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


    Napa Quake Seen Costing Up to $4 Billion as Wineries Shut

    Economy in U.S. Picked Up on Consumer Spending, Construction

    Practical Advice: Indemnification and Additional Insured Issues Revisited

    Big League Dreams a Nightmare for Town

    Water Bond Would Authorize $7.5 Billion for California Water Supply Infrastructure Projects

    20 Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2020 Top Lawyers!

    Key Legal Considerations for Modular Construction Contracts

    EPA Seeks Comment on Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification Rule

    Hybrid Contracts for The Sale of Goods and Services and the Predominant Factor Test

    Comparative Breach of Contract – The New Benefit of the Bargain in Construction?

    The Word “Estimate” in a Contract Matters as to a Completion Date

    Construction Activity on the Upswing

    OSHA Updates: You May Be Affected

    Recovery Crews Swing Into Action as Hurricane Michael Departs

    Corps Proposes $4.6B Plan to Steel Miami for Storm Surge

    New Hampshire’s Statute of Repose for Improvements to Real Property Does Not Apply to Product Manufacturers

    Mortgage Firms Face Foreclosure Ban Until 2022 Under CFPB Plan

    Insured's Experts Excluded, But Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: The Duty to Defend

    Quick Note: Subcontractor Payment Bond = Common Law Payment Bond

    Jean Nouvel’s NYC ‘Vision Machine’ Sued Over Construction Defects

    Delay Leads to Problems with Construction Defects

    Ten Years After Colorado’s Adverse Possession Amendment: a brief look backwards and forwards

    Empowering Success: The Advantages of Female Attorneys in Construction Defect Law

    What Will the 2024 Construction Economy Look Like?

    Recovering For Inflation On Federal Contracts: Recent DOD Guidance On Economic Price Adjustment Clauses

    CGL Policy Covering Attorney’s Fees in Property Damage Claims

    Depreciation of Labor in Calculating Actual Cash Value Against Public Policy

    Manhattan Townhouse Sells for a Record $79.5 Million

    Negligent Misrepresentation Claim Does Not Allege Property Damage, Barring Coverage

    IoT: Take Guessing Out of the Concrete Drying Process

    New York Appellate Court Holds Insurer’s Failure to Defend Does Not Constitute a “Reasonable Excuse” Required to Overturn Judgment

    Primer Debuts on Life-Cycle Assessments of Embodied Carbon in Buildings

    Is Everybody Single? More Than Half the U.S. Now, Up From 37% in '76

    Green Energy Can Complicate Real Estate Foreclosures

    California Attempts to Tackle Housing Affordability Crisis

    Insurance Attorney Gary Barrera Joins Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group

    Elon Musk's Boring Co. Is Feuding With Texas Over a Driveway

    Cal/OSHA-Approved Changes to ETS Will Take Effect May 6, 2022

    Thanks to All for the 2024 Super Lawyers Nod!

    Jury Finds Broker Liable for Policyholder’s Insufficient Business Interruption Limits

    Insurer Must Defend Claims of Alleged Willful Coal Removal

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Recognized in “The Best Lawyers in America” & “Best Lawyers: One’s to Watch” 2024 Editions

    New Becker & Poliakoff Attorney to Expand Morristown Construction Litigation Practice

    Alabama “occurrence” and subcontractor work exception to the “your completed work” exclusion

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    Fourteen Years as a Solo!

    Auditor: Prematurely Awarded Contracts Increased Honolulu Rail Cost by $354M

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    Intellectual Property And Employment Law Best Practices: Are You Covering Your Bases In Protecting Construction-Related Trade Secrets?
    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. Drawing 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

    Panthers Withdraw City, County Deal Over Abandoned Facility

    September 19, 2022 —
    Columbia, S.C. (AP) -- Carolina Panthers owner David Tepper’s real estate company wants to revoke a bankruptcy settlement it negotiated with the city and county where its abandoned South Carolina practice facility was supposed to be built because it says the governments are making exorbitant and unreasonable demands. GT Real Estate Holdings had offered $21 million to York County. It suggested giving the proceeds from selling part of its site in Rock Hill so the city would get at least $20 million. But the county and city have filed separate lawsuits and court papers. York County said it is entitled to more than $80 million in part to get back money from a special penny sales tax that was supposed to expand a road but Tepper’s company used for the proposed practice facility. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg

    The Need for Situational Awareness in Construction

    January 27, 2020 —
    Recent research backs up what we already know from practice: construction work is suboptimal. What happens on a construction site has not kept up with the demands of an increasingly complex work environment. Situational awareness could give on-site employees the necessary means to finally reap the productivity benefits of digitalization. Under the guidance of Professor Olli Seppänen, research teams at the Finnish Aalto University have delved into everyday conditions at a construction site. With the workers’ permission, they used video cameras, sensors, and surveys to locate the bottlenecks in productivity. The researchers also monitored the movement of products and materials on a construction site. The results are eye-opening. According to Aalto’s data, digitalization has not improved the productivity of construction foremen and workers. A typical worker still spends up to 70% of their time on activities that add no value: searching for information, unnecessary movement, and waiting. Construction materials are moved from place to place six times on the site before being consumed. In addition, especially on large construction sites, machinery often goes missing or is displaced. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    NY Estimating Consultant Settles $3.1M Government Project Fraud Case

    November 23, 2020 —
    VJ Associates, a Hicksville, N.Y., estimating consultant, has agreed to pay $3.13 million in civil and criminal penalties to settle charges that the firm overbilled and falsified hours on multiple federal and state government-funded transportation and other contracts in New York and Massachusetts, the U.S. Attorney's office in Boston announced on Oct. 29. Reprinted courtesy of Eva Fedderly, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contract Void Ab Initio: Key Insights into the KBR vs. Corps of Engineers Affirmative Defense

    February 12, 2024 —
    In a recent Board decision dated December 13, 2023, the United States Army Corps of Engineers sought to amend its answer in the case of APPEALS OF – KELLOGG BROWN & ROOT SERVICES, INC., under Contract No. W912GB-13-C-0011. The proposed amendment introduces an affirmative defense, contending that Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. (KBR) made material misrepresentations in its proposal, rendering the fully-performed contract void ab initio. Background: The contract in question, executed on July 9, 2013, was for the construction of an Aegis Ashore Missile Defense System site in Deveselu, Romania, with a firm, fixed-price amount of $134,211,592. The Corps moved to amend its answer to allege that KBR’s material misrepresentations induced the Corps to enter the contract, justifying the voiding of the contract. The alleged misrepresentations include issues related to subcontractor quotes, firm fixed prices, subcontracting plans, and more. Motion to Amend and Legal Defense: The Corps, despite delays in formally amending its answer, argued that KBR was aware of the potential affirmative defense before the conclusion of fact discovery. The proposed affirmative defense asserts that KBR made eight material misrepresentations in its proposal, upon which the Corps relied in awarding the contract and defending against a GAO protest. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Matthew DeVries, Burr & Forman LLP
    Mr. DeVries may be contacted at mdevries@burr.com

    Finding of No Coverage Overturned Due to Lack of Actual Policy

    March 18, 2019 —
    The Appellate Division overturned a verdict for the insurer when the actual policy was never introduced at trial. Pennsylvania Lumbermens Mut. Ins. Co. v. B&F Land Dev. Corp., 2019 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 264 (N.Y. App. Div. Jan 16, 2018). The decedent was killed when he fell through a skylight while working on a premises owned by B&F Land Development Corporation. The estate sued B&F for wrongful death. B&F tendered to its carrier, Pennsylvania Lumbermens Mutual (PLM). PLM issued a reservations of rights. It later denied coverage because the location of the loss was not a location listed on the policy, an exclusion barred coverage for bodily injury arising out of B&F's ongoing operations conducted by it or on its behalf, and the loss was not reported to PLM as soon as practicable. PLM sued B&F and the estate for a declaratory judgment that it had no duty to defend or indemnify. A default judgment was entered against B&F after it failed to answer. Trial proceeded against the estate 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

    New Hampshire Asbestos Abatement Firm Pleads Guilty in Federal Fraud Case

    February 02, 2017 —
    For the second time in three months, a New England-based asbestos removal company pleaded guilty in federal court to wage and benefit violations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Justin Rice, ENR
    Mr. Rice may be contacted at ricej@enr.com

    Judgment for Insurer Reversed Due to Failure to Establish Depreciation

    August 01, 2023 —
    The trial court erred in placing the burden on the policyholder to establish depreciation in determining the actual cash value of the loss. SFR Serv., LLC v. Tower Hill Prime Ins. Co., 2023 Fla. App. LEXIS 3570 (Fla. Ct. App. May 26, 2023). The insureds' roof was damaged by Hurricane Irma. They submitted their claim to their insurer, Tower Hill. The cost of repair was assessed at $7,726.94, below the amount of the deductible. Therefore, there was no recovery under the policy. The insureds assigned their claim to SFR Services, LLC, their roofing contractor. SFR submitted a claim to Tower Hill for $162,083.84. Tower Hill refused to pay and SFR sued. 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

    A Court-Side Seat: May Brings Federal Appellate Courts Rulings and Executive Orders

    June 29, 2020 —
    Here are a few interesting new rulings from the federal appellate courts. COURT ORDERS Like a Good Neighbor …?State of Maryland v. EPA On May 19, 2020, the D.C. Circuit decided a Clean Air Act case involving the use of the “Good Neighbor Provision” of the Act, which is triggered when one state has a complaint about emissions generated in a neighboring upwind state that settle in the downwind state. Here, Maryland and Delaware filed petitions with EPA seeking relief from the impact of emissions from coal-fired power plants that allegedly affect their states’ air quality. EPA largely denied relief, and the court largely upheld the agency’s use and interpretation of the Good Neighbor Provision. The opinion is valuable because of its clear exposition of this complicated policy. A Volatile Underground IssueWayne Land and Mineral Group v. the Delaware River Basin Commission Also on May 19, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a ruling involving the Delaware River Basin Commission. Established in 1961, the Commission oversees and protects the water resources in the Basin. Not long ago, the Executive Director of the Commission, citing a rule of the Commission, imposed very strict limitations on fracking operations in the Basin. This decision has been very controversial with the Third Circuit opining that the Commission’s authority to regulate fracking operations—thought to be a province of state authority—was not clear-cut. In this case, three Pennsylvania state senators filed motions to intervene in the case, but the lower court rejected their request. The Third Circuit has directed the lower court to take another look at their standing to participate in this litigation. This is a volatile issue in Pennsylvania. 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