BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design 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


    Decades of WCC Seminar at the Disneyland Resort

    Congratulations to Partner Nicole Whyte on Receiving the Marcus M. Kaufman Jurisprudence Award

    Stop by BHA’s Booth at WCC and Support the Susan G. Komen Foundation

    Protecting Expert Opinions: Lessons Regarding Attorney-Client Privilege and Expert Retention in Construction Litigation

    Condo Buyers Seek to Void Sale over Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Coffee Beans, Mars and the 50 States: Civil Code 1542 Waivers and Latent Defects

    Construction Industry on the Comeback, But It Won’t Be the Same

    Last Parcel of Rancho del Oro Masterplan Purchased by Cornerstone Communties

    Legal Battle Kicks Off to Minimize Baltimore Bridge Liabilities

    Late Filing Contractor Barred from Involving Subcontractors in Construction Defect Claim

    Insurance Agent Sued for Lapse in Coverage after House Collapses

    Beginning of the 2020 Colorado Legislative Session: Here We Go Again

    Contractor Changes Contract After Signed, Then Sues Older Woman for Breaking It

    North Dakota Supreme Court Clarifies Breadth of Contractual Liability Coverage

    No Coverage Under Property Policy With Other Insurance and Loss Payment Provisions

    Boston Catwalk Collapse Injures Three Workers

    Power Point Presentation on Nautilus v. Lexington Case

    Delays and Suspension of the Work Under Fixed Price Government Contract

    Skipping Depositions does not Constitute Failure to Cooperate in New York

    California Court of Appeals Says, “We Like Eich(leay)!”

    U.K. Construction Resumes Growth Amid Resurgent Housing Activity

    U.S. Building Permits Soared to Their Highest Level in Nearly Eight Years

    Appraisal Goes Forward Even Though Insurer Has Yet to Determine Coverage on Additional Claims

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2022 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Construction Defects Uncertain Role in Coverage in Pennsylvania

    Counterpoint: Washington Supreme Court to Rule on Resulting Losses in Insurance Disputes

    Nevada Legislature Burns Insurers' Rights to Offer Eroding Limits

    Emerging World Needs $1.5 Trillion for Green Buildings, IFC Says

    Sustainability Is an Ever-Increasing Issue in Development

    No Coverage for Defects in Subcontrator's Own Work

    Round and Round: Inside the Las Vegas Sphere

    Cutting the Salt Out: Tips for Avoiding Union Salting Charges

    Statutory Bad Faith and an Insured’s 60 Day Notice to Cure

    Nevada HOA Criminal Investigation Moving Slowly

    Benefits to Insureds Under Property Insurance Policy – Concurrent Cause Doctrine

    Pennsylvania “occurrence”

    Pennsylvania Mechanics’ Lien “Waivers” and “Releases”: What’s the Difference?

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    Can I Be Required to Mediate, Arbitrate or Litigate a California Construction Dispute in Some Other State?

    Corvette museum likely to keep part of sinkhole

    Civility Is Key in Construction Defect Mediation

    Keeping KeyArena's Landmark Lid Overhead at Climate Pledge Arena Redevelopment Is A 22,000-Ton Balancing Act

    City Wonders Who’s to Blame for Defective Wall

    Judge Dismisses Suit to Block Construction of Obama Center

    No Coverage Where Cracks in Basement Walls Do Not Amount to Sudden Collapse

    Common Construction Contract Provisions: Indemnity Provisions

    North Dakota Universities Crumble as Oil Cash Pours In

    Haight Welcomes Robert S. Rucci

    How the Election Could Affect the Housing Industry: Steven Cvitanovic Authors Construction Today Article

    Idaho Federal Court Rules Against Sacketts After SCOTUS Decided Judicial Review of an EPA Compliance Order was Permissible
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Retainage on Pennsylvania Public Contracts

    January 31, 2018 —
    Ah yes, retainage, what could represent your profit on a project and something frequently abused by owners on private and public projects alike. Fortunately, Pennsylvania law offers public works contractors some protection from retainage abuse. The Public Prompt Payment Act dictates when retainage can be withheld and when it must be released. Agencies that fail to follow the Prompt Payment Act’s retainage rules can end up owing you interest, penalty, and attorney’s fees. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC

    Look Up And Look Out: Increased Antitrust Enforcement Of Horizontal No-Poach Agreements Signals Heightened Scrutiny Of Vertical Agreements May Be Next

    November 28, 2022 —
    In the current regulatory environment, it is important for contractors to remain vigilant of heightened anti-competitive enforcement in the construction and procurement spheres by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ). Such vigilance should include, among other things, regular review of applicable laws and implementation of related updates to compliance policies, as well as careful evaluation of joint venture (JV), subcontractor, and teaming agreements.  Recent DOJ Activity Opens The Door To Broader Antitrust Exposure For Contractors Many contractors include exclusivity and non-compete clauses in their vertical agreements, including subcontractor agreements and certain types of JV and teaming agreements. In fact, many widely available “checklists” for drafting these agreements recommend including such provisions; however, under U.S. antitrust law, particularly as enforced by the DOJ in the last 1-2 years, exclusivity and non-compete clauses may be construed as unduly competition-restricting. Although no court has yet held that exclusivity and non-compete clauses in vertical agreements violate antitrust laws, recent aggressive enforcement activity by the DOJ with regard to horizontal no-poach agreements suggests that the investigatory headwinds may be blowing in that direction. Reprinted courtesy of John F. Finnegan, III, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar, & Fitzgerald, LLP (ConsensusDocs) and Dominick Weinkam, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar, & Fitzgerald, LLP (ConsensusDocs) Mr. Finnegan may be contacted at jfinnegan@watttieder.com Mr. Weinkam may be contacted at dweinkam@watttieder.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Future Has Arrived: New Technologies in Construction

    October 17, 2022 —
    The construction industry has traditionally been slow to adapt to new technologies, but things are changing. Construction companies are keen to control costs (including increased costs due to supply chain issues), improve efficiency, maintain productivity while dealing with labor shortages, and enhance safety, and protect data bases from cyberattacks. New technologies, including robotics, 3D printing, cloud and mobile computing, augmented reality, blockchain, and cybersecurity, are helping construction companies achieve those goals. Here are some key takeaways. Augmented Reality (AR) vs. Virtual Reality Augmented Reality is a technology that superimposes a computer generated image upon a user’s view of the real work. Virtual Reality, on the other hand, creates a virtual environment to replace the real one. AR has uses in many industries. For example, shoppers using AR can see what furniture or appliances will look like in their own homes and offices. Medical professionals can also use the technology to visualize organs and simulate procedures prior to operations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sarah B. Biser, Fox Rothschild LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Ms. Biser may be contacted at sbiser@foxrothschild.com

    Point Taken: The UK Supreme Court Finally Confirms the General Law of Liquidated Damages (LDs)

    April 04, 2022 —
    In a long-awaited decision which overturned the Court of Appeal’s ruling in the Triple Point Technology vs PTT Public Company case, the UK Supreme Court confirmed the general law of LDs, which is that—absent clear words to the contrary—they accrue up to the date of termination of a contract regardless of whether the contractor completes the work; after that, general damages are recoverable. This approach was held to reflect “commercial reality and the accepted function of liquidated damages.” Although the contract in question was not a construction contract, the decision is equally relevant in the construction sphere. By way of reminder, Triple Point failed to complete the works under Phase 1 of a contract for the design, installation, maintenance and licencing of software. Despite agreeing a revised project plan, PTT gave notice to terminate. Reprinted courtesy of Vincent C. Zabielski, Pillsbury and Julia Kalinina Belcher, Pillsbury Mr. Zabielski may be contacted at vincent.zabielski@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Belcher may be contacted at julia.belcher@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    OSHA Penalties—What Happened with International Nutrition

    April 15, 2015 —
    For those of you in and around Omaha, you recall the tragic collapse of International Nutrition’s plant in early 2014, killing two workers and injuring several others. OSHA swept onto the scene and issued citations. Surprisingly, the penalties totaled only $120,000. While a large sum, one would think two deaths and a score of injuries would generate a larger fine. International Nutrition appealed the penalties and they have now been reduced to $78,000, about a 1/3 reduction. Below, I’ll set forth what happened. The Original Penalties International Nutrition was originally fined $120,650.00 for citations ranging from willful, serious, to other-than-serious. 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

    Mississippi Sues Over Public Health Lab Defects

    October 29, 2014 —
    The state of Mississippi “is suing architects and designers of a new Public Health Lab, saying the $28 million lab wasn't up to containing deadly diseases, biohazards and chemicals,” reported The Clarion-Ledger. Dale Partners Architects, Earl Walls Associates, Eldridge and Associates, and Environmental Management Plus have been named as defendants. "The estimated damages are $3 million," attorney Dorsey Carson told The Clarion-Ledger. "This building is where they test tuberculosis, or where they would test anthrax or any other (biohazards). You don't have a choice – it has to meet rigorous standards." Charlie Alexander, a partner with Dale Partners, stated that “any allegations of design defects by his company and its team ‘are unfounded,’” reported The Clarion-Ledger. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Lack of Workers Holding Back Building

    May 10, 2013 —
    Builders are hiring again, or at least they’re trying to. According to an article in the Los Angeles Times, many of the workers who were laid off during the construction bust have gone on to work in other areas. John Nunan of Unger Construction told the Times that “we’re starting to see spot shortages of labor.” One problem is that despite the boom, wages haven’t risen. Rising costs for materials and land have put an additional squeeze on builders. One building supervisor noted that during the boom, he was making $26 an hour and entry level workers $17. Now he earns $16 an hour. From bust to recovery was about five years, and its labor pool could not just wait those years. Industry representatives told the Times that it has created a perception that construction is not a stable form of employment. Brian Turmail of the Associated General Contractors of America cited “pretty consistent news coverage about the fact that there are no jobs in construction.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    OSHA/VOSH Roundup

    August 19, 2015 —
    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 Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com