BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic 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


    The Sky is Falling! – Or is it? Impacting Lives through Addressing the Fear of Environmental Liabilities

    Motion for Summary Judgment Gets Pooped Upon

    The Cheap and Easy Climate Fix That Can Cool the Planet Fast

    EO or Uh-Oh: Biden’s Executive Order Requiring Project Labor Agreements on Federal Construction Projects

    Engineering, Architecture, and Modern Technology – An Interview with Dr. Jakob Strømann-Andersen

    Collapse Claim Fails Due To Defectively Designed Roof and Deck

    Why You May Not Want a Mandatory Mediation Clause in Your Construction Contract

    HHMR Celebrates 20 Years of Service!

    Road Project to Improve Access to Peru's Machu Picchu Site

    White and Williams Celebrates 125th Anniversary

    Product Manufacturers Beware: You May Be Subject to Jurisdiction in Massachusetts

    Carwash Prosecutors Seek $1.6 Billion From Brazil Builders

    California Supreme Court Rejects Third Exception to Privette Doctrine

    Entire Fairness or Business Judgment? It’s Anyone’s Guess

    California’s One-Action Rule May Apply to Federal Lenders

    Defend Trade Secret Act of 2016–-Federalizing Trade Secret Law

    Bert L. Howe & Associates Returns as a Sponsor at the 30th Annual Construction Law Conference in San Antonio

    Create a Culture of Safety to Improve Labor Recruitment Efforts

    Reversing Itself, West Virginia Supreme Court Holds Construction Defects Are Covered

    Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Duty to Defend When Case Law is Uncertain

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Title Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    Will There Be Construction Defect Legislation Introduced in the 2019 Colorado Legislative Session?

    Home Construction Thriving in Lubbock

    Providing Your Insurer Prompt Notice

    A Funny Thing Happened to My Ground Lease in Bankruptcy Court

    Guilty Pleas Draw Renewed Interest In Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws

    Palm Beach Billionaires’ Fix for Sinking Megamansions: Build Bigger

    CA Supreme Court Set to Rule on Important Occurrence Issue Certified by Ninth Circuit

    Saudi Prince’s Megacity Shows Signs of Life

    With Wildfires at a Peak, “Firetech” Is Joining Smart City Lineups

    When Does a Claim Against an Insurance Carrier for Failing to Defend Accrue?

    It’s Not What You Were Thinking!

    Melissa Dewey Brumback Invited Into Claims & Litigation Management Alliance Membership

    UK's Biggest Construction Show Bans 'Promo Girls'

    Contractor Haunted by “Demonized” Flooring

    New LG Headquarters Project Challenged because of Height

    A Word to the Wise about Construction Defects

    Product Defect Allegations Trigger Duty To Defend in Pennsylvania

    A Few Green Building Notes

    Couple Claims Contractor’s Work Is Defective and Incomplete

    FBI Makes Arrest Related to Saipan Casino Construction

    Spreading Cracks On FIU Bridge Failed to Alarm Project Team

    Will European Insurers’ Positive Response to COVID-19 Claims Influence US Insurers?

    Maine Court Allows $1B Hydropower Transmission Project to Proceed

    Attorney's Erroneous Conclusion that Limitations Period Had Not Expired Was Not Grounds For Relief Under C.C.P. § 473(b)

    Cost of Materials Holding Back Housing Industry

    “If It Walks Like A Duck . . .” – Expert Testimony Not Always Required In Realtor Malpractice Cases Where Alleged Breach Of Duty Can Be Easily Understood By Lay Persons

    24/7 Wall Street Reported on Eight Housing Markets at All-Time Highs

    The Peak of Hurricane Season Is Here: How to Manage Risks Before They Manage You

    Crumbling Roadways Add Costs to Economy, White House Says
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Save a Legal Fee: Prevent Costly Lawsuits With Claim Limitation Clauses

    April 25, 2012 —

    Ever had that lingering problem with a contracting partner that went away for awhile and then came back to bite you ? years later? In Washington, construction contract claims can be raised for up to six years after substantial completion. Six years!? Why would I want to wait that long to find out if I have a problem? You don’t have to.

    Over the past few years, I have discussed the notion of “contractual claim periods” on The Builders Counsel. For today’s Save a Legal Fee column, I cannot think of a better topic. These provisions are specifically intended to save you from unnecessary legal fees that might arise if a problem goes unnoticed for too long.

    Contractual claim periods are simply a way to reduce the amount of time that a contracting party has to raise a claim against its contracting partner. For example, a subcontractor might require that a general contractor raise any claim that it might have ? for defective or incomplete work, injury, damages, etc ? within a particular amount of time or forever lose the ability to raise the claim in a legal proceeding.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

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

    New Jersey Supreme Court Ruled Condo Association Can’t Reset Clock on Construction Defect Claim

    September 20, 2017 —
    The New Jersey Law Journal reported that New Jersey Supreme Court “justices reversed an Appellate Division ruling that found three suits filed against contractors by the Palisades at Fort Lee Condominium Association on various dates in March and April 2009 and September 2010 were within the six-year limit because the association received notice of construction defects in the building in an engineer's report issued in June 2007.” The justices stated that the statute of limitations is not reset when property changes hands: "An owner of a building cannot convey greater property rights to a purchaser than the owner possessed. If the building's owner knew or reasonably should have known of construction defects at the time of the sale of the property, the purchaser takes title subject to the original owner's right—and any limitation on that right—to file a claim against the architect and contractors." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    ASCE Statement on Calls to Suspend the Federal Gas Tax

    June 27, 2022 —
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – ASCE strongly opposes the recent announcement from the Biden Administration to suspend the current 18.4 cents-per-gallon federal gasoline tax for three months. Even at the same modest figure of 18 cents per gallon for over 25 years since 1993, the motor fuel tax has represented a reliable federal revenue source for communities to fix and modernize their network of roads, bridges, and transit systems. Suspending the gas tax would result in the loss of billions in revenue from the Highway Trust Fund (HTF), significantly diminishing much of the progress made in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law at a time when Americans expect improvements to the nation's roads, bridges, and transit systems. Replacing this lost revenue with funds from other sources is not a viable long-term solution and sets a damaging precedent. Encouraging states to follow suit will compound this bad idea and further exacerbate our nation's infrastructure funding challenges. Our transportation system, including roadways, bridge spans, and transit networks, can't rely on novel, unpredictable funding. Further, there is little guarantee that motorists will see any real relief at the pump. Gas holidays aren't price controls; the manager at the gas station still gets to set their price. Oil producers have benefited significantly in the past from previous state-level gas tax holidays. There is no mechanism to ensure that these "savings" are passed on to consumers, but there is a virtual guarantee of disrupting transportation dollars and the HTF. While it sounds like an enticing solution when pocketbooks are strained, Congress knows that a variety of factors, including plain supply and demand, affect the prices that people see at fuel stations. Now is the time to build on the momentum of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law which, for the first time in decades, takes significant steps to revitalize our nation's aging infrastructure, improve public safety, strengthen our economy, and deliver well-paying jobs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    United States Supreme Court Upholds Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements

    May 24, 2018 —
    On May 21, 2018, the United States Supreme Court held, in a 5-4 decision, that arbitration agreements which mandate individualized resolution of claims (as opposed to class or collective resolution) are enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"). In doing so, the Court rejected the argument that such "class action waivers" violate Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA"), which generally protects employees' rights to act "in concert" with one another. The Court addressed a split created by decisions from three Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal: Epic Systems Corp v. Lewis (7th Circuit), Ernst & Young v. Morris (9th Circuit) and National Labor Relations Board v. Murphy Oil USA (5th Circuit). All three cases involved employees who sought to bring collective or class actions under the Fair Labor Standards Act (the "FLSA"), and their respective employers who sought to enforce pre-dispute arbitration agreements which waived such collective actions and mandated "one-on-one" arbitration of wage disputes. In support of their position, the employees argued that the class and collective action waivers were illegal because they violated the NLRA's prohibition on barring employees from engaging in "concerted activities." Reprinted courtesy of Payne & Fears LLP attorneys Amy R. Patton, Jason I. Bluver and Jeffrey K. Brown Ms. Patton may be contacted at arp@paynefears.com Mr. Bluver may be contacted at jib@paynefears.com Mr. Brown may be contacted at jkb@paynefears.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Cooperation and Collaboration With Government May Be on the Horizon

    September 17, 2018 —
    In Is the Pendulum Swinging on Agency and Government Contractor Cooperation?, Pillsbury attorneys Mike Rizzo, Glenn Sweatt and Kevin Massoudi discuss comments from the Department of Defense as well as recent good faith and fair dealing court decisions that point to and encourage improved contractor/government relationships. Their key takeaways include
    • Government officials are actively encouraging collaboration with, and less antagonism of, industry contractors.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Utah Supreme Court Allows Citizens to Block Real Estate Development Project by Voter Referendum

    June 10, 2019 —
    The Utah Supreme Court recently decided Baker v. Carlson, 2018 UT 59, which considered a developer’s ongoing effort to build a mixed-use, part-residential and part-commercial development on the site of the long-defunct Cottonwood Mall located in Holladay, Utah. On November 28, 2018, the Supreme Court affirmed the Third District Court’s ruling that a voter referendum to block the development was valid. This ruling calls into question the certainty of investment-backed real estate decisions in Utah and thus could carry negative implications for the Utah construction and real estate development communities. The Cottonwood Mall opened in the early 1960s, and for several decades was a popular regional shopping destination. But the mall fell on financial hard times in the mid-1990s, and since 2007 the 57-acre lot has sat vacant. Around that time, the owner of the lot made plans to redevelop it, and asked Holladay City to rezone the site to permit mixed uses. In response, the City rezoned the lot as Regional/Mixed-Use (R/M-U). The City also created a process to control the development of an R/M-U zone, requiring prospective builders to first submit a site development master plan—which sets forth guidelines for the overall development and design of the site—to the City for approval. After the City approves a master plan, the developer must enter into a development agreement with the City, giving the developer certain rights and addressing other development-related issues. Reprinted courtesy of Sean M. Mosman, Snell & Wilmer and Mark O. Morris, Snell & Wilmer Mr. Mosman may be contacted at smosman@swlaw.com Mr. Morris may be contacted at mmorris@swlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nine Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch 2021

    September 14, 2020 —
    Nine Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys were selected for Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch 2021. Congratulations to Courtney Arbucci, Frances Brower, James de los Reyes, Kyle DiNicola, Arezoo Jamshidi, Kristian Moriarty, Beth Obra-White, Casey Otis and Kaitlin Preston! Since it was first published in 1983, Best Lawyers® has become universally regarded as the definitive guide to legal excellence. Best Lawyers lists are compiled based on an exhaustive peer-review evaluation. Almost 94,000 industry leading lawyers are eligible to vote (from around the world), and Best Lawyers has received over 11 million evaluations on the legal abilities of other lawyers based on their specific practice areas around the world. Lawyers are not required or allowed to pay a fee to be listed; therefore inclusion in Best Lawyers is considered a singular honor. Corporate Counsel magazine has called Best Lawyers “the most respected referral list of attorneys in practice.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

    Manhattan Homebuyers Pay Up as Sales Top Listing Price

    October 01, 2014 —
    Manhattan apartment prices rose 4.2 percent in the third quarter, bolstered by buyers who increasingly agreed to pay what sellers were asking or more. The median sale price of condominiums and co-ops was $908,242, up from $872,000 a year earlier, according to a report today from appraiser Miller Samuel Inc. and brokerage Douglas Elliman Real Estate. The average price per square foot increased 12 percent to $1,270, the third-highest in records dating to 1989, the firms said. Prices in Manhattan have climbed for four consecutive quarters, encouraging more owners to list properties after an inventory shortage last year. With the number of apartments on the market up 28 percent from the third quarter of 2013, buyers focused on those that were not-too-ambitiously priced, said Jonathan Miller, president of New York-based Miller Samuel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Oshrat Carmiel, Bloomberg
    Mr. Carmiel may be contacted at ocarmiel1@bloomberg.net