BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut consulting architect 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


    Revel Closing Shows Gambling Is No Sure Thing for Renewal

    Homebuilders Opposed to Potential Change to Interest on Construction Defect Expenses

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Road Project to Improve Access to Peru's Machu Picchu Site

    Navigating Threshold Arbitration Issues in Construction Contracts

    Designing a Fair Standard of Care in Design Agreements

    Texas Federal Court Delivers Another Big Win for Policyholders on CGL Coverage for Construction-Defect Claims and “Rip-and-Tear” Damages

    Arbitration is Waivable (Even If You Don’t Mean To)

    Home Repair Firms Sued for Fraud

    No Coverage for Collapse of Building

    Best Practices: Commercial Lockouts in Arizona

    New Jersey Rules that Forensic Lab Analysts Can’t be Forced to Testify

    Colorado SB 15-177 UPDATE: Senate Business, Labor, & Technology Committee Refers Construction Defect Reform Bill to Full Senate

    Worker’s Compensation Exclusivity Rule Gets “Trumped” by Indemnity Provision

    Can We Compel Insurers To Cover Construction Defect in General Liability Policies?

    Pensacola Bridge Halted Due to Alleged Construction Defects

    No Coverage Under Property Policy With Other Insurance and Loss Payment Provisions

    War-Torn Ukraine Looks to Europe’s Green Plans for Reconstruction Ideas

    Insurer Sued for Altering Policies after Claim

    Applying Mighty Midgets, NY Court Awards Legal Expenses to Insureds Which Defeated Insurer’s Coverage Claims

    California Governor Signs SB 496 Amending California’s Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Legal Fallout Begins Over Delayed Edmonton Bridges

    Cal/OSHA’s Toolbox Has Significantly Expanded: A Look At Senate Bill 606

    Breach of an Oral Contract and Unjust Enrichment and Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

    Texas Federal Court Finds Total Pollution Exclusion Does Not Foreclose a Duty to Defend Waterway Degradation Lawsuit

    Housing Starts Plunge by the Most in Four Years

    Hawaii Building Codes to Stay in State Control

    Banks Loosening U.S. Mortgage Standards: Chart of the Day

    2017 California Construction Law Update

    Congratulations to Wilke Fleury’s 2024 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!!

    New Addition To New Jersey Court Rules Impacts More Than Trial Practice

    Orange County Home Builder Dead at 93

    Subcontractor’s Claim against City Barred by City’s Compliance with Georgia Payment Bond Statute

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Jessica Garland as Its Newest Partner

    NYC Condo Skyscraper's Builder Wins a Round -- With a Catch

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Collapse Coverage Fails

    Feds Used Wire to Crack Las Vegas HOA Scam

    Colorado Drillers Show Sensitive Side to Woo Fracking Foes

    Board of Directors Guidance When Addressing Emergency Circumstances Occasioned by the COVID-19 Pandemic

    ABC Announces Disaster Relief Efforts and Resources Following Hurricane Milton

    Don’t Fall in Trap of Buying the Cheapest Insurance Policy as it May be Bad for Your Business Risks and Needs

    Are Modern Buildings Silently Killing Us?

    HP Unveils Cheaper, 3-D Printing System to Spur Sales

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

    Traub Lieberman Partner Rina Clemens Selected as a 2023 Florida Super Lawyers® Rising Star

    Meet Your Future Team Members: AI Agents

    Court of Appeal Holds Only “Named Insureds” May Sue for Bad Faith Under California FAIR Plan Policy

    Commonwealth Court Holds That Award of Attorney's Fees and Penalties is Mandatory Under the Procurement Code Upon a Finding of Bad Faith

    The Treasures Inside Notre Dame Cathedral

    Why Should Businesses Seek Legal Help Early On?
    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

    Risk Spotter Searches Internal Data Lakes For Loaded Words

    October 11, 2017 —
    A tech start-up recently announced that it has been granted seven U.S. patents for a system that applies a “deep learning” algorithm to examine corporate e-mail databases and flag those with message fields or attachments containing language that might increase risk for a company involved in a federal discrimination lawsuit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Sawyer, ENR
    Mr. Sawyer may be contacted at sawyert@enr.com

    'Perfect Storm' Caused Fractures at San Francisco Transit Hub

    January 08, 2019 —
    The underlying causes of the trouble at San Francisco’s 4.5-block-long Salesforce Transit Center are coming into focus. A combination of low fracture toughness deep inside thick steel plates, cracks present as a consequence of normal steel fabrication and stress levels from loads, which are a function of design, apparently caused brittle fractures in the bottom flanges of the center's twin built-up plate girders that span 80 ft across Fremont Street. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, ENR
    Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com

    Claim for Punitive Damages Based on Insurers' Alleged Bad Faith Business Practices Fails

    September 05, 2022 —
    The court granted the insurer's motion to dismiss the bad faith claim based upon allegations of a general business practice of acting recklessly toward an insured's rights under the policy. Sandpiper Isle Condo. Ass'n v. Empire Indem. Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114279 (M.D. Fla. June 28, 2022). Sandpiper suffered property damage from Hurricane Irma. Empire accepted the claim but there was disagreement on the value of the damage. An appraisal issued an award in favor of Sandpiper but Empire failed to pay the benefits for two years. 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

    Court Provides Guidance on ‘Pay-When-Paid’ Provisions in Construction Subcontracts

    July 13, 2020 —
    On April 17, the California Court of Appeal decided Crosno Construction, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty & Surety Company of America,1 effectively narrowing the scope of enforceable “pay-when-paid” provisions in construction subcontracts to the extent the subcontractor seeks recovery against a general contractor’s payment bond surety. Although the Crosno case involved a public works project, the rationale and holding should apply with equal force to private works projects. Basing the bulk of its decision on the Wm. R. Clarke Corp. v. Safeco Insurance Co.2 case, the court found that an open-ended “pay-when-paid” provision in a subcontract is not enforceable against a subcontractor that seeks to recover on a public works payment bond claim. This article discusses the Crosno decision and the implications for contractors on both sides of the contract moving forward. Brief Case Summary In Crosno, general contractor Clark Bros., Inc. contracted with the North Edwards Water District (the District) to build an arsenic removal water treatment plant. Clark hired steel storage tank subcontractor Crosno Construction, Inc. to build and coat two steel reservoir tanks. Clark and Crosno’s subcontract included a “pay-when-paid” provision, which stated that Clark would pay Crosno within a “reasonable time” of receiving payments from the owner, but “in no event less than the time Contractor and Subcontractor require to pursue to conclusion their legal remedies against Owner or other responsible party to obtain payment.” After Crosno completed its work, a dispute arose between Clark and the District, and the District withheld payment from Clark (including the monies earmarked for Clark’s subcontractors). Clark sued the District for payment, and Crosno filed its own action against Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America, the surety on Clark’s statutory public works payment bond, for recovery of the unpaid subcontract balance. Travelers rejected Crosno’s bond claim as premature, invoking the “pay-when-paid” subcontract language and pointing to Clark’s pending payment action against the District. The issue on appeal was whether the “pay-when-paid” provision in the subcontract blocked Crosno from recovering under the payment bond from Travelers while Clark’s lawsuit against the District was still pending. Reprinted courtesy of Ted R. Gropman, Pepper Hamilton LLP and Cindy J. Lee, Pepper Hamilton LLP Mr. Gropman may be contacted at ted.gropman@troutman.com Ms. Lee may be contacted at cindy.lee@troutman.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected for the 2024 Edition of Best Lawyers and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch

    September 11, 2023 —
    Best Lawyers and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch – 2024 Edition Best Lawyers 2024 Edition
    • Bruce Cleeland
    • Peter Dubrawski
    • Denis Moriarty
    • Theodore Penny
    Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch 2024 Edition
    • Frances Brower
    • Kyle DiNicola
    • Kristian Moriarty
    • Arezoo Jamshidi
    • Josh Maltzer
    • Philip McDermott
    • Patrick McIntyre
    • Annette Mijanovic
    • Kathleen Moriarty
    • Bethsaida Obra-White
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

    Halliburton to Pay $1.1 Billion to Settle Spill Lawsuits

    September 03, 2014 —
    Halliburton Co. agreed to pay $1.1 billion to settle a majority of lawsuits brought over its role in the largest offshore oil spill in U.S. history. The agreement is subject to court approval and includes legal fees, the Houston-based company said in a statement today. Halliburton was accused by spill victims and BP Plc of doing defective cementing work on the Macondo well before the April 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Halliburton blamed the incident on decisions by BP, which owned the well. The settlement comes as the judge overseeing oil-spill cases weighs fault for the disaster. An agreement now averts the company’s risk of a more costly judgment for some spill victims and removes much of the uncertainty that has plagued Halliburton for the past four years as investors waited to see the payout tally. With its biggest piece of liability resolved, Halliburton can refocus its attention on developing new oilfield technology that will help it boost profits worldwide. Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg journalists David Wethe, Margaret Cronin Fisk and Laurel Calkins Mr. Wethe may be contacted at dwethe@bloomberg.net; Ms. Fisk may be contacted at mcfisk@bloomberg.net; and Ms. Calkins may be contacted at lcalkins@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Central Wins Authority to Take Land for High-Speed Rail System

    October 03, 2022 —
    Move over luxury bus lines and quick flights. Central Texans should be on the lookout for bulldozers and train stops. On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of Texas held that Texas Central Railroad & Infrastructure, Inc. and related entities (collectively “Texas Central”) have eminent domain authority to acquire property for a proposed high-speed rail system between Dallas and Houston.[1] Specifically, the Court held that the corporation qualifies as an “interurban electric railway company” under the Texas Transportation Code. This ruling grants Texas Central the broad condemnation authority to procure land for the project. Texas Central has Statutory Authority to Take Land The plaintiff in the matter, a farm owner with property south of Dallas along the proposed path of the bullet train, challenged the companies power to condemn land. The landowner’s declaratory judgment action challenged Texas Central’s eminent-domain authority. Under Texas law, condemnation power must be conferred by the legislature, either expressly or by necessary implication.[2] Here, Texas Central was created for the purpose of constructing, acquiring, maintaining, or operating lines of electric railway between Texas municipalities. The Court found that Texas Central is engaged in activities to further that purpose. Therefore, the Court concluded, that although legislators did not contemplate high-speed railways at the time of drafting the Transportation Code, Texas Central nonetheless qualified as “interurban electric railway companies” under the statute. Reprinted courtesy of Barclay Nicholson, Sheppard Mullin and Erica Gibbons, Sheppard Mullin Mr. Nicholson may be contacted at bnicholson@sheppardmullin.com Ms. Gibbons may be contacted at egibbons@sheppardmullin.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Can Baltimore Get a Great Bridge?

    June 21, 2024 —
    When the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapsed after being struck by a massive container ship early in the morning on March 26, six highway workers were killed, a segment of the Baltimore Beltway was severed, the Port of Baltimore was largely shut down for two months — and the city lost an important piece of its identity. Before its destruction made it famous, the Key Bridge was not really a landmark like San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge or other charismatic spans that serve as symbols for their host cities. Built in 1977, it was a more utilitarian structure, with brawny trusswork that evoked the city’s industrial past, and an important job to do: It could carry the fuel-hauling tanker trucks that are prohibited from traveling through two nearby tunnels. Its visibility at the mouth of Baltimore’s harbor marked it as a prominent link between the modest communities that line the blue-collar waterfront and the glass apartment and office towers that now define the downtown skyline. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James S. Russell, Bloomberg