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


    Beth Cook Expands Insurance Litigation Team at Payne & Fears

    Design-Assist, an Ambiguous Term Causing Conflict in the Construction Industry[1]

    NY Gov. Sets Industry Advisory Council to Fix Public Contracts Process

    Construction Is Holding Back the Economy

    Civil RICO Case Against Johnny Doc Is Challenging

    Safety, Compliance and Productivity on the Jobsite

    San Diego County Considering Updates to Green Building Code

    Couple Perseveres to Build Green

    Can an App Renovate a Neighborhood?

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in 2022 Northern California Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    Texas LGI Homes Goes After First-Time Homeowners

    President Obama Vetoes Keystone Pipeline Bill

    Solicitor General’s Views to Supreme Court on Two Circuit Court Rulings that Groundwater Can be Considered “Waters of the United States”

    Steps to Curb Construction Defect Actions for Homebuilders

    A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

    Last Parcel of Rancho del Oro Masterplan Purchased by Cornerstone Communties

    Ex-Engineered Products Firm Executive Convicted of Bid Rigging

    Stop Losing Proposal Competitions

    April Rise in Construction Spending Not That Much

    Lewis Brisbois Launches New Practice Focusing on Supply Chain Issues

    Federal Court Predicts Coverage In Nevada for Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Hammer & Hand’s Top Ten Predictions for US High Performance Building in 2014

    Lenders Facing Soaring Costs Shutting Out U.S. Homebuyers

    Professor Stempel's Excpert Testimony for Insurer Excluded

    Steven Cvitanovic Recognized in JD Supra's 2017 Readers' Choice Awards

    Florida Governor Signs Construction Defect Amendments into Law

    The Trend in the Economic Loss Rule in Construction Defect Litigation

    Corporate Formalities: A Necessary Part of Business

    What You Need to Know About Notices of Completion, Cessation and Non-Responsibility

    The Expansion of Potential Liability of Construction Managers and Consultants

    Class Action Certification by Association for “Matters of Common Interest”

    Unpredictable Power Surges Threaten US Grid — And Your Home

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to the 2016 Southern California Super Lawyers Lists

    Edward Beitz and William Taylor Recognized by US News – Best Lawyers as a "Lawyer of the Year"

    Coloradoans Deserve More Than Hyperbole and Rhetoric from Plaintiffs’ Attorneys; We Deserve Attainable Housing

    CAPSA Changes Now in Effect

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2020 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Florida Court Gives Parties Assigned a Subrogation Claim a Math Lesson

    Hurricane Harvey: Understanding the Insurance Aspects, Immediate Actions for Risk Managers

    Supreme Court Declines to Address CDC Eviction Moratorium

    No Coverage for Collapse of Building

    Philadelphia Voters to Consider Best Value Bid Procurment

    The 2023 Term of the Supreme Court: Administrative and Regulatory Law Rulings

    KF-103 v. American Family Mutual Insurance: Tenth Circuit Upholds the “Complaint Rule”

    What Makes a Great Lawyer?

    Certain Private Projects Now Fall Under Prevailing Wage Laws. Is Yours One of Them?

    New Addition to the ASCE/SEI 7-22 Standard Protects Buildings from a 500-year Flood Event

    Duty to Defend Sorted Between Two Insurers Based Upon Lease and Policies

    Revisiting the CMO; Are We Overusing the Mediation Privilege?

    BWB&O is Recognized in the 2024 Edition of Best Law Firms®!
    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

    Eighth Circuit Rejects Retroactive Application of Construction Defect Legislation

    September 17, 2014 —
    The Eighth Circuit refused to retroactively apply an Arkansas statute establishing coverage for faulty workmanship. J-McDaniel Const. Co., Inc. v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 14911 (8th Cir. Aug. 4, 2014). The homeowners sued J-McDaniel for faulty workmanship in constructing their home. The defective construction work was performed by subcontractors. Mid-Continent refused to defend or indemnify J-McDaniel. The insured sued Mid-Continent. The district court dismissed the claim pursuant to Essex Ins. Co. v. Holder, 261 S.W. 3d 456, 460 (Ark. 2008). In Essex, the Arkansas Supreme Court held that defective workmanship resulting in damages only to the work product itself was not an occurrence. Although The Arkansas legislature overruled Essex by statute, the district court found that the Arkansas case law barred retroactive application of the statute. 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

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

    February 28, 2022 —
    Hundreds of thousands of homes are still without power due after Storm Eunice tore through the country, while insurers have indicated the clean-up could cost more than £300 million. At least four people were killed in the UK and Ireland during one of the worst storms in decades, with a gust of 122mph provisionally recorded at the Needles on the Isle of Wight, which, if verified, would be the highest ever recorded in England. Energy Networks Association (ENA) has said nearly 400,000 homes had no electricity on Friday night, with network providers recording 156,000 disrupted customers for UK Power Networks, 120,000 for Scottish & Southern, 112,000 for Western Power, 6,000 for Northern Power and 260 for Electricity North West. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg

    More (and Simpler) Options Under New Oregon Retention Law

    October 21, 2024 —
    Similar to the changes made by the Washington Legislature last year, the Oregon Legislature recently changed its retention law. Oregon public works agencies and large commercial project owners are now required to accept surety bonds in lieu of withholding retainage on construction projects. There is also no longer a requirement to deposit retention funds in an interest-bearing escrow account. The owner or public agency must accept the bond in lieu of retainage unless specific grounds exist. For example, public agencies must find there is “good cause” for rejection of the bond based on the “unique project circumstances. Private owners have less discretion to reject a bond and if the bond meets the statutory requirements, per ORS 701.435(1)(a) “the owner and lender shall accept” the bond “in lieu of all or any portion of the retainage…” Courts have not analyzed when “good cause” exists for public agencies to reject bonds or exactly what will allow a private owner to reject a bond. However, an agency or owner cannot have a general policy to reject retention bonds. The statute does not provide next steps if the contractor disagrees with a decision to reject the bond. It may be necessary to proceed under the contract’s dispute resolution procedure or it may be more appropriate to take the issue directly to the courts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Yelle, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Yelle may be contacted at michael.yelle@acslawyers.com

    PPP Loan Extension Ending Aug. 8

    August 03, 2020 —
    There is just over one week left to apply for the extended period of the Paycheck Protection Program, which will accept new applications through Aug. 8. Congress extended the legislation by unanimous consent on June 30 and President Trump signed the bill into law on July 4, 2020, allowing approximately $131.9 billion in funding to remain accessible to small businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Associated Builders and Contractors has expressed support for several changes to the PPP, but submitted comments on July 27, 2020, to the U.S. Department of the Treasury and U.S. Small Business Administration regarding changes to an interim final rule altering loan forgiveness and loan review procedures. ABC urges the government agencies to:
    • Provide further guidance on when businesses should apply for loan forgiveness and when they are notified of their forgiveness status.
    • Issue further guidance on the PPP audit process.
    • Increase flexibility for employee retention requirements and loan forgiveness.
    • Provide further clarification of non-payroll costs.
    • Refocus efforts to deliver PPP funds to underserved communities and minority businesses.
    Reprinted courtesy of Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Seventh Circuit Remands “Waters of the United States” Case to Corps of Engineers to Determine Whether there is a “Significant Nexus”

    July 10, 2018 —
    On June 27, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit decided the case of Orchard Hill Building Co. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Court of Appeals vacated the decision of the District Court granting the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps) motion for summary judgment dismissing the Orchard Hill Building Company’s (Orchard) complaint that the Corps’ jurisdictional determination erroneously found that the waters at issue were “jurisdictional waters” under the Clean Water Act (CWA) subject to the Corps’ jurisdiction. Acknowledging that the Corps and EPA had promulgated a new rule re-defining “waters of the United States” in 2015—which is now being challenged in the courts—the Court of Appeals noted that this case is controlled by the pre-2015 definition of “waters of the United States.” The Court of Appeals remanded the case to the Corps, directing it to determine if there was a significant nexus, as required. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Colorado Court of Appeals’ Ruling Highlights Dangers of Excessive Public Works Claims

    August 26, 2024 —
    In the case of Ralph L. Wadsworth Construction Company, LLC v. Regional Rail Partners (2024 COA 78), the Colorado Court of Appeals reviewed a complex contract dispute related to the design and construction of a transit rail line. The project, commissioned by the Regional Transportation District (“RTD”), involved a collaboration between Regional Rail Partners and Ralph L. Wadsworth Construction Company (“Wadsworth”) to build the North Metro Rail Line between Denver Union Station and Thornton. Key Facts:
    1. Contracts and Payments: Regional Rail Partners contracted with Wadsworth to perform specific construction tasks with a total contract value of $60,210,783. By the time of the trial, Regional Rail had paid almost $58 million of this amount.
    2. Disputes and Delays: The project faced numerous delays and disputes, leading to Wadsworth claiming significant financial damages attributed to these disruptions. In April 2018, Wadsworth’s expert estimated that Regional Rail owed them $12,408,496.60.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Mitigating the Consequences of Labor Unrest on Construction Projects

    February 14, 2023 —
    Until this past year, we have enjoyed an era of relative labor stability. It’s true, however, that labor unrest frequently coincides with inflationary pressure on prices, something that we are currently experiencing. The recent nationwide rail workers strike was averted only through the extraordinary intervention of the federal government. More recently, thousands of academic workers in the University of California system went on strike. Underscoring this development was a November 2022 New York Times article reporting that polls showed the highest level of support for organized labor since the 1960s. The same article also quoted a professor of labor relations warning that the current economy presents a high potential for strikes. This recalls the sixties and seventies when increased costs due to inflation led to a multitude of strikes. The construction industry has been historically strike-prone with approximately 22% of all strikes during the 1960s involving construction projects, contrasted with the fact that construction workers themselves accounted for only roughly 5% of the nation’s nonagricultural labor force. Incredibly, in 1969 alone, a record number of nearly 1,000 construction strikes occurred nationwide with 20 million worker days lost, more than five times the lost working time of the rest of the economy.[1] Reprinted courtesy of Cameron Lukas, Peckar & Abramson, P.C, Alan Winkler, Peckar & Abramson, P.C and Gregory Begg, Peckar & Abramson, P.C Mr. Lukas may be contacted at clukas@pecklaw.com Mr. Winkler may be contacted at awinkler@pecklaw.com Mr. Begg may be contacted at gbegg@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado Defective Construction is Not Considered "Property Damage"

    September 12, 2022 —
    In the July 5, 2022, case of Indian Harbor Ins. Co. v. Houston Casualty Co., the United States District Court for Colorado addressed the issue of whether damage to defectively installed balconies is considered “property damage” under Colorado law, requiring payment by a commercial general liability policy. Facts of the Case The case stems from a construction project where a subcontractor improperly installed balconies on an apartment complex. The owner of the project secured commercial general liability (CGL) coverage through an OCIP insured by Houston Casualty Company (HHC). The OCIP insured the general contractor and subcontractors. The general contractor also purchased a subcontractor default insurance policy insured by Indian Harbor. All parties agreed that the subcontractor improperly installed portions of various balconies, including flashing, water-proof sealing, and water-resistant barriers, among other defects with the installation process. The parties also agreed that other portions of the balconies were properly installed. However, in order to repair the defects in the installations, every bit of each balcony had to be torn off and re-constructed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.