BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure 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


    Don’t Conspire to Build a Home…Wait…What?

    Georgia Amends Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Construction Problem Halts Wind Power Park

    Gilbane Project Exec Completes His Mission Against the Odds

    Unpaid Subcontractor Walks Off the Job and Wins

    Musk Backs Off Plan for Tunnel in Tony Los Angelenos' Backyard

    Coverage Denied for Ensuing Loss After Foundation Damage

    Technology and the Environment Lead Construction Trends That Will Continue Through 2019

    Homeowners May Not Need to Pay Lien on Defective Log Cabin

    Points on Negotiating Construction Claims

    Decades of WCC Seminar at the Disneyland Resort

    Congratulations 2019 DE, NJ and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Renee Zellweger Selling Connecticut Country Home

    Colorado Legislature Kills SB 20-138 – A Bill to Extend Colorado’s Statute of Repose

    The OFCCP’s November 2019 Updated Technical Assistance Guide: What Every Federal Construction Contractor Should Know

    Patrick Haggerty Promoted to Counsel

    Airbnb Declares End to Party!

    Owner Bankruptcy: What’s a Contractor to Do?

    Illinois Supreme Court Announces Time Standards for Closing Out Cases

    Filing Lien Foreclosure Lawsuit After Serving Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    U.S. Army Corps Announces Regulatory Program “Modernization” Plan

    Crane Firm Pulled Off NYC Projects Following Multiple Incidents

    Mediating Contract Claims and Disputes at the ASBCA

    25 Days After Explosion, Another Utility Shuts Off Gas in Boston Area

    Construction Companies Can Be Liable for “Secondary Exposure” of Asbestos to Household Members

    Brazil World Cup Soccer Crisis Deepens With Eighth Worker Death

    Construction Defect Headaches Can Be Avoided

    What Every Project Participant Needs to Know About Delay Claims

    Texas Walks the Line on When the Duty to Preserve Evidence at a Fire Scene Arises

    Construction Defect Disputes: Know Your Measure of Damages!!!!!

    Return-to-Workplace Checklist: Considerations and Emerging Best Practices for Employers

    Blurred Lines: New York Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Privileged Documents in Connection with Pre-Denial Communications Prepared by Insurer's Coverage Counsel

    ASHRAE Approves Groundbreaking Standard to Reduce the Risk of Disease Transmission in Indoor Spaces

    Richest NJ Neighborhood Fights Plan for Low-Cost Homes on Toxic Dump

    California Ranks As Leading State for Green Building in 2022

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

    Litigation Counsel of America Honors Partner Victor Anderson with Peter Perlman Award

    Los Angeles Considering Census of Seismically Unstable Buildings

    Sixth Circuit Rejects Claim for Reverse Bad Faith

    Eliminating Waste in Construction – An Interview with Turner Burton

    Federal Contractors – Double Check the Terms of Your Contract Before Performing Ordered Changes

    Cal/OSHA-Approved Changes to ETS Will Take Effect May 6, 2022

    Pushing the Edge: Crews Carve Dam Out of Remote Turkish Mountains

    The Best Laid Plans: Contingency in a Construction Contract

    WSDOT Excludes Non-Minority Women-Owned DBEs from Participation Goals

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Confident about Construction Defect Bill

    The Indemnification Limitation in Section 725.06 does not apply to Utility Horizontal-Type Projects

    South Carolina Legislature Defines "Occurrence" To Include Property Damage Arising From Faulty Workmanship

    Hail Drives Construction Spending in Amarillo

    LA Metro To Pay Kiewit $297.8M Settlement on Freeway Job
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Research Institute: A Shared Information Platform Reduces Construction Costs Considerably

    October 26, 2017 —
    A new Danish study shows how the use of a shared digital management and communication platform on large-scale construction projects leads to considerable cost reductions. The Danish Building Research Institute conducted a six-month research project that studied the effects of using a specific IT concept during construction. The three case studies were: 1. The Maersk Tower, a 15-story, 42,700-square-meter extension to the Panum complex. 2. The Niels Bohr Building, a 52,000-square-meter new laboratory and academic building. 3. The Danish Defence’s Property Agency’s construction project portfolio (FES). Each of them used GenieBelt as the shared IT platform. It was used for the progress management of a construction project portfolio, management of construction activities, and communication between the construction management team and contractors. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at info@aepartners.fi

    Oregon agreement to procure insurance, anti-indemnity statute, and self-insured retention

    March 05, 2011 —

    In Continental Casualty Ins. Co. v. Zurich American Ins. Co., No. 09-35484 (9th Cir. Oct. 28, 2010), general contractor TCR was sued by an employee of subcontractor Safeway for bodily injuries suffered while working on the project. In the subcontract, Safeway agreed to procure primary insurance providing coverage for TCR for liability arising out of Safeway’s negligence. Safeway’s CGL policy included a self-insured retention that had to be satisfied before the insurer had a duty to defend. TCR filed suit against Safeway alleging that

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

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

    No Duty to Indemnify When Discovery Shows Faulty Workmanship Damages Insured’s Own Work

    November 07, 2012 —
    Our post last week addressed the duty to defend when alleged faulty workmanship caused loss to property adjacent to where the insured was working. See Pamerin Rentals II, LLC v. R.G. Hendricks & Sons Constr., Inc., 2012 Wis. App. LEXIS 698 (Wis. Ct. App. Sept. 5, 2012) [post here]. Today, we report on recent developments in the same case where the court determined, despite earlier finding the insurer owed a defense, it had no duty to indemnify. Pamperin Rentals II, LLC v. R.G. Hendricks & Sons Constr., Inc., 2012 Wisc. App. LEXIS 793 (Wis. Ct. App. Oct. 10, 2012). Hendricks contracted to “prepare the site and supply and install concrete, tamped concrete, and colored concrete” at several service stations. The owner sued Hendricks, alleging the concrete “was defective and/or the work performed was not done in a workman-like manner and resulted in damages, and will require replacement.” Pekin Insurance Company agreed to defend Hendricks subject to a reservation of rights. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii.
    Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    New York Office Secures Appellate Win in Labor Law 240(1) Fall in Basement Accident Case

    March 20, 2023 —
    New York, N.Y. (March 14, 2023) – New York Appellate Partner Nicholas P. Hurzeler and Managing Partner Gregory S. Katz recently prevailed when the New York Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the dismissal of a Labor Law 240(1) claim involving an accident that occurred in the basement of a house under construction. Balfe v. Graham, ___ AD3d ___ (2d Dept. 2023), decided March 8, 2023. In this matter, the plaintiff was installing ductwork in the basement of a house that had been stripped down to its foundation when he stepped backwards into an open hole that had been dug out of a concrete floor to accommodate the installation of an ejector pump. The lower court dismissed the plaintiff’s claim based on Labor Law 240(1), and he appealed. The plaintiff argued that he fell into an unprotected opening that should have been covered or barricaded. He further claimed the accident qualifies as a typical “falling worker” case within the scope of Labor Law 240(1), citing the depth of the hole needed to accommodate the ejector pump, and the size of the pump. Under the case law, a worker who falls into an uncovered opening on a construction site will typically be covered by Labor Law 240(1). Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas P. Hurzeler, Lewis Brisbois and Gregory S. Katz, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Katz may be contacted at Greg.Katz@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Hurzeler may be contacted at Nicholas.Hurzeler@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Judgment Stemming from a Section 998 Offer Without a Written Acceptance Provision Is Void

    March 22, 2021 —
    In Mostafavi Law Group, APC v. Larry Rabineau, APC (B302344, Mar. 3, 2021), the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District (Los Angeles), addressed an issue of first impression: whether the purported acceptance of a Code of Civil Procedure section 998 (“section 998”) offer lacking an acceptance provision gives rise to a valid judgment. The appellate court held that a section 998 offer to compromise (“998 Offer”) without an acceptance provision is invalid and any judgment stemming from it is void. In Mostafavi Law Group, plaintiffs sued defendants for defamation per se, among other claims, which was litigated at-length over several years. Defendants served plaintiffs with a written 998 Offer, offering to settle the action for the sum of $25,000.01. The 998 Offer did not specify the manner in which plaintiffs were to accept the offer. Within the statutory time period for acceptance, plaintiffs’ counsel hand-wrote the following onto the 998 Offer: “Plaintiff Mostafavi Law Group, APC accepts the offer.” That day, plaintiffs also filed a notice of acceptance of the 998 Offer, along with proof thereof, and sent a copy to defendants. The next day, having received the notice of acceptance, defendants advised plaintiffs that they would “draft and send . . . a settlement agreement for . . . signature” before paying the settlement funds. Reprinted courtesy of Arezoo Jamshidi, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP, Stevie B. Newton, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Lawrence S. Zucker II, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Jamshidi may be contacted at ajamshidi@hbblaw.com Mr. Newton may be contacted at snewton@hbblaw.com Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New OSHA Rule Creates Electronic Reporting Requirement

    June 22, 2016 —
    The United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a Final Rule revising portions of its Recording and Reporting Occupational Injuries and Illnesses regulations (Recording and Reporting Regulations). The revisions take effect August 10, 2016. Employers subject to the new requirements have until July 1, 2017 to submit electronically the required information for calendar year 2016. OSHA will make electronically-submitted workplace-safety data for each reporting employer available publicly in an online database. Reprinted courtesy of John K. Baker, White and Williams LLP and Kevin Conrad, White and Williams LLP Mr. Baker may be contacted at bakerj@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Conrad may be contacted at conradk@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Settlement Reached in Bridge Failure Lawsuit

    December 11, 2013 —
    Officials claimed the failure of a bridge in Afton Township, Illinois was because trucks owned by Welded Construction used the bridge despite exceeding the bridge’s weight limit of 36.5 tons. The firm argued that they should be responsible for the depreciated cost of the bridge, not its replacement cost. Welded Construction had been using the bridge to get to the site of an oil pipeline construction project for Enbridge Energy. Replacement of the bridge was initially estimated at $933,000, but that was in advance of any design work. Enbridge Energy settled the case at $900,000, which should cover most or all of the cost of repair or replacement. Some federal funds may also be available for repairing or constructing a new bridge. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    TOP TAKE-AWAY SERIES: The 2023 Fall Meeting in Washington, D.C.

    November 13, 2023 —
    Over 500 construction lawyers, experts, and consultants descended on Washington last week for the Forum’s 2023 Fall Meeting. Newly minted Forum Chair John Cook and Program Coordinators Catherine Delorey and Brian Zimmerman put together a stellar program focused on navigating government construction. For this installation of the post-meeting post, I'm teaming up with guest contributor, Jennifer Kanady, to bring you 10 of our top take-aways from this unique program. 10. Contracting with the government is replete with risk that could easily trap the unwary. Nobody likes to be taken advantage of. But hell hath no fury like the U.S. Government scorned. Erin Cannon-Wells and Aaron Silberman, gave a (truly) delightful, Indiana-Jones-inspired presentation on the regulations that can doom the unwitting contractor who is less than perfectly forthright in its dealings. The government has created financial incentives for members of the public to report your company’s violations as part of a qui tam action. When you consider the number of potential whistleblowers in the bidding process and the contracting chain, a qui tam action would seem more likely than not. Add to that the sanctions contractors might face for even innocent errors either by their own companies or their downstream subs, and government contracting begins to sound increasingly like the Temple of Doom. Oh, and in case you were only focused on affirmative claims, beware the “reverse false claim” which is concealing information that would rightfully entitle the government to a credit… Reprinted courtesy of Marissa L. Downs, Laurie & Brennan, LLP and Jennifer M. Kanady, FAC Services, LLC Ms. Downs may be contacted at mdowns@lauriebrennan.com Ms. Kanady may be contacted at JKanady@facfin.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of