BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield 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


    Does a No-Damage-for-Delay Clause Also Preclude Acceleration Damages?

    California’s Housing Costs Endanger Growth, Analyst Says

    Pending Sales of Existing Homes in U.S. Decline for Eighth Month

    Fires, Hurricanes, Dangerous Heat: The US Is Reeling From a String of Disasters

    Super Lawyers Recognized Five Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

    Solicitor General’s Views to Supreme Court on Two Circuit Court Rulings that Groundwater Can be Considered “Waters of the United States”

    Can Baltimore Get a Great Bridge?

    Homebuyers Aren't Sweating the Fed

    Word of the Day: “Contractor”

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Endorsements in CGL Insurance Policies: A Word of Caution

    A Court-Side Seat: A Poultry Defense, a Houston Highway and a CERCLA Consent Decree that Won’t Budge

    Building Supplier Sued for Late and Defective Building Materials

    Before Celebrating the Market Rebound, Builders Need to Read the Fine Print: New Changes in Construction Law Coming Out of the Recession

    Insurer Must Defend Claims of Negligence and Private Nuisance

    Examination of the Product Does Not Stop a Pennsylvania Court From Applying the Malfunction Theory

    Housing Starts Plunge by the Most in Four Years

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    Subcontractor Exception to "Your Work" Exclusion Does Not Apply to Coverage Under Subcontractor's Policy

    What California’s COVID-19 Reopening Means for the Construction Industry

    Foundation Differences Across the U.S.

    Fire Consultants Cannot Base Opinions on Speculation

    Who Is To Blame For Defective — And Still LEED Certified — Courthouse Square?

    Effective Zoning Reform Isn’t as Simple as It Seems

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

    Sales of New U.S. Homes Fell in February to Five-Month Low

    Terminating the Notice of Commencement (with a Notice of Termination)

    More Reminders that the Specific Contract Terms Matter

    Harlem Developers Reach Deal with Attorney General

    Don’t Waive Too Much In Your Mechanic’s Lien Waiver

    The Fifth Circuit, Applying Texas Law, Strikes Down Auto Exclusion

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “How Bad Is It?”

    Ninth Circuit Reverses Grant of Summary Judgment to Insurer For Fortuitous Loss

    Insurers Can Sue One Another for Defense Costs on Equitable Indemnity and Equitable Contribution Basis

    Additional Insurance Coverage Determined for General Contractor

    Coffee Beans, Mars and the 50 States: Civil Code 1542 Waivers and Latent Defects

    "Repair Work" Endorsements and Punch List Work

    NTSB Pittsburgh Bridge Probe Update Sheds Light on Collapse Sequence

    Remote Trials Can Control Prejudgment Risk

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- The Claim

    The Pandemic, Proposed Federal Privacy Regulation and the CCPA

    Supreme Court Rejects “Wholly Groundless” Exception to Question of Arbitrability

    Federal District Court Continues to Find Construction Defects do Not Arise From An Occurrence

    Builders FirstSource to Buy ProBuild for $1.63 Billion

    Three White and Williams Lawyers Named Top Lawyers by Delaware Today

    Steel Makeover Under Way for Brooklyn's Squibb Footbridge

    Workers at Two NFL Stadiums Test Positive for COVID-19, But Construction Continues

    2017 Legislative Changes Affecting the Construction Industry

    Merger to Create Massive Los Angeles Construction Firm

    Impaired Property Exclusion Bars Coverage When Loose Bolt Interferes with MRI Unit Operation

    Apartment Building Damaged by Cable Installer’s Cherry Picker
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Not All Work is Covered Under the Federal Miller Act

    May 24, 2021 —
    The recent opinion out of the Eastern District Court of Virginia, Dickson v. Forney Enterprises, Inc., 2021 WL 1536574 (E.D.Virginia 2021), demonstrates that the federal Miller Act is not designed to protect ALL that perform work on a federal construction project. This is because NOT ALL work is covered under the Miller Act. In this case, a professional engineer was subcontracted by a prime contractor to serve on site in a project management / superintendent capacity. The prime contractor’s scope of work was completed by January 31, 2019. However, the prime contractor was still required to inventory certain materials on site, which was performed by the engineer. The engineer claimed it was owed in excess of $400,000 and filed a Miller Act payment bond lawsuit on February 5, 2020 (more than a year after the project was completed). 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

    Seattle Developer Defaults on Renovated Office Buildings

    December 23, 2024 —
    A major developer in downtown Seattle defaulted on a loan backed by two of its most prized office properties, including one that formerly housed a branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Firms tied to Martin Selig Real Estate are in default on a more than $200 million loan, according to letters from lender Acore Capital dated Nov. 15 that were filed in Washington’s King County. The buildings would change ownership 30 days after that notice if no other action is taken, according to the letters. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anna Edgerton, Bloomberg

    Aecmaster’s Digital Twin: A New Era for Building Design

    May 06, 2024 —
    I sat down with Anssi Auvinen, the CEO and founder of Finnish startup Aecmaster, to discuss the future of design and how the company plans to make it happen. Anssi envisions data-driven design as the next radical change in the AEC sector. Anssi Auvinen started working in the building industry as a 16-year-old construction worker. Since then, he has acquired two master’s degrees: structural engineering and architecture. During his career, Anssi has witnessed how the digitalization of the design sector has progressed, but the results for both designers and building owners could have been more impressive. That inspired him in 2019 to start up Aecmaster, a software and consulting firm that aims to fulfill the promise of digitalization. The company’s software product launched in January 2024. The need for digital twins Anssi states that you can’t say you own a building until you possess its digital assets, the digital twin. 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

    Lower Manhattan Condos Rival Midtown’s Luxury Skyscrapers

    April 09, 2014 —
    Manhattan developer Bill Rudin hadn’t planned to start selling apartments at his Greenwich Village project until the end of this year. He began rethinking that strategy after getting cornered at a cocktail party. “People came up to me and said, ‘We want to buy, we want to buy. When can we buy?’” Rudin said in an interview. He opened a sales office in October for the Greenwich Lane, a complex under construction at the site of the shuttered St. Vincent’s Hospital, after an online sign-up list of would-be buyers for the 200 condominiums drew 1,100 names. More than half of the units at the development, still largely a field of dirt and skeletal towers, have sold at prices averaging $3,500 a square foot, in line with other projects downtown and a new luxury benchmark for the area. While Midtown skyscrapers fringing Central Park are setting sales records and attracting international investors, downtown Manhattan’s new condos are breaking their own price barriers with a focus on local buyers. From the cobblestone streets of Tribeca to the low-rise landmarks of Greenwich Village, builders are accelerating projects with features and costs that rival high-end offerings farther north. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Oshrat Carmiel, Bloomberg
    Ms. Carmiel may be contacted at ocarmiel1@bloomberg.net

    Federal Court Dismisses Coverage Action in Favor of Pending State Proceeding

    October 12, 2020 —
    The federal district court declined to exercise jurisdiction over the coverage action that was parallel to a case pending in state court involving the same parties and same issues pending. Navigators Ins, Co. v. Chriso's Tree Trimming, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129711 (E.D. Calif. July 22, 2020). Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) entered into a tree, brush and wood removal contract with Mount F Enterprises, Inc. Mountain F subsequently entered into a subcontractor agreement with Chriso Tree Trimming, Inc. for work to be performed for PG&E. In August 2017, Chriso attempted to remove a tree, but the tree accidentally fell in the wrong direction and knocked down nearby powerlines. The powerlines came into contact with surrounding brush and started the "Railroad Fire." The fire was eventually contained on September 15, 2017, after 12, 407 acres were burned and 7 structures and 7 homes were destroyed. Five subrogation lawsuits were filed in state court against Chriso and Mountain F by various insurance companies that paid for the damage caused by the Railroad Fire. A policy limits demand to settle all claims against Chriso and Mountain F was made. Navigators insured Chriso for $9 million through a Commercial Excess Liability Policy, payable once all other insurance was exhausted. The policy included a "Professional Services Endorsement" (PSE Exclusion) that excluded coverage of "professional services." "Professional services" was defined through a list of 12 non-exclusive professions and services that generally referred to activities involving specialized knowledge or skill that was predominantly mental or intellectual in nature rather than physical or manual. 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

    Reminder: Just Being Incorporated Isn’t Enough

    June 29, 2020 —
    I have discussed why contractors need to incorporate previously here at Construction Law Musings. Among the many reasons to incorporate are possible tax benefits and the protection of personal assets (like your house and your dog) from judgement and collection actions. This latter reason is key in the construction world in which Murphy can look like an optimist and projects have so many moving parts that something is likely to go wrong. The reason incorporation works as at least a partial shield is that the company and the owners are separate “people” or entities from a legal perspective and a contract with one “person” cannot be enforced against another. This same logic applies in the context of corporate versus individual actions, i. e. the actions of one person cannot be legally attributed to another person. By extension the assets of an individual cannot be collected to satisfy a purely corporate debt or judgment. 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

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    February 18, 2020 —
    Recently, I was talking with my friend Matt Hundley about a recent case he had in the Charlottesville, VA Circuit Court. It was a relatively straightforward (or so he and I would have thought) breach of contract matter involving a fixed price contract between his (and an associate of his Laura Hooe) client James River Stucco and the Montecello Overlook Owners’ Association. I believe that you will see the reason for the title of the post once you hear the facts and read the opinion. In James River Stucco, Inc. v. Monticello Overlook Owners’ Ass’n, the Court considered Janes River Stucco’s Motion for Summary Judgment countering two arguments made by the Association. The first Association argument was that the word “employ” in the contract meant that James River Stucco was required to use its own forces (as opposed to subcontractors) to perform the work. The second argument was that James River overcharged for the work. This second argument was made without any allegation of fraud or that the work was not 100% performed. Needless to say, the Court rejected both arguments. The Court rejected the first argument stating:
    In its plain meaning, “employ” means to hire, use, utilize, or make arrangements for. A plain reading of the contractual provisions cited–“shall employ” and references to “employees”–and relied on by Defendant does not require that the persons performing the labor, arranged by Plaintiff, be actual employees of the company or on the company’s payroll. It did not matter how the plaintiff accomplished the work so long as it was done correctly. The purpose of those provisions was to allocate to Plaintiff responsibility for supplying a sufficient workforce to get the work done, not to impose HR duties or require the company to use only “in house” workers. So I find that use of contracted work does not constitute a breach of the contract or these contractual provisions.
    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

    ASHRAE Seeks Comments by May 26 on Draft of Pathogen Mitigation Standard

    May 22, 2023 —
    ASHRAE, the professional group focused on research and standards development for heating, ventilation, air conditioning and air conditioning systems, is seeking comments on the first draft of a standard for pathogen mitigation, it announced May 15. ASHRAE will accept comments on the public review draft, via osr.ashrae.org, through May 26. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of