BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut window 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


    Haight’s John Arbucci and Kristian Moriarty Selected for Super Lawyers’ 2020 Southern California Rising Stars

    Home Building Mergers and Acquisitions 2014 Predictions

    Am I Still Covered Under the Title Insurance Policy?

    "On Second Thought"

    Near-Zero Carbon Cement Powers Sustainable 3D-Printed Homes

    Ex-Ironworkers Local President Sentenced to Prison Term for Extortion

    Federal District Court Continues to Find Construction Defects do Not Arise From An Occurrence

    In Personal Injury Actions, Prejudgment Interest on Costs Not Recoverable

    Will a Notice of Non-Responsibility Prevent Enforcement of a California Mechanics Lien?

    Negligence Claim Not Barred by Gist of the Action Doctrine

    In Colorado, Repair Vendors Can Bring First-Party Bad Faith Actions For Amounts Owed From an Insurer

    Supreme Court of Canada Broadly Interprets Exception to Faulty Workmanship Exclusion

    Waiving Consequential Damages—What Could Go Wrong?

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

    Alarm Cries Wolf in California Case Involving Privette Doctrine

    New York City Council’s Carbon Emissions Regulation Opposed by Real Estate Board

    Beam Fracture on Closed Mississippi River Bridge Is at Least Two Years Old

    Fraud Claims and Breach Of Warranty Claims Against Manufacturer

    Beginning of the 2020 Colorado Legislative Session: Here We Go Again

    Performance Bond Surety Takeover – Using Terminated Contractor To Complete The Work

    The Clock is Ticking: Construction Delays and Liquidated Damages

    M&A Representation and Warranty Insurance Considerations in the Wake of the Coronavirus Pandemic

    Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act Enacted

    Disaster-Relief Bill Stalls in Senate

    Congratulations 2020 DE, MA, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/30/22) – Proptech Trends, Green Construction, and Sustainable Buildings

    CLB Recommends Extensive Hawaii Contractor License Changes

    Hotel Owner Makes Construction Defect Claim

    If I Released My California Mechanics Lien, Can I File a New Mechanics Lien on the Same Project? Will the New Mechanics Lien be Enforceable?

    The Value of Photographic Evidence in Construction Litigation

    NARI Addresses Construction Defect Claim Issues for Remodeling Contractors

    To Catch a Thief

    Application of Set-Off When a Defendant Settles in Multiparty Construction Dispute

    Review your Additional Insured Endorsement

    Storm Eunice Damage in U.K. Could Top £300 Million

    William Lyon to Acquire RSI Communities

    Gilbane Project Exec Completes His Mission Against the Odds

    Legal Risks of Green Building

    Harborside Condo Construction Defect Settlement Moves Forward

    Drawing the Line: In Tennessee, the Economic Loss Doctrine Does Not Apply to Contracts for Services

    Fifth Circuit Confirms: Insurer Must Defend Despite Your Work/Your Product Exclusion

    E-Commerce Logistics Test Limits of Tilt-Up Construction

    Construction Defects Survey Results Show that Warranty Laws Should be Strengthened for Homeowners & Condominium Associations

    Public Works Bid Protests – Who Is Responsible? Who Is Responsive?

    After $15 Million Settlement, Association Gets $7.7 Million From Additional Subcontractor

    2025 Construction Law Update

    South Carolina Court of Appeals Diverges from Damico Opinion, Sending Recent Construction Defects Cases to Arbitration

    Private Project Payment Bonds and Pay if Paid in Virginia

    Massachusetts High Court to Decide if Insurers Can Recoup Defense Costs

    It’s Too Late, Lloyd’s: New York Federal Court Finds Insurer Waived Late Notice Defense
    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

    Sierra Pacific v. Bradbury Goes Unchallenged: Colorado’s Six-Year Statute of Repose Begins When a Subcontractor’s Scope of Work Ends

    November 03, 2016 —
    It’s official: the October 20, 2016 deadline to petition for certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals on its decision in Sierra Pacific Industries, Inc. v. Bradbury has passed, so it appears that decision will stand. In Sierra Pacific, the Court of Appeals held as a matter of first impression that the statute of repose for a general contractor to sue a subcontractor begins to run when a subcontractor’s scope of work is substantially complete, regardless of the status of the overall project. Sierra Pac. Indus., Inc. v. Bradbury, 2016 COA 132, ¶ 28, ___ P.3d ___. The Court of Appeals interpreted the statute of repose in C.R.S. section 13-80-104, which requires that “all actions against any architect, contractor, builder or builder vendor, engineer, or inspector performing or furnishing the design, planning, supervision, inspection, construction, or observation of any improvement to real property” must be brought within six years of substantial completion of that improvement. C.R.S. § 13-80-104(1)(a). Recognizing that “an improvement may be [to] a discrete component of an entire project” under Shaw Construction, LLC v. United Builder Services, Inc., 296 P.3d 145 (Colo. App. 2012), the Court of Appeals determined that “a subcontractor has substantially completed its role in the improvement at issue when it finishes working on the improvement.” Sierra Pac., 2016 COA at ¶¶ 20, 28. In doing so, it rejected Sierra Pacific’s argument that the statute could be tolled under the repair doctrine “while others worked to repair [the subcontractor’s] ‘improper installation work and flawed repair work.’” Id. at ¶ 29. Because six years had undisputedly passed since the subcontractor completed its scope of work when Sierra Pacific filed suit against it, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s order granting the subcontractor’s motion for summary judgment under Section 13-80-104(1)(a). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer Real Estate Litigation Blog
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    The Future of Airport Infrastructure in a Post-Pandemic World

    March 21, 2022 —
    In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, many service industries are reevaluating their physical footprint, and the aviation industry is no exception. Opportunities abound for developers, designers, and contractors to update and expand airport terminals to accommodate traditional needs while also meeting the growing demand for more open space (including larger outdoor areas in terminals and larger cargo facilities to meet the needs of Amazon, FedEx and UPS). The Future of Passenger Terminals In nearly every service industry, safety and hygiene policies are being overhauled, with a specific emphasis on the desire for more space across the board. Even before the pandemic caused a seismic shift in the way individuals interact with each other, airports and airlines had started reducing the number of unnecessary interactions between travelers and employees by introducing self-service check-in kiosks and contactless ordering at restaurants. The automation inside the airport will only continue to advance. Reprinted courtesy of Cait Horner, Pillsbury and Adam J. Weaver, Pillsbury Ms. Horner may be contacted at cait.horner@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Weaver may be contacted at adam.weaver@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Real Estate Crisis in North Dakota's Man Camps

    October 02, 2015 —
    Chain saws and staple guns echo across a $40 million residential complex under construction in Williston, North Dakota, a few miles from almost-empty camps once filled with oil workers. After struggling to house thousands of migrant roughnecks during the boom, the state faces a new real-estate crisis: The frenzied drilling that made it No. 1 in personal-income growth and job creation for five consecutive years hasn’t lasted long enough to support the oil-fueled building explosion. Civic leaders and developers say many new units were already in the pipeline, and they anticipate another influx of workers when oil prices rise again. But for now, hundreds of dwellings approved during the heady days are rising, skeletons of wood and cement surrounded by rolling grasslands, with too few residents who can afford them. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jennifer Oldham, Bloomberg

    Benefits and Pitfalls of Partnerships Between Companies

    December 21, 2016 —
    To bring innovations to the market, companies almost always need partnerships. Partnerships can offer scalability, productivity, and open up new markets. However, partnerships are not easy to establish and manage. The benefits of partnering Construction companies have always done joint ventures. The reason has been to simply be able to bid for and deliver a project that would be too big for one company at that specific moment. Partnering allows you to become larger than you are and to get work that would otherwise be out of your reach. It also lets you spread the risk in a demanding project among the members. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aarni@aepartners.fi

    “It Just Didn’t Add Up!”

    November 05, 2024 —
    Overturning arbitration awards in court is difficult. One of the few bases for a challenge to an award (under the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. 10(a)(4), as well as most state arbitration laws) is where the arbitrator is alleged to have “exceeded [his/her] powers” afforded the arbitrator by whatever rules and agreements are in place for the arbitration. Obviously, this places a burden on the arbitrator to “color within the lines” when serving as arbitrator and issuing rulings in the case. “After extensive discovery and a 10-day hearing, the Tribunal rendered a 142-page” award, whereupon the parties both sought to have the arbitrators correct what the parties agreed was an error in the award – increasing the award by $47,710. One of the parties, however, went further, urging that the arbitrators “erroneously included damages for claims related to production revenue” that occurred before a certain date. According to the court, that party was urging that “the Tribunal erred by factoring into its award damages related to Claims 2 and 3, which the Tribunal never substantially addressed.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Timely Legal Trends and Developments for Construction

    February 18, 2019 —
    The construction industry is broad and the legal concerns of industry members can be far-reaching. What seems like tomorrow’s problem often jumps to the forefront and becomes a high priority today. 2018 was full of moments like these – and it’s important to keep track of legal developments for a glimpse at what may be waiting around the corner. With that in mind, here are some of the most important legal developments for the construction industry from the second half of 2018. Sureties and Litigation – a Broad Topic Sureties play a vital role on construction projects. On federal jobs and state, county or municipal jobs, surety bonds are typically required. That means it’s important to stay on top of how the courts are treating surety agreements. Reprinted courtesy of Matt Viator, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Court-Side Seat: Recent Legal Developments at Supreme and Federal Appeals Courts

    December 18, 2022 —
    This is a review of initial Supreme Court and Federal Appeals Courts oral arguments and other matters in October 2022. Oral Arguments at the Supreme Court Michael Sackett, et ux., v. Environmental Protection Agency The Supreme Court’s 2022 term began on October 3, 2022, with this important oral argument. For many years, the petitioner has encountered EPA opposition to the construction of a home on his property located near a lake in Idaho. The agency insists that the land is subject to federal regulatory jurisdiction, in that a Clean Water Act permit will be needed before work can proceed. Several courts have already weighed in on this issue; whether the land in question is considered a regulated “wetlands” pursuant to the “significant nexus” test developed by the Court in the Rapanos case decided in 2006. The oral argument was fairly long and spirited. The justices appear to believe that the “significant nexus” is unworkable because in many instances it provides little or no guidance to landowners as to whether their property may be subject to federal jurisdiction, and thus subject to civil and even criminal penalties. Justice Kavanaugh remarked that “this case is going to be important for wetlands throughout the country and we have to get it right.” Later, Justice Gorsuch lamented the fact that implementing a test for federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act test is so difficult to apply: “If the federal government doesn’t know [if a property is adjacent to navigable water and is regulated,] “does a reasonable landowner have any idea.” The issue is very difficult to resolve, and the Congress has indicated that is has no interest in entering this regulatory thicket. 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

    Wyncrest Commons: Commonly Used Progress Payments in Construction Contracts Do Not Render Them Installment Contracts

    December 11, 2023 —
    In BIL-JIM Construction Company, Inc. v. Wyncrest Commons, LP, 2023 WL 7276637 (Unpublished, decided November 3, 2023), the New Jersey Appellate Division was asked to consider two issues regarding the interpretation and application of a construction contract that utilized the standard form American Institute of Architects owner/contractor agreement (AIA Document A101-2007) (the “AIA Contract”). Specifically, it was asked to consider: 1) whether a modified AIA Contract was an “installment contract,” whereby each progress payment was subject to its own statute of limitations; and 2) whether and when work had been approved in the context of New Jersey’s Municipal Land Use Law. While the decision is presently unpublished, it provides guidance as to how form contracts utilizing the same or similar terms will be treated by New Jersey’s courts and is a reminder that the potential for future claims must be considered during contract negotiations. Discussion The primary issue in Wyncrest was whether an AIA Contract was an “installment contract,” and the remaining issues turned on the resolution of this question. Wyncrest, the owner for the project at issue, did not dispute that its contractor, BIL-JIM Construction Company, Inc., had not been fully paid for work that it had performed in connection with a construction project located in Ocean County, New Jersey. Instead, Wyncrest argued that because its AIA Contract with BIL-JIM required that invoices be presented and paid monthly, it constituted an “installment contract.” As such, older payments would be treated as individual transactions and were time barred by the applicable statute of limitations. The trial court agreed with Wyncrest’s characterization of the AIA Contract as an “installment contract,” and found that BIL-JIM’s invoices were each subject to their own statute of limitations. However, the trial court disagreed with Wyncrest’s argument that BIL-JIM’s claim for retainage—which was submitted at the end of its work at the project—was time barred. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Benjamin J. Hochberg, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Hochberg may be contacted at bhochberg@pecklaw.com