• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut engineering 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


    City of Sacramento Approves Kings NBA Financing Plan

    Massachusetts Court Holds Statute of Repose Bars Certain Asbestos-Related Construction Claims

    Was Jury Right in Negligent Construction Case?

    Texas exclusions j(5) and j(6).

    Big Bertha Lawsuits—Hitachi Zosen Weighs In

    Title II under ADA Applicable to Public Rights-of-Way, Parks and Other Recreation Areas

    Beginning of the 2020 Colorado Legislative Session: Here We Go Again

    White and Williams LLP Acquires 6 Attorney Firm

    Water Damage: Construction’s Often Unnoticed Threat

    California Court of Appeal Clarifies Intent of Faulty Workmanship Exclusions

    Blackstone Said to Sell Boston Buildings for $2.1 Billion

    Gehry-Designed Project Seen Bringing NYC Vibe to L.A.

    NYC Hires Engineer LERA for Parking Garage Collapse Probe

    Guessing as to your Construction Damages is Not the Best Approach

    California Posts Nation’s Largest Gain in Construction Jobs

    CRH to Buy Building-Products Firm Laurence for $1.3 Billion

    Bremer Whyte Congratulates Nicole Nuzzo on OCBA Professionalism and Ethics Committee Appointment

    Preserving Your Construction Claim

    Miller Act Claim for Unsigned Change Orders

    Pine Island Bridge in Place as Florida Pushes Barrier Island Access in Ian's Wake

    Schools Remain Top Priority in Carolinas as Cleanup From Storms Continues

    Exclusion for Construction of Condominiums Includes Faulty Construction of Retaining Wall

    Arbitration Provisions Are Challenging To Circumvent

    Delay Leads to Problems with Construction Defects

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    Court Concludes That COVID-19 Losses Can Qualify as “Direct Physical Loss”

    Drafting the Bond Form, Particularly Performance Bond Form

    Key Economic & Geopolitical Themes To Monitor In 2024

    Florida Enacts Sweeping Tort Reform Legislation, Raising Barriers to Insurance Coverage Claims

    Construction in the Time of Coronavirus

    Is the Issuance of a City Use Permit Referable? Not When It Is an Administrative Act

    Seventh Circuit Confirms Additional Insured's Coverage for Alleged Construction Defects

    Cal/OSHA’s Toolbox Has Significantly Expanded: A Look At Senate Bill 606

    Attorneys' Fee Clauses are Engraved Invitations to Sue

    NYC Luxury-Condo Buyers Await New Towers as Sales Slow

    Nuclear Energy Gets a Much-Needed Boost

    Triple Points to the English Court of Appeal for Clarifying the Law on LDs

    New York Court Permits Asbestos Claimants to Proceed Against Insurers with Buyout Agreements

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (08/30/23) – AI Predicts Home Prices, Construction’s Effect on the Economy, and Could Streamline Communications for Developers

    Loose Bolts Led to Sagging Roof in Construction Defect Claim

    After More than Two Years, USDOT Rejects WSDOT’s Recommendation to Reinstate Non-Minority Women-Owned DBEs into DBE Participation Goals

    Meet D1's Neutrals Series: KENNETH FLOREY

    Nine ACS Lawyers Recognized by Best Lawyers®

    Coverage Denied for Ensuing Loss After Foundation Damage

    When Construction Contracts Go Sideways in Bankruptcy

    NY Project Produces America's First Utility Scale Wind Power

    CSLB Joint Venture Licenses – Providing Contractors With The Means To Expand Their Businesses

    Recent Changes in the Law Affecting Construction Defect Litigation

    Let’s Talk About a Statutory First-Party Bad Faith Claim Against an Insurer

    The G2G Year in Review: 2019
    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

    New OSHA Regulations on Confined Spaces in Construction

    May 20, 2015 —
    On May 1, OSHA announced its final rules for construction workers in confined spaces. The Final Rules, which will take effect August 3, 2015, will require more comprehensive training , with the goal of providing construction workers the same or similar protections as employees in manufacturing and general industry.
      The final rule will cover confined spaces such as:
    • Crawl spaces
    • Manholes
    • Tanks
    • Sewers
      The final rule will require the following:
    • Confined spaces must be large enough for an employee to enter and have a means of exiting.
    • The air in confined spaces must be tested before workers enter them to ensure that the air is safe.
    • Construction workers must share safety information with others when they are going to work in enclosed/confined spaces.
    • Hazards associated with confined spaces must be continuously monitored and abated to the extent possible.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    Co-Housing Startups Fly in the Face of Old-School NYC Housing Law

    December 18, 2022 —
    A room in an eight-bedroom Bed-Stuy brownstone with “charming views.” A five-bedroom “modern Manhattan” home. In a housing market as hot as New York City’s, these units advertised on co-housing companies’ websites sound promising. According to the city’s housing regulations, however, neither is legal. That hasn’t stopped companies from offering the rooms, as renters clamor for affordable living space. With the average studio apartment in Manhattan going for nearly $3,100 a month, newcomers to the city often find living with multiple roommates to be their best affordable-housing option. It’s a trend that startups have jumped on, and one some experts endorse as a way to quickly scale up affordable housing — even though municipal housing laws aren’t on board yet. The reality is that in many cities, housing laws that limit the number of unrelated individuals in a dwelling are still in place. New York, for instance, doesn’t allow more than three unrelated people to live in the same unit. To be sure, New Yorkers often break that law, as expensive housing forces people to find roommates through friends or on sites like Craigslist. But multimillion-dollar companies breaking that law is new.  Reprinted courtesy of Amelia Pollard, Bloomberg and Diego Lasarte, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Illinois Federal Court Applies Insurer-Friendly “Mutual Exclusive Theories” Test To Independent Counsel Analysis

    November 09, 2020 —
    Insureds often request independent counsel when insurers agree to provide a defense subject to a reservation of rights, pursuant to which an insurer takes the position that certain damages may not be indemnifiable. Requests for independent counsel are often rooted in fear that a defense attorney who has a relationship with the insurer may be incentivized to defend the insured in a way that maximizes the potential for the insurer to succeed on its coverage defenses. As explained by the Illinois Supreme Court in Maryland Cas. Co. v. Peppers, 355 N.E.2d 24 (Ill. 1976), when a conflict of interest arises between an insurer and its insured, the attorney appointed by the insurer is faced with serious ethical questions and the insured is entitled to its own attorney. Illinois courts generally follow the rule that an insured is entitled to independent counsel upon a showing of an actual conflict. In Builders Concrete Servs., LLC v. Westfield Nat’l Ins. Co., No. 19 C 7792, 2020 WL 5518474 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 14, 2020), the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois recently addressed a dispute between an insurer and its insured about independent counsel. Westfield insured Builders Concrete Services (BCS). Focus Construction hired BCS as a subcontractor to perform concrete work on a new apartment building. BCS’ work included pouring concrete for structural columns, one of which buckled and failed. BCS sued Focus Construction for withholding payment, and Focus Construction counter-sued for breach of contract and negligence relating to BCS’ alleged faulty work that caused the column to fall. Focus Construction’s counterclaim alleged that the column failure damaged other parts of the building on which Builders did not perform work. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy S. Macklin, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Macklin may be contacted at jmacklin@tlsslaw.com

    Kadeejah Kelly Named to The National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List

    October 17, 2022 —
    New York, N.Y. (October 6, 2022) – New York Associate Kadeejah J. Kelly was recently named to The National Black Lawyers (NBL) “Top 40 Under 40” list. The NBL “Top 40 Under 40” recognizes the most talented black attorneys under the age of 40 who have an outstanding reputation among peers, the judiciary and the public. The honorees on this list are nominated from leading lawyers, current members, and Executive Committee members. Ms. Kelly is a member of the General Liability and Professional Liability Practices. She has extensive experience defending owners, contractors, developers and corporations in high exposure construction cases including New York Labor Law matters, premises liability and construction defect claims. She also has experience defending malpractice claims against attorneys, accountants, architects, engineers, funeral home directors and other miscellaneous professionals. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    EPA Can't Evade Enviro Firm's $2.7M Cleanup Site Pay Claim, US Court Says

    January 25, 2021 —
    A Richmond, Va., federal appeals court has restored an environmental consultant's legal fight for $2.7 million in federal funds to cover work at a Superfund cleanup site it managed, rejecting a lower court’s dismissal of its claim over a technicality. Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Disputes Over Arbitrator Qualifications: The Northern District of California Offers Some Guidance

    August 10, 2021 —
    The selection of an arbitration panel can often lead to disputes between the parties regarding things like whether a particular candidate is qualified, whether a challenge to an arbitrator’s qualifications can be addressed pre-award and whether a party that names an unqualified arbitrator should lose the opportunity to name a replacement. In Public Risk Innovations v. Amtrust Financial Services, No. 21-cv-03573, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129464 (N.D. Ca. July 12, 2021), the court provided answers on all three of these issues. In Amtrust, the parties filed cross-motions to compel arbitration. Although both parties agreed the dispute was arbitrable, they disagreed about whether Public Risk Innovations, Solutions and Management’s (PRISM) arbitrator was qualified under the terms of the applicable contract. In seeking to have PRISM’s arbitrator disqualified, Amtrust argued that he: (1) was not a “current or former official of an insurance or reinsurance company”; and (2) was not “disinterested.” Amtrust also argued that because PRISM named an unqualified arbitrator (and presumably the time to appoint had passed), PRISM should be deemed to have failed to select an arbitrator as required by the contract and that Amtrust had the right to select a second arbitrator of its choice. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Justin K. Fortescue, White and Williams
    Mr. Fortescue may be contacted at fortescuej@whiteandwilliams.com

    SFAA and Coalition of Partners Encourage Lawmakers to Require Essential Surety Bonding Protections on All Federally-Financed Projects Receiving WIFIA Funds

    February 21, 2022 —
    February 17, 2022 (WASHINGTON, DC) – The Surety & Fidelity Association of America (SFAA) in collaboration with 15 trade associations, sent a letter strongly encouraging members of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, led by Chairman Tom Carper (D-DE) and Ranking Member Shelly Moore Capito (R-WV), to require payment and performance protections on federally-financed infrastructure projects receiving Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) loans, including public-private projects (P3s). “As the Environment and Public Works Committee looks at legislation in the second session of the 117th Congress to continue the important work of addressing our nation’s water infrastructure, we urge the Committee to amend the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program to help protect taxpayer funds, workers, subcontractors and suppliers, including Small and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program participants and subcontractors, who build water infrastructure especially in at-risk low income communities,” said Lee Covington, president and CEO, SFAA. The coalition of partners includes: American Property and Casualty Association American Subcontractor Association Business Coalition for Fair Competition Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers Finishing Contractors Association International International Union of Operating Engineers Mechanical Contractors Association of America National Association of Electrical Contractor National Association of Minority Contractors National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies National Association of Surety Bond Producers Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors’ National Association The Association of Union Constructors The Construction Employers of America Women Construction Owners and Executives The Surety & Fidelity Association of America (SFAA) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan trade association representing all segments of the surety and fidelity industry. Based in Washington, D.C., SFAA works to promote the value of surety and fidelity bonding by proactively advocating on behalf of its members and stakeholders. The association’s more than 450 member companies write 98 percent of surety and fidelity bonds in the U.S. For more information visit www.surety.org. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Washington Supreme Court Upholds King County Ordinance Requiring Utility Providers to Pay for Access to County’s Right-of-Way and Signals Approval for Other Counties to Follow Suit

    March 02, 2020 —
    On December 5, 2019, the Washington State Supreme Court released its opinion in King County v. King County Water Districts, et al.,[1] upholding King County’s Ordinance 18403, which requires utility companies who are franchise grantees to pay “franchise compensation” for their use of the County rights-of-way. Generally, utility companies must apply for and obtain from the County a franchise permitting it to do necessary work in the County rights-of-way. [2] Previously, King County only charged an administrative fee associated with issuing such a franchise. But with the new franchise compensation charges, King County estimates that it will raise approximately $10 million dollars per year for its general fund. Ordinance 18403 passed in November 2016 and was the first of its kind in the state. The ordinance created a rule, set forth in RCW 6.27.080, requiring electric, gas, water, and sewer utilities who are granted a franchise by King County to pay “franchise compensation” in exchange for the right to use the County’s rights-of-way. The rule provides that franchise compensation is in the nature of an annual rent payment to the County for using the County roads. King County decides an initial estimate of the charge by considering various factors such as the value of the land used, the size of the area that will be used, and the density of the households served. But utility companies can negotiate with the County over the final amount of franchise compensation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kristina Southwell, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Ms. Southwell may be contacted at kristina.southwell@acslawyers.com