BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut construction defect 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


    Additional Dismissals of COVID Business Interruption, Civil Authority Claims

    Civility Is Key in Construction Defect Mediation

    COVID-19 Case Remanded for Failure to Meet Amount in Controversy

    There Are Consequences to Executed Documents Such as the Accord and Satisfaction Defense

    EPA Announces Decision to Retain Current Position on RCRA Regulation of Oil and Gas Production Wastes

    EPC Contractors Procuring from Foreign Companies need to Reconsider their Contracts

    Fannie Mae Says Millennials Are Finally Leaving Their Parents' Basements

    New Jersey Legislation Would Bar Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause in Homeowners' Policies

    Be Careful with “Green” Construction

    Millennium’s Englander Buys $71.3 Million Manhattan Co-Op

    Inverse Condemnation and Roadwork

    Public Works Bid Protests – Who Is Responsible? Who Is Responsive?

    Ohio Supreme Court Rules That Wrongful Death Claims Are Subject to the Four-Year Statute of Repose for Medical Claims

    Construction Defect Not a RICO Case, Says Court

    Virginia Tech Has Its Own Construction Boom

    Colorado’s Workers’ Compensation Act and the Construction Industry

    Recent Bribery and Anti-Corruption Enforcement Trends in Global Construction Industry

    NYC Supertall Tower Condo Board Sues Over Alleged Construction, Design 'Defects'

    One More Statutory Tweak of Interest to VA Construction Pros

    2018 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

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

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (04/18/23) – Clean Energy, Critical Infrastructure and Commercial Concerns

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/13/22

    Depreciating Labor Costs May be Factor in Actual Cash Value

    The Best Lawyers in America© Peer Review Names Eight Newmeyer & Dillion Partners in Multiple Categories and Two Partners as Orange County’s Lawyers of the Year in Construction and Insurance Law

    Multifamily Building Pushes New Jersey to Best Year since 2007

    ASCE Statement on EPA Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan

    California Statutes Authorizing Public-Private Partnership Contracting

    Homebuilder Immunity Act Dies in Committee. What's Next?

    Partner John Toohey and Senior Associate Sammy Daboussi Obtain a Complete Defense Verdict for Their Contractor Client!

    Terminating Notice of Commencement Without Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    Chambers USA 2020 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Secures Summary Judgment Win for National Hotel Chain

    Who is Responsible for Construction Defect Repairs?

    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment

    Coverage Rejected Under Owned Property and Alienated Property Exclusions

    Insureds Survive Summary Judgment on Coverage for Hurricane Loss

    Perez Broke Records … But Should He Have Settled Earlier?

    California Supreme Court Adopts Vertical Exhaustion for Long-Tail Claims

    We Knew Concrete Could Absorb Carbon—New Study Tells How Much

    It Ain’t Over Till it’s Over. Why Project Completion in California Isn’t as Straightforward as You Think

    The Independent Tort Doctrine (And Its Importance)

    High-Rise Condominium Construction Design Defects, A Maryland Construction Lawyer’s Perspective

    Working Safely With Silica: Health Hazards and OSHA Compliance

    Insurer Must Pay for Matching Siding of Insured's Buildings

    Benefits and Pitfalls of Partnerships Between Companies

    Drones Used Despite Uncertain Legal Consequences

    Opoplan Introduces Generative AI Tools for Home-Building

    Pinnacle Controls in Verano
    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

    Assembly Bill 1701 Contemplates Broader Duty to Subcontractor’s Employees by General Contractor

    August 17, 2017 —
    AB 1701 recently passed the Assembly and is pending in the Senate’s Labor and Industrial Relations and Judiciary Committees. The Bill, if signed by the Governor, would create a new section in the California Labor Code (Section 218.7) making “direct contractors” – defined as a contractor “making or taking a contract in the state for the erection, construction, alteration, or repair of a building, structure, or other private work” – liable for wages a subcontractor or sub-subcontractor fails to pay to its employee for work included in the general contractor’s contract with the project owner. Under the new law, direct contractors would be liable for up to one year from the date of completion of the work for unpaid wages, fringe benefits, health and welfare benefits, and pension fund contributions, including interest and state tax payments owed to a subcontractor’s employee. The employee, however, would not be able to recover penalties or liquidated damages from the general contractor. AB 1701 would give the employee, Labor Commissioner, or a joint labor-management cooperation committee the right to enforce the direct contractor’s liability through a civil action. It would also extend to third parties who are owed fringe or other benefit payments or contributions on the employee’s behalf. Pursuant to the proposed language of the new statute, a prevailing plaintiff in such an action would be entitled to their reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, including expert witness fees. Although Labor Code § 218.7 would impose certain obligations on the subcontractor to provide the direct contractor with relevant project and payroll records, the subcontractor’s failure to comply with those obligations does not relieve the direct contractor from liability. Impact AB 1701’s apparent purpose is to protect employees, an undeniably important legislative goal. However, if passed, the bill could greatly increase general contractors’ exposure when subcontracting work and their cost of doing business. Especially because the new law would not impact existing laws requiring a direct contractor to timely pay a subcontractor. As a result, many coalitions against AB 1701 stress the halting effect this could have on the construction industry as a whole, particularly private construction, which is not as heavily regulated as public works. CGDRB will continue to monitor this Bill and provide updates as developments occur. Reprinted courtesy of Richard H. Glucksman, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger and Chelsea L. Zwart, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger Mr. Glucksman may be contacted at rglucksman@cgdrblaw.com Ms. Zwart may be contacted at czwart@cgdrblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The 2019 ISO Forms: Additions, Revisions, and Pitfalls

    February 24, 2020 —
    The Insurance Services Office, Inc. (ISO) issued several new and revised endorsements for use with Commercial General Liability (CGL) coverage forms, which became effective December 1, 2019, in most jurisdictions. The new ISO endorsements include several notable changes that Policyholders should be aware of, including revisions to existing Additional Insured (AI), Primary and Noncontributory, and Waiver of Subrogation endorsements, as well as a number of new AI and other endorsement forms. A summary of the more significant elements of new ISO endorsements is provided below. NEW ISO FORMS
    • New AI Endorsements - Automatic Status for Completed Operations
    For Contractors, Owners and other construction industry stakeholders, there are two new AI endorsements of note, CG 20 39 12 19 – Additional Insured – Owners, Lessee or Contractors – Automatic Status when Required in Written Construction Agreement with You (Completed Operations) and CG 20 40 12 19 – Additional Insured – Owners Lessees or Contractors – Automatic Status for Other Parties when Required in Written Construction Agreement (Completed Operations). AI coverage for Completed Operations is generally provided under form CG 20 37, which requires each additional insured to be listed in the endorsement schedule. The new ISO endorsements automatically extend AI status for Completed Operations without having to specifically identify each additional insured, thereby mirroring current AI endorsements that confer automatic AI status for Ongoing Operations (e.g. CG 20 33 and CG 20 38). Thus, the CG 20 39 and CG 20 40, correspond with CG 20 33 (ongoing operations), and CG 20 38 (ongoing operations), respectively, to extend AI coverage for Completed Operations. Reprinted courtesy of Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. attorneys Richard Brown, Michael V. Pepe and Janie Reilly Eddy Mr. Brown may be contacted at rwb@sdvlaw.com Mr. Pepe may be contacted at mvp@sdvlaw.com Ms. Eddy may be contacted at jre@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Be Careful When Walking Off of a Construction Project

    November 24, 2019 —
    I am truly grateful that my buddy Craig Martin (@craigmartin_jd) continues his great posts over at The Construction Contractor Advisor blog. He is always a good cure for writer’s block and once again this week he gave me some inspiration. In his most recent post, Craig discusses a recent Indiana case relating to the ever present issue of termination by a subcontractor for non-payment. In the Indiana case, the court looked at the payment terms and determined that the subcontractor was justified in walking from the project when it was not paid after 60 days per the contract. This result was the correct, if surprising. Why do I say surprising? Because I am always reluctant to recommend that a subcontractor walk from a job for non payment if it is possible to continue. This is not so much for legal reasons (not paying a sub is a clear breach of contract by a general contractor) but practical ones. The practical effect of walking from the job is that the subcontractor is put on the defensive. Instead of arguing later that it performed but was not paid, that subcontractor is put in the position of arguing that the general contractor cannot collect its completion related and other damages because it breached first. This is a more intuitively difficult argument and one that is not as strong as the first. Of course, all of this is contingent on the language in your contract (is there a “pay if paid” or language like that in the Indiana case?). 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

    Points on Negotiating Construction Claims

    December 30, 2013 —
    Eugene Heady of Smith Currie and Hancock offers some pointers on the effective negotiation of construction claims. He notes that “claims and disputes in the construction industry are commonplace,” but that “settlement usually comes after much pain, suffering, and expense.” He offers nine points to consider when negotiating construction claims. His first two points are to develop a claim position and then document that claim. He says that “the facts underlying the claim should be nonnegotiable.” The documentation “suggests to your opponent that you have done your homework and are serious about the pursuit of your claim.” He also notes that you need to understand the strengths and weaknesses of your position. On the other side, you need to “understand your opponent’s positions,” and also “your opponent’s strengths.” He points out that “an appreciation for what is truly important to your opponent is the starting point for the development of creative solutions to the dispute. Further, bargaining should be done in good faith, negotiation should be done on the merits, and you are well advised to “choose a seasoned and skilful negotiator. “A prolonged and expensive legal battle is not likely to change the outcome,” he warns. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    OSHA/VOSH Roundup

    August 31, 2020 —
    In an unusual flurry of occupational safety related activity, the Virginia courts decided two cases in the last week relating to either the review of occupational safety regulations themselves or their enforcement. In Nat’l College of Business & Technology Inc. v. Davenport (.pdf), the Virginia Court of Appeals considered what constitutes a “serious” violation of the exposure to asbestos Virginia Occupational Safety & Health (VOSH) regulations. The facts found by the Salem, Virginia Circuit Court were that employees of the petitioner college were exposed to asbestos insulation when they were required to enter a boiler room to retrieve paper files. However, no evidence was presented regarding the length of time or level of exposure at the Circuit Court level. Despite the lack of evidence regarding the level or extent of exposure, the Circuit Court upheld the VOSH citation for exposure and the level of violation at a “serious” level with the attendant penalty. The Virginia Court of Appeals disagreed with the second finding. The appellate court determined that the lack of evidence regarding the level of exposure (whether length or extent) made the serious level violation an error. The Court stated that merely presenting evidence that asbestos is a carcinogen is not enough given the number of carcinogenic materials in existence and then remanded the case back to Circuit Court to reconsider the penalty level. 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

    Marlena Ellis Makes The Lawyers of Color Hot List of 2022

    January 17, 2023 —
    In just her first year of practice, Marlena Ellis, Associate, is included in the Lawyers of Color Hot List of 2022. Marlena joined the firm in 2021 as a full-time associate practicing both Commercial Litigation, Insurance Coverage, and Bad Faith Practice. She advises a variety of clients including corporations, commercial entities and insurance companies in complex disputes and breach of fiduciary duty matters. The Lawyers of Color Hot List of 2022 honors junior and mid-level attorneys of color who exemplify integrity, leadership, and a passion for diversity in their roles. The selection committee spent months reviewing nominations to identify the right candidates for the list, and Marlena was one of the few chosen for this year. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Marlena Ellis, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Ellis may be contacted at ellism@whiteandwilliams.com

    Decline in Home Construction Brings Down Homebuilder Stocks

    December 11, 2013 —
    The main gains in October construction were in commercial construction. The stock market has reacted to the slow-down by selling off homebuilder stocks, leading to a drop in their price. Deutsche Bank did not expect this to be the long term situation in U.S. homebuilding. The bank expects that the dip in residential construction “should reverse course given the ongoing improvement in permits for new construction.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    One Nation, Under Renovation

    November 07, 2022 —
    In late 2019, Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot announced a landmark investment in some of the city’s poorest neighborhoods. Invest South/West would direct $1.4 billion in total, including $750 million in public funds, to redevelop properties across the city’s South and West Sides. Focused on 10 specific neighborhoods, the program’s first projects broke ground in August and September. Teams of workers will turn a firehouse into a culinary hub and event space; a stately Art Deco bank is set to be converted into an art space that will anchor an attached mixed-use development. Another former bank, in Humboldt Park, will be renovated into Latino-owned commercial offices, an entrepreneurial incubator space, and a Latino cultural center, as well as housing. These reuse projects aim to do more than fill the gaps of Chicago’s legendary vacant-property crisis: In reanimating shuttered historic buildings, the initiative aims to restore the economies of commercial corridors that were victims of destructive mid-20th-century “urban renewal” initiatives. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Zach Mortice, Bloomberg