BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut stucco 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


    Brazil Builder Bondholders Burned by Bribery Allegations

    Building and Landscape Standards Enacted in Response to the Governor's Mandatory Water Restrictions Dealing with the Drought and Possible Effects of El Niño

    Panthers Withdraw City, County Deal Over Abandoned Facility

    What You Need to Know About the Recently Enacted Infrastructure Bill

    The Almost-Collapse of a Sarasota, Florida Condo Building

    New York Climate Mobilization Act Update: Reducing Carbon Emissions and Funding Solutions

    Manufacturer of Asbestos-Free Product May Still Be Liable for Asbestos Related Injuries

    Quick Note: Staying, Not Dismissing, Arbitrable Disputes Under Federal Arbitration Act

    Condominium Association Wins $5 Million Judgment against Developer

    Just Because You Record a Mechanic’s Lien Doesn’t Mean You Get Notice of Foreclosure

    Limiting Plaintiffs’ Claims to a Cause of Action for Violation of SB-800

    Business Risk Exclusions Do Not Preclude Coverage

    Short on Labor, Israeli Builders Seek to Vaccinate Palestinians

    While You Were Getting Worked Up Over Oil Prices, This Just Happened to Solar

    The Show Must Go On: Navigating Arbitration in the Wake of the COVID-19 Outbreak

    A Classic Blunder: Practical Advice for Avoiding Two-Front Wars

    EPA Announces that January 2017 Revised RMP Rules are Now Effective

    Attorneys' Fee Clauses are Engraved Invitations to Sue

    ICC/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Green Model Code Integrates Existing Standards

    Indiana Court of Appeals Rules Against Contractor and Performance Bond Surety on Contractor's Differing Site Conditions Claim

    Michigan Court of Appeals Remands Construction Defect Case

    Specific Source of Water Not Relevant in Construction Defect Claim

    Design & Construction Case Expands Florida’s Slavin Doctrine

    US-Mexico Border Wall Bids Include Tourist Attraction, Solar Panels

    OSHA Issues New Rules on Injury Record Keeping

    Brazil World Cup Soccer Crisis Deepens With Eighth Worker Death

    House of Digital Twins

    MTA Debarment Update

    School District Settles Over Defective Athletic Field

    Latosha Ellis Selected for 2019 Leadership Council on Legal Diversity Pathfinder Program

    Triggering Duty to Advance Costs Same Standard as Duty to Defend

    Not so Fast! How Does Revoking Acceleration of a Note Impact the Statute of Limitations?

    The California Privacy Rights Act Passed – Now What?

    Nonparty Discovery in California Arbitration: How to Get What You Want

    NYC Building Explosion Kills Two After Neighbor Reports Gas Leak

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

    Court Rules on a Long List of Motions in Illinois National Insurance Co v Nordic PCL

    An Era of Legends

    Not Our Territory: 11th Circuit Dismisses Hurricane Damage Appraisal Order for Lack of Jurisdiction

    2019 Legislative Changes Affecting the Construction Industry

    A Chicago Skyscraper Cements the Legacy of a Visionary Postmodern Architect

    Bound by Group Builders, Federal District Court Finds No Occurrence

    Millennials Want Houses, Just Like Everybody Else

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/04/23) – NFL Star Gets into Real Estate, DOJ Focuses on “Buyer-Broker Commissions”, and the Auto Workers’ Strike Continues

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives First Tier Ranking by U.S. News and World Reports

    Mediation Clause Can Stay a Miller Act Claim, Just Not Forever

    Preparing For the Worst with Smart Books & Records

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (8/14/24) – Commercial Real Estate AI, Hotel Pipeline Growth, and Housing Market Improvements

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    Yet Another Reminder that Tort and Contract Don’t Mix
    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

    St. Petersburg Florida’s Tallest Condo Tower Allegedly Riddled with Construction Defects

    October 15, 2014 —
    In a new lawsuit, the Signature Place Condominium Association claims "it is spending ‘large sums' of money to repair problems ranging from cracks in exterior walls to improper fire wall installation to excessive noise from air-conditioning and heating systems,” according to the Tampa Bay Times. The lawsuit also stated that “some of the alleged defects were hidden by building components and finishes and thus were not discovered by owners "until after the purchase and occupancy of the unit,” reported the Tampa Bay Times. The association “seeks damages in excess of $15,000, cites more than 100 other alleged construction and design defects.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Lease-Leaseback Battle Continues as First District Court of Appeals Sides with Contractor and School District

    August 17, 2017 —
    Earlier, we wrote about Davis v. Fresno United School District (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 261, a Fifth District California Court of Appeals decision that sent shock waves through the school construction industry and raised questions regarding the use of California’s lease-leaseback method of project delivery (Education Code sections 17400 et seq.). California’s lease-leaseback method of project delivery provides an alternative project delivery method for public school districts than the usual design-bid-build method of project delivery. Under the lease-leaseback method of project delivery, a school district leases its property to a developer, who in turn builds a school facility on the property and leases it back to the school district. One of the benefits of the lease-leaseback method of project delivery is that school districts do not need to come up with construction funds to build school facilities since they pay for the construction over time through their lease payments to the developer. Critics, however, argue that because lease-leaseback projects do not need to be competitively bid, they are ripe for cronyism between developers and school districts. In Davis, a taxpayer successfully brought suit against the Fresno Unified School District challenging the propriety of a lease-leaseback project because the entirety of the District’s “lease payments” occurred while the project was being constructed and thus, successfully argued the taxpayer, there was no “true” lease of a facility since it was under construction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Contractor Sues Golden Gate Bridge District Over Suicide Net Project

    December 18, 2022 —
    The project to install a suicide-deterrence net and perform other upgrades on the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco now is expected to complete five years late and cost more than double the original contract price, its contractors say. The joint venture leading the project filed a breach-of-contract complaint against the agency that manages the bridge seeking $195 million in damages, while the agency counters that delays were caused by changes in the contractor’s ownership. 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

    Want to Stay Up on Your Mechanic’s Lien Deadlines? Write a Letter or Two

    March 22, 2017 —
    90 days. 150 days. 6 months. 30 days. Do these numbers sound familiar? If you read Construction Law Musings regularly, they should be. These are various deadlines relating to the recording and enforcement of mechanic’s liens in Virginia. 90 days from your last work performed (or from the last date of the last month of work in the correct circumstances) sets the outside limit on when a construction company can record a lien on a construction project. 150 days is the “look back” period for what work’s value can be included in that lien. 6 months is the statute of limitations for the filing of an enforcement suit. Finally, 30 days amount of time after your start of work within which you, as a construction professional, must notify a mechanic’s lien agent of your presence on a residential project. Of course, there are always nuances to these rules that need to be taken into account, preferably with the help of your friendly neighborhood construction attorney, before deciding how to proceed in this very picky and “form over function” area of construction law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    As of July 1, 2024, California Will Require Most Employers to Have a Written Workplace Violence Prevention Program (WVPP) and Training. Is Your Company Compliant?

    June 17, 2024 —
    The California legislature passed Senate Bill 553 (SB 553) in 2023. This bill requires most California employers to implement a written Workplace Violence Prevention Program (WVPP) and to train employees on the WVPP. At Newmeyer Dillion, we are dedicated to helping you navigate these requirements and maintain a safe, compliant work environment. Act Now: Two Weeks to Comply With SB 553's July 1st compliance deadline, employers have just two weeks to develop and implement a compliant Workplace Violence Prevention Program (WVPP). The clock is ticking, and it is imperative to act swiftly to ensure compliance and protect your employees. What is SB 553? SB 553 is a legislative measure aimed at enhancing workplace safety by mandating specific actions from employers to prevent workplace violence. This bill recognizes the growing concern around workplace violence incidents and the need for proactive measures to maintain a safe workplace. The key components of SB 553 include:
    1. Establishment of a Workplace Violence Prevention Program (WVPP): Employers are required to develop and implement a comprehensive written WVPP tailored to their specific workplace environment and risks.
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason L. Morris, Newmeyer Dillion and Louis "Dutch" Schotemeyer, Newmeyer Dillion Mr. Morris may be contacted at jason.morris@ndlf.com Mr. Schotemeyer may be contacted at dutch.schotemeyer@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Jobs Machine in U.S. Created More Than Burger Flippers Last Year

    January 14, 2015 —
    The biggest private employment increase in 17 years was driven by gains among above-average paying jobs, dispelling the popular notion that the U.S. is turning into a nation of fast-food workers. Industries that pay employees more than the average for all workers accounted for 66 percent of total jobs created in 2014, based on data compiled by Bloomberg from Labor Department records. Business services -- staffing agencies, accountants, consultants and computer-system designers -- and goods producers, including construction firms and manufacturers, were among those hiring the most. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Carlos Torres, Bloomberg
    Mr. Torres may be contacted at t ctorres2@bloomberg.net

    An Architect Uses AI to Explore Surreal Black Worlds

    October 24, 2023 —
    For architect Curry Hackett, the appeal of using artificial intelligence to design projects isn’t to build the world of the impossibly distant future. Instead he wants to mine the near present, using machine learning to generate postcards from a world that is recognizably our own, but refracted through a lens of Black history and material design. Hackett is the designer behind a series of provocations made using AI to remix Black vernacular architecture in kaleidoscopic Afrofuturist landscapes. Specifically, he’s assembling images with Midjourney, an AI tool favored by architects to imagine what buildings might look like. Hackett’s prompts result in straightforward yet surreal sets, including roadside Popeyes kiosks in rural North Carolina, homes with inflatable porches in the Florida panhandle and park benches made out of the couch from grandma’s living room. Quilts, basket weaving and other cultural modes associated with American South are the building materials for Hackett’s speculative futures. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kriston Capps, Bloomberg

    Recent Supreme Court Decision Could Have Substantial Impact on Builders

    January 23, 2023 —
    On October 27, 2022, the Washington State Supreme Court issued a decision which could have a substantial impact on the enforceability of contract clauses that require litigation to be commenced within a stated period of time from project completion. In Tadych v. Noble Ridge Construction, Inc.,the Supreme Court held that the contractual one-year statute of limitations for bringing claims against the contractor was substantively unconscionable and reversed the Court of Appeals. In Tadych, plaintiff owners (the Tadychs) contracted with defendant contractor (Noble Ridge Construction, Inc., or NRC) for the construction of a custom home in 2012. The contract included a one-year claim limitations clause that required claims to be raised within a one year period from project completion and that any claims not raised during the one-year period would be waived. In December 2013, as the project neared completion, the Tadychs met with NRC to identify any outstanding project issues. The Tadychs noted several, including rainwater pools at the landing at the bottom of the stairs and several nicks and cracks on the stucco exterior walls. The Tadychs moved into the home on April 8, 2014, and the City of Seattle Department of Planning and Development conducted its final site inspection on April 15 and approved the residence for occupancy on April 23. In January or February of 2015, the Tadychs began to notice a shift in their home. In February of 2015, the Tadychs engaged the Construction Dispute Resolution (CDR) to review NRC’s work. CDR raised concerns about the adequacy of the home’s construction and prepared a written report in March 2015 indicating several deviations from the architectural plans and building codes. The Tadychs sent this report to NRC, who assured the Tadychs that NRC’s work followed all requirements and rejected any claims that there were deviations from the plans. The Tadychs continued to notice issues with the home through October 2016. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cassidy Ingram, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight
    Ms. Ingram may be contacted at cassidy.ingram@acslawyers.com