BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor 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


    Legislation Update: S-865 Public-Private Partnerships in New Jersey Passed by Both Houses-Awaiting Governor’s Signature

    New WA Law Caps Retainage on Private Projects at 5%

    Congratulations to Woodland Hills Partner Patrick Au and Senior Associate Ava Vahdat on Their Successful Motion for Summary Judgment!

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “This Is Sufficient for Your Purposes …”

    Insurance Policy’s “No Voluntary Payment” Clauses Lose Some Bite in Colorado

    Congratulations to Partner Madeline Arcellana on Her Selection as a Top Rank Attorney in Nevada!

    White and Williams Recognizes Women’s History Month: Remembering Virginia Barton Wallace

    Safety Versus a False Sense of Security: Challenges to the Use of Construction Cranes

    Making the Construction Dispute Resolution Process More Efficient and Less Expensive, Part 2

    Extreme Flooding Overwhelms New York Roadways, Killing 1 Person

    CEB’s Mechanics Liens and Related Remedies – 2014 Update

    Lewis Brisbois Ranks Among Top 25 Firms on NLJ’s 2021 Women in Law Scorecard

    The Greenest U.S. Cities & States

    The Regulations on the Trump Administration's Chopping Block

    The New Industrial Revolution: Rebuilding America and the World

    Reminder: Your Accounting and Other Records Matter

    When it Comes to COVID Emergency Regulations, Have a Plan

    San Francisco Airport’s Terminal 1 Aims Sky High

    Deference Given To Procuring Public Agency Regarding Material Deviation

    Affordable Global Housing Will Cost $11 Trillion

    Zell Says Homeownership Rate to Fall as Marriages Delayed

    Construction Contract Clauses Only a Grinch Would Love – Part 4

    Part II: Key Provisions of School Facility Construction & Design Contracts

    California Court of Appeal Finds Coverage for Injured Worker Despite Contractor's Exclusion

    Time To “Construct” New Social Media Policies

    Rooftop Owners Sue Cubs Consultant for Alleged False Statements

    Ten Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to the Best Lawyers in America© 2019

    New Report Reveals Heavy Civil Construction Less Impacted by COVID-19 Than Commercial Construction

    Differing Site Conditions Produce Differing Challenges

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at Slower Pace in May

    MTA Implements Revised Contractors Debarment Regulations

    How a Robot-Built Habitat on Mars Could Change Construction on Earth

    Busting Major Alternative-Lending Myths

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2023 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Utah’s Highest Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Properly Commence an Action to Rely on the Relation-Back Doctrine to Overcome the Statute of Repose

    What is the Implied Warranty of Habitability?

    Carolinas Storm Damage Tally Impeded by Lingering Floods

    ASCE Statement on House Passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024

    No Duty to Defend Suit That Is Threatened Under Strict Liability Statute

    School’s Lawsuit over Defective Field Construction Delayed

    New Executive Orders Expedite the Need for Contractors to Go Green

    Hiring Subcontractors with Workers Compensation Insurance

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/8/24) – Hotel Labor Disputes, a Congressional Real Estate Caucus and Freddie Mac’s New Policies

    Construction Defect Bill Removed from Committee Calendar

    Bremer Whyte Sets New Precedent in Palos Verdes Landslide Litigation

    Firm Sued for Stopping Construction in Indiana Wants Case Tried in Germany

    Jobsite Safety Should Be Every Contractors' Priority

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Preserves Possibility of Coverage

    Unfortunate Event Test Leads to Three Occurrences

    “Other Insurance” and Indemnity Provisions Determine Which Insurer Must Cover
    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

    California Appellate Court Confirms: Additional Insureds Are First-Class Citizens

    May 04, 2020 —
    Many businesses shift risk by requiring others with whom they do business – e.g., vendors, subcontractors, suppliers, and others – to procure insurance on their behalf by making the business an “additional insured” under the other person’s liability insurance policy. Unfortunately, insurance companies sometimes treat these additional insureds as second-class citizens, refusing to acknowledge that the additional insured has the same rights as the policyholder, who paid the premium. In Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company v. SMG Holdings, a California appellate court removes any doubt whether these additional insureds are third-party beneficiaries entitled to the same rights – and bound by the same duties – as the entity that bought the policy. While the dispute at issue in SMG Holdings was a narrow one – i.e., whether the additional insured was bound by the policy’s arbitration clause – the implications of its holding are far ranging in ways that, in some instances, may benefit the additional insured. For example, because the additional insured is an intended beneficiary under the policy, neither the insurer nor the policyholder may do anything to impair the additional insured’s rights under the policy; if they do, they may be liable for tortiously interfering with the additional insured’s contract rights. This means that (again, by way of example) if the insurer attempts to rescind, or cancel, or amend the policy in a way that impairs the additional insured’s rights, the additional insured may have recourse. It also means that if the policyholder does something untoward that jeopardizes the additional insured’s rights under the policy, the policyholder may be liable to the additional insured for any resulting harm. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott S. Thomas, Payne & Fears
    Mr. Thomas may be contacted at sst@paynefears.com

    Brooklyn Atlantic Yards Yields Dueling Suits on Tower

    September 03, 2014 —
    Forest City Ratner Cos., the initial developer of Brooklyn’s $4.9 billion Atlantic Yards project surrounding Barclays Center arena, exchanged lawsuits with the Swedish construction firm Skanska AB (SKAB) over claims of design flaws and delays in building a stalled residential tower. The lawsuits, filed today in Manhattan state court, focus on a contract for the 34-floor “modular” residential high-rise building under construction next to the arena for the National Basketball Association’s Brooklyn Nets that opened in 2012 as the centerpiece of the former rail yard and a symbol of the New York borough’s resurgence. Skanska, a Stockholm-based firm that has grown to become New York’s second-largest building contractor, seeks at least $50 million in damages for changes to the building that were made without consultation, according to its complaint. Brooklyn-based Forest City Ratner blames Skanska for the project’s problems, citing “tens of millions of dollars” in cost overruns caused by a lack of skill and a failure to adhere to terms of the 2012 contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Erik Larson, Bloomberg
    Mr. Larson may be contacted at elarson4@bloomberg.net

    90 and 150: Two Numbers You Must Know

    July 22, 2019 —
    Mechanic’s liens are a big topic here at Construction Law Musings. I’ve discussed everything from the picky nature of this powerful payment tool to the changes that are upcoming on July 1, 2019. Given the strict way that the form and timing of a Virginia mechanic’s lien is so critical, I thought a quick reminder was in order. Two numbers that are critical to the timing and content of any mechanic’s lien are 90 and 150, both found in Va. Code 43-4. 90 days is the time from the last date of work (not invoicing), or last date of the last month in which work was done given proper circumstances. The 90 days prescibes the time during which a contractor can properly record a valid lien. This is a hard deadline and is 90 days, not three months. Miss this deadline and no matter what the type of payment that has not been made (something discussed below), the contractor will lose its lien rights. This is the easier of the two numbers to both understand and apply. Count 90 days from last non-corrective or warranty work and that is your hard out for filing. 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

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (4/10/24) – Hotels Integrate AI, Baby-Boomers Stay Put, and Insurance Affects Housing Market

    May 06, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, DOT’s major grant programs, proptech’s solution to climate change risks, mortgage-locked sellers put their homes on the market, and more! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Don’t Waive Your Right to Arbitrate (Unless You Want To!)

    October 19, 2017 —
    Does your construction contract require you to arbitrate (instead of litigate) disputes arising out of the contract? If so, and you want to arbitrate, you do NOT want to do anything inconsistent or adverse with your right to arbitrate. Arbitration can be waived and you do not want arbitration to be waived if you believe this is the best forum to resolve your construction dispute. For instance, actively participating in a lawsuit through the prosecution or defense of issues in the lawsuit is certainly inconsistent with your right to arbitrate. This will result in a waiver of your right to compel arbitration. In a non-construction dispute—a dispute involving a law firm and its former partner—the law firm sued the partner. Chaikin v. Parker Waichman LLP, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D2165b (Fla. 2d DCA 2017). There was a partnership agreement that required disputes to be resolved by arbitration. The law firm sued the partner claiming he violated a previously entered employment agreement that did not require arbitration. When the partner counterclaimed, the law firm claimed that the counterclaim must be compelled to arbitration because the counterclaim arose out of the partnership agreement that required arbitration. Guess what? The trial court actually compelled the counterclaim to arbitration! Crazy! Clearly, any employment agreement and partnership agreement were intertwined such that the dispute would involve the same set of facts and any claims would have a significant relationship to the partnership agreement. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Terminating the Notice of Commencement (with a Notice of Termination)

    July 19, 2017 —
    The notice of commencement is important for purposes of construction lien priority. Stock Bldg. Supply of Florida, Inc. v. Soares Da Costa Const. Services, LLC, 76 So.3d 313, 317 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (“[A] notice of commencement serves to determine the priority of liens under the Construction Lien Law.”). A lien relates back in time to the date the notice of commencement was recorded assuming the notice of commencement is still in effect when the lien is recorded (or an amended noticed of commencement is recorded). Lien priority is very important and the reason why a contractor should always want to ensure there is an effective notice of commencement in place rather than an expired notice of commencement. For the same reasons why a contractor wants to ensure there is an effective notice of commencement, there are times an owner wants to terminate a notice of commencement. An owner may want to terminate the potential priority of a construction lien. For instance, say the owner is refinancing or obtaining a construction loan in the midst of construction. A lender will want to ensure its mortgage maintains first priority and certainly priority over a potential construction lien. Otherwise, why would a lender finance the construction if it does not maintain first priority. It generally will not. Thus, an owner needs to terminate the notice of commencement so that the closing occurs on the loan and the mortgage recorded before a new notice of commencement is recorded and construction continues. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at Dadelstein@gmail.com

    Maritime Law: An Albatross for Contractors Navigating Marine Construction

    January 03, 2022 —
    “Ah! Well a-day! When evil looks, Had I from old and young! Instead of the cross, the Albatross, About my neck was hung.” 1 Contractors and subcontractors performing construction over water may find themselves encountering maritime law for the first time. Like the ancient mariner’s encounter with an albatross in The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, a contractor may be able to use maritime law to safely guide it through rough seas, or, if not careful, a contractor may find itself with maritime law hung, like an albatross, around its neck. This article gives an overview of key maritime law issues to demystify this historical body of law and answers some basic questions. What is admiralty jurisdiction? The Constitution gives federal courts jurisdiction over all maritime cases. This jurisdiction gives litigants the opportunity to remove state court cases to federal court and to avoid a jury trial. The purpose of admiralty jurisdiction in federal court is to protect and ensure the uniform treatment of nationwide maritime commerce and extends to maritime contracts and accidents. Any contract which relates to the navigation, business, or commerce of the sea is a maritime contract. Even contracts with mixed obligations on land and sea can fall within admiralty jurisdiction – such as construction contracts with a waterborne component. Admiralty jurisdiction also extends to maritime accidents – those that occur on navigable waters and have a maritime nexus. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cindy Matherne Muller, Jones Walker LLP
    Ms. Muller may be contacted at cmuller@joneswalker.com

    Takeaways From Schedule-Based Dispute Between General Contractor and Subcontractor

    September 09, 2024 —
    A recent opinion out of the Southern District of Florida, Berkley Insurance Co. v. Suffolk Construction Co., Case 1:19-cv-23059-KMW (S.D.Fla. July 22, 2024), provides valuable takeaways on schedule-based disputes between a general contractor and subcontractor on a high-rise project. In a nutshell, the general contractor’s original project schedule was abandoned due to project delays and the project wasn’t being built by any updated project schedule. The subcontractor claimed the general contractor was mismanaging the schedule putting unreasonable manpower and supervision constraints on it, i.e., it was working inefficiently. A bench trial was conducted and the Court found in favor of the subcontractor’s arguments. The Court found the general contractor had unrelated delays and that work activities were no longer methodical but, simply, piecemeal demands. The Court also rejected any inadequate manpower arguments finding the subcontract did not place any manpower requirements on the subcontractor. 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