BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestration
    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


    Construction Defect Bill Removed from Committee Calendar

    An Upward Trend in Commercial Construction?

    Battle of Experts Cannot Be Decided on Summary Judgment

    Will COVID-19 Permanently Shift the Balance between Work from Home and the Workplace?

    Haight Expands California Reach – Opens Office in Sacramento

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Business Interruption, COVID-19 Claims Under Pollution Policy Fails

    Architects Group Lowers U.S. Construction Forecast

    Brad Pitt’s Foundation Sues New Orleans Architect for Construction Defects

    Million-Dollar Home Sales Thrive While Low End Stumbles

    Roadway Contractor Owed Duty of Care to Driver Injured Outside of Construction Zone

    Changes to Pennsylvania Mechanic’s Lien Code

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation: A Redux

    Gillotti v. Stewart (2017) 2017 WL 1488711 Rejects Liberty Mutual, Holding Once Again that the Right to Repair Act is the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    Hurdles with Triggering a Subcontractor Performance Bond

    New York Court Enforces Construction Management Exclusion

    No Coverage for Sink Hole Loss

    Saudi Arabia Awards Contracts for Megacity Neom’s Worker Housing

    California MCLE Seminar at BHA Sacramento July 11th

    Job Growth Seen as Good News for North Carolina Housing Market

    New Jersey Appeals Court Ruled Suits Stand Despite HOA Bypassing Bylaw

    Insurer Must Defend Contractor Against Claims of Faulty Workmanship

    Although Property Damage Arises From An Occurrence, Coverage Barred By Business Risk Exclusions

    Nevada Governor Signs Construction Defect Reform Bill

    Connecticut Supreme Court Rules Matching of Materials Decided by Appraisers

    Montrose Language Interpreted: How Many Policies Are Implicated By A Construction Defect That Later Causes a Flood?

    New California Employment Laws Affect the Construction Industry for 2019

    New York's De Blasio Unveils $41 Billion Plan for Affordable Housing

    Restaurant Wants SCOTUS to Dust Off Eleventh Circuit’s “Physical Loss” Ruling

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives First Tier Ranking

    Corps Releases Final Report on $29B Texas Gulf Coast Hurricane Defense Plan

    Res Judicata Not Apply to Bar Overlapping Damages in Separate Suits Against Contractor and Subcontractor

    Appeals Court Rules that Vertical and Not Horizontal Exhaustion Applies to Primary and First-Layer Excess Insurance

    Three lawyers from Haight were recognized in The Best Lawyers in America© 2020 Edition

    Steven Cvitanovic to Present at NASBP Virtual Seminar

    North Carolina Court Rules In Favor Of All Sums

    Following Pennsylvania Trend, Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Construction Defect

    Ex-Detroit Demolition Official Sentenced for Taking Bribes

    A Court-Side Seat: An End-of-Year Environmental Update

    Empire State Building Owners Sue Photographer for Topless Photo Shoot

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    Insurance Policies and Indemnity Provisions Are Not the Same

    7 Sustainability Ideas for Modular Classrooms in the Education Industry (guest post)

    Lien Claimant’s Right to Execute against Bond Upheld in Court of Appeals

    Boys (and Girls) of Summer: New Residential Solar Energy System Disclosures Take Effect January 1, 2019

    Federal Court Denies Summary Judgment in Leaky Condo Conversion

    First Suit Filed for Losses Caused by COVID-19

    The 2023 Term of the Supreme Court: Administrative and Regulatory Law Rulings

    “Freelance Isn’t Free” New Regulations Adopted in New York City Requiring Written Contracts with Independent Contractors

    Under the Hood of U.S. Construction Spending Is Revised Data

    Miller Act Payment Bond Surety Bound to Arbitration Award
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Novation Agreements Under Federal Contracts

    November 29, 2021 —
    A unique aspect of doing business with the federal government is the built-in limits on a contractor’s right to assign the contract or the right to payment under the contract to third parties. The Anti-Assignment Act (41 U.S.C. § 6305) prohibits the transfer of a government contract or interest in a government contract to a third party. An assignment of a contract in violation of this law voids the contract except for the government’s right to pursue a breach of contract remedies. What’s a contractor to do when it is acquired/merged with another firm, is restructured or goes through a variety of other types of corporate transaction? The Federal Acquisition Regulations recognize that firms involved in government contracts get bought and sold from time to time and includes procedures for the novation of contracts in certain situations to avoid a potential violation of the Anti-Assignment Act. What Is a Novation? A novation is a three-party agreement between the United States, the original contractor and the new contractor offering to assume the government contract. The purpose the novation is to allow the government to recognize a new contractor as the successor-in-interest to a government contract and avoid a violation of the Anti-Assignment Act. Reprinted courtesy of Hal Perloff, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Perloff may be contacted at hal.perloff@huschblackwell.com

    Maryland Court Affirms Condo Association’s Right to Sue for Construction Defects

    November 27, 2013 —
    The Maryland Court of Appeals, that state’s highest court, recently reaffirmed that condominium association have broad discretion in suing for construction defects in when they are representing at least two unit owners. Nicholas D. Cowie of the Baltimore-based construction defect legal firm Cowie & Mott, gives his summary of the case on his firm’s web site. Mr. Cowie notes that the Council of Unit Owners of Bentley Place Condominium sued the developer and builder for construction defects in both common areas and within units, representing itself and “two or more” unit owners. A jury awarded $6.6 million; the builder and developer appealed. The court ruled on the appeal that the Council of Unit Owners had a right to pursue these claims, and could recover full damage to common elements, even if some owners are time-barred due to their date of purchase. Mr. Cowie represented the Council of Unit Owners during the lawsuit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Committeewoman Requests Refund on Attorney Fees after Failed Legal Efforts

    February 10, 2014 —
    West Deptford, New Jersey township redevelopment counsel Mark Cimino had spent a year arguing that the city should receive a $4 million reduction in construction costs due to “inadequate documentation provided by the bank, as well as receipts showing disbursement had ‘improperly’ been made toward uses other than construction,” according to a December 30th 2013 article in the South Jersey Times. However, a state appellate court upheld the ruling that “the township had no basis” to request the reduction. Now, Committeewoman Denice DiCarlo is “seeking a $10,000 refund on the attorney fees paid” to Cimino, the South Jersey Times reported on February 6th. “This entire matter has been a monumental waste of tax dollars, and I am angry that the entire township committee was misled by Mr. Cimino and induced to believe we had any reasonable chance of recovering loan proceeds from this lawsuit,” DiCarlo stated in a letter to Mayor Raymond Chintall. Not all committee members agree with DiCarlo. Committeeman Sam Cianfarini told South Jersey Times that “he still believed Fulton Bank owed it to West Deptford to answer for any funds put toward anything other than construction.” Cimino declared “that both the lawsuit and appeal were valid,” according to the February 6th article. He “accused DiCarlo of ‘playing politics.’” Read the full story, December 30th Article... Read the full story, February 6th Article... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Homebuilding in Las Vegas Slows but Doesn’t Fall

    October 15, 2013 —
    There was an 18 percent drop in the sale of new homes in September, as compared to the prior month, but that was still 6 percent higher than the home sales of the previous September. So far, August was the briskest month for homes sales in Las Vegas for 2013. Through September, builders have sold 5,653 homes, which is a fifty-three percent increase over the first nine months of 2012. Dennis Smith, the president of Home Builders Research said “that is a very strong annual change that clearly suggests new housing has revered from the recessionary doldrums of the past four years.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Loan Modifications Due to COVID-19 Pandemic: FDIC Answers CARES Act FAQs

    May 11, 2020 —
    In support of financial institutions and borrowers during the COVID-19 pandemic, the newly enacted Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) includes a number of provisions permitting lenders to suspend, during a covered period, requirements under U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) with respect to categorizing certain loan modifications as a troubled debt restructuring (TDR) due to COVID-19. In light of the CARES Act, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) issued a series of answers to FAQs for financial institutions with respect to loan modifications. The FAQs help guide lenders as well as borrowers as they address pending defaults under existing credit facilities. The FAQs encourage financial institutions to work with borrowers who may be unable to meet their payment obligations due to COVID-19 in several ways: Payment Accommodations Short-term accommodations which modify, extend, suspend or defer repayment terms should be intended to facilitate the borrower’s ability to work through the immediate impact of the virus. According to the FAQs, all loan accommodation programs should ultimately be targeted towards repayment. To that end, the FDIC recommends that financial institutions address deferred or skipped payments by either extending the original maturity date or by making those payments due in a balloon payment at the maturity date of the loan. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams attorneys Nancy Sabol Frantz, Marissa Levy, Timothy E. Davis and Kristen E. Andreoli Ms. Frantz may be contacted at frantzn@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Levy may be contacted at levymp@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Davis may be contacted at davist@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Andreoli may be contacted at andreolik@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Trio of Environmental Decisions from the Fourth Circuit

    August 28, 2018 —
    Within the past few weeks, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has issued some very significant rulings regarding the construction of new natural gas pipelines. These cases are Berkley, et al. v. Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, decided July 25; Sierra Club, Inc., et al., v. U.S. Forest Service, The Wilderness Society, et al., v. U.S. Forest Service, and Sierra Club, Inc. et al. v. U.S. Department of the Interior, decided July 27, 2018; and Sierra Club v. U.S. Department of the Interior and Defenders of Wildlife, et al., v. U.S. Department of the Interior, decided August 6, 2018. The first two cases involve the Mountain Valley Pipeline, and the last case involves the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    The Power of Team Bonding: Transforming Workplaces for the Better

    June 10, 2024 —
    The number of civil Complaints filed in California has been steadily rising over the last few years. When employees struggle daily to make a dent in what seems as an insurmountable to-do list, taking time away from work to chat with coworkers about their weekends or the latest Netflix drop seems counterintuitive. Yet recent studies suggest that taking even 30 minutes away from your workday to engage in team bonding has lasting benefits. Investing in team bonding activities is not just about having fun; it is about creating a cohesive, motivated, and high-performing team that can drive organizational success. As the evidence suggests, the return on investment for team bonding activities is substantial, making it a vital component of any successful workplace strategy. Enhancing Communication and Collaboration One of the primary benefits of team bonding is improved communication among team members. Effective communication is the bedrock of any successful team, and activities designed to foster relationships can significantly enhance this aspect. A study conducted by MIT’s Human Dynamics Laboratory found that teams with higher levels of social interaction outside of formal meetings performed better than those with limited interaction. These teams were more cohesive, coordinated, and ultimately more productive. Bonding activities, as simple as group lunches or intensive as a weekend retreat, create opportunities for employees to interact in a relaxed setting. This helps break down barriers and encourages open communication, which translates into a more collaborative work environment. When employees feel comfortable sharing ideas and feedback, it leads to better problem-solving and innovation. Reprinted courtesy of Alexa Stephenson, Kahana Feld and Brittney Aquino, Kahana Feld Ms. Stephenson may be contacted at astephenson@kahanafeld.com Ms. Aquino may be contacted at baquino@kahanafeld.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insured's Lack of Knowledge of Tenant's Growing Marijuana Means Coverage Afforded for Fire Loss

    August 17, 2020 —
    The California Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to the insurer regarding a claim for fire loss. Mosley v. Pacific Sec. Ins, Co., 2020 Cal. App LEXIS (Cal. Ct. App, May 26, 2020). The Mosleys rented their property to Pedro Lopez. Six months later, the property was damaged by fire. Lopez had tapped a main power line into the attic to power his energy-intensive marijuana growing operation. The illegal power line caused the fire. Pacific Specialty Insurance Company (PSIC) insured the property under an HO-3 Standard Homeowners policy. Paragraph E of the policy provided,
      We do not insure for loss resulting from any manufacturing, product or operation, engaged in:
    1. The growing of plants; or
    2. The manufacture, production, operation or processing of chemical, biological, animal or plant materials.
    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