BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant 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


    TxDOT, Flatiron/Dragados Mostly Resolve Bridge Design Dispute

    Illinois Non-Profit Sues over Defective Roof

    The United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, Finds Wrap-Up Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage of Additional Insureds

    Insurance Lawyers Recognized by JD Supra 2020 Readers' Choice Awards

    Timely Written Notice to Insurer and Cooperating with Insurer

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2024 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    New Jersey Supreme Court Holding Impacts Allocation of Damages in Cases Involving Successive Tortfeasors

    Library to Open with Roof Defect Lawsuit Pending

    Insurer Granted Summary Judgment on Faulty Workmanship Claim

    Insurers' Motion to Knock Out Bad Faith, Negligent Misrepresentation Claims in Construction Defect Case Denied

    Federal Courts Keep Chipping Away at the CDC Eviction Moratorium

    Missouri Protects Subrogation Rights

    Coverage Rejected Under Owned Property and Alienated Property Exclusions

    Defects in Texas High School Stadium Angers Residents

    David Uchida Joins Kahana Feld’s Los Angeles Office as Partner

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2023 New York – Metro Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    U.S. Department of Justice Settles against Days Inn

    Consult with Counsel when Preparing Construction Liens

    2025 Construction Law Update

    In Appellate Division First, New York Appellate Team Successfully Invokes “Party Finality” Doctrine to Obtain Dismissal of Appeal for Commercial Guarantors

    New York Restrictions on Flow Through Provision in Subcontracts

    How Long does a Florida Condo Association Have to File a Construction Defect Claim?

    At Least 23 Dead as Tornadoes, Severe Storms Ravage South

    Court Exclaims “Enough!” To Homeowner Who Kept Raising Wrongful Foreclosure Claims

    Two Injured in Walkway Collapse of Detroit Apartment Complex

    Hunton’s Geoffrey Fehling Confirmed to DC Bar Foundation’s Young Lawyers Network Leadership Council

    Vaccine Mandate Confusion Continues – CMS Vaccine Mandate Restored in Some (But Not All) US States

    Stay of Coverage Case Appropriate While Court Determines Arbitrability of Dispute

    A Court-Side Seat: Citizen Suits, “Facility” Management and Some Nuance for Your Hazard Ranking

    McGraw Hill to Sell off Construction-Data Unit

    In South Carolina, Insurer's Denial of Liability Does Not Waive Attorney-Client Privilege for Bad Faith Claim

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Stop - In the Name of the Law!”

    Architect Sues over Bidding Procedure

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds that Subrogation Waiver Does Not Violate Statute Prohibiting Limitation on Tort Liability in Construction Contracts

    Insurer Must Pay To Defend Product Defect Claims From Date Of Product Installation

    Do Hurricane-Prone Coastal States Need to Update their Building Codes?

    Handling Insurance Claims in the Wake of the Los Angeles Wildfires

    Florida Governor Signs COVID-19 Liability Shield

    Flawed Welding Faulted in Mexico City Subway Collapse

    Washington School District Sues Construction Company Over Water Pipe Damage

    Waiver Of Arbitration by Not Submitting Claim to Initial Decision Maker…Really!

    Renovate or Demolish Milwaukee’s Historic City Hall?

    Lewis Brisbois Successfully Concludes Privacy Dispute for Comedian Kathy Griffin Following Calif. Supreme Court Denial of Review

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

    Making the World’s Longest Undersea Railway Tunnel Possible with BIM

    More Money Down Adds to U.S. First-Time Buyer Blues: Economy

    Would You Trade a Parking Spot for an Extra Bedroom?

    2017 Legislative Changes Affecting the Construction Industry

    Ambiguous Application Questions Preclude Summary Judgment on Rescission Claim

    The Future of Construction Defects in Utah Unclear
    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. Leveraging 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

    Construction Contract Provisions that Should Pique Your Interest

    September 30, 2019 —
    Construction contracts are a big part of my legal practice and the drumbeat here at Construction Law Musings. Why? Because not only does your construction contract set the expectations and “rules of the game” for a construction project, it will be read strictly and literally by the Virginia courts should there be a dispute. For these reasons, construction professionals need to be alert for the language in certain key clauses in a construction contract to assure that these clauses are as balanced as possible and also well understood. Here are my “Top Five”:
    1. “Pay if Paid”- These clauses are almost always in the subcontracts between a general contractor and a subcontractor and are enforceable in Virginia if drafted correctly and under the proper circumstances.
    2. Change Orders- Whether work is subject to a change order and the required payment for any changed work are often a key source of contention (read legal fees). A properly drafted and followed change order provision can help avoid much of this contention.
    3. Indemnity- Much has been made in recent years about indemnity provisions and their enforceability. All parties in the construction payment chain can and should be aware of how to best draft their indemnity provisions to make them enforceable. Failure to do so can be catastrophic.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    A Termination for Convenience Is Not a Termination for Default

    April 22, 2024 —
    A termination for convenience is NOT a termination for default. They are NOT the same. They should NOT be treated as the same. I am a huge proponent of termination for convenience provisions because sometimes a party needs to be able to exercise a termination for convenience, but the termination is not one that rises to a basis for default. However, exercising a termination for convenience does not mean you get to go back in time and convert the termination for convenience into a termination for default. It does not work like that. Nor should it. An opinion out of the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals – Williams Building Company, Inc. v. Department of State, CBCA 7147, 2024 WL 1099788 (CBCA 2024 – demonstrates a fundamental distinction between a termination for convenience and a termination for default, i.e., that you don’t get to conjure up defaults when you exercise a termination for convenience:
    Because a termination for convenience essentially turns a fixed-price construction contract into a cost-reimbursement contract, allowing the contractor to recover its incurred performance costs, the resolution of this appeal will involve identifying the total costs that [Contractor] incurred in performing this contract before [Government] terminated it for convenience. Since [Government] terminated the contract for convenience rather than for default, it no longer matters whether, in the past,[Contractor] acted intentionally in overstating the amount of its incurred costs or committed a contract breach. Ultimately, as permitted in response to a termination for convenience, [Contractor] will recover those allowable costs that [Contractor]establishes it incurred in performing the contract.
    Williams Building Company, supra.
    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

    How Well Do You Know the 2012 IECC Code?

    January 31, 2014 —
    The online publication Big Builder reports that “only a handful of states have implemented the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC),” according to the International Code Council. However, because of “the aggressive 2015 IECC” approaching, they “anticipate wider implementation of the 2012 IECC to snowball.” Big Builder challenges their readers to test their knowledge of “2012 IECC mandates” by taking their quiz. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Project Labor Agreements Will Now Be Required for Large-Scale Federal Construction Projects

    February 14, 2022 —
    On February 4, 2022, President Biden issued an Executive Order on Use of Project Labor Agreements for Federal Construction Projects (EO), which will require the use of project labor agreements (PLAs) on large-scale federal construction projects with a total estimated cost of $35 million or more unless a senior official within the agency grants an exception. Agencies also may require the use of PLAs on projects that are less than $35 million. While the EO is effective immediately, it will only apply to solicitations issued on or after the effective date of final regulations issued by the FAR Council. The FAR Council has 120 days to propose regulations implementing the EO. Often there is a significant period of time between the publication of proposed regulations, evaluation of public comments, and publication of final regulations. Reprinted courtesy of Lori Ann Lange, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Lauren Rayner Davis, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Ms. Lange may be contacted at llange@pecklaw.com Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com Ms. Davis may be contacted at ldavis@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Orchestrating Bias: Arbitrator’s Undisclosed Membership in Philharmonic Group with Pauly Shore’s Attorney Not Grounds to Reverse Award in Real Estate Dispute

    June 21, 2017 —
    The California court of appeal recently issued an unpublished decision in Knispel v. Shore, 2017 WL 2492535, affirming a judgment confirming an arbitration award in a real estate dispute involving Pauly Shore. The court of appeal held that the arbitrator’s failure to disclose her membership in the Los Angeles Lawyers Philharmonic Group with the attorney representing Pauly was not grounds to overturn the judgment. The underlying arbitration involved a dispute between Michael Scott Shore, on the one hand, and his brother, Pauly, among others, on the other hand, regarding certain residential property located on Sunset Boulevard near The Comedy Store in West Hollywood (owned and operated by their mother, Mitzi Shore). The parties agreed to arbitrate their dispute before Judge Aviva K. Bobb (Ret.) of the Alternative Resolution Center. Judge Bobb issued an award in favor of Pauly, and he petitioned the trial court to affirm the award. Michael opposed, contending the arbitrator failed to disclose that she and Pauly’s attorney had both been members of the Lawyers Philharmonic, for which they had been practicing and performing together since November 2010. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lyndsey Torp, Snell & Wilmer
    Ms. Torp may be contacted at ltorp@swlaw.com

    Need and Prejudice: An Eleventh-Hour Trial Continuance Where A Key Witness Is Unexpectedly Unavailable

    July 10, 2018 —
    In Padda v. Superior Court (GI Excellence), No. E070522, the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two, recently held that a trial court abused its discretion in denying Defendants/Cross-Complainants’ request for a trial continuance where their key expert witness suddenly became ill twelve days before trial and before his deposition had been taken. Reprinted courtesy of Angela S. Haskins, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Allegra Perez, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Haskins may be contacted at ahaskins@hbblaw.com Ms. Perez may be contacted at aperez@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Renee Zellweger Selling Connecticut Country Home

    August 06, 2014 —
    You had me at seven fireplaces (and a bread oven). Actress Renee Zellweger’s Connecticut country home, on the market for $1.6 million, is hardly roughing it. The luxury farmhouse, built in 1770 and updated in 2004, is a stylish and luxurious country getaway. Set on 38 acres overlooking the Quinebaug River in rural Pomfret Center, the retreat at 96 Cotton Rd is 3,463 square feet with a top-of-the-line kitchen, a bread oven in the family room and a swimming pool. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Emily Heffter, Zillow

    Intricacies of Business Interruption Claim Considered

    January 07, 2015 —
    Reaching into the weeds to analyze a business interruption claim, the Massachusetts Court of Appeals determined the cost of ordinary payroll could be included in the calculation of net profit or loss in determining business loss income when business is resumed quickly after a fire. Verrill Farms, LLC v. Farm Family Cas. Ins. Co., 2014 Mass. App. LEXIS 145 (Mass. App. Ct. Nov. 4, 2014). The insured suffered a fire loss at its farm store. Within two days, the business was reopened at alternate locations at reduced capacity. Within a month, the business had resumed nearly full capacity in temporary locations. No employees were laid off. This allowed the insured to maintain its business and generate income. The insured submitted a claim for loss of business income, based on its loss of net income in the year after the fire. The insurer paid a sum considerably less than the claim based upon its interpretation of what expenses could be included in a calculation of net profit or loss in order to determine loss of business income. The trial court held that the insurer did not have to pay the cost of ordinary payroll beyond the sixty-day limit, and granted summary judgment in the insurer's favor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com