BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete 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


    Under the Hood of U.S. Construction Spending Is Revised Data

    West Virginia Wild: Crews Carve Out Corridor H Through the Appalachian Mountains

    Wait, You Want An HOA?! Restricting Implied Common-Interest Communities

    Updates to Residential Landlord Tenant Law

    New Jersey Court Rules on Statue of Repose Case

    Scotiabank Is Cautious on Canada Housing as RBC, BMO Seek Action

    Is the Construction Industry Actually a Technology Hotbed?

    Top Five Legal Mistakes in Construction

    Designers “Airpocalyspe” Creations

    Newmeyer & Dillion Welcomes Three Associates to Newport Beach Office

    Edison Utility Accused of Igniting LA Fire in Lawsuits

    Scarce Cemetery Space Creates Prices to Die For: Cities

    Gene Witkin Celebrates First Anniversary as Member of Ross Hart’s Mediation Team

    Construction Up in Northern Ohio

    Virginia Families Hope to Sue over Chinese Drywall

    The Risks and Rewards of Sustainable Building Design

    Manhattan to Get Tall, Skinny Tower

    The Future of High-Rise is Localized and Responsive

    How to Get Your Bedroom Into the Met Museum

    Insured Versus Insured Clause Does Not Bar Coverage

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Ursinus is Cleared!”

    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Court of Appeals Rules that HOA Lien is not Spurious, Despite Claim that Annexation was Invalid

    First Quarter Gains in Housing Affordability

    Biden Administration Focus on Environmental Justice Raises Questions for Industry

    Federal Energy Regulator Approves Rule to Speed Clean Energy Grid Links

    Biden’s Solar Plans Run Into a Chinese Wall

    Three Payne & Fears Attorneys Named 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars

    Insurer’s Duty to Defend: When is it Triggered? When is it Not?

    Amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 – Expert Testimony

    Homebuyers Get Break as Loan Rates Defy Fed Tapering: Mortgages

    Court Finds Matching of Damaged Materials is Required by Policy

    After $15 Million Settlement, Association Gets $7.7 Million From Additional Subcontractor

    Sixth Circuit Rejects Claim for Reverse Bad Faith

    How a Maryland County Created the Gold Standard for Building Emissions Reduction

    Warren Renews Criticism of Private Equity’s Role in Housing

    Texas Supreme Court Holds Anadarko’s $100M Deepwater Horizon Defense Costs Are Not Subject To Joint Venture Liability Limits

    2018 Spending Plan Boosts Funding for Affordable Housing

    Does a Broker Forfeit His or Her Commission for Technical Non-Compliance with Department of Real Estate Statutory Requirements?

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “This Is Sufficient for Your Purposes …”

    A Changing Climate for State Policy-Making Regarding Climate Change

    White and Williams Ranked in Top Tiers of "Best Law Firms"

    Best U.S. Home Sales Since 2007 Show Momentum in Housing Market

    One Shot to Get It Right: Navigating the COVID-19 Vaccine in the Workplace

    New York Appellate Division: Second Department Contradicts First Department, Denying Insurer's Recoupment of Defense Costs for Uncovered Claims

    Homebuilding on the Rise in Nation’s Capitol

    #3 CDJ Topic: Underwriters of Interest Subscribing to Policy No. A15274001 v. ProBuilders Specialty Ins. Co., Case No. D066615

    Key Takeaways For Employers in the Aftermath of the Supreme Court’s Halt to OSHA’s Vax/Testing Mandate

    In Florida, Exculpatory Clauses Do Not Need Express Language Referring to the Exculpated Party's Negligence

    As the Term Winds Down, Several Important Regulatory Cases Await the U.S. Supreme Court
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    U.S. Housing Starts Exceed Estimates After a Stronger December

    January 04, 2018 —
    Originally Published by CDJ on February 16, 2017 Builders started work on more U.S. homes than forecast in January after an upward revision to starts in the prior month, a sign construction was on a steady path entering 2017. Residential starts totaled an annualized 1.25 million, easing from a 1.28 million pace in the prior month, a Commerce Department report showed Thursday. The median forecast of economists surveyed by Bloomberg was 1.23 million. Permits, a proxy for future construction, increased at the fastest pace since November 2015 on a pickup in applications for apartment building. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sho Chandra, Bloomberg

    Third Circuit Holds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Despite Insured’s Expectations

    November 21, 2018 —
    In its recent decision in Frederick Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hall, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 31666 (3d Cir. Nov. 8, 2018), the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit had occasion to consider Pennsylvania’s doctrine of reasonable expectations in the context of a faulty workmanship claim. Hallstone procured a general liability policy from Frederick Mutual to insure its masonry operations. Notably, when purchasing the policy through an insurance broker, Hallstone’s principal stated that he wanted the “maximum” “soup to nuts” coverage for his company. Hallstone was later sued by a customer for alleged defects in its masonry work. While Frederick agreed to provide a defense, it also commenced a lawsuit seeking a judicial declaration that its policy excluded coverage for faulty workmanship. The district court agreed that the business risk exclusions applied, but nevertheless found in favor of Hallstone based on the argument that Hallstone had a reasonable expectation that when applying for an insurance policy affording “soup to nuts” coverage, it this would include coverage for faulty workmanship claims. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Margolies, Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
    Mr. Margolies may be contacted at bmargolies@tlsslaw.com

    Attorneys’ Fees and the American Arbitration Association Rule

    September 09, 2024 —
    A common question from clients, when a dispute arises on a construction project, is whether they can recover their attorney’s fees from the other side if they pursue a case and win. More often than not, such fees are not recoverable. As a general rule (commonly known as the “American Rule”), each party to a dispute must bear their own attorney’s fees unless there is some statutory provision or contractual agreement between the parties allowing otherwise. Since most construction disputes involve claims for breach of contract and/or negligence, no realistic statutory provision often allows for attorney’s fees. Many construction contracts do not typically provide a prevailing party the right to collect attorney’s fees from the other side. However, even if the American Rule applies, there may be another path to recovering attorney’s fees if the parties agree to arbitrate their dispute under the American Arbitration Association (AAA) rules. Reprinted courtesy of Bill Wilson, Robinson & Cole LLP Mr. Wilson may be contacted at wwilson@rc.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Housing Starts in U.S. Surge to Seven-Year High as Weather Warms

    May 20, 2015 —
    New residential construction in the U.S. surged in April to the highest level in more than seven years, indicating the industry has moved beyond a weather-related soft patch to regain strength. Housing starts jumped 20.2 percent to a 1.14 million annualized rate, the most since November 2007, from a 944,000 pace in March, a Commerce Department report showed Tuesday in Washington. The median forecast of 83 economists surveyed by Bloomberg was 1.02 million. More permits, a proxy for future construction, were issued than at any time since June 2008. An improving labor market and mortgage costs close to multiyear lows are reviving residential construction, a sign that the weakness in early 2015 was probably due to harsh winter weather. Builders including PulteGroup Inc. have said the spring selling season is off to a good start, and sentiment data for May showed developers are optimistic about the next six months. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shobhana Chandra, Bloomberg

    Is New York Heading for a Construction Defect Boom?

    March 12, 2015 —
    The New York Times reported that “[t]here is growing concern that some developers are repeating the mistakes of the last housing boom and delivering substandard product.” “My phone is ringing already on projects that were just completed,” Steven D. Sladkus, a Manhattan real estate lawyer who says his firm has dozens of active construction defect cases, told the New York Times. “Uh-oh, here we go again.” Recent data shows a rising trend of building plans in New York: “Last year, the city issued construction permits for 20,300 units of housing, according to the Real Estate Board of New York. And the state attorney general’s office received submissions for 263 offering plans for condo conversions and new construction in 2014, up from 184 in 2011. Those numbers will most likely grow in 2015, encouraged by Mayor Bill de Blasio’s push to build more housing.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Cross-Motions for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings for COVID-19 Claim Denied

    May 24, 2021 —
    The court denied both parties' motions for partial judgment on the pleadings seeking clarification of the policy's contamination exclusion. Thor Equities, LLC v. Factory Mut. Ins. Co., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62967 (S.D. N.Y. March 31, 2021). Thor was a commercial landlord, renting properties across the country to hundreds of tenants, for use in a variety of businesses, including office space, retail stores, restaurants, and bars. When state governments began shutting down businesses and issuing stay-at-home orders in March 2020, many of Thor's tenants had to close shop and sought abatements or other accommodations. Thor alleged it suffered significant business interruption as a result of the pandemic. 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

    MGM Seeks to Demolish Harmon Towers

    September 01, 2011 —

    Citing public safety concerns and the cost of repair, MGM Resorts International is seeking to demolish the unfinished hotel tower. The company has a few hurdles to go through before they start laying the charges to implode the structure. Any plans would have to be approved by not only Clark County officials, but also the district court has an order blocking any activity during litigation between MGM and the general contractor on the project, Perini Building Company.

    Architectural Record reports that MGM states it would take “approximately 18 months to conduct test and come up with an approved, permitted design to fix the Harmon.” MGM feels that repairs would then take another two to three years. Perini contends that they could “provide stamped drawings detailing all necessary repairs within three months.” They attribute MGM’s desire to demolish the building as “buyer’s remorse.”

    Read the full story…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    OSHA/VOSH Roundup

    August 31, 2020 —
    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 The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com