BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code 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


    When Is Mandatory Arbitration Not Mandatory?

    Obtaining Temporary Injunction to Enforce Non-Compete Agreement

    2019 Legislative Changes Affecting the Construction Industry

    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    Housing Inflation Begins to Rise

    Illinois Appellate Court Address the Scope of the Term “Resident” in Homeowners Policy

    AFL-CIO Joins in $10 Billion Infrastructure Plan

    Reminder: Your Accounting and Other Records Matter

    COVID-19 Impacts on Subcontractor Default Insurance and Ripple Effects

    California Governor Signs SB 496 Amending California’s Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Housing Inventory Might be Distorted by Pocket Listings

    Virtual Jury Trials: The Next Wave of Remote Legal Practice

    Consider Short-Term Lease Workouts For Commercial Tenants

    Construction Defects Up Price and Raise Conflict over Water Treatment Expansion

    Is Ohio’s Buckeye Lake Dam Safe?

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (06/06/23) – Housing Woes, EV Plants and the Debate over Public Financing

    Park Avenue Is About to Get Something It Hasn’t Seen in 40 Years

    Balcony Collapses Killing Six People

    Architectural Firm, Fired by School District, Launches Lawsuit

    Triple Points to the English Court of Appeal for Clarifying the Law on LDs

    DE Confirms Robust D&O Protection Despite Company Demise

    Slump in U.S. Housing Starts Led by Multifamily: Economy

    EPA Will Soon Issue the Latest Revision to the Risk Management Program (RMP) Chemical Release Rules

    Unpaid Subcontractor Walks Off the Job and Wins

    Project Team Upgrades Va. General Assembly

    Don’t Overlook Leading Edge Hazards

    Where Parched California Is Finding New Water Sources

    Colorado Hotel Neighbors Sue over Construction Plans

    Progress, Property, and Privacy: Discussing Human-Led Infrastructure with Jeff Schumacher

    Damage Caused Not by Superstorm Sandy, But by Faulty Workmanship, Not Covered

    #8 CDJ Topic: The Las Vegas HOA Fraud Case Concludes but Controversy Continues

    School District Gets Expensive Lesson on Prompt Payment Law. But Did the Court Get it Right?

    New York’s Highest Court Gives Insurers “an Incentive to Defend”

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

    WCC and BHA Raised Thousands for Children’s Cancer Research at 25th West Coast Casualty CD Seminar

    Contractual Assumption of Liability Does Not Bar Coverage

    New Notary Language For Mechanics Lien Releases and Stop Payment Notice Releases

    Lightstone Committing $2 Billion to Hotel Projects

    Breach of a Construction Contract & An Equitable Remedy?

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    Construction Defect Case Not Over, Despite Summary Judgment

    Congratulations to BWB&O for Ranking #4 in Orange County Business Journal’s 2023 Book of Lists for Law Firms!

    Record Home Sales in Sydney Add to Bubble Fear

    Back to Basics: What is a Changes Clause?

    Perrin Construction Defect Claims & Trial Conference

    Appropriation Bill Cuts Military Construction Spending

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    Connecticut Answers Critical Questions Regarding Scope of Collapse Coverage in Homeowners Policies in Insurers’ Favor

    Congratulations to Karen Baytosh and August Hotchkin on Their Recognition as 2021 Nevada Legal Elites!

    Panama Weighs Another Canal Expansion at Centennial Mark
    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. Leveraging 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

    SIGAR Report Finds +$15 Billion in “Waste, Fraud and Abuse” in Afghanistan

    August 20, 2018 —
    Today, our colleagues Alex Ginsberg, Glenn Sweatt and Kevin Massoudi published their Client Alert on a recently issued Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) Report that finds over $15 billion in waste, fraud and abuse. In New SIGAR Report Identifies “Waste, Fraud and Abuse” in Afghanistan, our colleagues identify key takeaways from the Report include:
    • The Report reviewed public spending for Afghanistan reconstruction efforts and identified at least $15.5 billion in waste, fraud and abuse.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    A Quick Virginia Mechanic’s Lien Timing Refresher

    February 27, 2023 —
    As those who read Construction Law Musings on a regular basis know, mechanic’s liens are a big part of my construction law practice. These tricky and strictly enforced statutory collection tools are very powerful when correctly recorded and utterly useless if they aren’t recorded in a timely fashion and with the correct information contained within them. Couple that fact with recent changes to the mechanic’s lien form in 2019, and I feel the need to give a quick refresher. If you’ve kept up with Musings, you know about the two big numbers for Virginia mechanic’s lien timing, 90 and 150. These should be kept in mind for every general contractor, subcontractor, or supplier on any construction project in Virginia. Virginia Code Section 43-4 sets out the reasons to keep these numbers in mind. The code section sets out why you need to know these numbers. The 90 refers to the deadline for recording a lien. This number affects the right to a lien in Virginia. In order to preserve lien rights, a construction contractor must record the lien within ninety days of the last day of the last month in which the last work was performed or no later than ninety days from the date of completion of the project or other termination of work. The short version is that most general contractors on commercial projects have 90 days from the last work in which to record their lien and most subcontractors have 90 days from the last day of the last month of work. However, the best practice is to simply calculate the 90 days from the last work performed or material supplied to avoid issues and arguments between attorneys regarding timing. 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

    Florida extends the Distressed Condominium Relief Act

    June 17, 2015 —
    The Distressed Condominium Relief Act had been poised to expire on July 1st, but has now been extended by two additional years by the Florida legislature, the National Review reported. The act was Part VII of the Condominium Act in 2010, and has been previously extended twice. According to the National Review, “This Legislation attempted to allay the fears of potential investors about incurring developer liability in connection with the purchase of bulk units. The Act created a shield in favor of bulk purchasers from such potential liability, especially construction defects liability.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Wine without Cheese? (Why a construction contract needs an order of precedence clause)(Law Note)

    August 11, 2011 —

    For today’s law note, I’m addressing a comment that came to me last week from Dave O’Hern of Miller O’Hern Construction.  Dave writes:

    I am a general contractor doing a fuel tank replacement project for our county. In the specifications there is a spec for a UL 142 tank, on the plans the spec references UL 2085 ? a much more expensive tank. My subcontractor bid the UL 142 tank. The specifications state that the specs and plans are on the same level of precedence.

    The county wants me to furnish the more expensive tank without compensation citing the clause that states the plans and specs are complementary and what is called for by one is binding as if called by all and the most stringent requirement will apply.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Brumback of Ragsdale Liggett PLLC. Ms. Brumback can be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com.

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

    Fungi, Wet Rot, Dry Rot and "Virus": One of These Things is Not Like the Other

    November 02, 2020 —
    The Hartford’s so-called virus exclusion in its commercial property forms is getting a workout, and policyholders now have an argument that may help their cases move past the pleadings stage. A U.S. District Court in Florida has deemed the exclusion ambiguous and denied an insurer’s motion to dismiss.1 The exclusion applies to “presence, growth, proliferation, spread, or any activity of ’fungi’, wet rot, dry rot, bacteria or virus.”2 The Court held that the parties did not necessarily intend to exclude a pandemic. In Urogynecology, the plaintiff sought coverage for the loss of the usefulness and functionality of its business location due to the Florida Governor’s shutdown order. The policy contained a 'fungi', wet rot, dry rot, bacteria, or virus” exclusion.3 The carrier moved to dismiss, and the plaintiff argued that the exclusion only applied if COVID-19 was present on-site, which was not the case. The Court addressed none of the issues regarding direct physical loss and instead decided the motion on the fungi exclusion. The Court held the exclusion ambiguous because the exclusion of virus “does not logically align with the grouping of the virus exclusion with other pollutants such that the Policy necessarily anticipated and intended to deny coverage for these kinds of business losses.”5 In addition, the Court stated that pollution case law was not on point because “none of the cases dealt with the unique circumstances of the effect COVID-19 has had on our society – a distinction this Court considers significant.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hugh D. Hughes, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Mr. Hughes may be contacted at hdh@sdvlaw.com

    Claims Litigated Under Government Claims Act Must “Fairly Reflect” Factual Claims Made in Underlying Government Claim

    November 27, 2023 —
    Unlike horseshoes and hand grenades, close sometimes isn’t close enough. In the next case, Hernandez v. City of Stockton, 90 Cal.App.5th 1222 (2023), the Third District Court of appeal found that a pedestrian who sued a public entity for personal injuries caused by an “uplifted sidewalk” was barred from pursuing his claim when it was revealed that he had in fact injured himself by falling into a hole left by an “empty tree well” (i.e., a tree well that did not contain a tree”). According to the Court, the pedestrian’s claim was barred because the factual basis for recovery asserted in his complaint was not “fairly reflected” in his government claim. The Hernandez Case In April 2018, pedestrian Manual Sanchez Hernandez injured himself while walking on a public sidewalk in Stockton, California. He submitted a government claim with the City of Stockton claiming that his injuries, which included injuries to his knee, hands and back, was caused by a dangerous condition on public property. In his government claim, Hernandez alleged that he tripped on an “uplifted sidewalk” at or near 230 E. Charter Way in Stockton, California and that his injuries were due because the City “negligently and recklessly designed, maintained and operated the subject property so as to cause [his] injuries.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Loss of Use From Allegedly Improper Drainage System Triggers Defense Under CGL Policy

    February 28, 2018 —
    The Eleventh Circuit, in Mid-Continent Casualty Co. v. Adams Homes of Northwest Florida, Inc., No. 17-12660, 2018 WL 834896, at * 3-4 (11th Cir. Feb. 13, 2018) (per curiam), recently held under Florida law that a homebuilder’s alleged failure to implement a proper drainage system that allowed for neighborhood flooding triggered a general liability insurer’s duty to defend because the allegations involved a potentially covered loss of use of covered property. Reprinted courtesy of Katherine E. Miller, Hunton & Williams and Michael S. Levine, Hunton & Williams Ms. Miller may be contacted at kmiller@hunton.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@hunton.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    April 28, 2014 —
    Billionaire Stephen Ross’s Related Cos. new project in the sleepy end of downtown Los Angeles is designed to invigorate Grand Avenue the way its Time Warner Center helped energize New York’s Columbus Circle. “The notion of bringing together this diverse mix of uses, and allowing for a lot of public spaces and public events, has proven to be very powerful in the right locations and with the right planning.” said William Witte, president of Related’s California division. The New York-based firm formed a joint venture with Los Angeles-based SBE Entertainment Group LLC to restart plans for a $650 million-to-$700 million complex with entertainment, shopping, apartments, condominiums and a luxury hotel, Witte said. After going back and forth with local officials for most of the past year, Related won approval in January for the Frank Gehry-designed project from Los Angeles County supervisors. Ms. Brandt may be contacted at nbrandt@bloomberg.net; Mr. Gittelsohn may be contacted at johngitt@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadja Brandt and John Gittelsohn, Bloomberg