BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield 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


    Freddie Mac Eases Mortgage Rules to Limit Putbacks

    OSHA Launches Program to Combat Trenching Accidents

    Order for Appraisal Affirmed After Insureds Comply with Post-Loss Obligations

    Possible Real Estate and Use and Occupancy Tax Relief for Philadelphia Commercial and Industrial Property Owners

    Be Sure to Dot All of the “I’s” and Cross the “T’s” in Virginia

    WSHB Expands into the Southeast

    South Africa Wants Payment From Colluding World Cup Builders

    Haight Ranked in 2018 U.S. News - Best Lawyers "Best Law Firms" List

    MapLab: Why More Americans Are Moving Toward Wildfire

    Michigan Supreme Court Finds Faulty Subcontractor Work That Damages Insured’s Work Product May Constitute an “Occurrence” Under CGL Policy

    Policy's One Year Suit Limitation Does Not Apply to Challenging the Insurer's Claims Handling

    What Every Project Participant Needs to Know About Delay Claims

    Harrisburg Sought Support Before Ruinous Incinerator Retrofit

    Key California Employment Law Cases: October 2018

    Jury Awards 20 Million Verdict Against Bishop Abbey Homes

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You Have No Class(ification)”

    Hudson Tunnel Plan Shows Sign of Life as U.S. Speeds Review

    The Living Makes Buildings Better with Computational Design

    The New Industrial Revolution: Rebuilding America and the World

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

    The Future of Construction Defects in Utah Unclear

    Terminating Notice of Commencement Without Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    Failing to Adopt a Comprehensive Cyber Plan Can Lead to Disaster

    Illinois Supreme Court Holds that Constructions Defects May Constitute “Property Damage” Caused By An “Occurrence” Under Standard CGL Policy, Overruling Prior Appellate Court Precedent

    Kaboom! Illinois Applies the Anti-Subrogation Rule to Require a Landlord’s Subrogating Property Insurer to Defend a Third-Party Complaint Against Tenants

    4 Lessons Contractors Can Learn From The COVID-19 Crisis

    Western Specialty Contractors Branches in San Francisco and Cleveland Take Home Top Industry Honors

    New Plan Submitted for Explosive Demolition of Old Tappan Zee Bridge

    The Cost of Overlooking Jury Fees

    “Freelance Isn’t Free” New Regulations Adopted in New York City Requiring Written Contracts with Independent Contractors

    Congratulations to Nine Gibbs Giden Partners Selected to the 2023 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    Not Our Territory: 11th Circuit Dismisses Hurricane Damage Appraisal Order for Lack of Jurisdiction

    Property Owner Entitled to Rely on Zoning Administrator Advice

    Where Do We Go From Here?

    Patriarch Partners Decision Confirms Government Subpoenas May Constitute a “Claim” Under D&O Policy; Warns Policyholders to Think Broadly When Representing Facts and Circumstances to Insurers

    The Contractor’s Contingency: What Contractors and Construction Managers Need to Know and Be Wary Of

    Another (Insurer) Bites The Dust: Virginia District Court Rejects Narrow Reading of Pollution Exclusion

    Louisiana District Court Declines to Apply Total Pollution Exclusion

    Rescission of Policy for Misrepresentation in Application Reversed

    Nicholas A. Thede Joins Ball Janik LLP

    ‘Like a War Zone’: Malibu Fire Ravages Multimillion-Dollar Homes

    Consequential Damages Flowing from Construction Defect Not Covered Under Florida Law

    OSHA Begins Enforcement of its Respirable Crystalline Silica in Construction Standard. Try Saying That Five Times Real Fast

    In Oregon Construction Defect Claims, “Contract Is (Still) King”

    Water Damage: Construction’s Often Unnoticed Threat

    Environmental Justice Update: The Justice40 Initiative

    Is Arbitration Final and Binding?

    Construction Companies Can Be Liable for “Secondary Exposure” of Asbestos to Household Members

    Ohio Condo Development Case Filed in 2011 is Scheduled for Trial

    California Storm Raises Mudslide Risk, Closes Interstate
    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

    MTA Debarment Update

    December 02, 2019 —
    Alliance for Fair and Equitable Contracting Today, Inc., a nonprofit formed by five trade associations, including the GCA, the BTEA and the NY Building Congress, has sued the Metropolitan Transportation Authority over rules that debar contractors for delays and cost overruns on MTA projects without regard to the reasons for the delays and cost overruns. As described in our prior client alert (see here), the current rules automatically debar firms that are determined to have gone over the MTA approved contract price or time by more than 10%. The rules do not consider mitigating circumstances. Delays and cost overruns are often caused by unforeseen conditions, design errors and omissions, and changes requested by the MTA. The MTA’s rules could lead contractors to absorb additional costs they shouldn’t be responsible for rather than face the risk of being debarred. As argued in Alliance’s action, “Debarment is the death penalty for a public works contractor, and not just in New York. A debarment by the MTA could result in debarment nationwide, given that public and private contractors throughout the country commonly inquire about bidders’ debarment history when considering project bids. The Debarment Statute and MTA Regulations thus effectively export an unreasonable law not only throughout New York State, but to all other states as well.” Reprinted courtesy of Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. attorneys Steven M. Charney, Gregory H. Chertoff and Paul Monte Mr. Charney may be contacted at scharney@pecklaw.com Mr. Chertoff may be contacted at gchertoff@pecklaw.com Mr. Monte may be contacted at pmonte@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    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

    Replacement of Gym Floor Due to Sloppy Paint Job is Not Resulting Loss

    January 02, 2024 —
    The court granted the insurer's motion for summary judgment finding damage to the gym floor due to a poor paint job was not a resulting loss. Bob Robinson Commercial Flooring, Inc. v. RLI Ins,. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 196105 (D. Ark. Nov. 1, 2023). Bob Robinson Commercial Flooring (BRCF) submitted a bid to the general contractor, Nabholz Construction Corporation, to install a vinyl athletic floor and striping at a middle school. The job also included the painting of a "Wildcat" logo the main gym floor. Therefore, BRCF's job was to install floors with proper painting and striping. Robert Liles and Robert Lines Parking Lot Services was the subcontractor hired to do the painting and striping. BRCF did not supervise or inspect Liles' work while it was ongoing. Nabholz informed BRCF that there were problems with the floor painting, including crooked lines, incorrect markings, misplacement of the three point lines for the basketball surface, drips, smudges, etc. The gym floor was eventually rejected due to the nature of the vinyl flooring, once primer and paint were applied, the paint could not be removed and repainted. BRCF had to hire a new subcontractor to remove the flooring, install new flooring and then paint new lines. The cost for removal and replacement was $134,188.95. 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

    Lien Actions Versus Lien Foreclosure Actions

    June 02, 2016 —
    The lawsuits required to perfect and foreclose upon a lien have confused lien claimants and their attorneys for years. This confusion was recently demonstrated in a recent case entitled Founders Kitchen and Bath, Inc. v. Alexander, No. A15A1262, 2015 WL 6875026 (Ga. App. 2015). In the case, the trial court granted an owner’s motion for summary judgment against a subcontractor that sought to foreclose on its materialman’s lien. In deciding to reverse the trial court’s decision, the Court held that issues of material fact still existed as to whether the owner and subcontractor were in privity of contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook Jr., Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    Arizona – New Discovery Rules

    May 16, 2018 —
    Effective July 1, 2018 New Rules of Civil Procedure are taking effect in Arizona on July 1, 2018. The new Rules will change how discovery works in civil litigation in the state. Here is a sneak peek at the changes that will impact your file handling the most: Tiered Discovery
    • How much discovery is allowed in a case will now depend on the amount and type of relief sought
    • Cases will be assigned to one of three tiers
    • Parties can agree on a tier assignment, the court can assign a tier, or a tier can be assigned based on the amount of damages, or a combination of monetary and non-monetary damages
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Belanger, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP
    Mr. Belanger may be contacted at jbelanger@bremerwhyte.com

    Congress Relaxes Several PPP Loan Requirements

    June 15, 2020 —
    On June 3, 2020, Congress passed the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act ("Act") which does exactly what it means to do: provide flexibility for PPP loan recipients. President Trump is expected to sign the bill into law within the week. The Act extends the "covered period" for Paycheck Protection Program ("PPP") loans from the original eight weeks to 24 weeks or December 31, 2020, whichever is earlier. This extension provides much needed reprieve to small businesses who can utilize these funds to weather the economic effects of the Coronavirus Pandemic through 2020. The Act also revises the limitations on how small businesses utilize their PPP loans. While the CARES Act originally required 75% of the PPP loan to be used for payroll costs, this number has now been reduced to 60%. This means that up to 40% of the PPP loan can be used to cover mortgage obligations, rent, and other covered utility payments. The PPP loan payment deferral period has also been extended to align with the date on which the PPP loan's forgiveness amount is remitted to the lender. This should provide more certainty to small businesses on their payback obligations, if any. Recently, the Small Business Administration also released loan forgiveness applications to assist a business in calculating their loan forgiveness. While the SBA will likely revise it with the Act's passing, small businesses should look at the application's framework to prepare for submitting their loan forgiveness requests in the future. Newmeyer Dillion continues to follow COVID-19 and its impact on your business and our communities. Feel free to reach out to us at NDcovid19response@ndlf.com or visit us at www.newmeyerdillion.com/covid-19-multidisciplinary-task-force/. Reprinted courtesy of Greg Tross, Newmeyer Dillion and Michael Krueger, Newmeyer Dillion Mr. Tross may be contacted at greg.tross@ndlf.com Mr. Krueger may be contacted at michael.krueger@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Award Doubled in Retrial of New Jersey Elevator Injury Case

    February 14, 2014 —
    Richard Tufaro, a New Jersey carpenter who suffered injuries from an elevator accident in 2005, had lost a $4 million award on appeal, but has recently “won $8million on retrial” according to The New Jersey Law Journal. In March of 2012, during the first trial, the “jury awarded $2.8 million for pain and suffering, $233,000 in medical expenses and $950,000 per quod to Tufaro's wife, totaling about $4 million.” In March 2013 the ruling was reversed by the Appellate Division who found “the verdict sheet and Coburn's jury instructions ‘together created a misleading and ambiguous deliberative environment, fully capable of engendering an unjust result.’" On February 11th, at the conclusion of the retrial, the jury “found Schindler Elevator and Escalator Co.'s negligent maintenance of an elevator led to a two-and-a-half-story plunge that left Richard Tufaro with neck and back injuries” and awarded Tufaro “$5.5 million for pain and suffering, $2.25 million per quod and $250,000 in medical expenses.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Another Smart Home Innovation: Remote HVAC Diagnostics

    June 17, 2015 —
    Builder magazine reported that “smart home technology manufacturer Nexia Home Intelligence now offers monitoring of a home’s HVAC system even when owners are away. If an issue arises, it can be fixed quickly, sometimes without a service call, the company says.” The service is available “with Trane and American Standard Wi-Fi-enabled thermostats” and requires a free Nexia account. System alerts are automatically transmitted to the dealer. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of