BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnesses
    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 York Appeals Court Rekindles the Spark

    That’s Common Knowledge! Failure to Designate an Expert Witness in a Professional Negligence Case is Not Fatal Where “Common Knowledge” Exception Applies

    Forum Selection Provisions Are Not to Be Overlooked…Even On Federal Projects

    Facebook Posts “Not Relevant” Rules Florida Appeals Court

    Courthouse Reporter Series: The Bizarre Case That Required a 117-Year-Old Expert

    Tender the Defense of a Lawsuit to your Liability Carrier

    South Adams County Water and Sanitation District Takes Proactive Step to Treat PFAS, Safeguard Water Supplies

    Colorado Chamber of Commerce CEO Calls for Change to Condo Defect Law

    School District Gets Expensive Lesson on Prompt Payment Law. But Did the Court Get it Right?

    Sales of New Homes in U.S. Increased 5.4% in July to 507,000

    Insurance Company Prevails in “Chinese Drywall” Case

    Solar Power Inc. to Build 30-Megawatt Project in Inner Mongolia

    Maryland Finally set to Diagnose an Allocation Method for Progressive Injuries

    Designers George Yabu and Glenn Pushelberg Discuss One57’s Ultra-Luxury Park Hyatt

    Colorado Construction Defect Action Reform: HB 17-1279 Approved by Colorado Legislature; Governor’s Approval Imminent

    Construction Up in United States

    Be Careful How You Terminate: Terminating for Convenience May Limit Your Future Rights

    No Duty to Defend Under Renter's Policy

    Avoiding Construction Defect “Nightmares” in Florida

    How Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Decision Affects Coverage of Faulty Workmanship Claims

    Manhattan Developer Wants Claims Dismissed in Breach of Contract Suit

    Insurer in Bad Faith Due to Adjuster's Failure to Keep Abreast of Case Law

    Six Inducted into California Homebuilding Hall of Fame

    Actual Cost Value Includes Depreciation of Repair Labor Costs

    Granting of Lodestar Multiplier in Coverage Case Affirmed

    Woman Files Suit for Property Damages

    Wes Payne Receives Defense Attorney of the Year Award

    Norristown, PA to Stop Paying Repair Costs for Defect-Ridden Condo

    Client Alert: Court of Appeal Applies Common Interest Privilege Doctrine to HOA Litigation Meetings

    Subcontractors Have Remedies, Even if “Pay-if-Paid” Provisions are Enforced

    Goldman Veteran Said to Buy Mortgages After Big Short

    U.S. Stocks Fall as Small Shares Tumble Amid Home Sales

    The Year 2010 In Review: Design And Construction Defects Litigation

    Details Matter: The Importance of Strictly Following Public Bid Statutes

    Updates to Residential Landlord Tenant Law

    Update Relating to SB891 and Bond Claim Waivers

    Carbon Monoxide Injuries Caused by One Occurrence

    Suing the Lowest Bidder on Public Construction Projects

    New EPA Regulation for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments

    Certified Question Asks Washington Supreme Court Whether Insurer is Bound by Contradictory Certificate of Insurance

    Pensacola Bridge Repair Plan Grows as Inspectors Uncover More Damage

    Nuclear Fusion Pushes to Reach Commercial Power Plant Stage

    Home Prices in U.S. Rose 0.3% in August From July, FHFA Says

    Travelers v. Larimer County and the Concept of Covered Cause of Loss

    Washington Court Denies Subcontractor’s Claim Based on Contractual Change and Notice Provisions

    Designing the Process to Deliver Zero-Carbon Construction – Computational Design in Practice

    Traub Lieberman Partners Lenhardt and Smith Obtain Directed Verdict in Broward County Failed Repair Sinkhole Trial

    A Court-Side Seat: Appeals and Agency Developments at the Close of 2020

    Civility Is Key in Construction Defect Mediation

    The Construction Industry's Health Kick
    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

    Construction Defect Specialist Joins Kansas City Firm

    January 13, 2014 —
    David Schatz, whose practice specializes in construction disputes and defects, has joined the Kansas City, Missouri firm Spencer Fane Britt & Brown LLP in their litigation practice group. Mr. Schatz’s expertise also includes banking and finance, banking litigation, commercial disputes, insurance, surety, employment, contract claims, and personal injury. Pat Whalen, Chairman of Spencer Fane Britt & Brown, said that Schatz “brings great experience across a range of industries, but many of us in Kansas City are particularly pleased by his construction and general litigation credentials, which will fit will with the resources we’re building in those areas.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Judge Dismisses Suit to Block Construction of Obama Center

    April 04, 2022 —
    Chicago (AP) -- A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit that sought to prevent the construction of the Obama Presidential Center in a park on Chicago's South Side. In a ruling issued Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Robert Blakey rejected the contention by the group Protect Our Parks that the city's park district improperly gave control of the land in Jackson Park to former President Barack Obama's foundation in violation of the public trust. The city, Blakey wrote, “did not abdicate control or ownership of the OPC site to the Obama Foundation.” Citing the state law that governs museums, the judge wrote that the Obama Center will ”confer a public benefit because they ’serve valuable public purposes, including ... furthering human knowledge and understanding, educating and inspiring the public, and expanding recreational and cultural resources and opportunities.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg

    Towards Paperless Construction: PaperLight

    June 02, 2016 —
    I just toured the newly built headquarters of a financial corporation. Our guide, a M&A specialist, boasted that they have completely removed paper from their offices. Could paperless construction become feasible any time soon? PaperLight is a portable smart board that could replace paper drawings on many occasions. Rollout, Inc., the developer of PaperLight, says that 90% of contractors still use paper plans. AEC firms spend, on average, $1600 per employee on printing annually. Over 37 million construction drawings are printed every year. Finding a usable solution that reduces these numbers makes economic sense. Even more so if you consider all the costs of errors that result from using outdated paper drawings. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aarni@aepartners.fi

    Augmented and Mixed Reality in Construction

    July 28, 2016 —
    Augmented reality (AR) and mixed reality (MR) are in the headlines, thanks to the recent mobile gaming boom. How are these emerging technologies applicable to construction? In this blog post, I present six application areas to consider. In AR—like Google Glass or Pokémon GO on a mobile device—the visible natural world is overlaid with a layer of digital content. In MR technologies, like Microsoft’s HoloLens or Magic Leap, virtual objects are integrated into and responsive to the natural world. In my earlier post, I wrote about virtual reality (VR), where the real world is replaced by a computer-generated environment. All the virtual technologies are still in relatively early stages of development. However, they already demonstrate the potential to change how we design, build, commercialize, and use the built environment. I brainstormed six application areas for AR and MR in construction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aarni@aepartners.fi

    The Double-Breasted Dilemma

    July 18, 2022 —
    What Is A Double-Breasted Operation? A double-breasted operation is when a firm has two entities, and one entity performs work under collective bargaining agreements and the other does not. While this type of operation is not outright prohibited, it is often subject to a variety of challenges and scrutiny. To legally run a double-breasted operation, the two companies must remain separate and distinct. If the companies are not sufficiently separate and distinct from one another, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) or a court may find that the two companies are operating as a single entity or that the non-union company, or also known as the open shop, is merely an alter ego of the union company and, therefore, bound by the terms of the collective bargaining agreement. In order to determine whether the companies are sufficiently separate and distinct, the two entities must pass either the single employer test or the alter ego test depending on the nature of the double-breasted operation. Typically, the single employer test is used when the two entities run parallel operations, and the alter ego test is used when the open shop replaces the union company. Under the single employer test, the NLRB or courts will generally consider four factors: (1) the interrelation of operations; (2) common management; (3) common control of labor relations; and (4) common ownership. The alter ego test does not require a finding that the companies are a single bargaining unit, but analyzes to what extent the two entities have substantially identical management, business operation and purpose, business equipment, customers, and ownership. While common ownership is a factor considered under both the single employer and alter ego tests, common ownership alone is not dispositive of whether the companies are sufficiently separate and distinct. In other words, the NLRB and courts do not simply look for common ownership to determine whether the double-breasted operation is lawful. It is merely one of many factors to consider. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lauren E. Rankins, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald, LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Ms. Rankins may be contacted at lrankins@watttieder.com

    Court Orders City to Pay for Sewer Backups

    March 31, 2014 —
    According to The Courier-Journal, in August of 2009 “raw sewage” backed “up into several houses during a torrential downpour” in Jeffersonville, Indiana. Now, a “Clark County judge has ordered the city of Jeffersonville to pay nearly $100,000 plus 8 percent annual interest for the city's negligence that led to” the incident. The problems allegedly began after a new lift station and force main, which “previously flowed southward to the Ohio River,” was “re-routed it to Springdale.” The city was eventually “cited by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management for failing to obtain a required local permit for the Springdale upgrade.” The Courier-Journal reported that Jeffersonville “agreed to take several steps to remedy the problem for residents and satisfy the state, which ultimately considered the issue resolved in October 2012.” Since the upgrade was completed, there have not been any further sewer backups, according to the city’s utility director, Len Ashack, as quoted by The Courier-Journal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Another Case Highlighting the Difference Between CGL Policies and Performance Bonds

    January 07, 2015 —
    During the summer of 2011, Ellis Construction hired Cool Sunshine Heating & Air Conditioning to install the HVAC systems in a single-family home it was building for Gary Doberman and Ellen Robertson in Boulder, Colorado. The homeowners took issue with much of the work performed on their home and tried to negotiate directly with Ellis Construction. When those negotiations broke down, the homeowners sent a notice of claim pursuant to the Construction Defect Action Reform Act, C.R.S. § 13-20-801, et seq. One of the defects alleged in the notice of claim was that the SEERS 13 compressor installed by Cool Sunshine was inappropriate for the system and that because it was installed to run on only one stage, it did not meet the City of Boulder’s code requirements for noise levels. The homeowners therefore requested that the compressor be replaced with a SEERS 20 compressor, which would comply with the Boulder City Code. 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

    LA Lakers Partially Survive Motion to Dismiss COVID-19 Claims

    June 13, 2022 —
    While the appellate court affirmed dismissal of a majority of the claims submitted by the Los Angeles Lakers for closure of the Staples Center and other properties due to COVID-19, a portion of their claims survived. L.A. Lakers v. Fed Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31503 (C.D. Calif. March 17, 2022). Government orders closed the Staples Center in March 2020. The Lakers alleged they lost tens of millions of dollars in revenue. They further alleged that the presence of coronavirus particles on fixtures and building systems caused physical alterations to the covered properties. The Lakers had to upgrade their properties to include new air filters, touchless light switches, toilets and sinks; sleeves or coatings for high-touch surfaces; and plexiglass dividers. The Lakers also alleged that five Metro stations within a mile of the Staples Center, that was used to get to games, were closed by civil authorities due to the presence of COVID-19. The Lakers submitted a claim for property damage and business interruption to Federal. The claim was denied and the Lakers filed suit. In February 2021, the court granted Federal's motion to dismiss without prejudice, after concluding that the Lakers' allegations of direct physical loss or damage were mere legal conclusions and not sufficient to state a claim. 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