BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut construction 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


    Gehry-Designed Project Seen Bringing NYC Vibe to L.A.

    Entire Fairness or Business Judgment? It’s Anyone’s Guess

    Insurer's Appeal of Jury Verdict Rejected by Tenth Circuit

    Construction Contracts Need Amending Post COVID-19 Shutdowns

    No Duty to Defend Under Renter's Policy

    Construction Goes Green in Orange County

    Certifying Claim Under Contract Disputes Act

    House of the Week: Spanish Dream Home on California's Riviera

    Turkey to Start Building 200,000 Homes in March, Erdogan Says

    Federal Court Finds Occurrence for Faulty Workmanship Under Virginia Law

    Echoes of Shutdown in Delay of Key Building Metric

    Insurer’s Confession Of Judgment Through Post-Lawsuit Payment

    New Mexico Adopts Right to Repair Act

    Toll Brothers Faces Construction Defect Lawsuit in New Jersey

    Subcontractors Have Remedies, Even if “Pay-if-Paid” Provisions are Enforced

    The Sensible Resurgence of the Multigenerational Home

    State of Texas’ Claims Time Barred by 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act

    ASCE's Architectural Engineering Institute Announces Winners of 2021 AEI Professional Project Award

    PulteGroup Fires Exec Accused of Defamation By Founder’s Heir

    10 Haight Lawyers Recognized in Best Lawyers in America© 2022 and The Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch 2022

    A Matter Judged: Subrogating Insurers Should Beware of Prior Suits Involving the Insured

    Wall Failure Due to Construction Defect Says Insurer

    Hong Kong Buyers Queue for New Homes After Prices Plunge

    Five Steps Employers Should Take In the Second Year Of the COVID-19 Pandemic

    London's Walkie Talkie Tower Voted Britain's Worst New Building

    Harmon Towers to Be Demolished without Being Finished

    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    Payment Bond Claim Notice Requires More than Mailing

    Tokyo's Skyline Set to See 45 New Skyscrapers by 2020 Olympics

    Insurer Must Defend Claims of Negligence and Private Nuisance

    Local Government’s Claims on Developer Bonds Dismissed for Failure to Pursue Administrative Remedies

    Will the Hidden Cracks in the Bay Bridge Cause Problems During an Earthquake?

    Broker Not Negligent When Insured Rejects Additional Coverage

    A Lot of Cheap Housing Is About to Get Very Expensive

    Condominium Construction Defect Resolution in the District of Columbia

    Haight Lawyers Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America© 2019

    A Discussion on Home Affordability

    Full Extent of Damage From Turkey Quakes Takes Shape

    Department of Transportation Revises Its Rules Affecting Environmental Review of Transportation Projects

    Harlem Developers Reach Deal with Attorney General

    Alabama Supreme Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect to Contractor's own Product

    Remodel Leads to Construction Defect Lawsuit

    NLRB Broadens the Joint Employer Standard

    Commentary: How to Limit COVID-19 Related Legal Claims

    Tropical Storms Pile Up Back-to-Back-to-Back Out West

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    Appellate Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    Haight Welcomes New Attorneys to Los Angeles, Sacramento and San Francisco

    How AI Can Become a Design Adviser

    CSLB Joint Venture Licenses – Providing Contractors With The Means To Expand Their Businesses
    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

    Philadelphia Court Rejects Expert Methodology for Detecting Asbestos

    October 11, 2017 —
    Lawsuits against talcum powder manufacturers have recently made headlines for the multimillion dollar verdicts returned in favor of plaintiffs with ovarian cancer. However, lawsuits brought by individuals with mesothelioma who did not work in occupations traditionally associated with asbestos exposure represent another potential liability for talcum powder manufacturers and retailers. In such cases, expert testimony linking mesothelioma to trace amounts of asbestos in talcum powder should be carefully scrutinized. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys Christian Singewald, Wesley Payne and Jonathan Woy Mr. Singewald may be contacted at singewaldc@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Payne may be contacted at paynew@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Woy may be contacted at woyj@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Palm Beach Billionaires’ Fix for Sinking Megamansions: Build Bigger

    June 14, 2021 —
    Thomas Peterffy became one of the world’s richest people by mastering risk on Wall Street. Building his Mediterranean-style mansion seven years ago on a vulnerable stretch of Florida’s Palm Beach Island was a matter of seeing the odds clearly once again. The consequences of climate change will play out over decades, and Peterffy is 76 years old. “I don’t have a care about it at all,” he said over lunch at Mar-a-Lago earlier this year, just down the street from his home. The founder of Interactive Brokers Group has a fortune of more than $21 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. “If something needs to be done to save it,” he added, “it’s not going to be my problem.” The town of Palm Beach is busy adapting to the risks of a warming planet, even if there appear to be fewer worriers among the buyers and speculative builders on the island. Some of the lowest-lying properties in the U.S. are seeing the highest-flying prices. The real estate website Zillow estimates the value of Peterffy’s home at $52 million. This year a new nine-bedroom mansion with toes-in-the-sand views sold to financier Scott Shleifer for a record-breaking price in excess of $122 million. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Prashant Gopal & Amanda L. Gordon, Bloomberg

    Insurers May Not Be Required to Defend Contractors In a Florida §558 Proceeding

    November 06, 2018 —
    In recent holding, the Florida Supreme Court held that an insurer may not have a duty to defend a contractor in a Florida §558 proceeding. Chapter 558 of the Florida Statutes sets forth procedural requirements which must be met before a claimant may file a construction defect action. These requirements include serving a contractor, subcontractor or supplier with written notice of the claim. The contractor, in turn, must serve a written response to the notice of claim in which the contractor provides either an offer to repair the alleged construction defect at no cost to the claimant, resolution of the claim through a monetary payment, a statement disputing the claim, or a statement that any monetary payment will be determined by the recipient’s insurer. The claimant may file suit if the contractor disputes the claim and refuses to remedy the alleged defect or provide monetary compensation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Erik Simpson, Gordon & Rees
    Mr. Simpson may be contacted at esimpson@grsm.com

    Rikus Locati Selected to 2024 Northern California Rising Stars!

    August 05, 2024 —
    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2024 Northern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars! BWB&O is proud to announce that Walnut Creek Associate Rikus Locati has been selected to the 2024 Northern California Super Lawyers list as Rising Stars for his work in Personal Injury. Super Lawyers is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The objective of Super Lawyers’ patented multiphase selection process is to create a credible, comprehensive, and diverse listing of outstanding attorneys that can be used as a resource for attorneys and consumers searching for legal counsel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Insurer's In-House Counsel's Involvement in Coverage Decision Opens Door to Discovery

    January 11, 2021 —
    The Mississippi Supreme Court held that the insurer must produce written communications from and make available for deposition the in-house counsel who orchestrated the denial of coverage. Travelers Pro. Cas. Co. of Am. v. 100 Renaissance, LLC, 2020 Miss. LEXIS 409 (Miss. Oct. 29, 2020). An unidentified driver struck a flagpole owned by the insured Renaissance, causing $2,134 in damages. Renaissance filed a claim with Travelers for uninsured-motorist coverage. The Travelers' claims handler, Charlene Duncan, determined there was no coverage because the flagpole was not a covered auto. Before corresponding with the insured, Duncan sought legal advice from Travelers' in-house counsel, Jim Harris. Renaissance sued Travelers for coverage and bad faith. Renaissance then took Duncan's deposition and asked that she explain both the denial letter and the reasons Travelers denied the claim. Duncan repeatedly said she did not know the basis of the denial and that she had consulted with Harris. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    OSHA Updates: New Submission Requirements for Injury and Illness Records

    October 02, 2023 —
    In a revival of an OSHA recordkeeping rule originally implemented under the Obama administration in 2016 and "rolled back" by the Trump administration in 2019, OSHA issued a final rule on July 21, 2023, requiring certain establishments in high-hazard industries to submit additional injury and illness data electronically to OSHA. The Final Rule is found at 29 CFR 1904 and goes into effect on Jan. 1, 2024. What does this mean? On and after Jan. 1, 2024, OSHA will require employers with 100 or more workers in certain high-hazard industries to provide annual information from their Forms 300 and 301, in addition to the already-required electronic submission of Form 300A. Form 300 is the Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses, including the specific injuries or illnesses and the employee names, while Form 301 is the corresponding Injury and Illness Incident Report, which includes additional details on each item listed on the 300 Log. Form300A is the corresponding Annual Summary showing the injury and illness totals for the year, including the number of cases, number of lost workdays, the injury and illness types, the average number of employees and the total hours employees worked. This Form 300A Annual Summary must be routinely submitted by employers with more than 250 employees on or before March 2 of each year for the prior year. Reprinted courtesy of Ashley Meredith Strittmatter and Chelsea N. Hayes, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Ms. Strittmatter may be contacted at astrittmatter@bakerdonelson.com Ms. Hayes may be contacted at cnhayes@bakerdonelson.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado’s Workers’ Compensation Act and the Construction Industry

    June 20, 2022 —
    In general, issues relating to employment law occur in all industries. However, some issues are more likely to be raised in certain employment contexts. For example, office work environments tend to give rise to harassment and discrimination claims while wage and hour disputes and workplace safety claims are common in the oil and gas industry. In the construction industry, employers must be especially cognizant of discrimination and harassment claims, employee misclassification claims, workplace safety issues, and wage and hour claims. In the context of workers’ compensation claims, construction projects often create unusual situations due to the contractual relationships between the parties. Even relatively simple construction of a single-family residence involves several levels of contracting, including between the owner and general contractor, between the owner or general contractor and design team, between the general contractor and subcontractors, and between the prime subcontractors and lower tiered sub-subcontractors. In most circumstances, this would not be an issue. However, when an injured worker makes a workers’ compensation claim, the contractual relationships among the various entities involved in a project can have a significant impact on which party or parties could be liable for the injury. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jordan Kaplan, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Kaplan may be contacted at kaplan@hhmrlaw.com

    Approaches in the Absence of a Differing Site Conditions Clause

    April 10, 2019 —
    A contractor who has encountered unforeseen conditions will typically rely on the contract’s differing site conditions clause as a means to recovery. Most construction contracts address those issues directly. In ConsensusDocs Standard Agreement and General Conditions between Owner and Constructor, the starting point is § 3.16.2. But what if the contract does not contain a differing site conditions clause? Or, what if the contract does contain such a clause, but the contractor failed to provide adequate notice or satisfy other conditions or requirements of the contract? When reliance on a differing site conditions clause is impractical, a contractor still may seek recovery in certain instances under one or more of the following legal theories: misrepresentation; fraud; duty to disclose; breach of implied warranty; and mutual mistake. Misrepresentation Misrepresentation occurs when an owner “misleads a contractor by a negligently untrue representation of fact[.]” John Massman Contracting Co. v. United States, 23 Cl. Ct. 24, 31 (1991) (citing Morrison–Knudsen Co. v. United States, 170 Ct. Cl. 712, 718–19, 345 F.2d 535, 539 (1965)). A contractor may be able to recover extra costs incurred, under a theory of misrepresentation, if it can show that (1) the owner made an erroneous representation, (2) the erroneous representation went to a material fact, (3) the contractor honestly and reasonably relied on that representation, and (4) the contractor’s reliance on the erroneous representation was to the contractor’s detriment. See T. Brown Constructors, Inc. v. Pena, 132 F.3d 724, 728–29 (Fed. Cir. 1997). These four requirements can be satisfied, for example, through the use of deposition testimony detailing the owner’s representations and the contractor’s reliance thereon. See, e.g., C & H Commercial Contractors, Inc. v. United States, 35 Fed. Cl. 246, 256–57 (1996). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Parker A. Lewton, Smith Currie
    Mr. Parker may be contacted at palewton@smithcurrie.com