BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnesses
    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


    Sewage Treatment Agency Sues Insurer and Contractor after Wall Failure and Sewage Leak

    Contractors Liable For Their Subcontractor’s Failure To Pay Its Employees’ Wages And Benefits

    Build Back Better Includes Historic Expansion of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program

    Construction Industry Outlook: Building a Better Tomorrow

    Benefit of the Coblentz Agreement and Consent Judgment

    Ruling Finds Builder and Owners at Fault in Construction Defect Case

    Los Angeles Is Building a Future Where Water Won’t Run Out

    Avoid Five Common Fraudulent Schemes Used in Construction

    Mobile Home Owners Not a Class in Drainage Lawsuit

    Court of Appeal: Privette Doctrine Does Not Apply to Landlord-Tenant Relationships

    Illinois Supreme Court Holds That the Implied Warranty of Habitability Does Not Extend to Subcontractors

    Hammer & Hand’s Top Ten Predictions for US High Performance Building in 2014

    Restaurant Wants SCOTUS to Dust Off Eleventh Circuit’s “Physical Loss” Ruling

    How the California and Maui Wildfires Will Affect Future Construction Projects

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/06/21)

    Summarizing Changes to NEPA in the Fiscal Responsibility Act (P.L. 118-5)

    Ninth Circuit Holds Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Applies Beyond All-Risk Policies

    Sept. 11 Victims Rejected by U.S. High Court on Lawsuit

    Reinsurer Must Reimburse Health Care Organization for Settlement Costs

    No Duty to Defend under Homeowner's Policy Where No Occurrence, No Property Damage

    Second Month of US Construction Spending Down

    Will Superusers Future-Proof the AEC Industry?

    Don’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public Project.

    Contractor Sues Yelp Reviewer for Defamation

    What Buyers Want in a Green Home—and What They Don’t

    Delaware Settlements with Minors and the Uniform Transfer to Minor Act

    Concerns About On-the-job Safety Persist

    Condo Board Goes after Insurer for Construction Defect Settlement

    That Boilerplate Language May Just Land You in Hot Water

    Construction Defects Claims Can Be Limited by Contract Says Washington Court

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss "Redundant Claims" Denied

    Blog Completes Sixteenth Year

    Court Finds Duty To Defend Environmental Claim, But Defense Limited to $100,000

    Buffalo-Area Roof Collapses Threaten Lives, Businesses After Historic Snowfall

    Fast-Moving Isaias Dishes Out Disruption in the Mid-Atlantic, Northeast

    How Robotics Can Improve Construction and Demolition Waste Sorting

    Ex-Corps Worker Pleads Guilty to Bribery on Afghan Contract

    Seyfarth Shaw’s Construction Group Receives Top Tier Recognition from Legal 500

    Around the State

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: LESLIE KING O'NEAL

    Supreme Court Opens Door for Challenges to Older Federal Regulations

    Is Everybody Single? More Than Half the U.S. Now, Up From 37% in '76

    Lack of Flood Insurance for New York’s Poorest Residents

    Lien Law Unlikely To Change — Yet

    White and Williams LLP Secures Affirmation of Denial to Change Trial Settings Based on Plaintiffs’ Failure to Meet the Texas Causation Standard for Asbestos Cases

    Sales of Existing Homes in U.S. Fall to Lowest Since 2012

    Bill Taylor Co-Authors Chapter in Pennsylvania Construction Law Book

    Woman Files Suit for Property Damages

    Four Ways Student Debt Is Wreaking Havoc on Millennials

    Good Indoor Air Quality Keeps Workers Healthy and Happy
    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. Drawing 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

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (4/24/24) – Omni Hotels Hit with Cyberattack, Wisconsin’s Low-Interest Loans for Home Construction, and Luxury Real Estate Sales Increase

    May 20, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, alternative lenders take the lead in CRE loans, construction workers worry about artificial intelligence, prospective homeowners express concerns about climate risks, and more!
    • Even as overall real estate sales fell 4% nationwide in the first quarter, luxury real estate sales increased more than 2%, posting their best year-over-year gains in three years. (Robert Frank, CNBC)
    • As many banks cut back from commercial real estate loans amid rising interest rates and a regional banking crisis that exploded in early 2023, a number of alternative lenders jumped in to lead the way. (Andrew Coen, Commercial Observer)
    • Workers in construction and other industries are worried about artificial intelligence, and it’s keeping their companies from moving forward more decisively with the surging technology. (Matthew Thibault, Construction Dive)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    The Risk of A Fixed Price Contract Is The Market

    August 03, 2022 —
    When performing work on a fixed price or unit, there is risk that is being assumed on your end. One risk is the market. You are ultimately banking on the fact that the market is not going to make your fixed prices unprofitable. That’s not an unforeseeable occurrence because the market shifts and that shift can have a negative ripple effect. In a recent case out of the Federal Circuit, U.S. Aeroteam, Inc. v. U.S., 2022 WL 243176 (Fed.Cir. 2022), this market risk played a role in a fixed price contract. Here, a contractor was hired by the federal government to produce ground support trailers. A key component of these trailers was a running gear. The contractor relied on a vendor for these running gears. Due to financial difficulties, the vendor had to raise its unit price for the running gears. Based on the increased price, the contractor elected to manufacture the running gears itself. The contractor asked the government if this was ok and the government approved the request. Once the contractor started manufacturing these running gears, it had an “awe” moment – the manufacturing costs were higher than anticipated. The contractor submitted a request for equitable adjustment which the government denied. The Contractor than sued the government raising three arguments to support its entitlement to additional costs: (1) constructive change; (2) cardinal change; and (3) commercial impracticability. The contractor lost on all arguments. It probably should have lost on all arguments. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Georgia Court of Appeals Holds That Insurer Must Defend Oil Company Against Entire Lawsuit

    October 07, 2019 —
    The Georgia Court of Appeals recently affirmed a grant of summary judgment in favor of Mountain Express Oil Company on its breach of contract claim against liability insurer, Southern Trust Insurance Company. Empire Petroleum brought claims against Mountain Express for breach of contract, injunctive relief, and libel or slander, among others. Mountain Express sought a defense to that lawsuit under its insurance policy with Southern Trust. Southern Trust contended that the insurance policy did not cover Empire’s non-libel/slander claims, and therefore reimbursed Mountain Express for only a portion of its attorneys’ fees. After the Empire lawsuit settled, Mountain Express sued Southern Trust for breach of contract and bad faith for failing to pay the remaining defense costs, contending that Southern Trust had a duty to defend the entire lawsuit. The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to Mountain Express on its breach of contract claim. Citing policy language stating that “[the insurer] will have the right and duty to defend the insured against any ‘suit’ seeking those damages,” the court held that Southern Trust was obligated to defend the entire lawsuit. Specifically, in reaching that conclusion, the court noted that by agreeing to defend any “suit,” not any “claim,” Southern Trust obligated itself to defend the entire lawsuit if any claim could be covered under the policy. Accordingly, Southern Trust breached the policy when it only agreed to defend some of the claims against its insured. Reprinted courtesy of Lawrence J. Bracken II, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Alexander D. Russo, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Bracken may be contacted at lbracken@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Owner’s Slander of Title Claim Against Contractor Recording Four Separate Mechanics Liens Fails Under the Anti-SLAPP Statute

    February 01, 2021 —
    Most mechanics lien actions follow a pretty standard process:
    1. A mechanics lien claimant, either a contractor subcontractor, material supplier, or laborer, performs work but is not paid;
    2. Mechanics lien claimant records a mechanics lien on the property in which work was performed; and
    3. Within 90 days thereafter files suit to foreclose on the mechanics lien.
    Sometimes, either before or after a mechanics lien claimant files suit, the owner will record a mechanics lien release bond, in which case mechanics lien claimant files suit against the release bond. But what if a mechanics lien claimant records a mechanics lien, the owner records a mechanics lien release bond, and the mechanics lien claimant records three different but identical mechanics liens thereafter? Is this even legal? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    How to Defend Stucco Allegations

    February 07, 2014 —
    Managing partner Paul McBride discusses how to defend stucco defect allegations in his article in Kring & Chung, LLP’s online publication. According to McBride, about “80% of construction defect lawsuits which [Kring & Chung] defend involve stucco-clad houses.” In the article, McBride addresses “improper building paper installation and stucco cracks.” “If you are defending the stucco subcontractor,” McBride advises to look “first, at the windows section of the plaintiffs’ defect report and cost of repair estimate.” He explains that “this is the section where the plaintiffs’ expert will allege water intrusion that will be allocation to your stucco subcontractor.” McBride declares that the “most important thing to understand about stucco cracks is that stucco cracking is common. This is both a common sense observation and a perfectly valid legal defense.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Pulled from the Swamp: EPA Wetland Determination Now Judicially Reviewable

    September 15, 2016 —
    Landowners and developers bogged in an EPA wetland determination were recently thrown a life line when the United States Supreme Court determined The Army Corps of Engineer’s (Corps) “jurisdictional determinations” (JD) regarding wetland designations are reviewable by the court. United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co. Inc. Under the Clean Water Act (CWA) landowners and developers who do not have the proper permits can face severe criminal and civil penalties for releasing any pollutant into “the waters of the United States.” Anybody stuck wading through the permitting process will tell you it is difficult, time consuming, expensive, and may eventually prohibit the intended use of the property. Furthermore, there is yet to be a consensus on the definition or scope of the term “waters of the US”. Consequently, a landowners or developers may never be certain whether a permit is necessary before conducting any activity that may discharge a pollutant into a “water of the United States”. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sean Minahan, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Minahan may be contacted at sminahan@ldmlaw.com

    No Coverage for Defects in Subcontrator's Own Work

    February 11, 2019 —
    Damage to the concrete floor installed by the insured subcontractor was not property damage and thus not covered under the insured's CGL policy. Kalman Floor Co. v. Old Republic Gen. Ins. Corp., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3319 (D. Colo Jan. 8, 2019). In 2007, Kalman Floor Co. was subcontracted to construct over 158,000 square feet of concrete flooring for a cold storage facility. The concrete floor was completed in late 2008. In late 2009, the contractor notified Kalman that pockmarks, or "pop-outs," were visible on the concrete flooring. The only damage to tangible property in the facility caused by the pop-outs was the concrete flooring itself. On January 31, 2009, Old Republic issued a general liability policy to Kalman for one year. The policy excluded for damage to "your work," defined as "work or operations performed by you or on your behalf." Old Republic denied coverage for damage to the concrete floor. Kalman sued, seeking a declaration that the exclusions did not bar coverage. 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

    Delays Caused When Government (Owner) Pushes Contractor’s Work Into Rainy / Adverse Weather Season

    January 13, 2020 —
    There are a number of horizontal construction projects where a contractor’s sequence of work and schedule is predicated on avoiding the rainy season (or certain force majeure events). The reason is that the rainy season will result in delays due to the inability to work (and work efficiently) during the adverse weather (including flooding caused by the weather). If the work is pushed into the rainy season, is such delay compensable if the government (or owner) delayed the project that pushed work out into the rainy season? It very well can be. For example, in Meridian Engineering Co. v. U.S., 2019 WL 4594233 (Fed. Cl. 2019), a contractor was hired by the Army Corps of Engineers to construct a flood control project for a channel in Arizona. Due to delays, including those caused by the government, the project was pushed into the monsoon season, which caused additional delays largely due to flooding caused by the heavy rain. One issue was whether such delays were compensable to the contractor – the government raised the argument that the contractor assumed the risk of potential flooding from the rainy season. The Court found this argument unconvincing:
    [The contractor’s] initial construction schedule planned for a completion of the channel invert work, a necessary step in protecting the site from flooding, to be completed by late June 2008…[M]any issues arose in the project’s early stages that led to cumulative substantial delay, including those caused by the government’s failure….The government cannot now claim that [the contractor] assumed the risk of flooding from monsoon season when the government was largely responsible for [the contractor’s] inability to complete the project prior to the beginning of the monsoon season. Simply put, the government cannot escape liability for flood damages when the government is responsible for causing the contractor to be working during the flood-prone season. Meridian Engineering, 2019 WL at *7 (internal citations omitted)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com