BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim 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


    Anti-Assignment Provision Unenforceable in Kentucky

    Are You Satisfying WISHA Standards?

    How BIM Can Serve Building Owners

    The Pitfalls of Oral Agreements in the Construction Industry

    Eleventh Circuit’s Noteworthy Discussion on Bad Faith Insurance Claims

    Hunton Insurance Group Advises Policyholders on Issues That Arise With Wildfire Claims and Coverage – A Seven-Part Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series

    What Contractors Can Do to Address Rising Material Costs

    PSA: Virginia DOLI Amends COVID Workplace Standard

    Do We Really Want Courts Deciding if Our Construction Contracts are Fair?

    Edison Utility Accused of Igniting LA Fire in Lawsuits

    Insurer's Judgment on the Pleadings Based Upon Expected Injury Exclusion Reversed

    Dispute Over Exhaustion of Primary Policy

    Best Practices for ESI Collection in Construction Litigation

    When Is Mandatory Arbitration Not Mandatory?

    Consider Manner In Which Loan Agreement (Promissory Note) Is Drafted

    California Supreme Court Holds that Prevailing Wages are Not Required for Mobilization Work, for Now

    Demand for New Homes Good News for Home Builders

    Need to Cover Yourself for “Crisis” Changes on a Job Site? Try These Tips (guest post)

    Residential Mortgage Lenders and Servicers Beware of Changes to Rule 3002.1

    Full Extent of Damage From Turkey Quakes Takes Shape

    Supreme Court Opens Door for Challenges to Older Federal Regulations

    Safe and Safer

    Don’t Put Yourself In The Position Of Defending Against An Accord And Satisfaction Defense

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Preserves Possibility of Coverage

    Appeal of an Attorney Disqualification Order Results in Partial Automatic Stay of Trial Court Proceedings

    Surprising Dismissal of False Claims Act Case Based on Appointments Clause - What Does It Mean?

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/1/24) – IMF’s Data on Housing, REITs Versus Private Real Estate, and Suburban Versus Urban Office Property Market

    The 2021 Top 50 Construction Law Firms™

    Digitalizing the Hospital Design Requirements Process

    Competitive Bidding Statute: When it Applies and When it Does Not

    Federal Government May Go to Different Green Building Standard

    Doctrine of Merger Not a Good Blend for Seller of Sonoma Winery Property

    Nuclear Fusion Pushes to Reach Commercial Power Plant Stage

    Limiting Services Can Lead to Increased Liability

    Subsequent Purchaser Can Assert Claims for Construction Defects

    Couple Gets $79,000 on $10 Million Construction Defect Claim

    Rikus Locati Selected to 2024 Northern California Rising Stars!

    Expert's Opinions On Causation Leads Way To Summary Judgment For Insurer

    Eleventh Circuit Holds that EPA Superfund Remedial Actions are Usually Entitled to the FTCA “Discretionary Function” Exemption

    Europe’s Satellites Could Help Catch the Next Climate Disaster

    Contractor’s Charge Of Improvements To Real Property Not Required For Laborers To Have Lien Rights

    Celebrating Excellence: Lisa Bondy Dunn named by Law Week Colorado as the 2024 Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants

    Contractors with Ties to Trustees Reaped Benefits from LA Community College Modernization Program

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

    The Nightmare Scenario for Florida’s Coastal Homeowners

    Giant Floating Solar Flowers Offer Hope for Coal-Addicted Korea

    Idaho Business Review Names VF Law Attorney Brittaney Bones Women of the Year Honoree

    2020s Most Read Construction Law Articles

    Feds, County Seek Delay in Houston $7B Road Widening Over Community Impact

    Construction Defect Bill Introduced in California
    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

    Pensacola Bridge Halted Due to Alleged Construction Defects

    July 21, 2018 —
    The Pensacola News Journal reported that cracks were discovered again in the Pensacola Bay Bridge, which caused construction of said bridge to be halted once more: “Cracks found in a portion of the concrete in the Pensacola Bay Bridge project have twice halted construction in the last several months, raising concerns about oversight and disclosure from the state, particularly in light of the Miami bridge collapse earlier this year.” The Florida Department of Transportation stated “that the cracks were found during a routine visual inspection of newly placed concrete in March,” according to the Pensacola News Journal. The $400 million project began in 2017 and was scheduled to be completed by 2020. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Whether Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship Is an Occurrence Creates Ambiguity

    March 16, 2017 —
    The Ohio Court of Appeals determined that the CGL policy was ambiguous as to whether a subcontractor's faulty workmanship was an "occurrence." Ohio N. Univ. v. Charles Constr. Serv., 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 258 (Ohio Ct. App. Jan. 23, 2017). In 2007, Ohio Northern University (ONU) entered a contract with Charles Construction Services, Inc. (CCS) to construct a hotel on the campus. In 2011, the building was completed, but ONU found water intrusion and moisture damage in the interior. When remediating the water damage, ONU found additional, serious structural defects. ONU sued CCS, alleging breach of contract, breach of express warranty, and negligent misrepresentation. CCS filed a third-party action against many of its subcontractors. Cincinnati Insurance Company (CIC) intervened and filed a cross-claim for a declaratory judgment that it had no duty to provide coverage to CCS. CIC and ONU filed cross motions for summary judgment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    August 17, 2011 —

    Jim Haugey, the Chief Economist for Reed Construction Data noted that new residential construction spending fell 0.2% in June and a slightly larger drop of 0.5% in residential remodeling. While economic growth is still low, Haugey states that homebuilders have “record low inventories.” He forecasts a shrinkage of 1.5% in 2011, followed by about 20% growth in 2012.

    Read the full story…

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

    Builder’s Be Wary of Insurance Policies that Provide No Coverage for Building: Mt. Hawley Ins. Co v. Creek Side at Parker HOA

    May 01, 2014 —
    On the heels of a recent order regarding coverage under a Comprehensive General Insurance policy issued by Mt. Hawley Insurance Company (“Mt. Hawley”), builders should be very wary of CGL policies providing no coverage for property damage. On January 8, 2013, District Court Judge R. Brooke Jackson granted a motion for declaratory judgment filed by Mt. Hawley. The order states that the subject insurance policies issued by Mt. Hawley to Mountain View Homes II, LLC (“MV Homes”), the builder developer of the Creek Side at Parker development (the “Project”), did not provide coverage for any of the work performed by MV Homes or its subcontractors on the Project. MV Homes originally began construction on the Project in 2002 and completed construction in 2005. MV Homes was insured by National Fire and Marine Insurance Company (“National Fire”) and Mt. Hawley. In December 2008, Creek Side at Parker Homeowners Association, Inc. (“the HOA”) served notice on MV Homes. The HOA then instituted a construction defect lawsuit on June 1, 2009 against MV Homes and others. MV Homes initially demanded a defense and indemnity from National Fire, which provided a defense. Then, after two years, MV Homes demanded a defense and indemnity from Mt. Hawley in July 2011. Mt. Hawley denied coverage and did not provide a defense. The case was settled soon after, and National Fire reserved or assigned claims against Mt. Hawley. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Parking Reform Takes Off on the West Coast

    January 23, 2023 —
    Starting January 1, 2023, real estate developers in Oregon and California will no longer be required to build off-street parking facilities for certain projects located near public transit. Both states enacted new rules during the course of 2022 which are effective as of the beginning of 2023, and which seek to reduce the costs of building at least some new projects in major population centers. In California, A.B. 2097 was signed by Governor Gavin Newsom in September, and prohibits city governments throughout the state (including in charter cities) from enforcing any local land use provisions which would require the developer to build parking spaces as part of their project if the project is located within one half-mile of a major public transit stop. The law applies to both residential and commercial projects. Cities can continue mandating parking for individual projects if they find that doing so is important to support the development of affordable housing—this exception was added to allay concerns that the bill would undermine “density bonus” programs which have become an important tool for the promotion of new affordable housing development around the state. In Oregon, following a 2020 executive order by Governor Kate Brown, the state Land Conservation and Development Commission (the body responsible for land use and planning regulation in Oregon) embarked on a two-year rulemaking process which culminated in July of 2022 with the approval of a set of “Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities Rules.” Like the California legislation, these rules (in part) limit the ability of Oregon’s most populous cities to enforce parking minimums for new development projects. Unlike the California law, the Oregon rules encourage cities simply to repeal their parking mandates entirely. Cities subject the new rules which choose not to repeal their parking mandates in full must, as an alternative, adopt new local policies to reduce the amount of land dedicated to parking in certain geographies or in connection with certain uses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Allan Van Vliet, Pillsbury
    Mr. Van Vliet may be contacted at allan.vanvliet@pillsburylaw.com

    Avoiding Wage Claims in California Construction

    November 25, 2024 —
    For both private works projects and state and local public works projects in California, higher-tiered contractors can find themselves opening up their wallets if their lower-tiered subcontractors fail to pay their workers. And if you think this is just another one of those crazy California things, think again. Higher-tiered parties on federal public works projects can also be asked to open up their wallets if their lower-tiered subcontractors stiff their workers. While we’re coming upon the season of giving, here’s a Scrooge-like guide on things you can do to avoid finding yourselves on the hook for your lower-tiered subcontractor’s even more Scrooge-like failure to pay their workers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Charles Carter v. Pulte Home Corporation

    October 12, 2020 —
    In Carter v. Pulte Home Corp., __Cal.App.5th__(July 23, 2020), the California Court of Appeal affirmed the entry of judgment in favor of subcontractors in connection with a Complaint for Intervention based on equitable subrogation filed by Travelers Property Casualty Company of America (“Travelers”) seeking to recover defense costs incurred in defending Pulte Home Corporation (“Pulte”) in an underlying construction defect lawsuit. The parties’ dispute arose out of Travelers’ defense of Pulte as an additional insured under policies issued to four subcontractors involved in the underlying construction defect lawsuit. Several subcontractors involved in the underlying construction defect lawsuit refused to defend Pulte based on the indemnity clauses in their subcontracts. Such clauses promised to indemnify Pulte as follows: “all liability, claims, judgments, suits, or demands for damages to persons or property arising out of, resulting from, or relating to Contractor’s performance of work under the Agreement (“Claims”) unless such Claims have been specifically determined by the trier of fact to be the sole negligence of Pulte. . . .” Pulte eventually settled the construction defect lawsuit and its claims against all of the subcontractors. Travelers ultimately paid $320,491.82 for Pulte’s defense and recovered $164,400 from some of the subcontractors. Travelers’ intervention in the underlying lawsuit was intended to recover the remaining $156,091.82 from the subcontractors that refused to indemnify Pulte for the defense of the construction defect lawsuit. In the underlying trial, Travelers argued that the subcontractors were obligated to pay defense costs on a joint and several basis (minus what Travelers had already recovered). The trial court did not agree and held that Travelers was not entitled to equitable subrogation for the remaining defense costs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Velladao, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Velladao may be contacted at Michael.Velladao@lewisbrisbois.com

    Southern California Lost $8 Billion in Construction Wages

    August 17, 2011 —

    Los Angeles and Orange Counties are first on a list no area wants to be on. According to the Sacramento Bee, reporting on data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, LA and Orange Counties saw an $8 billion drop in construction wages in 2010, as compared to 2006. In 2006, the region saw payrolls of $26.8 billion, but in 2010, that was reduced to $18.5 billion.

    This was not the largest percentage change. Of the metropolitan areas with the largest declines in construction earnings, Las Vegas saw a $3.6 billion drop, however that represented half of their 2006 totals of $7.2 billion. Conversely, a $3.3 billion drop in the New York area represented only 10% of what had been $33.8 billion in payroll in 2006.

    Read the full story…

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