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


    Is It Time to Digitize Safety?

    Panama Weighs Another Canal Expansion at Centennial Mark

    New Defendant Added to Morrison Bridge Decking Lawsuit

    Florida Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Homeowners Unaware of Construction Defects and Lack of Permits

    Rise in Home Building Helps Other Job Sectors

    You May Be Able to Dodge a Bullet, But Not a Gatling Gun

    Coyness is Nice. Just Not When Seeking a Default Judgment

    Harmon Towers Duty to Defend Question Must Wait, Says Court

    Newmeyer Dillion Partner Louis "Dutch" Schotemeyer Named One of Orange County's 500 Most Influential by Orange County Business Journal

    Second Circuit Certifies Question Impacting "Bellefonte Rule"

    Does a Contractor (or Subcontractor) Have to Complete its Work to File a Mechanics Lien

    Corps Spells Out Billions in Infrastructure Act Allocations

    Southern California Lost $8 Billion in Construction Wages

    Beware of Design Pitfalls In Unfamiliar Territory

    Recession Graduates’ Six-Year Gap in Homeownership

    Court Addresses When Duty to Defend Ends

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/13/22

    Why You Make A Better Wall Than A Window: Why Policyholders Can Rest Assured That Insurers Should Pay Legal Bills for Claims with Potential Coverage

    The Importance of the Subcontractor Exception to the “Your Work” Exclusion

    Mind The Appeal Or: A Lesson From Auto-Owners Insurance Co. V. Bolt Factory Lofts Owners Association, Inc. On Timing Insurance Bad Faith And Declaratory Judgment Insurance Claims Following A Nunn-Agreement

    Lightstone Committing $2 Billion to Hotel Projects

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    Labor Intensive

    Follow Up on Continental Western v. Shay Construction

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit with Additional Million

    As Climate Changes, 'Underwater Mortgage' May Take on New Meaning

    Montrose III: Appeals Court Rejects “Elective Vertical Stacking,” but Declines to Find “Universal Horizontal Exhaustion” Absent Proof of Policy Wordings

    Inside New York’s Newest Architectural Masterpiece for the Mega-Rich

    A Classic Blunder: Practical Advice for Avoiding Two-Front Wars

    Bidders Shortlisted as Oroville Dam Work Schedule is Set

    Colorado Court Holds No Coverage for Breach of Contract Claim

    Newmeyer & Dillion Welcomes Three Associates to Newport Beach Office

    The Future of Construction Tech Is Decision Tech

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    Citigroup Reaches $1.13 Billion Pact Over Mortgage Bonds

    Your Bad Faith Jury Instruction Against an Insurer is Important

    Recovering For Inflation On Federal Contracts: Recent DOD Guidance On Economic Price Adjustment Clauses

    Update Regarding McMillin Albany LLC v. Super Ct.

    Responding to Ransomware Learning from Colonial Pipeline

    Texas and Georgia Are Paying the Price for Sprawl

    Pulte Home Corp. v. CBR Electric, Inc.

    No Coverage for Building's First Collapse, But Disputed Facts on Second Collapse

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increased 4.3% in November

    Do You Really Want Mandatory Arbitration in Your Construction Contract?

    How A Contractor Saved The Day On A Troubled Florida Condo Project

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    Chambers USA 2019 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    Another Municipality Takes Action to Address the Lack of Condominiums Being Built in its Jurisdiction

    Trial Court Abuses Discretion in Appointing Unqualified Umpire for Appraisal
    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

    Floating Crane on Job in NYC's East River Has a Storied Past of Cold War Intrigue

    January 04, 2018 —
    Originally Published by CDJ on March 22, 2017 The complex maneuver of lifting heavy prefabricated modules out of New York City's East River to build a university laboratory took careful planning and the work of one particular floating crane with a complicated past. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, ENR
    Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com

    Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Shares Fall on Wind-Down Measure

    March 12, 2014 —
    Common shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac experienced their biggest intraday drop in 10 months after leaders of the Senate Banking Committee announced plans to eliminate the companies in a new bill. Fannie Mae shares tumbled as much as 44 percent, paring the losses to 31 percent to close in New York at $4.03, after Edwin Groshans, a managing director at Washington-based equity research firm Height Analytics LLC, described the proposal as holder-negative. Freddie Mac fell 27 percent to close at $4.04. Preferred shares also dropped, some by as much as 12 percent. The bipartisan measure, drafted with input from President Barack Obama’s administration, would replace the U.S.-owned mortgage financiers with government bond insurance that would kick in only after private capital suffered losses of at least 10 percent, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson and Senator Mike Crapo said in a statement today. The bill would require most borrowers to make down payments of at least 5 percent. Ms. Benson may be contacted at cbenson20@bloomberg.net; Ms. Hopkins may be contacted at chopkins19@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Clea Benson and Cheyenne Hopkins, Bloomberg

    DHS Awards Contracts for Border Wall Prototypes

    September 20, 2017 —
    The Dept. of Homeland Security has awarded eight contracts to companies to develop prototypes for the Trump administration’s proposed wall along sections of the nearly 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border. The contracts are divided evenly between concrete and nonconcrete options. DHS’s Customs and Border Protection agency didn’t specify what sort of materials would be used in the nonconcrete barriers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record
    ENR staff may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    An Interesting Look at Mechanic’s Lien Priority and Necessary Parties

    May 13, 2019 —
    As regular readers of Construction Law Musings are well aware, I like to discuss mechanic’s liens. Whether it is their picky nature, the way court’s treat them or the soon to take effect changes in the form, mechanic’s liens are a topic near and dear to my heart as a construction attorney. This past month the Fairfax Circuit Court took on the intersection of mechanic’s lien priority under Virginia Code section 43-21 (the lien priority statute) and what constitute necessary parties that must be named in any enforcement suit. In Marines Plumbing, LLC v. Durbin, et al., the Court discussed an all too typical scenario. Marines Plumbing performed repair work on the defendants’ property and the defendants did not pay for the work. Marines Plumbing recorded a memorandum of lien and subsequently sued to enforce that lien. In filing its suit, Marines Plumbing failed to name the trustees and lender on a deed of trust securing the loan on the property. Needless to say, the Defendants moved to dismiss the action for failure to name necessary parties (lender and trustees). 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

    Florida Court of Appeals Rejects Insurer’s Attempt to Intervene in Underlying Lawsuit to Submit Special Interrogatories

    October 09, 2018 —
    On August 10, 2018, the Florida Court of Appeals for the Second District upheld a trial court’s dismissal of an insurance company’s intervention in a tort lawsuit brought against its insured for the purposes of submitting special interrogatories and verdict forms. In Houston Specialty Ins. Co. v. Vaughn, 2018 Fla. App. LEXIS 11197, 2018 WL 3795785 (Fla. 2d DCA Aug. 10, 2018), the insured, All Florida Weatherproofing and Construction, Inc. (“All Florida”) provided pressure washing, roof coating, and other roof-related services. Houston Specialty issued a general liability policy to All Florida. In 2012, a worker fell off a roof while applying protective coating on behalf of All Florida. The worker and his family sued All Florida in connection with the worker’s injuries. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy Macklin, Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
    Mr. Macklin may be contacted at jmacklin@tlsslaw.com

    Why Construction Firms Should Think Differently on the Issue of Sustainability

    May 25, 2020 —
    How does a construction company differentiate itself from the competition? If the company owner don’t know the answer to this question, or if the first thought that popped into his or her mind was a generic answer along the lines of customer service, keep reading. While all businesses should strive to deliver better results for their customers, if a construction firm is looking to stand out from the crowd, putting sustainability at the very center of everything it does will be a clear difference maker. Finding ways to divert construction and demolition (C&D) waste materials away from landfills and into recycling streams is a must. Keeping track of and measuring your C&D recycling rates on a per-project basis, and also company-wide, can be the difference between winning and losing a contract. Reprinted courtesy of Chris Batterson, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Batterson may be contacted at chris.batterson@rubiconglobal.com

    Hirers Must Affirmatively Exercise Retained Control to be Liable Under Hooker Exception to Privette Doctrine

    September 12, 2023 —
    Don’t drink and drive people. I mean seriously. It’s been over 40 years since California native Candace Lightner formed Mothers Against Drunk Driving in 1980 after her 13-year-old daughter, Candace, was killed by a drunk driver who later served just 9 months in jail before getting out and getting into his sixth (yes, sixth) drunk driving accident. It hurts the victims and their families, makes a mess for the offender (and their family), and, as the next case, Marin v. Department of Transportation, 88 Cal.App.5th 529 (2023), illustrates, can needlessly draw out the pain as the victim’s family seeks financial recourse for their emotional loss from others. Miguel Angel Rodriguez De La Cruz, a highway construction worker, was killed by a drunk driver. I’m not sure what his family did on the legal front after his death – perhaps sued the drunk driver – but among possible others they sued the California Department of Transportation. And they lost. Although there is no such thing as “winning” and “losing” in these types cases. It’s just losing and losing. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Partners Jeremy S. Macklin and Mark F. Wolfe Secure Seventh Circuit Win for Insurer Client in Late Notice Dispute

    November 12, 2019 —
    In a written decision dated August 12, 2019, authored by Chief Judge Diane P. Wood, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled in favor of Traub Lieberman’s insurer client, affirming the District Court’s grant of summary judgment in the insurer’s favor. Partners, Jeremy S. Macklin and Mark F. Wolfe, represented the insurer client in the District Court and before the Seventh Circuit. Macklin argued the case before the Seventh Circuit on behalf of the insurer on May 28, 2019. The insurer client issued an excess liability policy to Deerfield Construction, a telecommunications construction company, which incorporated the notice requirements of the primary liability insurance policy issued by American States Insurance Company. The insured’s employee was involved in an automobile accident in 2008, during the effective dates of the excess liability policy. A lawsuit arising from the accident was filed and served in 2009. While Deerfield Construction, through its retained insurance intermediary, provided immediate notice of the accident and lawsuit to the primary liability insurer, the insurer client did not receive notice of either the accident or the lawsuit from any source until December 2014, approximately six weeks before trial. Following a $2.3 million judgment, the insurer client filed a complaint for declaratory judgment seeking a finding that Deerfield Construction materially breached the excess liability policy by not providing reasonable notice of the accident or the lawsuit, as required by the policy. The District Court found that the notice given to the insurer client was unreasonable as a matter of law. The District Court rejected Deerfield Construction’s argument that an insurance broker involved in the purchase of the excess liability policy, Arthur J. Gallagher, was the insurer client’s apparent agent for purposes of accepting notice. The District Court also rejected Deerfield Construction’s argument that the insurer client’s acts of requesting discovery, reviewing trial reports, and participating in settlement discussions raised equitable estoppel concerns. Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy S. Macklin, Traub Lieberman and Mark F. Wolfe, Traub Lieberman Mr. Macklin may be contacted at jmacklin@tlsslaw.com Mr. Wolfe may be contacted at mwolfe@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of