BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating 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


    What You Don’t Know About Construction Law Can Hurt Your Engineering Firm (Law Note)

    Judge Nixes SC's $100M Claim Over MOX Construction Delays

    Sanibel Causeway Repair: Contractors Flooded Site With Crews, Resources

    Housing to Top Capital Spending in Next U.S. Growth Leg: Economy

    Providing Notice of Claims Under Your Construction Contract

    Mitigating FCRA Risk Through Insurance

    California Department of Corrections Gets Hit With the Prison Bid Protest Blues

    Jason Smith and Teddie Arnold Co-Author Updated “United States – Construction” Chapter in 2024 Legal 500: Country Comparative Guides

    Unit Owners Have No Standing to Sue under Condominium Association’s Policy

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

    What is a “Force Majeure” Clause? Do I Need one in my Contract? Three Options For Contractors, Subcontractors and Suppliers to Consider

    The Rise of Modular Construction – Impacts for Consideration

    Avoiding Wage Claims in California Construction

    Legislative Update on Bills of Note (Updated Post-Adjournment)

    Cameron Pledges to Double Starter Homes to Boost Supply

    Connecticut Grapples With Failing Concrete Foundations

    United States Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in EEOC Subpoena Case

    Note on First-Party and Third-Party Spoliation of Evidence Claims

    Ben L. Aderholt Joins Coats Rose Construction Litigation Group

    When is a Residential Subcontractor not Subject to the VCPA? Read to Find Out

    Palo Alto Considers Fines for Stalled Construction Projects

    Paris ‘Locks of Love’ Overload Bridges, Threatening Structures

    Flint Water Crisis and America’s Clean Water Access Failings

    Insurer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Earth Movement Exclusion Denied

    Haight’s Sacramento Office Has Moved

    Pollution Created by Business Does Not Deprive Insured of Coverage

    Private Mediations Do Not Toll The Five-Year Prosecution Statute

    The Future of High-Rise is Localized and Responsive

    California Contractors: Amended Section 7141.5 Provides Important License Renewal Safety Net

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolute Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    Michigan Court Waives Goodbye to Subrogation Claims, Except as to Gross Negligence

    Novation Agreements Under Federal Contracts

    Reduce Suicide Risk Among Employees in Remote Work Areas

    Don’t Assume Your Insurance Covers A Newly Acquired Company

    Sometimes it Depends on “Whose” Hand is in the Cookie Jar

    Ninth Circuit: Speculative Injuries Do Not Confer Article III Standing

    Following California Law, Federal Court Adopts Horizontal Allocation For Asbestos Coverage

    Montrose III: Vertical Exhaustion Applies in Upper Layers of Excess Coverage

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “This Is Sufficient for Your Purposes …”

    Call to Conserve Power Raises Questions About Texas Grid Reliability

    Uniformity in Florida’s Construction Bond Laws Brings About Fairness for the Industry

    CDJ’s #9 Topic of the Year: Nevada Supreme Court Denies Class Action Status in Construction Defect Case

    Insurance Policies and Indemnity Provisions Are Not the Same

    New EPA Regulation for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments

    Demonstrating A Fraudulent Inducement Claim Or Defense

    Law Firm's Business Income, Civil Authority Claim Due to Hurricanes Survives Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    Can Your Industry Benefit From Metaverse Technology?

    No Coverage for Additional Insured for Construction Defect Claim

    Construction Contract Language and Insurance Coverage Must Be Consistent

    Super Lawyers Selects Haight Lawyers for Its 2023 California Rising Stars List
    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

    Material Prices Climb…And Climb…Are You Considering A Material Escalation Provision?

    May 31, 2021 —
    As you may know, material prices have been climbing. And they continue to climb based on the volatility of the material market. On top of that, there are lead times in getting material due to supply chain and other related concerns. The question is, how are you addressing these risks? These are risks that need to be addressed in your contract. As it relates to climbing material prices, one consideration is a material escalation provision. The objective of this provision is to address the volatility of the material market in economic climates, such as today’s climate, where the price of material continues to climb. Locking down a material price today will be different than locking down the same price months from today. This volatility and risk impacts pricing and budgets. Naturally, an owner and contractor would like to be in a position to lock down supplier prices as soon as possible—both to secure pricing and to account for items with long lead times or that recent data forecasts a long lead time due to supply chain concerns. However, this is not always possible or practical and can depend on numerous issues such as when the owner contracts with the contractor, when the owner issues the notice to proceed (and permits are issued), final construction documents and revisions to the construction documents, the type of material, whether there is staging or storage available for the materials, and the current status including climitazation of the project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    U.S. District Court for Hawaii Again Determines Construction Defect Claims Do Not Arise From An Occurrence

    August 27, 2013 —
    In a decision authored by Judge Leslie E. Koybayashi, the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii followed its prior decisions that construction defect claims were not covered because such claims do not arise from an occurrence. Nautilus Ins. Co. v. 3 Builders, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88480 (D. Haw. June 24, 2013). 3 Builders, the insured, was sued by the Apartment Owners of Mililani Pinnacle for the faulty installation of a new roof. Pinnacle claimed the completed roofs were not properly installed.complaint alleged breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, negligence, and other causes of action. 3 Builders tendered the defense to Nautilus, who accepted the tender and defended for three years. Nautilus, however, filed a complaint for a declaratory judgment on its coverage obligations. Nautilus sought summary judgment, contending there was no coverage because all of the claims arose from the contractual relationship to perform the roof work, and a breach of contract was not the type of fortuitous event covered by a CGL policy under Hawaii law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    New WOTUS Rule

    November 13, 2023 —
    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers amended the regulation to conform the definition of “waters of the United States” to conform to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency. See the prior blog post about the Supreme Court’s ruling: Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency – Construction and Utility Law | Atlanta | AHC Law Federal Register :: Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States”; Conforming Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook Jr., Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    2018 Construction Outlook: Mature Expansion, Deceleration in Some Sectors, Continued Growth in Others

    January 24, 2018 —
    U.S. construction starts are expected to increase 3 percent to $765 billion in 2018 according to Dodge Data & Analytics in its 2018 Dodge Construction Outlook. But we may be approaching the end of a construction boom, at least in certain industry segments. The construction industry as a whole is in a “mature stage of expansion,” indicates Robert Murray, Chief Economist for Dodge Data & Analytics. “After rising 11% to 13% per year from 2012 through 2015, total construction starts advanced a more subdued 5% in 2015. An important question entering 2017 was whether the construction industry had the potential for further expansion,” explained Murray. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel, Rosen, Black, Dean, LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Difficulty in Defending Rental Supplier’s Claim Under Credit Application

    October 11, 2021 —
    In construction, one of the easiest claims to prove from a burden of proof standpoint is that of a supplier, particularly a rental equipment supplier. Oftentimes, these claims are more in the realm of a collection claim because a rental supplier will generally be able to establish that a party opened an account with them, signed a credit application and personal guaranty, and equipment was rented and even delivered to a specific jobsite during set dates. Defending these claims is not so easy. And even if there is a defense as it relates to some amounts, there needs to be an upside challenging those amounts when factoring in the attorney’s fees, costs, and interest on the other amounts and on continuing the dispute. An example of the difficulty in defending these claims from rental suppliers can be found in the recent case of Custom Design Expo, Inc. v. Synergy Rents, Inc., 2021 WL 4125806 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021). Here, a contractor rented equipment (e.g, forklifts) from a supplier. The equipment was rented on an open account and the contractor signed a personal guaranty. The supplier sued the contractor for about $81,000 that remained unpaid. The supplier appeared to waste no time and moved for summary judgment with an affidavit from its credit manager. The credit manager affirmed that the contractor executed a credit application for purposes of renting equipment on an open account, the application contained a personal guaranty, and the credit application formed the basis of a contract. The credit manager authenticated the credit application and affirmed that the contractor owed it about $81,000 in unpaid amounts for rental equipment that was furnished under the credit application. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Settlement between IOSHA and Mid-America Reached after Stage Collapse Fatalities

    April 02, 2014 —
    On August 13, 2011, “[s]even people were killed and dozens were injured when the stage collapsed during a Sugarland concert” at the Indiana State Fair, according to the JC Online. Recently, Mid-America Sound Corp., the company that provided the stage equipment, has settled with the Indiana Occupational Safety and Health Administration (IOSHA), agreeing “to pay a $50,000 fine and increase employee safety training.” "This agreement is a resolution requiring both extensive safety improvements for the construction or erection of temporary roof structures and specifically related employee safety training that will create a safer workplace for Indiana event production workers," Labor Commissioner Rick Ruble said in a statement, as quoted by JC Online. "The agreement produces a positive outcome for everyone involved." The stage equipment company “made no admission of any wrongdoing by entering into the settlement,” according to Michael Moon, attorney for Mid-America Sound Corp., as quoted by JC Online. “Mid-America believed that it was important to move forward in a cooperative effort with IOSHA and to avoid the costs and expenses of further litigation." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Proposed Florida Construction Defect Act

    January 09, 2015 —
    Michael J. Furbush and Thomas P. Wert of Roetzel & Andress discussed Florida’s House Bill 87, which proposes to “substantially overhaul Florida’s Construction Defect Act, Chapter 558, requiring property owners to provide more detailed notice of the alleged defect and imposing sanctions on property owners who make frivolous claims.” Representative Kathleen Passidomo sponsored the bill, which “requires claimants to provide additional details about the alleged defect in the notice of claim, including the specific location of each alleged defect, and the specific provisions of the building code, plans, or specifications that serve as the basis of the defect claim. The failure to include this information in the notice of claim would be considered prima facie evidence of a defective notice.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Coverage Denied for Insured's Defective Product

    October 15, 2014 —
    The court found there was no coverage obligations for the insured's defective product. Titanium Indus., Inc. v. Federal. Ins. Co., 2014 WL 4428324 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Sept. 10, 2014). The insured, Titanium Industries, supplied titanium bar materials to Biomet Manufacturing Corporation. Biomet manufactured orthopedic implants and devises. The titanium was used to manufacture screws to incorporate into Biomet's products. Biomet notified the insured of a potential defect in some of the titanium material, described as "alloy segregation," i.e., the failure of alloys in a metal to completely melt, causing the alloy to separate and undermine the strength of the finished product. The insured and Biomet negotiated a settlement, which included lost profits and the cost of returning the titanium. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com