BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineer
    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


    Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Applied to Pass-Through Agreements

    Poor Pleading Leads to Loss of Claim for Trespass Due to Relation-Back Doctrine, Statute of Limitations

    Carrier Has Duty to Defend Claim for Active Malfunction of Product

    Don’t Ignore the Dispute Resolution Provisions in Your Construction Contract

    Contractor to Repair Defective Stucco, Plans on Suing Subcontractor

    To Bee or Not to Bee - CA Court Finds Denial of Coverage Based on Exclusion was Premature Where Facts had not been Judicially Determined

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (06/28/23) – Combating Homelessness, U.S. Public Transportation Costs and the Future of Commercial Real Estate

    No Coverage for Sink Hole Loss

    An Oregon School District Files Suit Against Robinson Construction Co.

    The Future Has Arrived: New Technologies in Construction

    Haight Welcomes Robert S. Rucci

    One More Mechanic’s Lien Number- the Number 30

    Specific Performance: Equitable Remedy to Enforce Affirmative Obligation

    Under Colorado House Bill 17-1279, HOA Boards Now Must Get Members’ Informed Consent Before Bringing A Construction Defect Action

    NJ Court Reaffirms Rule Against Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Claims and Finds Fraud Claims Inherently Intentional

    Federal Contractors Should Request Debriefings As A Matter Of Course

    Partner John Toohey is Nominated for West Coast Casualty’s Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence!

    Sixth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Property Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Window Manufacturer Weathers Recession by Diversifying

    Compliance Doesn’t Pay: Compliance Evidence Inadmissible in Strict Liability Actions

    Meet the Hipster Real Estate Developers Building for Millennials

    The First UK Hospital Being Built Using AI Technology

    Partner Jason Taylor and Senior Associate Danielle Kegley Successful in Appeal of Summary Disposition on Priority of Coverage Dispute in the Michigan Court of Appeals

    The Architecture of Tomorrow Mimics Nature to Cool the Planet

    Court Rules that Collapse Coverage for Damage Caused “Only By” Specified Perils Violates Efficient Proximate Cause Rule and is Unenforceable

    Congratulations to Haight’s 2021 Super Lawyers San Diego Rising Stars

    Business Interruption, Food Spoilage Claims Resulting from Off Premise Power Failure Denied

    Congratulations to BWB&O for Ranking in The U.S. News – Best Lawyers ® as “Best Law Firms”!

    Draft Federal Legislation Reinforces Advice to Promptly Notify Insurers of COVID-19 Losses

    Hunton Insurance Lawyer, Adriana Perez, Selected to the National Association of Women Lawyers’ 2023 Rising List

    Rhode Island Finds Pollution Exclusion Ambiguous, Orders Coverage for Home Heating Oil Leak

    Preparing the Next Generation of Skilled Construction Workers: AGC Workforce Development Plan

    Acceptable Worksite: New City of Seattle Specification Provisions Now In Effect

    Difficult Task for Court to Analyze Delay and Disorder on Construction Project

    A Quick Virginia Mechanic’s Lien Timing Refresher

    Insurer Must Indemnify Additional Insured After Settlement

    California Cracking down on Phony Qualifiers

    Landmark Towers Association, Inc. v. UMB Bank, N.A. or: One Bad Apple Spoils the Whole Bunch

    2023 Construction Outlook: Construction Starts Expected to Flatten

    Balancing Cybersecurity Threats in Smart Cities: Is the Potential Convenience of “Smart” Intersections Worth the Risk?

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

    Flint Water Crisis and America’s Clean Water Access Failings

    Waiver of Consequential Damages: The Most Important Provision in a Construction Contract

    Over 70 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 4th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    Policy Lanuage Expressly Prohibits Replacement of Undamaged Material to Match Damaged Material

    When Brad Pitt Tried to Save the Lower Ninth Ward

    Wreckage Removal Underway at Site of Collapsed Key Bridge in Baltimore, But Weather Slows Progress

    How Long does a Florida Condo Association Have to File a Construction Defect Claim?

    President Trump’s “Buy American, Hire American” Executive Order and the Construction Industry

    Kiewit-Turner Stops Work on VA Project—Now What?
    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

    Toll Brothers Surges on May Gain in Deposits for New Homes

    June 01, 2020 —
    Toll Brothers Inc. shares surged after the company posted profit that beat estimates and said deposits on new homes were up in recent weeks, a potential sign of optimism for the luxury housing market. The homebuilder, which focuses on higher-end customers, has struggled during the pandemic. It reported orders for the second quarter that missed estimates and said the key metric had plunged starting March 16, when much of the economy shut down. But investors shrugged off those results, focusing instead on a 13% year-over-year gain this month in deposits, which the company called a “leading indicator of current market demand.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Prashant Gopal, Bloomberg

    Why a Challenge to Philadelphia’s Project Labor Agreement Would Be Successful

    February 22, 2018 —
    There is a common misconception that all Philadelphia Public Works projects must be performed pursuant to a project labor agreement with various members of the Building and Construction Trades Council. This common misconception is even shared by the current Mayoral administration, who I saw in a recent court filing testified under oath that “project labor agreements are required for all construction projects in Philadelphia with a value of at least five million dollars.” (As is discussed below this is flat out false.) No one has yet to step forward to challenge Philadelphia’s project labor agreement scheme. However, if someone did, I think the challenge would be successful for three reasons. First, contrary to the Mayor’s representative’s statement, there is no requirement that all projects in excess of $5 million be subject to a project labor agreement. Second, Philadelphia’s project labor agreement excludes signatories to collective bargaining agreements with the United Steel Workers (USW) from participating, which violates public bid laws. Third, the exclusion of the USW, also gives rise to a challenge that federal labor law preempts the project labor agreement. A. Background on the Philadelphia PLA. Under a project labor agreement (PLA), a contractor wishing to perform work on a project agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions of employment established by the public owner and certain construction unions. Each PLA varies, but typically PLA’s will require a contractor’s employees to become members of a union – if they are already not members – in order to work on a project or will require a contractor to hire labor from a union hiring hall. PLA’s are controversial because they exclude non-union contractors from performing work on a project subject to a PLA, unless of course that contractor agrees to become “union” for purposes of that project. For reasons beyond this blog post, a merit shop contractor would be crazy to do that. The “Philadelphia PLA” that Mayor Kenney believes is required for all public projects over $5 million was instituted by Mayor Nutter through a 2011 Executive Order(Executive Order No. 15-11, Public Works Project Labor Agreements). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    South Carolina Court of Appeals Diverges from Damico Opinion, Sending Recent Construction Defects Cases to Arbitration

    October 24, 2023 —
    Could the latest opinion from the South Carolina Court of Appeals be the distant ringing of a death knell for runaway construction defects verdicts? On the heels of the Damico ruling earlier this year, the courts have issued several opinions distinguishing various arbitration agreements from the one analyzed in Damico and have sent subsequent cases to arbitration. This summer, the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals compelled arbitration in Cleo Sanders v. Savannah Highway Automotive Company, et al. Appellate Case No. 2021-000137 / Opinion No. 28168 (petition for rehearing pending) and Joseph Abruzzo v. Bravo Media Productions, et al. Appellate Case No. 2020-001095 / Opinion 6004. Now, in the matter of Jonathan Mart, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, Respondent, v. Great Southern Homes, Inc., Appellant, Appellate Case No. 2018-001598, the Court of Appeals reversed the circuit court’s order denying a homebuilder’s motion to dismiss and compelled arbitration in this action, which was brought by the homeowner, individually and on behalf of other similarly situated homeowners. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Laura Paris Paton, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Ms. Paton may be contacted at lpaton@grsm.com

    Homeowner Alleges Pool Construction Is Defective

    November 13, 2013 —
    A Texas man is suing the contractor who built his pool alleging that within months of construction, the pool began to crack and leak water. According to the lawsuit from Larry Merendino, when the concrete contractor, PC Construction, removed some concrete, they found PVC joints that were not glued properly and were leaking. Mr. Merendino is suing the company and five other firms, claiming that the construction of his pool was negligent and that the companies operated by deceptive trade practices. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Did You Really Accept That Bid? – How Contractors Can Avoid Post-Acceptance Bid Disputes Over Contract Terms

    July 28, 2016 —
    When California general contractors submit bids to an owner, can they force their subcontractors to honor their bids? Can they recover damages if the subcontractor later refuses to do so? While the general rule in California is that a general contractor who reasonably relies on a subcontractor’s bid may recover damages when the subcontractor reneges, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District recently held that there is a substantial and important exception to the general rule. In Flintco Pacific, Inc. v. TEC Management Consultants, Inc. (LASC No. YC067984), the Court of Appeal held that where a general contractor requires a subcontractor to enter into a “standard-form subcontract” which materially differs from the subcontractor’s bid, the general contractor has rejected the subcontractor’s bid and has instead issued a counteroffer. The subcontractor is thereafter free to walk, or accept the new terms. If the subcontractor walks, the general contractor may not seek to enforce the terms of the subcontract or seek reliance damages. Reprinted courtesy of David A. Harris, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Steven M. Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Harris may be contacted at dharris@hbblaw.com Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Clean Water Act Cases: Of Irrigation and Navigability

    January 06, 2020 —
    The federal courts have recently decided two significant Clean Water Act (CWA) cases: State of Georgia, et al. v. Wheeler, where the US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia held that the 2015 rulemaking proceeding of EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers redefining the term “Waters of the United States” in the CWA violated the Act as well as the Administrative Procedure Act; and the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, et al. v. Glaser, where the appeals court ruled that the lower court erroneously interpreted a CWA NPDES permitting exception involving agricultural return flows. An Absence of Navigability: State of Georgia, et al. v. Wheeler Decided on August 21, 2019, the district court, one of the few courts to grapple with the rule’s compliance with the CWA and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), held that the agencies’ redefinition of the terms “Interstate Waters,” “Tributaries” and “Adjacent Waters” violated the CWA by reading “navigability” out of the new definitions, or by failing to adhere to the Supreme Court’s rulings in the 2005 case of Rapanos v. United States, in particular Justice Kennedy’s concurrence regarding the application of the “significant nexus” in case-by-case adjudications as to whether a particular body of water was covered by the Act. Moreover, some provisions of the rule conflicted with the APA because they were not a logical outgrowth of the rules proposed by the agencies in 2014, and on which they solicited comments, and other determinations were not supported by a reasonable explanation. In addition, without a clear statement from Congress that it supported the rule’s effect of increasing the nature and extent of enhanced federal jurisdiction over waters subject to the CWA, the court was loathe to approve the rule. Accordingly, the rule was remanded to the agencies for additional review consistent with this decision. This decision is of particular importance as it may well be the first case to subject this new EPA rule—the linchpin of much of EPA’s regulation under the CWA—to extended review. (Other courts have only been asked to enjoin the rule, which involves a different type of review.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Massachusetts High Court to Decide if Insurers Can Recoup Defense Costs

    February 07, 2018 —
    The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) is set to hear argument on February 6 in a case that will decide whether insurers can recoup defense costs if it is later determined that they owed no duty to defend an underlying claim. At issue in Holyoke Mut. Ins. Co. v. Vibram USA, Inc., No SJC-12401, is Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig O'Neill, White and Williams, LLP
    Mr. O'Neill may be contacted at oneillc@whiteandwilliams.com

    Hunton Partner Michael Levine Appointed to Law360’s 2024 Insurance Authority Property Editorial Advisory Board

    May 20, 2024 —
    Washington, DC-based partner Michael Levine has been recognized for his extensive experience and insights into emerging and legacy property and business interruption insurance coverage issues by being selected to Law360’s 2024 Editorial Advisory Board for Insurance Authority Property. As a member of the board, Mike will provide feedback on Law360’s coverage of property issues and expert insight on how best to shape future reporting of issues affecting businesses across all industry sectors. Reprinted courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth llp Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of