BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractor
    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


    New Law Impacting Florida’s Statute of Repose

    PAGA Right of Action Not Applicable to Construction Workers Under Collective Bargaining Agreement

    Sweet News for Yum Yum Donuts: Lost Goodwill is Not an All or Nothing Proposition

    In a Win for Design Professionals, California Court of Appeals Holds That Relation-Back Doctrine Does Not Apply to Certificate of Merit Law

    The World’s Largest 3D-Printed Neighborhood Is Here

    Revised Cause Identified for London's Wobbling Millennium Bridge After Two Decades

    Changes to Va. Code Section 43-13: Another Arrow in a Subcontractor’s Quiver

    Sick Leave, Paid Time Off, and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act

    Report to Congress Calls for Framework to Cut Post-Quake Recovery Time

    Construction Defect Not a RICO Case, Says Court

    California Court Broadly Interprets Insurance Policy’s “Liability Arising Out of” Language

    Thousands of London Residents Evacuated due to Fire Hazards

    California Mechanics’ Lien Case Treads Both Old and New Ground

    Business Interruption, Food Spoilage Claims Resulting from Off Premise Power Failure Denied

    Nomos LLP Partners Recognized in Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    Homebuilders Opposed to Potential Change to Interest on Construction Defect Expenses

    New Opportunities for “Small” Construction Contractors as SBA Adjusts Its Size Standards Again Due to Unprecedented Inflation

    Exploring Architects’ Perspectives on AI: A Survey of Fears and Hopes

    One World Trade Center Due to Be America’s Tallest and World’s Priciest

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rise Most Since February 2006

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

    New Hampshire’s Statute of Repose for Improvements to Real Property Does Not Apply to Product Manufacturers

    Sept. 11 Victims Rejected by U.S. High Court on Lawsuit

    Does Arbitration Apply to Contemporaneously Executed Contracts (When One of the Contracts Does Not Have an Arbitration Provision)?

    Defining Constructive Acceleration

    Jason Poore Receives 2018 Joseph H. Foster Young Lawyer Award

    Condominium Association Wins $5 Million Judgment against Developer

    McGraw Hill to Sell off Construction-Data Unit

    The Starter Apartment Is Nearly Extinct in San Francisco and New York

    Fed Inflation Goal Is Elusive as U.S. Rents Stabilize: Economy

    Are Mechanic’s Liens the Be All End All of Construction Collections?

    Steven L. Heisdorffer Joins Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell

    SB 721 – California Multi-Family Buildings New Require Inspections of “EEEs”

    Are Untimely Repairs an “Occurrence” Triggering CGL Coverage?

    Tenth Circuit Finds Insurer Must Defend Unintentional Faulty Workmanship

    Updated 3/13/20: Coronavirus is Here: What Does That Mean for Your Project and Your Business?

    Oregon Construction Firm Sued for Construction Defects

    Understanding California’s Pure Comparative Negligence Law

    Montrose III: Appeals Court Rejects “Elective Vertical Stacking,” but Declines to Find “Universal Horizontal Exhaustion” Absent Proof of Policy Wordings

    Vancouver’s George Massey Tunnel Replacement May Now be a Tunnel Instead of a Bridge

    Insurer Awarded Summary Judgment on Collapse Claim

    Moving Toward a Telework Future: A Checklist of Considerations for Employers

    What is a “Force Majeure” Clause? Do I Need one in my Contract? Three Options For Contractors, Subcontractors and Suppliers to Consider

    How Many New Home Starts are from Teardowns?

    Attempt to Overrule Trial Court's Order to Produce Underwriting Manual Fails

    Improperly Installed Flanges Are Impaired Property

    Wood Product Rotting in New Energy Efficient Homes

    Allegations Versus “True Facts”: Which Govern the Duty to Defend? Bonus! A Georgia Court Clears Up What the Meaning of “Is” Is

    Boston Water Main Break Floods Trench and Kills Two Workers

    Construction Defects Not Occurrences under Ohio Law
    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

    To Ease Housing Crunch, Theme Parks Are Becoming Homebuilders

    January 29, 2024 —
    For visitors, Universal Studios Florida offers a chance to visit a fantastical land full of wizards, Minions and various characters from NBC Universal’s many film and television properties. But for the roughly 28,000 men and women who work at the 840-acre theme park and resort complex in Orlando, the troubles of the real world — like the rising cost of housing — are not far away. Central Florida has seen some of the nation’s fastest pandemic-era rent increases, thanks to a confluence of job growth, migration and housing underproduction that has put a strain on residents. The average tenant in the region saw their monthly rent jump by $600 between early 2020 and early 2023. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, the Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford metro area has one of the worst affordable housing shortages in the US, with only 15 available units for every 100 extremely low-income renter households. The dire need for workforce housing is behind the entertainment conglomerate’s latest project in Central Florida: a 1,000-unit mixed-use development, set to open in 2026, that promises to give tenants who work in the service industry a short commute to the constellation of tourist attractions and hotels nearby. To launch the project, Universal donated 20 acres of land adjacent to the Orange County convention center. Called Catchlight Crossings and built in partnership with local developer Wendover Housing Partners, the project broke ground in November. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Sisson, Bloomberg

    Labor Under the Miller Act And Estoppel of Statute of Limitations

    May 08, 2023 —
    If you want a case that goes into history of the federal Miller Act, check out the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal’s opinion in U.S. ex rel. Dickson v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, 2023 WL 3083440 (4th Cir. 2023). While I am not going to delve into this history, it’s a worthwhile read. It is also a worthwhile read for two other points. First, it discusses what constitutes “labor” under the Miller Act. Second, it discusses doctrine of estoppel to prevent a surety from raising the statute of limitations to bar a Miller Act payment bond claim, which is a doctrine you do NOT want to rely on, as this case reinforces. Both of these points applicable to Miller Act claims are discussed below. This case dealt with a prime contractor renovating staircases that was terminated by the federal government. The prime contractor hired a professional engineer as its subcontractor to serve as its project manager and supervise labor on the project. The engineer/subcontractor also had “logistical and clerical duties, taking various field measurements, cleaning the worksite, moving tools and materials, and sometimes even watering the concrete himself.” Dickson, supra, at *1. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Public-Private Partnerships: When Will Reality Meet the Promise?

    October 09, 2018 —
    The promise of public-private partnerships (P3s) seems irresistible. The $4.5-trillion that the American Society of Civil Engineers says the U.S. must spend on at-risk infrastructure by 2025 is a backlog beyond the collective means of local, state and federal governments to fund and deliver. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard Fechner, GHD, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    ASCE Statement on EPA Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan

    December 27, 2021 —
    WASHINGTON, DC. – The American Society of Civil Engineers applauds the Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan released yesterday by the Environmental Protection Agency to help communities across the country remove lead pipes out of their drinking water systems. Access to clean and safe drinking water is critical to public health and economic prosperity, and ASCE's 2021 Report Card for America's Infrastructure. gave a grade of C- for the drinking water category. It is estimated that as many as 10 million American households still have lead water pipes in use, which can put at risk the health and safety of families, particularly children. For utilities, moving forward with completing an inventory of lead service lines as part of the Lead and Copper Rule is a critical step, so we can get a better national picture of the scope of the problem. This plan will allocate nearly $3 billion from the recently passed Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) to states for lead service line replacements in FY 2022 and will prioritize communities with the highest lead levels. While additional investment will be needed, it is a significant down-payment on a national shared priority of clean drinking water for all Americans. It will allow utilities of all sizes to accelerate their rate of lead pipe replacement and offer technical assistance to those communities just embarking on these types of projects. For more information about the American Society of Civil Engineers, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    July 31, 2013 —
    An issue that has plagued builders in Colorado construction defect litigation is the difficulty of getting additional insured carriers to fully participate in the builder’s defense, oftentimes leaving the builder to fund its own defense during the course of the litigation. Many additional insurers offer a variety of positions regarding why they will not pay for fees and costs during the course of a lawsuit. Some insurers argue that, until after trial, it is impossible to determine its proper share of the defense, and therefore cannot make any payments until the liability is determined as to all of the potentially contributing policies. (This is often referred to as the “defense follows indemnity” approach.) Others may make an opening contribution to defense fees and costs, but fall silent as fees and costs accumulate. In such an event, the builder may be forced to fund all or part of its own defense, while the uncooperative additional insured carrier waits for the end of the lawsuit or is faced with other legal action before it makes other contributions. Recent orders in two, currently ongoing, U.S. District Court cases provide clarity on the duty to defend in Colorado, holding that multiple insurers’ duty to defend is joint and several. The insured does not have to go without a defense while the various insurers argue amongst themselves as to which insurer pays what share. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Insured's Lack of Knowledge of Tenant's Growing Marijuana Means Coverage Afforded for Fire Loss

    August 17, 2020 —
    The California Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to the insurer regarding a claim for fire loss. Mosley v. Pacific Sec. Ins, Co., 2020 Cal. App LEXIS (Cal. Ct. App, May 26, 2020). The Mosleys rented their property to Pedro Lopez. Six months later, the property was damaged by fire. Lopez had tapped a main power line into the attic to power his energy-intensive marijuana growing operation. The illegal power line caused the fire. Pacific Specialty Insurance Company (PSIC) insured the property under an HO-3 Standard Homeowners policy. Paragraph E of the policy provided,
      We do not insure for loss resulting from any manufacturing, product or operation, engaged in:
    1. The growing of plants; or
    2. The manufacture, production, operation or processing of chemical, biological, animal or plant materials.
    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

    How Robotics Can Improve Construction and Demolition Waste Sorting

    September 11, 2023 —
    Commercial construction projects generate a lot of waste. Managing this debris is crucial to minimizing the industry’s environmental impact, but it’s often a time-consuming and error-prone process. Robotic waste sorting provides a better alternative. Why C&D Waste Management Must Improve The current state of construction and demolition (C&D) debris management leaves considerable room for improvement. Nearly all C&D waste takes decades to break down in landfills—and the sector generates hundreds of millions of tons of it annually. More efficient debris management would help firms protect the environment and their bottom line. Poor waste management practices also take an economic toll. Recycling extends materials’ useful life, helping minimize resource costs. Inefficient waste sorting may additionally lead to unnecessarily high workforce expenses and incur lost business from firms’ lack of sustainability. Reprinted courtesy of Emily Newton, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Property Owner’s Defense Goes Up in Smoke in Careless Smoking Case

    September 23, 2019 —
    Property owners owe a duty of reasonable care to avoid causing harm to neighboring properties. When a property owner knows or should know about a condition that poses a risk of danger to neighboring properties, the property owner must exercise reasonable care to make the condition safe. The Court of Special Appeals of Maryland recently held that, where hundreds of discarded cigarette butts had accumulated in a bed of mulch over an extended period of time prior to the fire at issue, the owner of the property with the mulch beds owed a duty of care to its neighbors to prevent a foreseeable fire. In Steamfitters Local Union No. 602 v. Erie Insurance Exchange, 2019 Md. App. LEXIS 430 (May 30, 2019), a fire originated in a strip of mulch at property owned by the Steamfitters Local Union No. 602 (Union) and caused damage to neighboring properties. The fire occurred when an unknown person discarded a cigarette butt into the mulch. Following the fire, investigators found “hundreds, if not thousands of cigarettes” in the mulch where the fire originated. A representative for the Union acknowledged that there were more butts in the mulch “than there should have been” and that, “[i]n the right situation,” a carelessly discarded cigarette could cause a fire. The Union, however, had no rules or signs to prohibit or regulate smoking at the property, where apprentices would often gather prior to class. The insurance companies for the damaged neighbors filed subrogation actions alleging that the Union, as the property owner, failed to use reasonable care to prevent a foreseeable fire. A jury found in favor of the subrogating insurers and against the Union. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael J. Ciamaichelo, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Ciamaichelo may be contacted at ciamaichelom@whiteandwilliams.com