BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestration
    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


    US-Mexico Border Wall Bids Include Tourist Attraction, Solar Panels

    Red Wings Owner, Needing Hockey-Arena Neighborhood, Builds One

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (6/18/24) – Cannabis’ Effect on Real Estate, AI’s Capabilities for Fund Managers and CRE’s Exposure on Large Banks

    Colorado’s New Construction Defect Law Takes Effect in September: What You Need to Know

    ABC Chapter President Comments on Miami Condo Collapse

    Can a Lease Force a Tenant's Insurer to Defend the Landlord?

    Beyond Inverse Condemnation in Wildfire Litigation: An Oregon Jury Finds Utility Liable for Negligence, Trespass and Nuisance

    Pentagon Has Big Budget for Construction in Colorado

    RDU Terminal 1: Going Green

    Arbitration and Mediation: What’s the Difference? What to Expect.

    Issues of Fact Prevent Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion in Collapse Case

    California Complex Civil Litigation Superior Court Panels

    Cherokee Nation Wins Summary Judgment in COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim

    Ohio: Are Construction Defects Covered in Insurance Policies?

    Elon Musk’s Proposed Vegas Strip Transit System Advanced by City Council Vote

    Facing Manslaughter Charges In Worker's 2021 Trench Collapse Death, Colorado Contractor Who Willfully Ignored Federal Law Surrenders To Police

    Mega-Consulate Ties U.S. to Convicted Billionaire in Nigeria

    The Future of Construction Defects in Utah Unclear

    Counsel Investigating Coverage Can be Sued for Invasion of Privacy

    Construction Defects Uncertain Role in Coverage in Pennsylvania

    Indemnitor Owes Indemnity Even Where Indemnitee is Actively Negligent, California Court Holds

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

    A New Way to Design in 3D – Interview with Pouria Kay of Grib

    Developer Boymelgreen Forced to Hand Over Financial Records for 15 Broad Street

    COVID-19 Response: Environmental Compliance Worries in the Time of Coronavirus

    Giant Gas Pipeline Owner, Contractor in $900M Payment Battle

    Additional Insured Prevails on Summary Judgment For Duty to Defend, Indemnify

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

    DC Circuit Rejects Challenge to EPA’s CERCLA Decision Regarding Hardrock Mining Industry

    Haight Welcomes New Attorneys to Los Angeles, Sacramento and San Francisco

    Certificates Of Merit For NC Lawsuits Against Engineers And Architects? (Still No)(Law Note)

    Eminent Domain Bomb Threats Made on $775M Alabama Highway Project

    North Carolina Federal Court Holds “Hazardous Materials” Exclusion Does Not Bar Duty to Defend Under CGL Policy for Bodily Injury Claims Arising Out of Direct Exposure to PFAs

    OSHA’s New Severe Injury and Fatality Reporting Requirements, Are You Ready?

    Hartford Stadium Controversy Still Unresolved

    Indicted Union Representatives Try Again to Revive Enmons

    Margins May Shrink for Home Builders

    Just When You Thought the Green Building Risk Discussion Was Over. . .

    Deductibles Limited to Number of Suits Filed Against Insured, Not Number of Actual Plaintiffs

    California Court of Appeal Adopts Horizontal Exhaustion Rule

    As Natural Gas Expands in Gulf, Residents Fear Rising Damage

    Building 47 Bridges in Two Years

    Ex-Construction Firm That Bought a $75m Michelangelo to Delist

    Toward Increased Citizen Engagement in Urban Planning

    Prevailing Parties Entitled to Contractual Attorneys’ Fees Under California CCP §1717 Notwithstanding Declaration That Contract is Void Under California Government Code §1090

    Microsoft Urges the Construction Industry to Deliver Lifecycle Value

    Cable-Free Elevators Will Soar to New Heights, and Move Sideways

    California Court Forces Insurer to Play Ball in COVID-19 Insurance Coverage Suit

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

    Apartment Investors Turn to Suburbs After Crowding Cities
    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

    What Cal/OSHA’s “Permanent” COVID Standards Mean for Employers

    March 06, 2023 —
    Effective Feb. 3, 2023, California has implemented new, “permanent,” COVID-19 standards. The new regulations were adopted by Cal/OSHA on Dec. 15, 2022, but only became effective upon the review and final approval by the Office of Administrative Law. These non-emergency regulations—slated to remain in effect for two years—supplant the COVID-19 Prevention Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) that have been in effect since early in the pandemic. The non-emergency regulations abandon core parts of the ETS, include new definitions for key terms, and update requirements for important provisions. We discuss the primary changes below. The regulation itself is available online, as well as a copy provided by Cal/OSHA comparing the differences between the ETS and the new regulation. An End to Exclusion Pay The non-emergency regulations do not require employers to maintain exclusion pay (an excluded employee’s earnings, seniority, rights, and benefits). All that employers must do under the new regulations is inform confirmed COVID-19 cases and close contacts about potential COVID-19 benefits under federal or local laws (where applicable). This does not affect employees who may receive paid time off under other federal, state, and local laws, as well as through collective bargaining agreements or other employer policies. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Payne & Fears LLP

    ADA Lawsuits Spur Renovation Work in Fresno Area

    November 06, 2013 —
    The El Gallo restaurant in Clovis, California has completed more than $45,000 worth of accessibility upgrades, ranging from installing signs for handicap parking to an $8,000 wheelchair-accessible ramp. The restaurant closed in 2010 when they were sued over alleged Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) violations. But the El Gallo was only the first Fresno-area business hit with an accessibility lawsuit. And others wanted to avoid getting sued at all. Donald Bremseth, an architect working in Clovis, said that designing modifications to older buildings to bring them into compliance with the ADA has kept him busy, designing dozens of projects in the area. Daniel Zoldak, vice president of Lars Anderson & Associates, noted at on one inspection, he saw about 50 ADA violations, and with the fines at least $2,000 per violation, $10,000 or $20,000 of renovations doesn’t look so bad. That’s under the new law, which also allows a business 30 days to get into compliance. Under the old law, the minimum fine was $4,000. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    25 Years of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar

    May 03, 2018 —
    For a quarter of a century, West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar has been a professional development staple of the construction defect industry. It’s the place where experts, attorneys, mediators, insurance agents, and other industry leaders have gathered to discuss current happenings, take continuing education credits, network with other industry members, and to connect with others. Celebrating its silver anniversary, this year’s seminar continues to be the construction defect community’s must-go-to event. On May 16th-18th, the seminar will return to the Disneyland Hotel. This issue of Construction Defect Journal will provide you with information about what’s happening in and around the West Coast Casualty Seminar and to commemorate the past. We hope to see you at this year’s West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar. Enjoy! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Golden Gate Bridge's $76 Million Suicide Nets Near Approval

    June 30, 2014 —
    Officials of the agency that runs San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge today approved a $76 million funding plan to erect a suicide barrier along the span, where people plunge to their deaths at a rate of about once a week. The Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District’s 19-member board voted unanimously to approve the funding, which includes $20 million from district reserves. “We must fight mental illness on many fronts and this budget action is a critical component of saving the lives of people who might not see that their brightest days are ahead of them,” Senator Mark Leno, a Democrat from San Francisco, said in a news release yesterday ahead of the meeting. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Alison Vekshin, Bloomberg
    Ms. Vekshin may be contacted at avekshin@bloomberg.net

    A License to Sue: Appellate Court Upholds Condition of Statute that a Contracting Party Must Hold a Valid Contractor’s License to Pursue Action for Recovery of Payment for Contracting Services

    June 21, 2017 —
    California Business & Professions Code section 7031(a) requires a party to have contractor’s license in order to maintain an action for compensation for services performed for which a contractor’s license is needed. In Phoenix Mechanical Pipeline, Inc. v. Space Exploration Technologies Corp., No. B269186 (2017 WL 2544856) (Cal. Ct. App. June 13, 2017), the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District considered the scope of this statute in denying, in part, Phoenix Mechanical Pipeline, Inc.’s (“Phoenix Pipeline”) appeal of a trial court ruling granting Space Exploration Technologies Corporation’s (“SpaceX”) demurrer to Phoenix Pipeline’s second amended complaint, without leave to amend. Phoenix Pipeline filed the underlying lawsuit for, among other claims, breach of contract and breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing arising from an agreement with SpaceX for Phoenix Pipeline to perform various plumbing, concrete removal and electrical services. Phoenix Pipeline alleged SpaceX paid for such services from 2010 to October 2013, but failed to pay Phoenix for services performed from October 2013 to August 2014, totaling just over $1,000,000. According to Phoenix Pipeline, this work was performed pursuant to a series of invoices, which constituted individual agreements between SpaceX and Phoenix Pipeline. Reprinted courtesy of Omar Parra, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Jesse M. Sullivan, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Parra may be contacted at oparra@hbblaw.com Mr. Sullivan may be contacted at jsullivan@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Judge Nixes SC's $100M Claim Over MOX Construction Delays

    February 16, 2017 —
    A federal judge on Feb. 8 dismissed a claim by the state of South Carolina against the U.S. Dept. of Energy over delayed construction of the Mixed-Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility, near Aiken, S.C. The claim for financial compensation was part of a lawsuit the state filed in February 2016 seeking payment of $1 million per day—or an annual maximum of $100 million—for the MOX facility not producing fuel by Jan. 1, 2016. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Owner’s Obligation Giving Notice to Cure to Contractor and Analyzing Repair Protocol

    November 23, 2016 —
    Recently, I read an informative article from another attorney addressing considerations of an owner when it receives a repair protocol in response to a Florida Statutes Chapter 558 notice of defect letter. This is a well-written article and raises two important issues applicable to construction defect disputes: 1) how is an owner supposed to respond to a repair protocol submitted by a contractor in accordance with Florida’s 558 notice of construction defects procedure and 2) irrespective of Florida’s 558 procedure, how is an owner supposed to treat a contractual notice to cure / notice of defect requirement that requires the owner to give the contractor a notice to cure a defect. This article raises such pertinent points that I wanted to address the issues and topics raised in this article. 558 Procedure–Owner’s Receipt of Contractor’s Repair Protocol When a contractor submits a repair protocol to an owner in response to a notice of construction defects letter per Florida Statutes Chapter 558, the owner should seriously consider that protocol. The owner does this by discussing with counsel and any retained expert. The owner needs to know whether the protocol is a reasonable, cost-effective protocol to repair the asserted defects or, alternatively, whether the protocol is merely a band-aid approach and/or otherwise insufficiently addresses the claimed defects. Every scenario is different. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Katz, Barron, Squitero, Faust, Friedberg, English & Allen, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@katzbarron.com

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

    March 20, 2023 —
    We’ve talked a fair bit about the Privette doctrine which provides for a rebuttable presumption that a hirer is not liable for workplace injuries sustained by employees of hired parties. We’ve also talked about its two exceptions: (1) The Hooker exception which provides for liability if the hirer retained control over the work being performed, negligently exercised that control, and its negligent exercise of that control contributed to an employee’s injury; and (2) the Kinsman exception which provides for liability if the hirer knew or should have known of a concealed hazard, that the hired party did not know of and could not have reasonably discovered, and the hirer failed to warn the hired party of the hazard. The Privette doctrine is not the end all be all of landowner liability, however, as discussed in Ramirez v. PK 1 Plaza 580 SC LP, 85 Cal.App.5th 252 (2022). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com