BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim 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


    Toddler Crashes through Window, Falls to his Death

    Consequential Damages From Subcontractor's Faulty Work Constitutes "Property Damage" and An "Occurrence"

    California Supreme Court Declines to Create Exception to Privette Doctrine for “Known Hazards”

    Quick Note: Don’t Forget To Serve The Contractor Final Payment Affidavit

    EPA Threatens Cut in California's Federal Highway Funds

    "Abrupt Falling Down of Building or Part of Building" as Definition of Collapse Found Ambiguous

    U.S. Homeownership Rate Rises for First Time in Two Years

    Eleven WSHB Attorneys Honored on List of 2016 Rising Stars

    Pennsylvania Reconstruction Project Beset by Problems

    Managing Infrastructure Projects with Infrakit – Interview with Teemu Kivimäki

    Construction Reaches Half-Way Point on San Diego's $2.1 Billion Mid-Coast Trolley

    Evaluating Smart Home Technology: It’s About More Than the Bottom Line

    Designing the Process to Deliver Zero-Carbon Construction – Computational Design in Practice

    Construction Defects not Creating Problems for Bay Bridge

    How to Get Your Bedroom Into the Met Museum

    Will Future Megacities Be a Marvel or a Mess? Look at New Delhi

    Mitigating FCRA Risk Through Insurance

    $109-Million Renovation Begins on LA's Willowbrook/Rosa Parks Station

    EEOC Focuses on Eliminating Harassment, Recruitment and Hiring Barriers in the Construction Industry

    New Homes in Palo Alto to Be Electric-Car Ready

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/20/22

    Sellers' Alleged Misrepresentation Does Not Amount To An Occurrence

    Terminator’s Trench Rehab Drives L.A. Land Prices Crazy

    Housing Starts Rebound in U.S. as Inflation Eases: Economy

    Lis Pendens – Recordation and Dissolution

    California Home Sellers Have Duty to Disclose Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Craig Holden Named Top 100 Lawyer by Los Angeles Business Journal

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute Stage 2- Increase the Heat

    Choice of Laws Test Mandates Application of California’s Continuous and Progressive Trigger of Coverage to Asbestos Claims

    Brenda Radmacher to Speak at Construction Super Conference 2024

    Trends in Project Delivery Methods in Construction

    California Supreme Court Shifts Gears on “Reverse CEQA”

    More thoughts on Virginia Mechanic’s Liens

    The Status of OSHA’s Impending Heat Stress Standard

    Contractors Set to Implement Air Quality Upgrades for Healthier Buildings

    New Recommendations for Healthy and Safe Housing Conditions

    Elevators Take Sustainable Smart Cities to the Next Level

    Super Lawyers Selects Haight’s Melvin Marcia for Its 2023 Northern California Rising Stars List

    A Lawyer's Perspective on Current Issues Dominating the Construction Industry

    Construction Contract Clauses Only a Grinch Would Love – Part 4

    Thank Your Founding Fathers for Mechanic’s Liens

    Pennsylvania Modernizes State Building Code

    Sweat the Small Stuff – Don’t Overlook These Three (3) Clauses When Negotiating Your Construction Contract

    Athletic Trainers Help Workers Get Back to the Jobsite and Stay Healthy After Injury

    Applying Mighty Midgets, NY Court Awards Legal Expenses to Insureds Which Defeated Insurer’s Coverage Claims

    Florida Passes Tort Reform Bill

    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    Mold Due to Construction Defects May Temporarily Close Fire Station

    New Jersey/New York “Occurrence”

    Hamptons Home Up for Foreclosure That May Set Record
    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

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Title Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    February 01, 2022 —
    In a rare title insurance dispute before the federal district court in Hawaii, the court denied the insurer's motion for summary judgment while granting the insured's motion for summary judgment. First Am. Title Ins. Co. v. GS Industries, LLC, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 240601 (D. Haw. Dec. 16, 2021). GS Industries, LLC took ownership of a parcel of real property located fronting Waipa Lane in Honolulu. The property used four buildings and a parking area for 50 cars. GS obtained a title insurance policy from First American. The policy insured GS' fee simple interest in the property in the amount of $3,500,000. The policy insured GS "against loss or damage, not exceeding $3,500,000, sustained or incurred by GS by reason of . . . not right of access to and from the land,." The policy did not identify any issues with access to the property and did not define "access." A portion of Waipa Lane was owned by the City and County of Honolulu. Parcel 86 and Parcel 91 on Waipa Lane were privately owned. (Private Waipa Lane Parcels). Vehicular access to (ingress) and from (egress) the property was via Waipa Lane. Ingress was made via the publicly owned portion of Waipa Lane. Vehicular egress was made via the Private Waipa Lane Parcels. The City of Honolulu maintained the Private Waipa Lane Parcels and considered them to be pubic. None of the owners of Parcels 86 or 91 notified GS of their intent to block the use of Waipa Lane. 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

    Be Careful with Good Faith Payments

    February 24, 2020 —
    Sometimes doing the expedient thing and what looks good at the time can come back to bite you. Just ask 3M Company. In Faneuil, Inc. v. 3M Co., the Virginia Supreme Court considered a customer services subcontract between Faneuil and 3M relating to a toll collection contract 3M entered into with ERC. The subcontract had a “pay if paid” clause in it requiring payment to 3M from ERC before ERC was required to pay Faneuil, a written change order provision and a base monthly payment to Faneuil for the services that could be reduced in the event of less than expected toll collections. Further, the subcontract stated that if either party settled 3rd party claims, that settlement would not bind the other party to the subcontract absent consent or Court order. Faneuil was then alleged to have been required to provide “Special Services” relating to manual identification of license plates and other information necessary for toll billing due to 3M’s alleged failure to provide adequate imaging services. Faneuil requested (without written change order) and 3M promised to pay extra for these services. When 3M was slow to pay for the special services, Faneuil did what you would expect and threatened to stop providing them. Instead of contesting the right to the work, 3m made sporadic “good faith” payments to induce continued Special Services from Faneuil. Eventually 3M’s issues caused ERC to stop payments and thus 3M stopped paying Faneuil. 3M then settled the payment claims with ERC and still failed to pay Faneuil. 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

    NYC’s Developers Plow Ahead With Ambitious Plans to Reshape City

    May 03, 2021 —
    New York City’s builders have had a curious reaction to a pandemic that emptied Manhattan’s office towers, shuttered restaurants and kept tourists home. Over the past year, as scores of businesses closed and many residents beat it out of town, developers doubled-down on visions of steel-and-glass grandeur, hatching plans that could transform the city. Vornado Realty Trust recently said it will demolish the Hotel Pennsylvania and add an office tower taller than 1,200 feet (366 meters) at the site by Madison Square Garden. Near Grand Central Terminal, giant towers are sprouting, including a project to redevelop the Grand Hyatt next to the transit hub. The developers are proposing a 1,600-foot skyscraper that would be among the tallest in the Western Hemisphere. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Clark & Natalie Wong, Bloomberg

    Supreme Court of Washington State Upholds SFAA Position on Spearin Doctrine

    September 13, 2021 —
    September 9, 2021 (WASHINGTON, DC) – The Surety & Fidelity Association of America (SFAA) commends the decision of The Supreme Court of The State of Washington to reverse the lower court ruling in the case of Lake Hills Investments, LLC vs. Rushforth Construction Co. As argued by SFAA, the Supreme Court found the contractor should not be responsible for damage caused by the defective design provided by the owner even where the contractor was responsible for certain defective work. In addition, the contractor is not completely barred from asserting this defense if the defects were caused by a combination of deficient performance by the contractor and deficient design, and proportional liability should be determined. The SFAA, along with the National Electrical Contractors Association Puget Sound Chapter (NECA), Mechanical Contractors Association of Western Washington (MCAWW) and SMACNA-Western Washington (SMACNA), issued an Amici Curiae in support of Petitioner AP Rushforth Construction Co., Inc. d/b/a AP Rushforth, and Adolfson & Peterson, Inc.’s (collectively “AP”) Petition for Discretionary Review. In the brief they argued the Court should grant the Petition because the decision by the lower court is contrary to precedent of limiting a contractor’s liability when the owner’s defective plans and specifications caused the defective work, and upsets settled expectations of allocation of risk and liability between contractors, owners and architects (among others) on construction projects. This allocation of risk and the principle of limiting the contractor’s liability for defective work based on defective plans and specifications is long settled doctrine in Washington State and throughout the country, a doctrine based on the US Supreme Court’s landmark decision in U.S. vs. Spearin more than 100 years ago. The Surety & Fidelity Association of America (SFAA) is a trade association of more than 425 insurance companies that write 98 percent of surety and fidelity bonds in the U.S. SFAA is licensed as a rating or advisory organization in all states and it has been designated by state insurance departments as a statistical agent for the reporting of fidelity and surety experience. www.surety.org Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Peter Roth, SFAA
    Mr. Roth may be contacted at proth@surety.org

    Improvements to AIA Contracts?

    February 05, 2015 —
    Joel Sciascia, general counsel for the construction management company Pavarini McGovern, made some insightful comments in the Viewpoint section of the latest Engineering News Record magazine. He argues that architects should not be the initial decision maker (“IDM”) under AIA contracts. Instead of using the architect, Mr. Sciascia suggests the use of an independent dispute-resolution board. In 2007, the AIA introduced a new concept into the A-201 documents through which the owner and contractor had the option of naming an independent third party to resolve disputes, instead of automatically allowing the architect to resolve disputes. But, if the parties did not select any specific independent decision maker, the architect would be considered the default initial decision maker. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    No Coverage for Construction Defects Under Arkansas Law

    January 13, 2017 —
    The federal district court found there was no coverage for the insured contractor under Arkansas law when sued for construction defects by two homeowners. Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Hambuchen Constr., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160364 (W.D. Ark. Nov. 18, 2016). In one case, the Pierces hired Hambuchen, the insured contractor for the construction of a new home, which was completed in 2006. Two years after moving in, the Pierces experienced water leaks at various locations inside the home and the basement flooded. Water damage rendered the back deck unstable. In 2010 and 2011, Hambuchen made repairs to stop leaks on the decks, but in 2012 the back deck again showed signs of water damage. The Pierces sued, and Auto-Owners provided a defense under a reservation of rights. In the second case, the Lessmanns hired Hambuchen in 2005 as general contractor to construct their new home. Following completion of the home, the Lessmanns complained about scratched windows. The Lessmanns filed suit against Hambuchen for breach of the construction contract by failing to build their home in a workmanlike manner. The Lessmanns filed suit in May 2009. Auto-Owners was not aware of the suit until 2015 when it received notice that the Lessmanns had filed an amended complaint. The Lessmans' suit went to trial and Hambuchen prevailed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Cyber Security Insurance and Design Professionals

    March 29, 2017 —
    Cyber security insurance is a relatively new insurance product that has probably become more popular and important in today’s digital age. Think about it. Almost everything is created, transmitted, shared, and stored digitally. Companies utilize cloud-based platforms to store documents, share documents, and transmit documents. Documents are transmitted via e-mail. Documents are created electronically with various software programs. And, finally, technology has made it convenient to create, access, store, share, and transmit documentation digitally through smartphones, tablets, or laptops (and various applications) – so technology enables things to be done remotely in the moment to maximize efficiency and production. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Construction Managers, Are You Exposing Yourselves to Labor Law Liability?

    February 22, 2021 —
    When dealing with construction site accidents, who a party is matters. Under Labor Law sections 200, 240(1) and 241(6) owners, contractors, and their agents have a non-delegable duty to provide reasonable and adequate protection to workers from risks inherent at work sites, with a specific emphasis placed on elevation-related hazards. Given the near strict liability nature of Labor Law section 240(1), it is critical to identify whether a party is a proper Labor Law defendant from the get-go. While identifying the owner (and usually the contractor) may be relatively straightforward, identifying “their agents” has proven to be a more complex undertaking. It should be noted that the requirements set forth in the Labor Law are non-delegable from the standpoint of the owner or contractor, however, the duties themselves can be assigned to “agents” of an owner or “agents” of a contractor. When such an assignment occurs, the same non-delegable duty held by the owner or contractor is imposed on the agents as well. Moreover, “once an entity becomes an agent under the Labor Law it cannot escape liability to an injured plaintiff by delegating the work to another entity.[1]” An entity that often skirts the line between being an agent and not, is the Construction Manager. Traditionally, the Construction Manager has been found to be outside the purview of the Labor Law when its scope of work is narrowly focused on scheduling and general coordination of the construction process. However, when a Construction Manager’s scope expands, so does its risk that it may, in fact, become a proper Labor Law defendant. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Timothy P. Welch, Hurwitz & Fine, P.C.
    Mr. Welch may be contacted at tpw@hurwitzfine.com