BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut testifying construction 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


    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    Florida Lawmakers Fail to Reach Agreement on Condominium Safety Bill

    The Coverage Fun House Mirror: When Things Are Not What They Seem

    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    ASCE Statement on Senate Passage Of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    Traub Lieberman Partner Rina Clemens Selected as a 2023 Florida Super Lawyers® Rising Star

    Texas Legislature Puts a Spear in Doctrine Making Contractor Warrantor of Owner Furnished Plans and Specifications

    Fannie Overseer Moves to Rescue Housing With Lower Risk to Lenders

    Property Damage Caused By Construction Next Door Covered as Ensuing Loss

    Rise in Single-Family Construction Anticipated in Michigan

    Appellate Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    New York Court of Appeals Addresses Choice of Law Challenges

    Additional Insured Not Covered Where Injury Does Not Arise Out Of Insured's Work

    Revel Closing Shows Gambling Is No Sure Thing for Renewal

    Sixth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Under Kentucky Law

    PSA: Performing Construction Work in Virginia Requires a Contractor’s License

    Be Wary of Construction Defects when Joining a Community Association

    Home Building Mergers and Acquisitions 2014 Predictions

    The Problem With Building a New City From Scratch

    Arizona Supreme Court Clarifies Area Variance Standard; Property Owners May Obtain an Area Variance When Special Circumstances Existed at Purchase

    Washington Trial Court Narrows Definition of First Party Claimant, Clarifies Available Causes of Action in Commercial Property Loss Context

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

    Chinese Billionaire Sues Local Governments Over Project Payment

    Foreclosure Deficiency: Construction Loan vs. Home Improvement Loan

    Everyone Wins When a Foreclosure Sale Generates Excess Proceeds

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (8/6/24) – Construction Tech Deals Surge, Senators Reintroduce Housing Bill, and Nonresidential Spending Drops

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Causing Property Damage to Insured's Product Only

    Attorneys Fees Under California’s Prompt Payment Statutes. Contractor’s “Win” Fails the Sniff Test

    Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claim Against Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Bertha – The Tunnel is Finished, but Her Legacy Continues

    Contrasting Expert Opinions Result in Denial of Cross Motions for Summary Judgment

    11th Circuit Affirms Bad Faith Judgement Against Primary Insurer

    Exceptions to Privette Doctrine Do Not Apply Where There is No Evidence a General Contractor Affirmatively Contributed to the Injuries of an Independent Contractor's Employee

    Commonwealth Court Holds That Award of Attorney's Fees and Penalties is Mandatory Under the Procurement Code Upon a Finding of Bad Faith

    Haight’s Kristian Moriarty Selected for Super Lawyers’ 2021 Southern California Rising Stars

    Don’t Assume Your Insurance Covers A Newly Acquired Company

    Just Because You Caused it, Doesn’t Mean You Own It: The Hooker Exception to the Privette Doctrine

    Lewis Brisbois Appellate Team Scores Major Victory in Bad Faith Insurance Action

    What You Need to Know About CARB’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel Regulations

    Neighbor Allowed to Remove Tree Roots on Her Property That Supported Adjoining Landowners’ Two Large Trees With Legal Immunity

    Contractors Admit Involvement in Kickbacks

    Bridge Disaster - Italy’s Moment of Truth

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2023 New York – Metro Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    Workers Compensation Immunity and the Intentional Tort Exception

    Traub Lieberman Partner Gregory S. Pennington and Associate Emily A. Velcamp Obtain Summary Judgment in Favor of Residential Property Owners

    KB Home Names New President of its D.C. Metro Division

    Dump Site Provider Has Valid Little Miller Act Claim

    The Requirement to Post Collateral Under General Agreement of Indemnity Is Real

    Construction Bidding for Success

    The New “White Collar” Exemption Regulations
    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. Leveraging 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

    OSHA Releases COVID-19 Guidance

    June 15, 2020 —
    The United States Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) ensures safe and healthful working conditions for employees by setting and enforcing standards and by providing training, outreach, education and assistance. The COVID-19 outbreak has increased demand for N95 filtering face piece respirators (N95 FFRs), limiting availability for workers in healthcare and emergency response. On April 3, 2020, OSHA issued interim guidance for employers to combat the supply shortages of N95 FFRs and to comply with the respiratory protection standard (29 CFR § 1910.134). This guidance will remain in effect until further notice and applies in all industries. Employers must continue to manage their respiratory protection programs and be mindful of N95 FFR shortages. Specifically, employers should identify and evaluate respiratory hazards in the workplace, and develop and implement written respiratory protection programs. Businesses should reassess their engineering controls, work practices, and administrative controls to identify any changes they can make to decrease the need for N95 FFRs. Some examples provided in the guidance include using portable local exhaust systems or moving operations outdoors. Employers may also consider temporarily suspending non-essential operations, to the extent such operations are not already suspended due to state mandates. Reprinted courtesy of L. Stephen Bowers, White and Williams LLP and Joshua Tumen, White and Williams LLP Mr. Bowers may be contacted at bowerss@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Tumen may be contacted at tumenj@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    What to Know Before Building a Guesthouse

    September 17, 2014 —
    Those tiny, often very cute homes that people are adding on their properties seem to be popping up everywhere these days. The tiny buildings can provide extra rental income, offer a less-expensive housing option or provide a home for a relative. Accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, are second dwelling units created on a lot with an existing house or attached house. They’re often referred to as mother-in-law apartments, granny flats or studio apartments. As a homeowner, what are the legal issues to consider before building an ADU of your own? Different cities, different rules First off, different cities have different rules. Before plotting the space for your new tiny house, check with your city’s planning and zoning department to determine what those rules are. You can start online at accessorydwellings.org for a list of regulations by state and city. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cynthia Flash, Bloomberg

    Location, Location, Location—Even in Construction Liens

    October 28, 2015 —
    We all know the importance of filing a construction lien within 120 days of your last work. Nebraska Construction Lien Act, § 52-137. But, equally, if not more important is filing the construction lien on the correct property. Often times on a construction project, the exact address of the project may not be known. And, if there are a few buildings going up on the same general site, it is difficult to determine which property or building address you are working on. Sometimes you can look at the contract. For example, the AIA family of documents lists the address on the first page. But, what if the wrong address is listed? What if the wrong owner is listed? 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

    Congratulations to Partner John O’Meara for Being Named as One of America’s Top 100 Civil Defense Litigators for Three Consecutive Years!

    September 20, 2021 —
    Please join Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP in congratulating Woodland Hills Partner John O’Meara for being selected as one of America’s Top 100 Civil Defense Litigators for the third year in a row! Membership among America’s Top 100 Civil Defense Litigators highlights the accomplishments of the nation’s most esteemed and skilled Civil Defense attorneys. Only 100 attorneys in each state receive this honor and candidates for membership are identified through third-party research or peer nominations by America’s Top 100 or elite attorneys in the community. Candidates are judged by the attorney’s lifetime legal achievements, professional experience, significant case results, peer reputation, client satisfaction, other notable honors, media notoriety, and community impact. Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Federal District Court Dismisses Property Claim After Insured Allows Loss Location to Be Destroyed Prior to Inspection

    September 29, 2021 —
    In BMJ Partners LLC v. Arch Specialty Insurance Co., No. 20-CV-03870, 2021 WL 3709182 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 20, 2021), the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois dismissed, with prejudice, a coverage action filed by an insured based on a failure to comply with a request to inspect the involved property under Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The loss at issue involved a hail-damaged building in Carpentersville, Illinois. During the discovery phase of the litigation, the property insurer served a request to inspect the subject property under FRCP Rule 34. After ignoring numerous requests to schedule the inspection, the insurer filed a motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute or, alternatively, to compel an inspection. After the motion was filed, a status hearing was conducted where the insured’s counsel advised the Court of his intention to file a motion to withdraw from representation of the insured. After the date set to file the motion to withdraw passed without anything being filed, the Court entered an order directing the insured to show cause why the matter should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. In response to the order to show cause, the insured advised the Court that instead of responding to the property insurer’s discovery requests, the insured sold the property to a buyer who subsequently tore down the building. In light of what the Court described as the insured’s “flabbergasting admission”, the Court was compelled to grant the motion to dismiss and do so with prejudice. In support of the “extreme sanction” of dismissing the matter with prejudice, the Court first noted that the insured had not come close to justifying a discharge of the pending show-cause order. Rather, the insured’s responsive filing refers to the Court's show cause order only indirectly and does not deny, or offer any justification for, disregarding case-related communications for several months. Even if that were not enough, the Court further held that the insured’s spoliation of evidence likewise provides sufficient basis for dismissal given that Courts have inherent authority to sanction parties for failure to preserve potential evidence. According to the Court, dismissal with prejudice was the only appropriate sanction in light of the insured’s violation of the obligation to preserve the property. Not only did the insured ignore multiple requests from the insurer to inspect, but during the same time frame the insured found time to allow inspections of the building as part of the sale by both the Village of Carpentersville and the property's buyer. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James M. Eastham, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Eastham may be contacted at jeastham@tlsslaw.com

    Filing Lien Foreclosure Lawsuit After Serving Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    June 06, 2022 —
    If you are an unpaid contractor in direct contract with the owner of real property, you should be serving a Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit prior to foreclosing on your construction lien. This should extend to any trade contractor hired directly by the owner. As a matter of course, I recommend any lienor hired directly by the owner that wants to foreclose its lien to serve a Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit. For example, if you are a plumbing contractor hired by the owner and want to foreclose your lien, serve the Affidavit. If you are a swimming pool contractor hired by the owner and want to foreclose your lien, serve the Affidavit. You get the point. (If you are not in direct contract with the owner, you do not need to serve the Affidavit, but you need to make sure you timely served your Notice to Owner; when you are in direct contract with the owner, you do not need to serve the Notice to Owner because the owner already knows you exist.) The Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit is a statutory form. I suggest working with counsel to help execute to avoid any doubts with the information to include. The unpaid amount listed should correspond with the amount in your lien and you want to identify all unpaid lienors (your subcontractors and suppliers) and amounts you believe they are owed. 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

    Video: Contractors’ Update on New Regulations Governing Commercial Use of Drones

    September 01, 2016 —
    At a presentation before the AGC of Georgia, AHHC attorneys Mark Hanrahan, David Cook, and Chadd Reynolds covered “Contractors’ Update on New Regulations Governing Commercial Use of Drones.” View the presentation here: https://vimeo.com/177566370 On June 23, 2016, the Department of Transportation and Federal Aviation Administration issued new regulations regarding non-hobby and non-recreational civil operation of small unmanned aircraft systems. These regulations are intended to limit interference with federal airspace while advancing research and safety in commercial industries. They also addressed practical implications and how to comply by the August 29, 2016 deadline. 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

    Bad Faith in the First Party Insurance Context

    December 15, 2016 —
    In a previous article I discussed bad faith when it comes to an insurance claim. Recently, in Barton v. Capitol Preferred Insurance Co., Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2736b (Fla. 5th DCA 2016), the court discussed bad faith in the first-party insurance context (i.e., a property / homeowners insurance policy). In this case, homeowners, as the insured, sued their homeowners insurance carrier for sinkhole coverage. The homeowner filed a Civil Remedy Notice of Insurer Violation (also known as a Civil Remedy Notice) against their insurer with the Florida Department of Insurance in accordance with Florida Statute s. 624.155. This Civil Remedy Notice is a prerequisite to initiating such a bad faith claim; the notice specifies the statutory violations committed by the insurer and gives the insurer 60 days to cure the violation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@katzbarron.com