BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnesses
    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


    Is Arbitration Final and Binding?

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: Known Loss Doctrine & Interpretation of “Occurrence”

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

    Insurance Telematics and Usage Based Insurance Products

    Condo Developers Buy in Washington despite Construction Defect Litigation

    West Virginia Wild: Crews Carve Out Corridor H Through the Appalachian Mountains

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

    BHA at the 10th Annual Construction Law Institute, Orlando

    Thanks for My 6th Year Running as a Construction Litigation Super Lawyer

    Anatomy of an Indemnity Provision

    Ambiguous Application Questions Preclude Summary Judgment on Rescission Claim

    Late Progress Payments on Local Public Works Projects Are Not a Statutory Breach of Contract

    Undocumented Debris at Mississippi Port Sparks Legal Battle

    American Council of Engineering Companies of California Selects New Director

    Tennessee Looks to Define Improvements to Real Property

    Dangerous Condition, Dangerous Precedent: California Supreme Court Expands Scope of Dangerous Condition Liability Involving Third Party Negligent/Criminal Conduct

    The Unwavering Un-waivable Implied Warranty of Workmanship and Habitability in Arizona

    Tests Find Pollution From N.C. Coal Ash Site Hit by Florence Within Acceptable Levels

    Construction Executives Should Be Dusting Off Employee Handbooks

    Proving Contractor Licensure in California. The Tribe Has Spoken

    From Both Sides Now: Looking at Contracts Through a Post-Pandemic Lens

    Is a Text a Writing?

    No Coverage Where Cracks in Basement Walls Do Not Amount to Sudden Collapse

    California Mechanics’ Lien Case Treads Both Old and New Ground

    Is Your Contract “Mission Essential?” Recovering Costs for Performing During a Force Majeure Event Under Federal Regulations

    OSHA’s Multi-Employer Citation Policy: What Employers on Construction Sites Need to Know

    Collapse of Underground Storage Cave Not Covered

    Iconic Seattle Center Arena Roof the Only Piece to Stay in $900-Million Rebuild

    Construction Defects and Warranties in Maryland

    Fraud, the VCPA and Construction Contracts

    Short-Term Rental Legislation & Litigation On the Way!

    California Supreme Court Holds that Prevailing Wages are Not Required for Mobilization Work, for Now

    Toddler Crashes through Window, Falls to his Death

    Biden's Next 100 Days: Major Impacts Expected for the Construction Industry

    Flow-Down Clauses Can Drown Your Project

    ConsensusDOCS Updates its Forms

    Latosha Ellis Joins The National Black Lawyers Top 40 Under 40

    Word of the Day: “Contractor”

    AAA Revises its Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    NIST Florida Condo Collapse Probe Develops Dozens of Hypotheses

    Texas Supreme Court Authorizes Exception to the "Eight-Corners" Rule

    House Approves $715B Transportation and Water Infrastructure Bill

    A Court-Side Seat: SCOTUS Clarifies Alien Tort Statute and WOTUS Is Revisited

    John Boyden, Alison Kertis Named “Top Rank Attorneys” by Nevada Business Magazine

    In Florida, Component Parts of an Improvement to Real Property are Subject to the Statute of Repose for Products Liability Claims

    Quick Note: Third-Party Can Bring Common Law Bad Faith Claim

    Lakewood Introduced City Ordinance to Battle Colorado’s CD Law

    Bert L. Howe & Associates Returns as a Sponsor at the 30th Annual Construction Law Conference in San Antonio

    Mendocino Hospital Nearing Completion

    ASCE Statement on Senate Passage Of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
    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

    Construction Defect Journal Seeks Article Submissions Regarding SB800 and Other Builders Right to Repair Laws

    October 28, 2011 —

    As we approach the tenth anniversary of the passage and signing of SB800, California’s right-to-repair law, we’d like to hear your reactions to the law, your experiences with it, and your thoughts on it and right-to-repair laws in other states.

    We invite you to submit articles either reacting to SB800 or on other matters relevant to construction defect and claims issues. You can promote your firm’s capabilities and get valuable exposure through the publication of your articles. Construction Defect Journal is widely read by our highly targeted audience of decision makers, construction attorneys, builders, owners, and claims professionals.

    Articles may contain relevant images, your firm’s name, and links to your corporate website or third parties and can be submitted through e-mail to submitstory@constructiondefectjournal.com. Please remember to include your contact information if you would like it to be published with your content. If you are submitting photos or PDF documents with your article, please send them as e-mail attachments. Items submitted are assumed to be cleared for publishing upon receipt by CDJ.

    Normally articles are published in full, although we reserve the right to edit content for space purposes. All articles submitted are considered for publication. For additional questions please contact editor@constructiondefectjournal.com.

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

    How to Challenge a Project Labor Agreement

    May 24, 2018 —
    Building and Construction Trades Council of Metropolitan District v. Associated Builders and Contractors of Massachusetts Rhode Island, Inc Massachusetts Water Resources Authority v. Associated Builders and Contractors of Massachusetts Rhode Island, Inc, 507 U.S. 218, 113 S.Ct. 1190, 122 L.Ed.2d 565 (1993) , affectionately knows as Boston Harbor, is the seminal Supreme Court decision that held that the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) does not preempt government mandated project labor agreements (“PLAs”) if the government entity is acting as a market participant rather than a market regulator. Boston Harbor has led to many believing that virtually all PLAs are legal when the government agency is a project owner or if the PLA involves a private project. However, does Boston Harbor really cut that far? In short, no. The primary issue in Boston Harbor was one of preemption. The Supreme Court addressed whether the NLRA preempted state and local laws and ordinances mandating PLAs. On that narrow issue, the Supreme Court said there is no preemption if the government is acting as a market participant. What the Court did not address is whether other federal statutes invalidate PLAs. Specifically, whether PLA’s can run afoul of Section 8(e), the so called “hot cargo” provisions, of the NLRA. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.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

    Which Cities have the Most Affordable Homes?

    October 08, 2014 —
    Builder analyzed U.S. cities with populations of half a million or more and then filtered further with cities that have a “median new home closing price under $250,000, a first mortgage rate below 4 percent for new homes, and a median new home price per square foot below $125.” Topping the list was El Paso, Texas with the lowest median price ($168,600). Fifth on the list was San Antonio-New Braunfels, Texas with a median price of $230,400. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Keep Your Construction Claims Alive in Crazy Economic Times

    May 25, 2020 —
    Coronavirus is dominating the news. Construction in Virginia is facing what is at best an uncertain future and at worst a series of large scale shutdowns due to COVID-19. The number of cases seem to grow almost exponentially on a daily basis while states and the federal government try and patch together a solution. All of this adds up to the possibility that owners and other construction related businesses could shutter and importantly payment streams can slow or dry up. Aside from keeping your contractual terms in mind and meeting the notice deadlines found in your contract, these uncertain economic times require you to be aware of the claims process. Along with whatever claims process is set out in the contract and your run of the mill breach of contract through non-payment type claims, in times like this payment bond and mechanic’s lien claims are a key way to protect your payment interest. The law has differing requirements for each of these unique types of payment claims. Mechanic’s liens are technical and statute based with very picky requirements. The form and content of a memorandum of lien will be strictly read and in most cases form will trump substance. Further, among other requirements best discussed with a Virginia construction lawyer, you must keep in mind two numbers, 90 and 150. The 90 days is the amount of time that you have in which to record a lien. This deadline is generally calculated from the last date of work (or possibly the last day of the last month in which you did work). File after this deadline and your lien will be invalid because the right to record a lien has expired. The 150 days is a look back from the last day of work or the date of lien filing, whichever is sooner in time. The 150 days applies to the work that can be captured in the lien. In other words, it dictates the amount of the lien. 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

    Preparing For the Worst with Smart Books & Records

    November 07, 2012 —
    Contractors are often too caught up in keeping the wheel of business churning to recognize deficiencies in how their records are managed. Working hard and working often tend to leave little time for consideration of your documents. But all too often I see the unthinkable, a contractor gets into trouble and has to call on its surety for help. At that point, you might finally get your first dose of reality about your records – and it can cost you. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC.
    Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

    Recent Statutory Changes Cap Retainage on Applicable Construction Projects

    March 11, 2024 —
    Recent reforms to certain state retainage laws have reduced the lawful amount of withholding permitted on construction projects. In theory, retainage allows an owner to mitigate the risk of incomplete or defective work by withholding a certain portion of payment until the construction project is substantially complete. Recent statutory developments in Washington, New York, and Georgia represent significant changes in how much an owner may retain on applicable construction projects in those jurisdictions. The details of each state’s retainage laws vary in many important respects. Most states set caps at 5% or 10%, with important variations depending on the type of project and the amount of progress completed. Some states require retainage to be held in an escrow account, but most do not. Many federal construction projects allow up to 10% retainage, while other federal agencies do not require any retention. See 48 CFR § 52.232-5(e) - Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts. The ongoing motivation for retainage reform is typically framed in terms of reducing delays in getting payment to subcontractors who complete their scope of work on time and free from defects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick McKnight, Fox Rothschild LLP
    Mr. McKnight may be contacted at pmcknight@foxrothschild.com

    Where There's Smoke...California's New Emergency Wildfire Smoke Protection Regulation And What Employers Are Required To Do

    August 26, 2019 —
    California employers need to pay heed to the recently announced California Division of Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (Cal/OSHA) emergency regulation related to their duty to protect employees from the potential harm caused by wildfire smoke. As of July 29, 2019, employers are required to actively monitor their local Air Quality Index (AQI) and take steps to protect their employees from the harmful particulate matter contained within wildfire smoke. Which Workplaces Are Impacted? The regulation applies to all workplaces exposed to wildfire smoke with an AQI level of 151 or greater (ranging from "unhealthy" to "hazardous"). "Exposed" workplaces are those that are not in enclosed buildings, structures, or vehicles with mechanical ventilation and the ability to close all windows and doors. Outdoor occupations including construction, agriculture, landscaping, maintenance, commercial delivery, and others that expose the worker to the outside air for more than one hour will be the most impacted by this new regulation, although firefighters engaged in fighting wildfires are expressly exempt from the statute. What If I Have A Potentially Exposed Workplace? Employers with outdoor workplaces that are exposed to wildfire smoke are required to monitor the AQI before each shift, and "periodically throughout the day," all to ensure that the Air Quality Index for PM2.5 (particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers or smaller) remains below 151. This can be done by visiting certain governmental websites, including U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's AirNow website (www.airnow.gov), which allow for regular email alerts to be issued to the employer. An employer with a potentially exposed workplace must also set up a communication system capable of communicating to all affected employees (in a language readily understood) the status of wildfire smoke hazards. The communication system must also provide the employees a process to inform the employer of worsening air quality and/or any adverse symptoms that they may be experiencing (e.g., asthma or chest pain). Finally, employers are required to add to their Injury and Illness Protection Program (IIPP) the provision of effective training and instruction (i.e., approximately 15 minutes) regarding:
    1. the health effects of wildfire smoke;
    2. the right to obtain medical treatment without fear of reprisal;
    3. how employees can obtain the current AQI for PM2.5;
    4. the requirements of this regulation;
    5. the employer's communication system regarding wildfire smoke;
    6. the employer's methods for protecting employees from wildfire smoke;
    7. the importance, limitations, and benefits of using a respirator when exposed to wildfire smoke; and
    8. the proper use and maintenance of respirators.
    The Required Provision of Respiratory Protective Equipment Employers with exposed workplaces are required to provide effective NIOSH-approved respirators (e.g., N95 filtering facepiece respirators) when AQI for PM2.5 levels are 151-200 (unhealthy), 201-300 (very unhealthy), or 301-500 (hazardous). The N95 respirator typically costs less than a dollar per mask and can be easily purchased online. Employers are also required to clean, store, and maintain these respirators for times of need. Employees are free to decide whether to use a respirator when the AQI for PM2.5 level is between 151-500, although employers must be prepared to offer the equipment at an AQI level of 151 or higher. Use of the respirator by an employee exposed to an AQI for PM2.5 level that exceeds 500, however, is required by law. What Should Potentially Exposed Employers Do Now? Employers should immediately begin supplementing their IIPP platforms to include this regulation's prescribed training regarding wildfire smoke. Companies should also develop an adequate monitoring and communication plan regarding wildfire smoke hazards and effectively train their supervisors on the same. Finally, acquiring an adequate supply of N95 filtering respirators now will help ensure that employers are prepared for the next wildfire. Michael Studenka is a partner in Newmeyer Dillion's Labor & Employment practice group. His practice focuses on the life cycle of Employment law. Mike advises and trains companies on proactive measures to keep them protected and in compliance, and leverages his significant trial experience when faced with litigation. You can reach out to him at michael.studenka@ndlf.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of