BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration 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


    Pennsylvania Supreme Court: Fair Share Act Does Not Preempt Common Law When Apportioning Liability

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2019

    Aurora Joins other Colorado Cities by Adding a Construction Defect Ordinance

    Indemnification Provisions Do Not Create Reciprocal Attorney’s Fees Provisions

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC Recognized Among The Top 50 Construction Law Firms TM of 2024 by Construction Executive

    Design & Construction Case Expands Florida’s Slavin Doctrine

    Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Strikes a Deathblow to Substantial Factor Causation in Most Cases; Is Asbestos Litigation Next?

    Rhode Island Examines a Property Owner’s Intended Beneficiary Status and the Economic Loss Doctrine in the Context of a Construction Contract

    Fourth Circuit Holds that a Municipal Stormwater Management Assessment is a Fee and Not a Prohibited Railroad Tax

    US Moves to Come Clean on PFAS in Drinking Water

    Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Supports Coverage

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect, Bad Faith Claims

    Ninth Circuit: Speculative Injuries Do Not Confer Article III Standing

    All Risk Policy Only Covers Repair to Portion of Dock That Sustains Damage

    California Mediation Confidentiality May Apply to Third Party “Participants” Retained to Provide Analysis

    Expert's Opinions On Causation Leads Way To Summary Judgment For Insurer

    San Francisco House that Collapsed Not Built to Plan

    Hydrogen Powers Its Way from Proof of Concept to Reality in Real Estate

    Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Insurance Bad Faith Trials

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

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    The Goldilocks Rule: Panel Rejects Proposed Insurer-Specific MDL Proceedings for Four Large Insurers, but Establishes MDL Proceeding for the Smallest

    When Is an Arbitration Clause Unconscionable? Not Often

    Janus v. AFSCME

    What Sustainable Building Materials Will the Construction Industry Rely on in 2020?

    Five-Year Statute of Limitations on Performance-Type Surety Bonds

    Tenants Underwater: Indiana Court of Appeals Upholds Privity Requirement for Property Damage Claims Against Contractors

    Engineering Report Finds More Investigation Needed of Balconies at New Jersey Condo

    Texas Supreme Court Holds Stipulated Extrinsic Evidence May Be Considered in Determining Duty to Defend

    Manhattan Site for Supertall Condo Finds New Owner at Auction

    In a Win for Property Owners California Court Expands and Clarifies Privette Doctrine

    New Jersey Judge Declared Arbitrator had no Duty to Disclose Past Contact with Lawyer

    New Jersey Court Washes Away Insurer’s Waiver of Subrogation Arguments

    Responding to Ransomware Learning from Colonial Pipeline

    Elizabeth Lofts Condo Owners Settle with Plumbing Supplier

    Zero-Energy Commercial Buildings Increase as Contractors Focus on Sustainability

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions

    How Drones are Speeding Up Construction

    Key California Employment Law Cases: October 2018

    Proving & Defending Lost Profit Damages

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    What the FIU Bridge Collapse Says About Peer Review

    Court Finds No Occurrence for Installation of Defective flooring and Explains Coverage for Attorney Fee Awards

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    China Bans Tallest Skyscrapers Following Safety Concerns

    CA Supreme Court Finds “Consent-to-Assignment” Clauses Unenforceable After Loss Occurs During the Policy Period

    Court Holds That Property Insurance Does Not Cover Economic Loss From Purchasing Counterfeit Vintage Wine

    Whose Employee is it Anyway?: Federal Court Finds No Coverage for Injured Subcontractor's Claim Based on Modified Employer's Liability Exclusion

    Housing in U.S. Cools as Rate Rise Hits Sales: Mortgages

    Wharf Holdings to Sell Entire Sino-Ocean Stake for $284 Million
    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

    Sometimes, Being too Cute with Pleading Allegations is Unnecessary

    June 06, 2018 —
    There are times where being too darn cute with your pleading allegations is unnecessary and does not work. But, the point is really that the cuteness is unnecessary. In a Miller Act payment bond dispute in Boneso Brothers Construction, Inc. v. Sauer, Inc., 2018 WL 2387833 (N.D.Cal. 2018), a claimant asserted claims against a Miller Act payment bond surety for breach of the payment bond, breach of a subcontract, open account, and account stated. The question is why would the claimant sue the payment bond surety for breach of subcontract (when the subcontract was not with the surety), and open account and account stated. I have no clue, other than such claims appeared quite unnecessary when the claimant asserted an action on the Miller Act payment bond (which is what the surety is liable under — actions under the statutory payment bond). Such claims were dismissed. And, they should have been. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Hydrogen—A Key Element in the EU’s Green Planning

    December 07, 2020 —
    GettyImages-1150744671-300x225Hydrogen is gaining global recognition for its potential as a key player in the energy transition. Investors and businesses are exploring opportunities across multiple sectors, including energy, manufacturing, transport and finance. According to a report by Bloomberg, the current pipeline for global hydrogen projects is worth an estimated $90 billion. The EU is not going to be left behind, with a focal point of its Green Deal being on hydrogen. The EU’s executive branch (the European Commission or EC) has confirmed its commitment to increasing hydrogen projects across the bloc, with a priority on green hydrogen. Its Hydrogen Strategy, released in March, states that hydrogen is “essential to support the EU’s commitment to reach carbon neutrality by 2050 and for the global effort to implement the Paris Agreement while working towards zero pollution.” The EU’s executive branch (the European Commission or EC) has confirmed its commitment to increasing hydrogen projects across the bloc, with a priority on green hydrogen. Its Hydrogen Strategy, released in March, states that hydrogen is “essential to support the EU’s commitment to reach carbon neutrality by 2050 and for the global effort to implement the Paris Agreement while working towards zero pollution.” Reprinted courtesy of Matthew Oresman, Pillsbury and Henrietta Worthington, Pillsbury Mr. Oresman may be contacted at matthew.oresman@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Worthington may be contacted at henrietta.worthington@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Bremer Whyte Sets New Precedent in Palos Verdes Landslide Litigation

    August 26, 2024 —
    In what is believed to be a groundbreaking new precedent, Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara’s Los Angeles litigation team has obtained a landmark ruling on behalf of residents in the “Portuguese Bend” neighborhood of Palos Verdes, California. Congratulations to Partner Michael D’Andrea and Senior Associate Shelly Mosallaei in receiving this result for our clients. Plaintiff, a real estate developer, sued a number of local residents and property owners, including our client, alleging that their failure to address landslides and geological disturbances around Plaintiff’s property constituted a legal trespass and nuisance. Plaintiff alleged that its plans to develop multiple lots in Palos Verdes was thwarted because Defendant’s soil and land encroached onto Plaintiff’s property. Plaintiff’s suit against multiple residents created an uproar in the community regarding who was ultimately responsible (if anyone) for natural soils movement that has plagued this neighborhood for years. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Approaches to Managing Job Site Inventory

    August 30, 2017 —
    There is no question that organization on the job site can mean the difference between efficient performance and costly errors. A simple mistake can cost a company thousands, which is why details are carefully articulated and supervisors become better scrutinizers than magazine editors. But for some reason, many companies don’t consider managing job site inventory under this same attentive category, or perhaps they don’t know about the technology available to help them do it. Whole Inventory, Big to Small For contractors, keeping track of every piece of material and equipment lowers losses and keeps crews busy. This is especially true for contractors in the trades who often have specialized equipment in inventory such as power supplies, HVAC “smart energy” components or inspection equipment. Once everything is accounted for, the possibility of loss is decreased and there’s a chance to evaluate the use of all materials and equipment. This can show the efficiency of allotted resources. Is there enough equipment on the site to get tasks completed? Is there a need for more? Less? Having excess equipment can sometimes prepare a crew for problem scenarios. But it can also mean the construction company is overpaying for unneeded resources. However, the only way to know is by effectively managing job site inventory. That includes all equipment and materials. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jessica Stark, Construction Informer

    Engineer at Flint Negligence Trial Details Government Water Errors

    April 04, 2022 —
    Warren Green, vice president and chief engineer of Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, an engineering consultant to Flint, Mich. during its disastrous water crisis of 2014 and 2015, testified in federal court last week that city officials forged ahead to switch its source of drinking water without adequate water softening or testing after one municipal manager assured him that the more extensive testing would be done. Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record and Jeff Yoders, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Mr. Yoders may be contacted at yodersj@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    NY Court Holds Excess Liability Coverage Could Never be Triggered Where Employers’ Liability Policy Provided Unlimited Insurance Coverage

    February 28, 2018 —
    In a potentially significant development in New York insurance law, a recent appellate level decision held that an excess liability policy was not obligated to provide coverage where the underlying employer’s liability policy provided unlimited coverage pursuant to New York regulations. The Arthur Vincent & Sons Construction, Inc. v. Century Surety Insurance Co.1 case arose out of an underlying wrongful death claim. Fordham University hired Arthur Vincent and Sons Construction, Inc. (“AVSC”) to install a new roof on its Lewis Calder Center. As is typical of most construction contracts, AVSC agreed to indemnify the University against any claims arising out of its negligence, and to name the University as an additional insured on its commercial general liability policy. AVSC was insured by three policies: (1) a worker’s compensation and employer’s liability policy issued by Commerce and Industry Insur¬ance Company (“CIIC”); (2) a primary CGL policy issued by Century Surety Insurance Company (“Century”); and (3) an excess liability policy issued by Admiral Insurance Company (“Admiral”). Reprinted courtesy of Theresa A. Guertin, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Samantha M. Martino, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Guertin may be contacted at tag@sdvlaw.com Ms. Martino may be contacted at smm@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Contract’s Scope of Work Should Be Written With Clarity

    March 06, 2023 —
    The scope of work section in your construction contract should never be overlooked. In numerous instances, it is overlooked which leads to a dispute as to the precise nature of the scope of work. This dispute could be the result of an ambiguity in the scope of work section. Or it could be the result of an omission. Or it could be the result of a lack of clarification. Or it could be the result of not properly reviewing and vetting the scope of work section. This is a section—whether included in the body of your contract or attached as an exhibit—you absolutely, positively want clarity. Otherwise, you are potentially setting yourself up for a future dispute that could include (i) an additional work / change order dispute, (ii) an incomplete work dispute, or (iii) a failure to properly perform your work dispute. These are all disputes you want to avoid, and many times can avoid, by going through and negotiating the scope of work section to bring clarity to this section. Remember, clarity is a positive. Ambiguity or uncertainty is a negative. An example of such an avoidable scope of work dispute can be found in All Year Cooling and Heating, Inc. v. Burkett Properties, Inc., 2023 WL 2000991 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023). Here, an air conditioning contractor was hired to install six new split air conditioning systems. The scope of work provided that there were currently “two split systems that are currently existing, working perfectly and are not to be replaced as part of this contract.” The property manager claimed the air conditioning contractor was required to bring these two existing split air conditioning systems up to code as the contract provided that notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the contractor “will certify and shall ensure that all split systems in the building, upon completion of all the work, will be fully compliant with all codes and regulations and shall be responsible for any costs relates to the implementation and/or remediation of same.” 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

    Maybe Supervising Qualifies as Labor After All

    May 22, 2023 —
    Remember back in 2021 when I “mused” about Dickson v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland et al.? Remember how the Eastern District of Virginia held that mere supervision does not qualify as “labor” under the federal Miller Act? Well, the 4th Circuit recently weighed in on the appeal of that case and had some interesting things to say about the definition of labor. As a quick reminder, Plaintiff worked as a project manager on a project to repair and upgrade certain stairs at the Pentagon. Plaintiff subcontracted with prime contractor Forney Enterprises Inc. on this project. On Dec. 20, 2018, the prime contract was terminated. Plaintiff filed the Miller Act suit on Feb. 5, 2020. Dickson alleged that Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, or F&D, must pay him, pursuant to the Miller Act, the amount he is owed for the labor he performed on the project. Now before the district court were cross-motions for summary judgment. In evaluating Plaintiff’s claims, the district court examined the defendant’s claims that (1) Dickson’s work did not qualify as “Labor” under the Miller Act, and (2) that the suit was not timely filed. The Eastern District of Virginia court agreed with both arguments. 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