BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield 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


    Sixth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Property Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Second Circuit Denies Petitions for Review of EPA’s Final Regulations to Establish Requirements for Cooling Water Intake Structures

    Are You Ready For 2015?

    DC Circuit Rejects Challenge to EPA’s CERCLA Decision Regarding Hardrock Mining Industry

    How Data Drives the Future of Design

    Used French Fry Oil Fuels London Offices as Buildings Go Green

    Be Sure to Bring Up Any Mechanic’s Lien Defenses Early and Often

    West Virginia Wild: Crews Carve Out Corridor H Through the Appalachian Mountains

    Illinois Supreme Court Announces Time Standards for Closing Out Cases

    Presidential Memorandum Promotes Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West

    Green Energy Can Complicate Real Estate Foreclosures

    Florida's New Pre-Suit Notification Requirement: Retroactive or Prospective Application?

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Brokers' MSJ on Duties Owed In Construction Defect Case

    Florida Courts Say that Developers Are Responsible for Flooding

    Rescission of Policy for Misrepresentation in Application Reversed

    Puerto Rico Grid Restoration Plagued by Historic Problems, New Challenges

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit with Additional Million

    Connecticutt Class Action on Collapse Claims Faces Motion to Dismiss

    Ruling Finds Builder and Owners at Fault in Construction Defect Case

    Construction Defects and Second Buyers in Pennsylvania

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

    Do We Need Blockchain in Construction?

    Los Angeles Team Secures Summary Judgment for Hotel Owner & Manager in Tenant’s Lawsuit

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/06/21)

    Newark Trial Team Secures Affirmance of ‘No Cause’ Verdict for Nationwide Housing Manager & Developer

    American Arbitration Association Revises Construction Industry Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Recent Statutory Changes Cap Retainage on Applicable Construction Projects

    Class Action Certification by Association for “Matters of Common Interest”

    Relief Bill's Highway Funds Could Help Construction Projects

    Ohio Rejects the Majority Trend and Finds No Liability Coverage for a Subcontractor’s Faulty Work

    U.K. Developer Pledges Building Safety in Wake of Grenfell

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    Flint Water Crisis and America’s Clean Water Access Failings

    Construction Law Breaking News: California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Beacon Residential Community Association

    I’m Sorry, So Sorry: Legal Implications of Apologies and Admissions of Fault for Delaware Healthcare Professionals

    AAA Revises Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    NYT Points to Foreign Minister and Carlos Slim for Collapse of Mexico City Metro

    Restrictions On Out-Of-State Real Estate Brokers Being Challenged In Nevada

    Flawed Welding Faulted in Mexico City Subway Collapse

    HOA Group Speaking Out Against Draft of Colorado’s Construction Defects Bill

    Homebuilders See Record Bearish Bets on Shaky Recovery

    Employee Exclusion Bars Coverage for Wrongful Death of Subcontractor's Employee

    The California Legislature Return the Power Back to the People by Passing the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018

    2021 Real Estate Trends: New Year, New Reality—A Day of Reckoning for Borrowers and Tenants

    Texas Couple Claim Many Construction Defects in Home

    Could You Be More Specific . . . About My Excess AI Coverage?

    California Team Secures Appellate Victory on Behalf of Celebrity Comedian Kathy Griffin in Dispute with Bel Air Neighbor

    Federal Subcontractor Who Failed to Follow FAR Regulations Finds That “Fair” and “Just” are Not Synonymous

    Two Things to Consider Before Making Warranty Repairs

    No Coverage for Breach of Contract Claims Against Contractor
    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

    The World’s Largest 3D-Printed Neighborhood Is Here

    March 20, 2023 —
    Amid the tech boom-fueled sprawl in Austin, Texas, Wolf Ranch at first appears to be another colorfully named but architecturally unimaginative suburban subdivision. Until, that is, you turn a corner and stumble across giant robots building homes resembling waves frozen in concrete. This 100-house addition to the 2,500 homes planned for Wolf Ranch is called “the Genesis Collection,” and as the world’s largest 3D-printed community, it is indeed sui generis. A collaboration between Lennar Corp., the US’s second-biggest home builder, and 3D-printing startup Icon, Genesis represents perhaps the most significant innovation in residential construction in decades. If it can scale, 3D-printed construction promises to deliver energy-efficient homes that can be built faster and more affordably, in novel designs and with minimal waste. The concrete structures are also more resilient to increasingly intense climate-driven hurricanes, wildfires and heat waves. “I think we'll look back and say this was a pretty pivotal moment in the history of construction,” says Jason Ballard, Icon’s cowboy hat-wearing co-founder and chief executive officer. “I do think 3D printing and robotic construction are necessary to end the global housing crisis.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Todd Woody, Bloomberg

    Administration Seeks To Build New FBI HQ on Current D.C. Site

    February 28, 2018 —
    A Senate committee plans to examine a new $3.3-billion Trump administration proposal to demolish the Federal Bureau of Investigation's worn, outmoded headquarters in downtown Washington, D.C., and construct a new facility on that site. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com

    Select the Best Contract Model to Mitigate Risk and Achieve Energy Project Success

    October 17, 2022 —
    Power and energy projects are inherently complex and risky. Therefore, management and proper allocation of risk among project participants are essential to success. Careful drafting of the engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contract is a critical first step in managing risk. The standard contract format used for power and energy construction projects is the EPC contract. In its traditional form, the EPC contract makes the EPC contractor responsible for the entire project, including engineering (design of the power plant), procurement (purchase, installation and performance of all equipment) and construction (construction of the plant). EPC contracts can, however, employ different contract models and pricing structures, each of which carries differing levels of risk for project participants. Selecting the appropriate contract model and pricing structure to meet the unique needs of the project is important. Reprinted courtesy of Gregory S. Seador, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Seader may be contacted at seador@slslaw.com

    Inspectors Hurry to Make Sure Welds Are Right before Bay Bridge Opening

    August 27, 2013 —
    Each of the 20 welds at the base of the tower of the Bay Bridge took more than four hours to complete, with the lengthy welds forming at one-and-a-half inches per minute. They’ve been finished for two years now, but inspectors are just now checking the welds for defects. Any defects found will have to be removed and repaired. Mazen Wahbeh, an engineer on the project, assumes that less than 5 percent of the total welded area will have to be repaired. According to Wahbeh, the bridge can open before the welds are thoroughly checked and repaired, and so “the contractor is prioritizing the remaining work.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Show Must Go On: Navigating Arbitration in the Wake of the COVID-19 Outbreak

    July 20, 2020 —
    The recent COVID-19 outbreak has altered life for all of us, in ways both big and small. Unprecedented restrictions relating to the pandemic have forced individuals across the globe to change the ways in which they live and work. Perhaps not surprisingly, these restrictions have also changed the way we resolve disputes. Just as virtual conferencing has become the “new normal” for family gatherings and social events, it has also become the “new normal” for everything from mediation, to oral argument, to full-blown hearings. To be sure, there are a number of advantages to conducting adversarial proceedings virtually. First and foremost, it results in substantial cost savings for the parties involved. In-person proceedings typically require significant travel expenses, including airline tickets, hotel reservations, and food and beverage stipends. The use of a virtual forum essentially eliminates these expenses, cutting costs dramatically for attorneys, clients, judges, and arbitrators alike. Virtual conferencing also affords the opportunity for increased participation from party representatives living across the country, or even across the world. While demanding work schedules often make it impossible for multiple party representatives to attend a deposition, or even a hearing, in person, virtual proceedings require much less of a time commitment. Because these virtual proceedings require participants to spend less time away from other work-related obligations, party representatives are able to attend proceedings that they may otherwise have had to miss. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys Justin K. Fortescue, Zachery B. Roth and Marianne Bradley Mr. Fortescue may be contacted at fortescuej@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Roth may be contacted at rothz@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Bradley may be contacted at bradleym@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    COVID-19 and Mutual Responsibility Clauses

    June 01, 2020 —
    As everyone knows, there is a tremendous amount of uncertainty in the construction industry due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Schedules, productivity, safety processes, and seemingly everything else are being affected. In these difficult times, most contractors are making every effort to work together to solve the problems caused by COVID-19. But what happens when differences arise between project owners, contractors, and subcontractors as to the effect of COVID-19 on a project? One party may want to continue pushing the schedule, others may want to slow down, or, more likely, not be able to keep up with the original schedule because of some reason related to COVID-19. As between a prime contractor and a subcontractor, a mutual responsibility clause can provide some clarity or, unfortunately, depending on how the subcontract is written, confusion. Almost all subcontracts have a clause which flows down the prime contractor’s obligations on a project to the subcontractor as applicable to the subcontractor’s work. Known as “flow-down” clauses, this clause works in one direction; obligations of the prime contractor “flow-down” to the Subcontractor. A mutual responsibility clause, in essence, works in both directions. The subcontractor is required to perform its obligations consistent with the prime contractor’s obligations to the owner and the subcontractor is granted the same rights against the prime contractor which the prime contractor has against the owner. Obligations flow down and rights flow up. The rights and obligations flowing through the prime contractor include, the obligation to perform the work in accordance with the plans and specifications, the obligation to meet the schedule constraints in the prime agreement, and the right to extensions of time and change orders to the extent the prime contractor obtains the same. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joseph M. Leone, Drewry Simmons Vornehm, LLP
    Mr. Leone may be contacted at jleone@dsvlaw.com

    Insurance Policies and Indemnity Provisions Are Not the Same

    October 19, 2020 —
    Just because you own a pair of Air Jordans doesn’t make you Michael Jordan. In the next case, Carter v. Pulte Home Corporation, Case No. A154757 (July 23, 2020), the 1st District Court of Appeal denied an insurance carrier’s equitable subrogation claim explaining that an insurer’s obligations under its insurance policy are not the same as an idemnitee’s obligations under an indemnity provision. Or, as aptly put by the Court of Appeal, while a “subrogated insurer is said to ‘stand in the shoes’ of its insured, because it has no greater rights than the insured. Here . . . [the insurer] is seeking to stand in a different, more advantageous set of shoes.” Carter v. Pulte Home Corporation Pulte Home Corporation was sued for construction defects by 38 homeowners in two housing developments. Various subcontractors had worked on the projects, but under their subcontracts, each subcontractor agreed to indemnify Pulte from and against “all liability, claims, judgments, suits, or demands for damages to persons or property arising out of, resulting from, or relating to Contractor’s performance of work under the Agreement (‘Claims’) unless such Claims have been specifically determined by the trier of fact to be the sole negligence of Pulte . . . ” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    New Jersey Supreme Court Holding Impacts Allocation of Damages in Cases Involving Successive Tortfeasors

    March 28, 2022 —
    Newark, N.J. (March 21, 2022) - Late in 2021, the Supreme Court of New Jersey addressed the issue of allocating damages in personal injury cases in which the plaintiff asserts claims against successive tortfeasors, such as medical malpractice in the treatment of a slip and fall injury caused by negligence. The decision in Glassman v. Friedel, 249 N.J. 199 (2021) overruled and replaced the long-held principles established in Ciluffo v. Middlesex General Hospital, 146 N.J. Super. 478 (App. Div. 1977) regarding successive liability. Ciluffo held that, when an initial tortfeasor settles before trial, the non-settling defendants in a successive tort were entitled to a pro tanto credit for the settlement amount against any damages assessed against them. The Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division in 2020, and the Supreme Court of New Jersey last year, abandoned that framework for one more consistent with statutory contribution law in the Garden State. In Glassman v. Friedel, 465 N.J. Super. 436 (App. Div. 2020), the Appellate Division held that the application of the principles in Ciluffo in a negligence case has no support in modern jurisprudence, thus limiting its application. It rejected the holding in Ciluffo in light of the state legislature’s enactment of the Comparative Negligence Act, which requires juries to apportion damages between successive events and apportion fault among the parties responsible for each event. The appellate division went on to hold that a non-settling, successive tortfeasor may present proofs at trial as to the negligence of the settling tortfeasor, and that the burden of proof as to the initial tortfeasor’s negligence being the proximate cause of the second causative event indeed lies on the non-settling defendant. In sum, the appellate division in Glassman established steps the jury can use to determine successive tortfeasor liability, but largely treated it as one, attenuated incident. Reprinted courtesy of Thomas Regan, Lewis Brisbois and Karley Kamaris, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Regan may be contacted at Thomas.Regan@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Kamaris may be contacted at Karley.Kamaris@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of