BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut consulting engineers
    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


    California Court Invokes Equity to Stretch Anti-Subrogation Rule Principles

    Know and Meet Your Notice Requirements or Lose Your Payment Bond Claims

    Indemnity Provision Prevails Over "Other Insurance" Clause

    #8 CDJ Topic: The Las Vegas HOA Fraud Case Concludes but Controversy Continues

    Colorado Senate Committee Approves Construction Defect Bill

    Insurance Law Alert: California Appeals Court Allows Joinder of Employee Adjuster to Bad Faith Lawsuit Against Homeowners Insurer

    Quick Note: Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    Key Legal Considerations for Modular Construction Contracts

    Jobsite Safety, Workforce Shortage Drive Innovation in Machine Automation

    Auburn Woods Homeowners Association v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    Stop Losing Proposal Competitions

    Best Practices for ESI Collection in Construction Litigation

    Insureds Survive Motion to Dismiss Civil Authority Claim

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

    Public Housing Takes Priority in Biden Spending Bill

    Construction Defects Survey Results Show that Warranty Laws Should be Strengthened for Homeowners & Condominium Associations

    White House Seeks $310M To Fix Critical San Diego Wastewater Plant

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

    Bad Welds Doom Art Installation at Central Park

    Insurer Could Not Rely on Extrinsic Evidence to Circumvent Its Duty to Defend

    Ninth Circuit: Speculative Injuries Do Not Confer Article III Standing

    Florida Self-Insured Retention Satisfaction and Made Whole Doctrine

    Potential Problems with Cases Involving One Owner and Multiple Contractors

    Contractual Fee-Shifting in Litigation: Who Pays the Price?

    SFAA Commends U.S. House for Passage of Historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill

    Design Professional Needs a License to be Sued for Professional Negligence

    Developers Celebrate Arizona’s Opportunity Zones

    What a Difference a Day Makes: Mississippi’s Discovery Rule

    When Are General Conditions and General Requirements Covered by Builder's Risk

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit

    Maybe California Actually Does Have Enough Water

    The Impact of Nuclear Verdicts on Construction Businesses

    Sinking Floor Does Not Meet Strict Definition of Collapse

    Recommendations and Drafting Considerations for Construction Contingency Clauses Part III

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment to Dispose of Hail Damage Claim Fails

    Breaking the Impasse by Understanding Blame

    Which Cities have the Most Affordable Homes?

    Significant Victory for the Building Industry: Liberty Mutual is Rejected Once Again, This Time by the Third Appellate District in Holding SB800 is the Exclusive Remedy

    CSLB Begins Processing Applications for New B-2 License

    Wichita Condo Association Files Construction Defect Lawsuit

    “Good Faith” May Not Be Good Enough: California Supreme Court to Decide When General Contractors Can Withhold Retention

    2011 Worst Year Ever for Home Sales

    Does Stricter Decertification Mean More “Leedigation?”

    Why Do Construction Companies Fail?

    Hawaii Appellate Court Finds Duty to Defend Group Builders Case

    Negligent Failure to Respond to Settlement Offer Is Not Bad Faith

    NY Appeals Court Ruled Builders not Responsible in Terrorism Cases

    How Does Weather Impact a Foundation?

    How Retro-Commissioning Can Extend the Life of a Building—and the Planet

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction
    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

    General Contractor Cited for Safety Violations after Worker Fatality

    September 17, 2015 —
    The general contractor of Washington’s SR 520 Floating Bridge Project was cited by the Washington Department of Labor & Industries (L&I) “for serious safety violations following the death of worker Joe Arrants in March.” According to EHS Today, “Arrants was killed when he fell approximately 60 feet to the dock below.” EHS Today reported that during the investigation, L&I found that the fall protection systems were not used “in accordance with fall protection standards and the manufacturer’s recommendation during forming and stripping operations.” Furthermore, there was no “lifesaving skiff immediately available,” or “a ring buoy with at least 90 feet of line, which would make rescue difficult if a worker fell into the water,” and the contractor did not ensure that the hand tools and equipment were in good, working condition. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    City of Sacramento Approves Kings NBA Financing Plan

    May 21, 2014 —
    Sacramento, California’s city council recently approved a financing plan that will enable the construction of the $477 million downtown arena project to move forward, reported KNOE News. Sacramento will now be responsible for a $223 million subsidy, and “the Kings would contribute $254 million to construct the arena and develop surrounding land with a hotel, office tower and shopping.” “Kings President Chris Granger called it a historic day for the team and Sacramento region, saying the arena would serve as a hub for economic development,” according to KNOE News. “The project would bring 11,000 construction jobs and 4,000 permanent jobs, [Granger] said.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Mountain States Super Lawyers 2019 Recognizes 21 Nevada Snell & Wilmer Attorneys

    June 18, 2019 —
    Snell & Wilmer is pleased to announce that 21 attorneys from the Nevada offices have been selected for inclusion in the 2019 Mountain States Super Lawyers publication. Of those 21, 12 were recognized as Mountain States Rising Stars. Patrick Byrne was also named to the Top 100 list of attorneys for the Mountain States region. Super Lawyers, part of Thomson Reuters, is a listing of lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The annual selections are made using a patented multiphase process that includes independent research, peer nominations and peer evaluations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer

    Portions of Policyholder's Expert's Opinions Excluded

    November 13, 2023 —
    The federal district court granted, in part, the insurer's motion to exclude portions of expert testimony. Tundra M. Holdings, LLC v. Markel Ins. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139952 (D. Alaska Aug. 10, 2023). Plaintiff alleged a building it owned suffered damages consisting of building roof failure due to snow load. Plaintiff submitted a claim to Markel for its loss. Plaintiff hired an engineering firm to conduct an inspection. The recommendation was to install snow guards and that 28 rafters be replaced with new beams. The evaluation did not state that the recommendation was required by law or ordinance. Nor did the evaluation make mention of replacing the metal roof on the building or anything about the water system or sprinkler system. Plaintiff then obtained an estimate of $687,500 for roof repair/replacement, store front repair, a sprinkler system installer and a water system upgrade. 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

    Payne & Fears Recognized by Best Lawyers in 2025 Best Law Firms®

    December 03, 2024 —
    Payne & Fears LLP has been named to the 2025 Best Lawyers “Best Law Firms” list. This recognition highlights firms that demonstrate professional excellence, receiving outstanding ratings from both clients and peers. Payne & Fears has been ranked in the following practice areas: Metropolitan Tier 1
    • Orange County
      • Commercial Litigation
      • Employment Law – Management
      • Insurance Law
      • Labor Law – Management
      • Litigation – Labor and Employment
      • Litigation – Real Estate
    Metropolitan Tier 2
    • Las Vegas
      • Commercial Litigation
    Metropolitan Tier 3
    • Orange County
      • Litigation – Intellectual Property
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Payne & Fears LLP

    In Phoenix, Crews Thread Needle With $730M Broadway Curve Revamp

    July 31, 2024 —
    Motorists scrambling to dart across three lanes of traffic when merging onto the freeway. Vehicles slowing to a crawl due to extremely curved exit ramps. Commuters enduring agonizing backups as three freeways converge in a tight footprint. Bicyclists and pedestrians sweating through long detours to traverse freeways. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Blair, Engineering News-Record Mr. Blair may be contacted at blairs@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Judgment Stemming from a Section 998 Offer Without a Written Acceptance Provision Is Void

    March 22, 2021 —
    In Mostafavi Law Group, APC v. Larry Rabineau, APC (B302344, Mar. 3, 2021), the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District (Los Angeles), addressed an issue of first impression: whether the purported acceptance of a Code of Civil Procedure section 998 (“section 998”) offer lacking an acceptance provision gives rise to a valid judgment. The appellate court held that a section 998 offer to compromise (“998 Offer”) without an acceptance provision is invalid and any judgment stemming from it is void. In Mostafavi Law Group, plaintiffs sued defendants for defamation per se, among other claims, which was litigated at-length over several years. Defendants served plaintiffs with a written 998 Offer, offering to settle the action for the sum of $25,000.01. The 998 Offer did not specify the manner in which plaintiffs were to accept the offer. Within the statutory time period for acceptance, plaintiffs’ counsel hand-wrote the following onto the 998 Offer: “Plaintiff Mostafavi Law Group, APC accepts the offer.” That day, plaintiffs also filed a notice of acceptance of the 998 Offer, along with proof thereof, and sent a copy to defendants. The next day, having received the notice of acceptance, defendants advised plaintiffs that they would “draft and send . . . a settlement agreement for . . . signature” before paying the settlement funds. Reprinted courtesy of Arezoo Jamshidi, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP, Stevie B. Newton, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Lawrence S. Zucker II, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Jamshidi may be contacted at ajamshidi@hbblaw.com Mr. Newton may be contacted at snewton@hbblaw.com Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    October 12, 2020 —
    Aside from waiver of lien rights (something that will be illegal in Virginia after July 1, 2015), the most troublesome contractual impediment to payment for a subcontractor or supplier on a project often is the “pay if paid” clause. As a general rule, in Virginia, these clauses where drafted in the proper fashion, are enforceable. As I have said many times, in Virginia freedom of contract almost always wins out. While this is the case, I emphasize that such clauses must be very explicit and specific. Furthermore, and in something that should be obvious, these clauses are generally limited by the Courts of Virginia to only be enforceable and to only forgive the need for payment if the upstream contractor on the construction job has not been paid for the work that the sub claiming non payment has done. 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