Sovereign Immunity] am For Real

    Conflicting Exclusions Result in Duty to Defend

    English High Court Finds That Business-Interruption Insurance Can Cover COVID-19 Losses

    "My Bad, I Thought It Was in Good Faith" is Not Good Enough - Contractor Ordered to Pay Prompt Payment Penalties

    Do We Need Blockchain in Construction?

    No Escape: California Court of Appeals Gives a Primary CGL Insurer’s “Other Insurance” Clause Two Thumbs Down

    Suffolk Stands Down After Consecutive Serious Boston Site Injuries

    Ohio “property damage” caused by an “occurrence.”

    $48 Million Award and Successful Defense of $135 Million Claim

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Just Hanging Around”

    Avoid L&I Violations by Following Appropriate Safety Procedures

    Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion on Business Risk Exclusions Fails

    Judge Gives Cintra Bid Protest of $9B Md. P3 Project Award New Life

    #11 CDJ Topic: Cortez Blu Community Association, Inc. v. K. Hovnanian at Cortez Hill, LLC, et al.

    Challenging Enforceability of Liquidated Damages (In Federal Construction Context)

    Mass Timber Reduces Construction’s Carbon Footprint, But Introduces New Risk Scenarios

    Look to West Africa for the Future of Green Architecture

    EPA Issues New PFAS Standard, Provides $1B for Testing, Cleanup of 'Forever Chemicals'

    Remote Work Issues to Consider in Light of COVID-19

    Illinois Lawmakers Approve Carpenters Union's Legislation to Help Ensure Workers Are Paid What They're Owed

    Surviving the Construction Law Backlog: Nontraditional Approaches to Resolution

    CGL Policy May Not Cover Cybersecurity and Data-Related Losses

    The Unpost, Post: Dynamex and the Construction Indianapolis

    Industry Practices Questioned After Girder Fractures at Salesforce Transit Center

    Fourth Circuit Finds Insurer Reservation of Rights Letters Inadequate to Preserve Coverage Defenses Under South Carolina Law

    Foundation Arbitration Doesn’t Preclude Suing Over Cracks

    Judgment Stemming from a Section 998 Offer Without a Written Acceptance Provision Is Void
    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

    Oklahoma Finds Policy Can Be Assigned Post-Loss

    April 26, 2021 —
    Oklahoma joined the majority of court in finding that after a loss occurs, the insured can assign the policy to another. Johnson v. CSAA Gen. Ins. Co., 2020 Okla LEXIS 118 (Okla. Dec. 15, 2020). Johnson's property was damaged in a storm. She filed a claim with her insurer. She also executed an assignment of her claim in order to repair the property with the execution of assignment to Triple Diamond Construction LLC. An appraiser retained by Triple Diamond determined the storm damage was $36,346.06. The insurer paid only $21,725.36 for the loss. Johnson and Triple Diamond sued the insurer for breach of contract, seeking $14,620.70, not inclusive of interest, attorneys' fees and costs. The insurer filed a motion to dismiss, or an alternative motion for summary judgment to dismiss Triple Diamond as a party. The insurer argued that both the policy and an Oklahoma statute barred the assignment. The district court granted the insurer's motion. 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

    The Construction Industry Lost Jobs (No Surprise) but it Gained Some Too (Surprise)

    October 12, 2020 —
    The announcement this week by major airlines and then by Disney that they will be laying off tens of thousands of workers is just the latest in what we already know: The coronavirus pandemic has adversely impacted workers around the world. And the construction industry is no exception, although its impacts have been uneven, and in some cases surprisingly good. According to a report by the Associated General Contractors of America, 39 states lost construction jobs between August 2019 and August 2020 while 31 states and the District of Columbia added construction jobs between July and August 2020. California saw the largest decline in construction jobs between August 2019 and August 2020, down 52,000 jobs or 5.8%, followed by by New York (-46,000 jobs/-11.3%), Texas (-39,300 jobs/-5.0%), Massachusetts (-20,200 jobs/-12.4%) and Illinois (-17,200/-7.5%). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

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

    February 22, 2021 —
    January 25, 2021, President Biden signed an Executive Order (EO) “Ensuring the Future is Made in All America by All of America’s Workers”, which seeks to bolster U.S. manufacturing through the federal procurement process. Note that, just six day earlier, on January 18, the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Counsel issued a final rule implementing former President Trump’s July 2019 EO, titled “Maximizing Use of American-Made Goods, Products, and Materials” (EO No. 13881) on the then-current Buy American standards. For context, Trump’s proposed revisions – adopted and implemented by the FAR Council earlier this year – imposed three (3) significant changes worth noting: (1) increasing the percentage of domestic content (other than iron or steel) from 50% to 55% that an end product must contain in order to qualify as a “domestic end product”; (2) implementing an even higher increase in the domestic content requirement for iron and steel products to at least 95% U.S. “predominately” iron or steel product; and (3) increasing the price evaluation preference for domestic offerors from 6% to 20% (for other than small business) and 30% (for small businesses). The FAR’s rule became effective January 21, 2021, and applies to solicitations issued on or after February 22, 2021, and resulting contracts let. Biden’s EO rescinds Trump’s EO No. 13881 “to the extent inconsistent with [Biden’s] EO.” However, when dissected, it is clear Biden’s Buy American plan does little to modify thresholds inconsistent with the Trump Administration; rather, the White House’s latest EO implements changes in the form of BA administration. Nonetheless, Biden’s EO does expressly note that it supersedes and replaces Trump’s EO on the same issues. Reprinted courtesy of Meredith Thielbahr, Gordon & Rees and Nicole Lentini, Gordon & Rees Ms. Thielbahr may be contacted at mthielbahr@grsm.com Ms. Lentini may be contacted at nlentini@grsm.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    July 09, 2014 —
    On July 3, 2014, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion affirming the First District Court of Appeal in the case of Beacon Residential Community Association v. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (Case No. S208173). The issue in the Beacon case is whether the architects of a residential project owe a duty to future third party homeowners under SB800 and common law. In 2011, Judge Richard Kramer of the San Francisco Superior Court sustained demurrers of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill and HKS Architects to the homeowners association complaint without leave to amend. The homeowners association appealed and the First District Court of Appeal reversed Judge Kramer, ruling that the homeowners could assert SB800 and common law claims against the architects of the project even in the absence of privity of contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Steven M. Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
    Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com

    Architect Sues over Bidding Procedure

    November 13, 2013 —
    The city of Louisville, Ohio is being sued by an architect who claims that city officials split projects into parts in order to circumvent state laws on public bidding. Rodney Meadows, the architect who filed the suit, also claims he is not motivated by any interest in working for the city. “I wouldn’t want to work with them,” he said. Nor is he seeking damages in the suit. The project at contention is Louisville’s renovations of an existing building for the Police Department. The city has spent $328,692 on the renovations, but state law says that projects costing more than $25,000 or $50,000 (depending on other matters) must be put out for public bidding. But city officials contend they haven’t broken the law. “A significant amount of work was done by our own people,” said E. Thomas Ault, the Louisville city manager. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Understanding the Details: Suing Architects and Engineers Can Get Technical

    November 02, 2017 —
    Before suing an architect or engineer for professional negligence, a plaintiff must obtain a “certificate of merit” (“Certificate”) under Code of Civil Procedure section 411.35. Boiled down to the basics, the Certificate declares that the attorney consulted with and received an opinion from an expert that a reasonable and meritorious case exists against said design professional. The Certificate must be filed before serving the complaint on any defendant, but can be filed within 60 days under certain circumstances. This rule was recently analyzed against another long-standing rule in California, known as the “relation-back doctrine.” Under the relation-back doctrine, a court will deem a later-filed pleading, such as an amended complaint, to be deemed filed at the time of an earlier complaint. In Curtis Engineering Corp. v. Superior Court of San Diego County, No. D072046, (Cal. Ct. App. 10/23/17), the Fourth Appellate Court considered the interplay between section 411.35 and the relation-back doctrine, holding that a Certificate filed more than 60 days after filing the original pleading does not relate back to the filing of the original pleading. Reprinted courtesy of Steven Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Stephen Tye, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com Mr. Tye may be contacted at stye@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Blackouts Require a New Look at Backup Power

    April 06, 2020 —
    Recent blackouts on both East and West coasts are causing commercial property owners to reassess their need for backup power. The likelihood of more-frequent blackouts means backup power must evolve from ensuring the safe exit of office workers to enabling core business functions to continue uninterrupted. That’s a major shift in preparedness that construction executives should consider in future planning. In New York City on July 13, 2019, a Con Edison blackout left 72,000 customers in Manhattan and Queens without power primarily because of a flawed connection at an electrical substation. Eight days later, a second Con Edison blackout left more than 50,000 customers, mostly in Brooklyn, without power due to high usage during a heat wave. These events occurred even though, as Con Edison stated, the New York City grid is one of the most complex and technologically advanced in the world and contains multiple layers of redundancy. In northern and central California in late October, 2019, intentional blackouts were implemented by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) on a massive scale in response to out-of-control wildfires. “Never before in California history have more than 2 million people gone five days without electrical power because of the intentional safety policy of a utility,” reported the Los Angeles Times. It was the second massive blackout in California in two weeks, after PG&E had earlier shut off power to almost 2 million people in rolling blackouts. The blackouts on both coasts are remarkable not only for their breadth but for the range of causes—from limiting wildfires sparked in part by faulty, above-ground, power lines to a flawed connection at a substation to overuse during a heat wave. The conditions creating those causes are not likely to subside, and Con Edison warned this summer of more service outages to come. In California, The Washington Post writes, “blackouts are redefining the prosperous state.” Reprinted courtesy of John McBride, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: LISA D. LOVE

    March 19, 2024 —
    Company: JAMS Office Location: New York, NY Email: llove@jamsadr.com Website: https://www.jamsadr.com/love/ Law School: Georgetown University Law Center (J.D. 1984) Types of ADR services offered: Arbitration, mediation, neutral evaluation and special master services Affiliated ADR organizations: JAMS, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, and CPR Geographic area served: Domestic and International Q: Describe the path you took to becoming an ADR neutral. A: I started my legal career practicing law as a complex commercial transactions attorney in the corporate department of a major New York law firm for eleven years. After leaving the firm, I served as chief legal counsel to several municipalities and as co-founding partner of a boutique finance, infrastructure and real estate law firm. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Marissa L. Downs, Laurie & Brennan, LLP
    Ms. Downs may be contacted at mdowns@lauriebrennan.com