BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expert
    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


    Delaware River Interstate Bridge Shut to Assess Truss Fracture

    The Great Skyscraper Comeback Skips North America

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/06/21)

    A Look at Trending Legislative Changes Impacting Workers' Comp

    Administrative and Environmental Law Cases Decided During the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2017-2018 Term

    Construction Bright Spot in Indianapolis

    Intentionally Set Atlanta Interstate Fire Closes Artery Until June

    Elyria, Ohio, to Invest $250M to Halt Illegal Sewage into Black River

    Bankruptcy on a Construction Project: Coronavirus Edition

    Construction Defects Claims Can Be Limited by Contract Says Washington Court

    No Coverage for Additional Insured

    Pa. Contractor Pleads No Contest to Prevailing-Wage Charges, Pays Workers $20.7M

    Rhode Island Sues 13 Industry Firms Over Flawed Interstate Bridge

    Contractor Prevails in Part Against CalOSHA in Valley Fever Case

    2017 California Construction Law Update

    In Search of Cement Replacements

    The Rise Of The Improper P2P Tactic

    Miorelli Doctrine’s Sovereign Immunity in Public Construction Contracts — Not the Be-All and End-All

    White Collar Overtime Regulations Temporarily Blocked

    Insurance Policy Provides No Coverage For Slab Collapse in Vision One

    The One New Year’s Resolution You’ll Want to Keep if You’re Involved in Public Works Projects

    Florida extends the Distressed Condominium Relief Act

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers!

    Court Holds That Parent Corporation Lacks Standing to Sue Subsidiary’s Insurers for Declaratory Relief

    After Sixty Years, Subcontractors are Back in the Driver’s Seat in Bidding on California Construction Projects

    Insurers Must Defend Allegations of Faulty Workmanship

    Lien Attaches To Landlord’s Interest When Landlord Is Party To Tenant Improvement Construction Contract

    The ABCs of PFAS: What You Need to Know About Liabilities for the “Forever Chemical”

    Following Mishaps, D.C. Metro Presses on With Repairs

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 05/04/22

    Colorado House Bill 20-1290 – Restriction on the Use of Failure to Cooperate Defense in First-Party Claims

    Colorado Supreme Court to Hear Colorado Pool Systems, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance Company, et al.

    How Drones are Speeding Up Construction

    County Officials Refute Resident’s Statement that Defect Repairs Improper

    10 Year Anniversary – Congratulations Greg Podolak

    New York Court Rejects Owner’s Bid for Additional Insured Coverage

    Understanding the Real Estate and Tax Implications of Florida's Buyer Ban Law

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

    Miller Act Payment Bond Surety Bound to Arbitration Award

    Contract Void Ab Initio: Key Insights into the KBR vs. Corps of Engineers Affirmative Defense

    Be Sure to Dot All of the “I’s” and Cross the “T’s” in Virginia

    Repairs to Water Infrastructure Underway After Hurricane Helene

    The COVID-19 Impact: Navigating the Legal Landscape’s New Normal

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (08/17/22) – Glass Ceilings, Floating Homes and the Inflation Reduction Act

    BHA’s Next MCLE Seminar in San Diego on July 25th

    Arbitration Provisions Are Challenging To Circumvent

    CA Supreme Court Rejects Proposed Exceptions to Interim Adverse Judgment Rule Defense to Malicious Prosecution Action

    ASCE Statement on Hurricane Milton and Environmental Threats

    Statutory Bad Faith and an Insured’s 60 Day Notice to Cure

    Robinson+Cole’s Amicus Brief Adopted and Cited by Massachusetts’s High Court
    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

    Louisiana Politicians Struggle on Construction Bills, Hospital Redevelopment

    June 16, 2011 —

    Louisiana politicians are still working on a compromise in the state’s construction budget, as reported in the Times-Picayune. Rob Marrianneax, the chair of the Senate Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Committee, removed a $45 million request from Governor Bobby Jindal and added $4 million for projects that Jindal vetoed last year.

    Two senators have formed competing plans to fund redevelopment construction for New Orleans’s Methodist Hospital. Mitch Landrieu, the mayor of New Orleans, hoped for $30 million dollars in state bonds. Senator Cynthia Willard-Lewis proposed an amendment that would supply $1.6 million, while Senator J.P. Morrell has an amendment that would supply $4 million.

    Read the full story…

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

    Boston Developer Sues Contractor Alleging Delays That Cost Millions

    November 01, 2021 —
    A Miami developer is suing the general contractor it hired to build a 22-story mixed-use tower in Boston’s trendy Seaport District, alleging construction delays cost it $4.9 million in lost revenue. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Materials Company CEO Sees Upturn in Building, Leading to Jobs

    November 05, 2014 —
    The Washington Post reported that Mesa Industries Inc. (a construction equipment and materials company), are "prepping for significant growth," which suggests that the construction industry is poised for growth. Terry Segerberg, CEO of Mesa Industries Inc., "is seeing enough nonresidential orders to suggest a sustained jobs recovery is underway in the industry — and in firms like hers that supply it." A Bureau of Labor Statistics report predicted that 1.6 million construction jobs will be added through 2022, according to the Washington Post. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    County Sovereign Immunity Invokes Change-Order Ordinance

    December 20, 2017 —
    The recent case of Fulton County v. Soco Contracting Company, Inc. addresses two very interesting questions for local government attorneys. First, can a county ordinance bolster a defense of sovereign immunity against a contractor’s claims? Second, can a county waive sovereign immunity by failing to respond to Requests for Admission? Facts: County hired Contractor to construct a facility near the airport. The contract provided that change orders must satisfy a county ordinance, which required approval by the Board of Commissioners. But in emergency situations, the County Manager could approve change orders, as long as the contractor executes a proposed modification and the purchasing agent approves it. The project suffered substantial delays, which Contractor attributed to weather, design delays, delays by the County in providing decisions on changes, and delays in obtaining permits during the federal government’s shutdown. As a result of these issues, Contractor comes County changed the scope of the contract. Contractor asserted claims against County for the delays and the changes to the work. The appellate opinion addresses the change order claims. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lizbeth Dison, Autry Hall & Cook, LLP

    Court Addresses When Duty to Defend Ends

    August 24, 2020 —
    There are certain generally held principles regarding an insurer’s duty to defend. One of these principles is that an insurer has a duty to defend its insured if the complaint states a claim that potentially falls within the policy’s coverage. However, there is a lack of consistency regarding the point at which the insurers’ duty to defend ends. When the only potentially covered claim has been dismissed, must the insurer continue to defend? Certain jurisdictions, such as Hawaii and Minnesota, have held that an insurer’s duty to defend continues through an appeals process, or until a final judgment has been entered, disposing of the entire case. Commerce & Industry Insurance Company v. Bank of Hawaii, 832 P.2d 733 (Haw. 1992); Meadowbrook, Inc. v. Tower Insurance Company, 559 N.W. 2d 411 (Minn. 1997). Earlier this week, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania took a different approach to this question in Westminster American Insurance Company v. Spruce 1530, No. 19-539, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106534 (E.D. Pa. June 17, 2020) – holding that the trial court’s dismissal of the only potentially covered claim was sufficient to terminate Westminster’s duty to defend. Reprinted courtesy of Anthony L. Miscioscia, White and Williams and Margo E. Meta, White and Williams Mr. Miscioscia may be contacted at misciosciaa@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Meta may be contacted at metam@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The “Right to Repair” Construction Defects in the Rocky Mountain and Plains Region

    October 16, 2018 —
    In excess of 30 states have enacted tort reform legislation requiring property owners to notify construction professionals of the presence of alleged construction defects prior to the commencement of a lawsuit. These statutes also often permit construction professionals to make an offer of repair within a statutorily defined period of time after receipt of a notice of claim letter. Undoubtedly, the notice-of-claim process has played a meaningful part in bringing construction professionals and claimants to timely resolutions of construction defect concerns in isolated instances. However, while these statutes are commonly referred to as “right of repair” legislation, their practical effect is often reduced to little more than procedural empty gestures serving as a prelude to litigation. This article will briefly survey the “right to repair” statutes in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota. In Nebraska, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming there is no right to repair or notice-of claim statue. Reprinted courtesy of Jean Meyer, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell LLC and Sheri Roswell, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell LLC Mr. Bracken, may be contacted at meyer@hhmrlaw.com  Ms. Russo may be contacted at roswell@hhmrlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Miller Act CLAIMS: Finding Protections and Preserving Your Rights

    November 29, 2021 —
    The Miller Act (the “Act”), which requires the prime contractor to furnish a performance bond and a payment bond to the government, protects “all persons supplying labor and materials carrying out the work provided for in the contract.”[1] Despite its broad language, courts have limited the parties who may actually assert a claim under the Act. This article introduces general background of the Act, identifies subcontractors who may qualify for protections under the Act, and suggests ways to preserve the rights as prime contractors. Brief Background of the Miller Act Under the Miller Act, there are two types of bonds the prime contractor furnishes to the government in a federal construction contract of more than $100,000[2] 1. Performance Bond A performance bond protects the United States and guarantees the completion of the project in accordance with the contract’s terms and conditions.[3] This bond must be with a surety that is satisfactory to the officer awarding the contract and in the amount the officer considers adequate for government protection.[4] If a contractor abandons a project or fails to perform, the bond itself will cover the government’s cost of substitute performance. Thus, the performance bond disincentivizes contractors from abandoning projects and provides the government with reassurance that an abandonment will not create delays or additional expenses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Diana Lyn Curtis McGraw, Fox Rothschild LLP
    Ms. McGraw may be contacted at dmcgraw@foxrothschild.com

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    September 26, 2022 —
    Construction is a zero sum game. What do I mean by that? I mean that even where you, a construction professional with a great construction lawyer, have reviewed and edited a subcontract presented to you or provided a well-drafted contract to the other party that contains an attorney fees provision, every dollar that you spend on litigation is a dollar less of profit. Couple the fact that no construction company can or should bid or negotiate work with an eye toward litigation (aside from having a well written contract that will be enforced to the letter here in Virginia). Particularly on “low bid” type projects, contractors and subcontractors cannot “pad” their bids to take into account the possibility of attorney fees, arbitration, or litigation. Furthermore, the loss of productivity when your “back office” personnel are tied up dealing with discovery, phone calls, and other incidents of litigation that do nothing but rehash a bad project and increase the expense sap money from the bottom line. While the possibility of a judgment including attorney fees may soften this blow, you are still out the cash. All of this said, if you are in commercial construction for any significant period of time disputes will arise and I have discussed the process in some detail at other places here at Construction Law Musings. As a construction litigator, I am fully aware of this fact of life. Efficient management of these disputes is key, particularly when they escalate to the point where some form of outside “help” (read arbitrator or judge) is necessary. 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