BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expert
    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


    When Licensing Lapses: How One Contractor Lost a $1 Million Dispute

    Dispute Resolution Provision in Subcontract that Says Owner, Architect or Engineer’s Decision Is Final

    Corrective Action Protest Grounds for GSA Schedule Federal Construction Contractors

    ASCE Statement on Calls to Suspend the Federal Gas Tax

    NTSB Sheds Light on Fatal Baltimore Work Zone Crash

    Lewis Brisbois Moves to Top 15 in Law360 2022 Diversity Snapshot

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

    Timely and Properly Assert Affirmative Defenses and Understand Statutory Conditions Precedent

    Pennsylvania: Searching Questions Ahead of Oral Argument in Domtar

    Arizona Is the No. 1 Merit Shop Construction State, According to ABC’s 2020 Scorecard

    Construction Warranties: Have You Seen Me Lately?

    Prison Time and Restitution for Construction Fraud

    Harlem Developers Reach Deal with Attorney General

    Texas Supreme Court Cements Exception to “Eight-Corners” Rule Through Two Recent Rulings

    CCPA Class Action Lawsuits Are Coming. Are You Ready?

    What Are The Most Commonly Claimed Issues In Construction Defect Litigation?

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    Time is of the Essence, Even When the Contract Doesn’t Say So

    Montana Court Finds Duty to Defend over Construction Defect Allegation

    Houston Bond Issue Jump-Starts 237 Flood Control Projects

    Condominium Association Responsibility to Resolve Construction Defect Claims

    Toll Brothers Report End of Year Results

    Architecture, Robotics, and the Importance of Human Interaction – An Interview with Prof. Kathrin Dörfler

    Partner Jonathan R. Harwood Obtained Summary Judgment in a Case Involving a Wedding Guest Injured in a Fall

    Ahlers & Cressman’s Top 10 Construction Industry Contract Provisions

    The Texas Storm – Guidance for Contractors

    House Passes $25B Water Resources Development Bill

    Performance Bonds: Follow the Letter of the Bond and Keep The Surety Informed

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa M. Rolle and Vito John Marzano Secure Dismissal of Indemnification and Breach of Contract Claims Asserted against Subcontractor

    Texas Shortens Cut-Off Date for Suits Against Homebuilders Who Provide a 6-Year Written Warranty

    FIFA May Reduce World Cup Stadiums in Russia on Economic Concern

    Second Circuit Affirms Win for General Contractor on No Damages for Delay Provision

    Mercury News Editorial Calls for Investigation of Bay Bridge Construction

    This Times Square Makeover Is Not a Tourist Attraction

    LaGuardia Airport Is a Mess. An Engineer-Turned-Fund Manager Has a Fix

    Home-Rentals Wall Street Made Say Grow or Go: Real Estate

    Buy American Under President Trump: What to Know and Where We’re Heading

    Texas Allows Wide Scope for Certificate of Merit

    Solar and Wind Just Passed Another Big Turning Point

    Formaldehyde-Free Products for Homes

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Jason Moberly Caruso As Its Newest Partner

    Just Decided – New Jersey Supreme Court: Insurers Can Look To Extrinsic Evidence To Deny a Defense

    The OFCCP’s November 2019 Updated Technical Assistance Guide: What Every Federal Construction Contractor Should Know

    Renters Who Bought Cannot Sue for Construction Defects

    Only Two Weeks Until BHA’s Texas MCLE Seminar in San Antonio

    Don’t Waive Your Right to Arbitrate (Unless You Want To!)

    Water Damage: Construction’s Often Unnoticed Threat

    The Business of Engineering: An Interview with Matthew Loos

    Winning Attorney Fees in Litigation as a California Construction Contractor or Subcontractor

    Fargo Shows Record Home Building
    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

    Traub Lieberman Team Obtains Summary Judgment in Favor of Client Under Florida’s Newly Implemented Summary Judgment Standard

    August 23, 2021 —
    On July 27, 2021, the Circuit Court of the Ninth Judicial Circuit in and for Osceola County, Florida granted summary judgment in favor of a client insurer defended by Traub Lieberman Partner Heather M. Fleming and Associate Gregory H. Lercher in connection with a first party property lawsuit arising from Hurricane Irma that involved multiple, comingled claims, in part resolved via prior appraisal. As of May 1, 2021, Florida state courts have applied a new summary judgment standard after Florida’s longstanding rule was amended by the Supreme Court of Florida. The amendment aligns Florida’s standard with that of the federal courts and the supermajority of states that have already adopted the federal summary judgment standard codified in Rule 56 of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Supreme Court of Florida’s stated goal in adopting the new standard across the Sunshine State was to improve the fairness and efficiency of Florida's civil justice system, to relieve parties from the expense and burdens of meritless litigation, and to save the work of juries for cases where there are real factual disputes that need resolution. Reprinted courtesy of Heather Fleming, Traub Lieberman and Gregory H. Lercher, Traub Lieberman Ms. Fleming may be contacted at hfleming@tlsslaw.com Mr. Lercher may be contacted at glercher@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    White and Williams Lawyers Recognized by Best Lawyers

    August 26, 2015 —
    Twelve White and Williams lawyers have been listed in The Best Lawyers in America 2016. Inclusion in Best Lawyers is based entirely on peer-review. The methodology is designed to capture the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical area and legal practice area. Best Lawyers employs a sophisticated, conscientious, rational, and transparent survey process designed to elicit meaningful and substantive evaluations of the quality of legal services. 2016 Best Lawyers Attorney / Practice Area Frank Bruno / Patent Law James Coffey / Mergers and Acquisitions Law Timothy Davis / Real Estate Law Joseph Foster / Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants William Hussey / Tax Law; Trusts and Estates Michael Kraemer / Employment Law - Management; Labor Law; Management; Litigation - Labor and Employment Randy Maniloff / Insurance Law John Orlando / Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants Thomas Rogers / Real Estate Law Joan Rosoff / Real Estate Law Craig Stewart / Insurance Law; Product Liability - Defendants William Taylor / Construction Law Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    You may contact White and Williams LLP attorneys at www.whiteandwilliams.com

    CFTC Establishes Climate-Risk Unit, Echoing Other Biden Administration Agency Themes

    April 12, 2021 —
    On March 17, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC or Commission) joined other federal agencies led by Biden Administration appointees in ramping up consideration of climate-related risks in matters under the Commission’s jurisdiction. Stressing the need for a climate-resilient financial system, the CFTC’s new Climate-Risk Unit (CRU) will focus on “the role of derivatives in understanding, pricing, and addressing climate-related risk and transitioning to a low-carbon economy.” Formation of the CRU will accelerate the CFTC’s “engagement in support of industry-led and market-driven processes in the climate – and the larger ESG – space critical to ensuring that new products and markets fairly facilitate hedging, price discovery, market transparency, and capital allocation.” As with similar programs launched by the Securities and Exchange Commission (see our previous alert from March 19), businesses affected by the CFTC’s new initiative should consider active engagement to ensure informed and appropriate approaches are included in any new regulations, policies, or frameworks governing climate-related issues. Reprinted courtesy of Karen C. Bennett, Lewis Brisbois and Jane C. Luxton, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Bennett may be contacted at Karen.Bennett@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Luxton may be contacted at Jane.Luxton@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Be Careful When Requiring Fitness for Duty Examinations

    October 21, 2015 —
    Fitness for Duty examinations can be an important part of an employer’s hiring and retention protocol. The Nebraska Supreme Court recently clarified when an employer may require applicants and employees to undergo fitness for duty examinations. In Arens v. Nebco, Inc., the court ruled that an employer must have a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its demand that a current employee submit to a fitness for duty examination. In this case, Lenard Arens suffered two significant injuries over the course of his 25 years of employment with Nebco. The second injury, a closed head injury, limited the type of work he could do and required written instructions due to short term memory loss. Arens was assigned to drive tractor-trailer trucks. Several years after returning to work, Arens had two minor accidents with his truck within a matter of days. Arens supervisor required him to undergo fitness for duty examination. Arens failed the fitness for duty examination and was terminated. Arens filed suit, claiming that Nebco discriminated against him by making him take a fitness for duty test. 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

    Watch Your Step – Playing Golf on an Outdoor Course Necessarily Encompasses Risk of Encountering Irregularities in the Ground Surface

    May 08, 2023 —
    On April 27, 2023, the First District Court of Appeal issued an opinion in Walter Wellsfry, et al. v. Ocean Colony Partners, LLC (A165175, April 27, 2023) affirming summary judgment for a golf course owner on the grounds that the injured golfer’s lawsuit was barred by the primary assumption of risk doctrine. In doing so, the Court of Appeal found that outdoor golfers assume the risks associated with the topographical features of the course, including the risk of stepping on an inconspicuous tree root. Recreational golfer Walter Wellsfry was walking from a tee box back to his golf cart when he allegedly stepped on a small tree root concealed by grass, causing him to fall into his golf cart in immediate pain. The ground consisted of mixed terrain, including a combination of grass, dirt, and sand. The tree root was estimated to be approximately 1.5 inches high by 1.5 inches wide. Believing he may have only sprained an ankle, Wellsfry continued the course and reported the incident to management. He later sued the golf course owner Ocean Colony Partners for negligence, claiming that the tree root was a “hidden obstruction” creating an unreasonable risk of harm to anyone who traversed the area. Reprinted courtesy of Kaitlyn A. Jensen, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Lawrence S. Zucker II, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Jensen may be contacted at kjensen@hbblaw.com Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Acceptable Worksite: New City of Seattle Specification Provisions Now In Effect

    July 13, 2017 —
    The City of Seattle’s City Purchasing & Contracting Services recently revised its General Special Provisions for City construction contracts to add new “Acceptable Worksite” language. The City indicates that the purpose of the provisions is “to ensure that City construction worksites are respectful and appropriate, including prohibiting bullying, hazing, and other similar behaviors.” An “Acceptable Worksite” is defined as a worksite “that is appropriate, productive, and safe work for all workers” and “free from behaviors that may impair production, and/or undermine the integrity of the work conditions including but not limited to job performance, safety, productivity, or efficiency of workers.” Prohibited behaviors under the new specification provisions include persistent offensive conduct and language, hazing, offensive jokes about race, gender, or sexuality, assigning undesirable tasks or unskilled work to trained apprentices and journey-level workers, refusal to hire based on race, gender, or sexuality, and references to or requests for immigration status. The new program also includes monitoring, response, and enforcement of the provisions by City Purchasing and Contracting Services employees. Finally, the language must also be incorporated into all sub-tier contracts on City projects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lindsay K. Taft, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Ms. Taft may be contacted at ltaft@ac-lawyers.com

    DE Confirms Robust D&O Protection Despite Company Demise

    February 18, 2015 —
    On Feb. 5, 2015, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, per Judge Brendan L. Shannon, entered proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law in favor of the former president and CEO of Ultimate Escapes Inc., James M. Tousignant, and its chairman, Richard Keith, after determining that Tousignant’s actions in negotiating and executing a controversial asset purchase agreement were protected by the business judgment rule, despite the demise of the company a short time later. The failure of a business strategy, in and of itself, does not create liability on the part of the former directors and officers of a bankrupt company. Background Ultimate Escapes was a luxury destination club that provided its members with access to high-end vacation residences around the world. Unfortunately, Ultimate Escapes’ business suffered greatly from the economic downturn that began in 2008, and on Sept. 20, 2010, Ultimate Escapes filed voluntary petitions for relief pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys James Yoder, Michael Onufrak and Siobhan Cole Mr. Yoder may be contacted at yoderj@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Onufrak may be contacted at onufrakm@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Cole may be contacted at coles@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Georgia Court Clarifies Landlord Liability for Construction Defects

    June 02, 2016 —
    In Cowart v. Schevitz, the Georgia Court of Appeals clarified the instances in which an out-of-possession landlord can be liable in a premises liability claim. No. A15A2036, 2016 WL 563114, at *4 (Ga. Ct. App. Feb. 15, 2016). In this case, the plaintiff was leaving a restaurant and injured herself stepping down off of a sidewalk near the bottom of a ramp. The plaintiff filed a premises liability claim against the owner of commercial property (the “landlord”) and the operator of the restaurant (who later settled), seeking medical expenses and costs of litigation. An expert testifying on behalf of the plaintiff stated that the ramp was required to have railings pursuant to building codes and, had the railings been installed on the ramp, the plaintiff’s fall more than likely would not have occurred. The landlord moved for summary judgment, arguing that as an out-of-possession landlord, his liability to third persons for the use of the property by his tenant was precluded under O.C.G.A. § 44-7-14. The trial court denied the motion without comment, and the owner subsequently appealed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Chadd Reynolds, Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Reynolds may be contacted at reynolds@ahclaw.com