BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut architect 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


    Kansas Man Caught for Construction Scam in Virginia

    Be Wary of Construction Defects when Joining a Community Association

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/30/24) – Life Science Construction to Increase, Overall Homeownership Is Majority Female, and Senators Urge Fed Chair to Lower Interest Rates

    Construction Defect Scam Tied to Organized Crime?

    Pending Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Rise Most in Four Years

    Mexico’s Construction Industry Posts First Expansion Since 2012

    Carrier Has Duty to Defend Claim for Active Malfunction of Product

    U.S. Supreme Court Allows Climate Change Lawsuits to Proceed in State Court

    Key Economic & Geopolitical Themes To Monitor In 2024

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Bars Coverage for Pool Damage

    Meet BWB&O’s 2025 Best Lawyers in America!

    What Is the Best Way to Avoid Rezoning Disputes?

    Ongoing Operations Exclusion Bars Coverage

    New Jersey’s Governor Puts Construction Firms on Formal Notice of His Focus on Misclassification of Workers as Independent Contractors

    The Other Side of the North Dakota Oil Boom: Evictions

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to Best Lawyers in America© Orange County and as Attorneys of the Year 2018

    Relief Bill's Highway Funds Could Help Construction Projects

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (4/10/24) – Hotels Integrate AI, Baby-Boomers Stay Put, and Insurance Affects Housing Market

    No Coverage Under Exclusions For Wind and Water Damage

    Noteworthy Construction Defect Cases for 1st Qtr 2014

    Fifth Circuit Decision on Number of Occurrences Underscores Need to Carefully Tailor Your Insurance Program

    Arizona Supreme Court Leaves Limits on Construction Defects Unclear

    Colorado Senate Bill 15-177: This Year’s Attempt at Reasonable Construction Defect Reform

    Construction Cybercrime Is On the Rise

    California Imposes New Disabled Access Obligations on Commercial Property Owners

    Construction Defect Suit Can Continue Against Plumber

    Negligent Construction an Occurrence Says Ninth Circuit

    Structure of Champlain Towers North Appears Healthy

    Economic Damages and the Right to Repair Act: You Can’t Have it Both Ways

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2023 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

    In All Fairness: Illinois Appellate Court Finds That Arbitration Clause in a Residential Construction Contract Was Unconscionable and Unenforceable

    Supreme Court Finds Insurance Coverage for Intentional (and Despicable) Act of Contractor’s Employee

    Update: Supreme Court Issues Opinion in West Virginia v. EPA

    Venue for Miller Act Payment Bond When Project is Outside of Us

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2021 Top Lawyers by Hudson Valley Magazine

    Texas Supreme Court to Review Eight-Corners Duty-to-Defend Rule

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Dining

    Contractual Impartiality Requires an Appraiser to be Unbiased, Disinterested, and Unswayed by Personal Interest

    Falling Crime Rates Make Dangerous Neighborhoods Safe for Bidding Wars

    Traub Lieberman Elects New Partners for 2020

    Perez Broke Records … But Should He Have Settled Earlier?

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives First Tier Ranking

    L.A. Mixes Grit With Glitz in Downtown Revamp: Cities

    The DOL Claims Most Independent Contractors Are Employees

    End of an Era: Los Angeles County Superior Court Closes the Personal Injury Hub

    A Subcontractor’s Perspective On California’s Recent Changes to Indemnity Provisions

    Construction Robots 2023

    Lien Actions Versus Lien Foreclosure Actions

    Builders FirstSource to Buy ProBuild for $1.63 Billion
    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

    Harmon Tower Opponents to Try Mediation

    June 28, 2013 —
    There are plenty of issues on the table in the fight between CityCenter and Tutor Perini over the Harmon Tower project in Las Vegas. Some of them might be solved at a mediator’s table instead of reaching the courtroom. Both sides will be participating in a six-day negotiation with an outside mediator. Their hope is that the projected two-year jury trial can be reduced to only one year. The judge in the case remains skeptical. “It ain’t happening. I know you all,” was Clark County District Judge Elizabeth’s Gonzalez’s comment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Housing to Top Capital Spending in Next U.S. Growth Leg: Economy

    September 24, 2014 —
    Bruce Hottle’s $10,000 computer systems upgrade in February at his Pennsylvania concrete plant may be his last investment for another two years. More than 1,100 miles south in suburban Miami, Maggie Cruz-Ledon and her husband have set a 2015 deadline to buy a house, upping their budget in the process. Hottle’s and Cruz-Ledon’s plans represent a sneak peek into the next leg of the expansion. Housing and business capital spending, two areas closely tied to swings in the world’s largest economy, are poised to diverge as home construction gives growth more of a boost in the long run while investment in new plants and equipment shows less promise, according to economists at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shobhana Chandra, Bloomberg
    Ms. Chandra may be contacted schandra1@bloomberg.net

    6 Ways to Reduce Fire Safety Hazards in BESS

    January 02, 2024 —
    Renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind, are projected to generate 44% of all power in the U.S. by 2050, which is increasing the need for battery energy storage systems (BESS).1 BESS are electrochemical devices that collect energy from a power grid, power plant or renewable source, hold it, and then discharge that energy later to provide electricity on demand. “A BESS does not itself create or produce energy, it is a storage system. The energy is produced by other means, including different types of renewable sources. Think of a cellphone – you charge it overnight and then it runs throughout the day off that battery power,” says Stacie Prescott, head of energy for middle and large commercial at The Hartford. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Hartford Staff, The Hartford Insights

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

    July 20, 2020 —
    The recent COVID-19 outbreak has altered life for all of us, in ways both big and small. Unprecedented restrictions relating to the pandemic have forced individuals across the globe to change the ways in which they live and work. Perhaps not surprisingly, these restrictions have also changed the way we resolve disputes. Just as virtual conferencing has become the “new normal” for family gatherings and social events, it has also become the “new normal” for everything from mediation, to oral argument, to full-blown hearings. To be sure, there are a number of advantages to conducting adversarial proceedings virtually. First and foremost, it results in substantial cost savings for the parties involved. In-person proceedings typically require significant travel expenses, including airline tickets, hotel reservations, and food and beverage stipends. The use of a virtual forum essentially eliminates these expenses, cutting costs dramatically for attorneys, clients, judges, and arbitrators alike. Virtual conferencing also affords the opportunity for increased participation from party representatives living across the country, or even across the world. While demanding work schedules often make it impossible for multiple party representatives to attend a deposition, or even a hearing, in person, virtual proceedings require much less of a time commitment. Because these virtual proceedings require participants to spend less time away from other work-related obligations, party representatives are able to attend proceedings that they may otherwise have had to miss. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys Justin K. Fortescue, Zachery B. Roth and Marianne Bradley Mr. Fortescue may be contacted at fortescuej@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Roth may be contacted at rothz@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Bradley may be contacted at bradleym@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Minnesota Supreme Court Dismisses Vikings Stadium Funding Lawsuit

    January 22, 2014 —
    The Minnesota Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuit that had alleged that funding for the new Vikings stadium was unconstitutional, according to KARE. "We were so hopeful the courts would deal with this expeditiously and they did," said Michele Kelm-Helgen, chair of the Minnesota Sports Facilities Authority told KARE. "And they would be definitive in their result and they were." Doug Mann, former Minneapolis mayoral candidate, had been the one to file the lawsuit. Mann told KARE 11 that “the courts made their ‘political stance loud and clear’ and said he did not know if he would pursue any other legal action. But he maintained his position the stadium funding wasn't legally vetted.” Minnesota Vikings spokesperson Lester Bagley declared, “This was the last remaining hurdle that we see in front of us. We are pleased with the Supreme Court's and Court of Appeals' action,” KARE reported. 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

    #1 CDJ Topic: McMillin Albany LLC v Superior Court of California

    December 30, 2015 —
    Stephen A. Sunseria of Gatzke Dillon & Balance LLP discussed how the Fifth Appellate District court “issued a blistering criticism of the Fourth Appellate District’s prior opinion in Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013) 219 Ca.App.4th 98, which severely limited the reach of the Act to actions not involving property damage and allowing property damage claims to proceed freely under common law without any constraints posed by the Act.” Sunseri stated that “McMillin is a great victory for homebuilders, but battle lines are now clearly drawn between the two appellate districts.” Read the full story... In another article regarding the McMillin Albany LLC case, Garret Murai of Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP posted an article on his California Construction Law Blog that went over the legal debate of California’s Right to Repair Act including Liberty Mutual, Burch v. Superior Court, and KB Home Greater Los Angeles, Inc. v. Superior Court and concluded with a discussion of the McMillin Albany case. Murai predicted, rightly it turned out, that the case would see a “final round before the California Supreme Court.” Read the full story... In their December 2, 2015 article, authors Richard H. Glucksman, Glenn T. Barger, Jon A. Turigliatto, and David A. Napper of Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger reported that the California Supreme Court granted the petition for review of the McMillin Albany decision: “The holdings in Liberty Mutual and McMillin Albany present a conflict of authority that the California Supreme Court has appropriately deemed worthy of review. The parties will now be permitted to file briefs on the merits and amicus briefs will certainly be submitted by the defense and plaintiff bars.” Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Court-Side Seat: Guam’s CERCLA Claim Allowed, a “Roundup” Verdict Upheld, and Judicial Process Privilege Lost

    June 14, 2021 —
    This is a brief account of some of the important environmental and administrative law cases recently decided. THE U.S. SUPREME COURT BP PLC, et al. v Mayor and City of Baltimore The issue the court confronted was a procedural matter: Can the defendant energy companies use the federal removal statutes (see 28 USC Section 1442) to remove a state law climate change lawsuit to federal court? Here, a group of energy companies were sued by the mayor and city council of Baltimore in state court, where they alleged that the defendants had concealed the adverse environmental effects of the fossil fuel products they promoted and sold in Baltimore City. Several similar lawsuits have been filed in many state courts, where typically it is alleged that the defendants can be sued on various common law theories. Rather than defend these cases in state court, the defendants have sought to remove these cases to federal court because climate change liability appears to be an issue that should be settled at the federal level. These efforts have been unsuccessful, with most federal trial and appellate courts holding that the reasons cited for removal (oftentimes the federal officer removal statute) have not been persuasive. In this case, both the Maryland federal district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals held they had no jurisdiction to authorize removal, and thus returned the case to the state court. Noting that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled that a removal action could be countenanced under Section 1442, thus creating a circuit split, the Supreme Court held that a straightforward reading of the removal statute empowers the reviewing court to examine all theories for removal that a district court has rejected. Consequently, the Court remanded the case to the Fourth Circuit where it can decide, “in the first instance,” whether there actually exist grounds to remove this case to federal court. 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