BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete 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


    DOE Abruptly Cancels $13B Cleanup Award to BWXT-Fluor Team

    Nevada’s Construction Defect Law

    Fifth Circuit Asks Texas Supreme Court to Clarify Construction Defect Decision

    Hurricane Laura: Implications for Insurers in Louisiana

    Court Finds That SIR Requirements are Not Incorporated into High Level Excess Policies and That Excess Insurers’ Payment of Defense Costs is Not Conditioned on Actual Liability

    Legislative Update – The CSLB’s Study Under SB465

    Duty to Defend Sorted Between Two Insurers Based Upon Lease and Policies

    Winter COVID-19 Relief Bill: Overview of Key Provisions

    Contract’s Definition of “Substantial Completion” Does Not Apply to Third Party for Purposes of SOL, Holds Court of Appeal

    Denver Passed the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s Ruling On Certificates Of Merit And “Gist Of Action” May Make It More Difficult For An Architect Or Engineer To Seek An Early Dismissal

    Update Regarding New York City’s Climate Mobilization Act (CMA) and the Reduction of Carbon Emissions in New York City

    Use Your Instincts when Negotiating a Construction Contract

    Sewage Flowing in London’s River Thames Draws Green Bond Demand

    Construction Defect Bill Introduced in California

    Haight Welcomes Elizabeth Lawley

    Construction Defect Leads to Death, Jury Awards $39 Million

    Background Owner of Property Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate Construction Defects

    Residential Building Sector: Peaking or Soaring?

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    Prison Contractors Did Not Follow the Law

    Dangerous Condition, Dangerous Precedent: California Supreme Court Expands Scope of Dangerous Condition Liability Involving Third Party Negligent/Criminal Conduct

    Homeowners Sue Over Sinkholes, Use Cash for Other Things

    Recent Developments with California’s Right to Repair Act

    A Proactive Approach to Construction Safety

    Practical Pointers for Change Orders on Commercial Construction Contracts

    A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

    BHA at The Basic Course in Texas Construction Law

    Shoring of Problem Girders at Salesforce Transit Center Taking Longer than Expected

    Alexander Moore Promoted to Managing Partner of Kahana Feld’s Oakland Office

    Subsidence Exclusion Bars Coverage for Damage Caused by Landslide

    U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments: Maritime Charters and the Specter of a New Permitting Regime

    ETF Bulls Bet Spring Will Thaw the U.S. Housing Market

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

    Differing Site Conditions: What to Expect from the Court When You Encounter the Unexpected

    SB800 Not the Only Remedy for Construction Defects

    Awarding Insurer Summary Judgment Before Discovery Completed Reversed

    Economic Damages Cannot be Based On Speculation

    Insurer Must Pay for Matching Siding of Insured's Buildings

    New Jersey Law Firm Sued for Malpractice in Construction Defect Litigation

    This New Indicator Shows There's No Bubble Forming in U.S. Housing

    Five New Laws to Know Before They Take Effect On Jan. 1, 2022

    New Jersey Court Upholds Registration Requirement for Joint Ventures Bidding on Public Works Contracts

    Choice of Law Provisions in Construction Contracts

    CDJ’s #2 Topic of the Year: Ewing Constr. Co., Inc. v. Amerisure Ins. Co., 2014 Tex. LEXIS 39 (Tex. Jan.17, 2014)

    A Court-Side Seat: Waters, Walls and Pipelines

    Illinois Court of Appeals Addresses What It Means to “Reside” in Property for Purposes of Coverage

    Lawsuits over Roof Dropped

    Four Key Steps for a Successful Construction Audit Process

    Depreciation of Labor in Calculating Actual Cash Value Against Public Policy
    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. Leveraging 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

    Matthew Graham Named to Best Lawyers in America

    September 10, 2018 —
    Wendel Rosen’s very own Matt Graham has been selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America© 2019 in the area of Construction Law. First published in 1983, Best Lawyers is the oldest and most respected peer-review publication in the legal profession. 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

    Focusing on Design Elements of the 2014 World Cup Stadiums

    June 30, 2014 —
    While Garret Murai on his California Construction Law blog admits that the construction of Brazil’s World Cup stadiums has been problematic (construction worker deaths, delays, and cost overruns), he focused on the design work: “…there’s no denying that the venues are stunning, and for a country known for its beauty as well as beauties (think the Girl From Ipanema), dare I say even sexy.” For instance, Murai described the Estadio do Maracana (constructed in 1950 and renovated in 2013) as looking “a bit like the front of the USS Enterprise.” He goes onto explain how the stadium was originally constructed for the 1950 World Cup, and “famous” attendees include Frank Sinatra and the Pope. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Manhattan Home Prices Top Pre-Crisis Record on Luxury Deals

    January 06, 2016 —
    Manhattan home prices surged to a record in the fourth quarter, propelled by closings of luxury deals in new developments that were agreed to years ago, when construction was just starting on many of the buildings. The median price of all completed co-op and condominium purchases in the borough jumped 17 percent from a year earlier to $1.15 million, the highest in 27 years of record-keeping, according to a report Tuesday by appraiser Miller Samuel Inc. and brokerage Douglas Elliman Real Estate. That tops the previous peak of $1.03 million, set in the second quarter of 2008, before the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. triggered a plunge in property prices and a near standstill in sales. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Oshrat Carmiel, Bloomberg

    ABC, Via Construction Industry Safety Coalition, Comments on Silica Rule

    February 18, 2020 —
    The Construction Industry Safety Coalition (CISC) has responded to OSHA’s request for information regarding changes to the “Occupational Exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica – Specified Exposure Control Methods Standard,” also known as the silica rule. Specifically, OSHA requested comments in mid-August on potential changes to Table 1, which designates compliance actions for a range of conditions and tasks exposing workers to respirable crystalline silica. CISC, comprised of 26 members including Associated Builders and Contractors, has formally requested that OSHA expand compliance options. “Expanding Table 1 and otherwise improving compliance with the rule is of paramount importance to member associations and contractors across the country,” CISC tells OSHA Principal Deputy Loren Sweatt. “Based upon feedback from contractors, both large and small, compliance with the rule remains challenging.” Reprinted courtesy of Rachel O'Connell, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    January 11, 2021 —
    Welcome to 2021! As often happens here at Construction Law Musings, the year starts with a few posts on notable construction law cases that dropped in the past year or so. Not only does this review hopefully help you keep up, but helps me keep up with the latest developments (one of the reasons why I keep blogging). The first of these cases is Appalachian Power Co. v. Wagman Heavy Civil, Inc. out of the Western District of Virginia federal court. In this case, Wagman Heavy Civil, Inc. (“Wagman”) and the Virginia Department of Transportation (“VDOT”) contracted for the design and construction of a highway interchange project (the “Project”). Wagman and the Appalachian Power Company (“APCO”) entered into a written contract (the “Written Contract”) for APCO to remove and relocate its utility structures (the “Work”) in order to facilitate construction for the Project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Challenging a Termination for Default

    September 23, 2024 —
    No contractor wants to be terminated for default. It is the harshest contractual recourse. It is a recourse that has implications, particularly in the public sector. However, a party needs to be in a position to support the basis of the termination for default, and the terminated party, in most instances, should not be in a position to imply accept the basis of the default. This applies regardless of the project. In the federal context: “When a contractor challenges a default termination, the government bears the burden of establishing the validity of the termination.” Sergent’s Mechanical Systems, Inc. v. U.S., 2024 WL 4048175, *7 (Fed.Cl. 2024) (internal quotation and citation omitted). Once the government establishes the default, “the contractor bears the burden of establishing that the default was excused by fault of the government.” Id. at *8 (internal quotation and citation omitted). Relevant considerations as to whether the contractor is in default include the contractor’s failure to meet contract specifications or the required schedule. Sergent’s Mechanical Systems, supra, at *8. “[T]here is ‘a requirement that the contractor give reasonable assurances of performance in response to a validly issued cure notice.” Id. (internal quotation and citation omitted). 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

    White and Williams Elects Four Lawyers to Partnership, Promotes Six Associates to Counsel

    January 13, 2017 —
    White and Williams is pleased to announce the election of Edward Beitz, Justin Fortescue, Jennifer Santangelo and Amy Vulpio to the partnership and the promotion of Paul Briganti, Joshua Galante, Dana Spring Monzo, George Morrison, Craig O’Neill and Steven Urgo from associate to counsel. The newly elected partners and promoted counsel represent the wide array of practices that White and Williams offers its clients, including bankruptcy, corporate, finance, healthcare, insurance coverage, labor and employment, real estate and reinsurance. These lawyers have earned their elevations based on their contributions to the firm and their practices. “We are thrilled to elect these four lawyers to the partnership and promote six associates to counsel. These promotions are representative of the breadth of services and deep bench that we have to offer at White and Williams,” said Patti Santelle, Managing Partner. “The election of our new partners and promotion of our counsel is a reflection of their success and dedication as well as the continued health of the firm.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    A Teaming Agreement is Still a Contract (or, Be Careful with Agreements to Agree)

    November 18, 2019 —
    I have discussed teaming agreements in this past here at Construction Law Musings. These agreements are most typically where one of two entities meets a contracting requirement but may not have the capacity to fulfill a contract on its own so brings in another entity to assist. However, these agreements are contracts and are treated as such here in Virginia with all of the law of contracts behind them. One illustrative case occurred here in Virginia and was decided by the Virginia Supreme Court. That case is CGI Fed. Inc. v. FCi Fed. Inc. While this is not strictly a “construction” case, it helps lay out some of the pitfalls of teaming agreements in general. In this case, the parties entered into a fairly typical small business (FCI) Big Business (CGI) teaming arrangement for the processing of visas for the State Department. The parties negotiated the workshare percentage (read payment percentage) should FCI get the work and the teaming agreement set out a framework for the negotiation of a subcontract between FCI, the proposed general contractor, and CGI, the proposed subcontractor. After a while working together, FCI submitted a proposal to the State Department and as part of the negotiations of this proposal, the work percentage for CGI was lowered in exchange for some management positions for CGI relative to the work by amendment to the original teaming agreement. However, one day later FCI submitted a proposal to the State Department that not only didn’t include the management positions, but further lowered CGI’s workshare. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com