BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut 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


    Chinese Demand Rush for Australia Homes to Stay, Ausin Says

    Wildfire Is Efficient Proximate Cause of Moisture Reaching Expansive Soils Under Residence

    Bill would expand multi-year construction and procurement authority in Georgia

    Appraisal Award for Damaged Roof Tiles Challenged

    KB Homes Sues Condo Buyers over Alleged Cybersquatting and Hacking

    Orlando Commercial Construction Permits Double in Value

    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    French Government Fines National Architects' Group $1.6M Over Fee-Fixing

    Leaky Wells Spur Call for Stricter Rules on Gas Drilling

    Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

    Skanska Will Work With Florida on Barge-Caused Damage to Pensacola Bay Bridge

    Billionaire Behind Victoria’s Secret Built His Version of the American Heartland

    Rhode Island Sues 13 Industry Firms Over Flawed Interstate Bridge

    St. Petersburg Florida’s Tallest Condo Tower Allegedly Riddled with Construction Defects

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2023 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Unlicensed Contractors Caught in a Sting Operation

    Rebuilding the West: Construction Considerations After the Smoke Clears

    Bert L. Howe & Associates Brings Professional Development Series to Their Houston Office

    The Prompt Payment Act Obligation is Not Triggered When the Owner Holds Less Retention from the General Contractor

    Colorado Requires Builders to Accommodate High-Efficiency Devices in New Homes

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

    ADP Says Payrolls at Companies in U.S. Increase 200,000

    New Jersey Appeals Court Ruled Suits Stand Despite HOA Bypassing Bylaw

    Boston Tower Project to Create 450 Jobs

    California Construction Bill Dies in Committee

    Contractors Admit Involvement in Kickbacks

    Subcontractors Eye 2022 with Guarded Optimism

    Expansion of Statutes of Limitations and Repose in K-12 and Municipal Construction Contracts

    NYC Design Firm Executives Plead Guilty in Pay-to-Play Scheme

    Don’t Waive Your Right to Arbitrate (Unless You Want To!)

    Circumstances In Which Design Professional Has Construction Lien Rights

    Manhattan Condos at Half Price Reshape New York’s Harlem

    Key Takeaways For Employers in the Aftermath of the Supreme Court’s Halt to OSHA’s Vax/Testing Mandate

    Changes to Pennsylvania Mechanic’s Lien Code

    Jury's Verdict for Loss Caused by Collapse Overturned

    North Carolina, Tennessee Prepare to Start Repairing Helene-damaged Interstates

    Keller Group Fires Two Executives in Suspected Australia Profits Reporting Fraud

    Attorneys’ Fees Are Available in Arizona Eviction Actions

    Significant Ruling in PFAS Litigation Could Impact Insurance Coverage

    “Time Is Money!” In Construction and This Is Why There Is a Liquidated Damages Provision

    Construction Law Alert: Builder’s Alternative Pre-litigation Procedures Upheld Over Strong Opposition

    Freddie Mac Eases Mortgage Rules to Limit Putbacks

    California Supreme Court Finds that When it Comes to Intentional Interference Claims, Public Works Projects are Just Different, Special Even

    Ireland Said to Plan Home Loans Limits to Prevent Bubble

    Don MacGregor of Bert L. Howe & Associates Awarded Silver Star Award at WCC Construction Defect Seminar

    The Activist Group Suing the Suburbs for Bigger Buildings

    Policing Those Subcontractors: It Might Take Extra Effort To Be An Additional Insured

    The Difference Between Routine Document Destruction and Spoliation

    Drones Give Inspectors a Closer Look at Bridges

    Contractual Assumption of Liability Does Not Bar Coverage
    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

    Just When You Thought General Contractors Were Necessary Parties. . .

    November 30, 2020 —
    Did you think that a subcontractor had to name a general contractor in a mechanic’s lien suit? I did. Did you think that nothing about this changed in the case where a Virginia mechanic’s lien was “bonded off” pursuant to Va. Code Section 43-71? I did. Well, a recent Virginia Supreme Court case, Synchronized Construction Services Inc. v. Prav Lodging LLC, seems to at least create some doubt as to whether the a general contractor is a “necessary” party to a lawsuit by a subcontractor in the case where a bond is posted for release of a mechanic’s lien. In Prav Lodging, the facts were a bit unusual. The day after the mechanic’s lien was recorded by Synchronized Construction Services, Inc. (“Synchronized”) the construction manager, Paris Development Group, the construction manager and de facto general contractor, went out of business. Despite this fact, and after the lien was bonded off, Synchronized sued to enforce the lien and for breach of contract against Paris. The wrinkle here is that Synchronized was unable to serve several defendants, among them Paris, within one year of filing suit as required by Virginia statute. In the Circuit Court, the financing bank moved to dismiss the suit for failure to serve necessary parties. The Circuit Court dismissed the breach of contract count but refused to dismiss the mechanic’s lien count on this basis. 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

    Manhattan to Add Most Office Space Since ’90 Over 3 Years

    June 18, 2014 —
    Manhattan is poised to add the most office space in any three-year period since 1990 as projects including buildings at Hudson Yards and the World Trade Center site are completed, the New York Building Congress said. The borough, home to the largest U.S. office market, probably will add 9 million square feet (836,000 square meters) of office space at nine development sites from last year through 2015, according to the organization, which promotes construction in the New York City area. An additional 10 million square feet at six buildings is likely to become available from 2016 through 2018, the group said in a statement today. “It’s a vote of confidence in the market, which we think is long overdue,” Richard T. Anderson, president of the New York Building Congress, said in a telephone interview. “As a global center of finance and office-related functions, the city needs to regenerate its office space.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jonathan LaMantia, Bloomberg
    Mr. LaMantia may be contacted at jlamantia1@bloomberg.net

    Hundreds of Coronavirus Coverage Cases Await Determination on Consolidation

    September 21, 2020 —
    On July 30, 2020, the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation (JPML) heard oral argument on the potential consolidation of all federal cases involving business interruption coverage relating to coronavirus and shut-down orders. A decision will be rendered in the near future. Meanwhile, many cases are on hold, waiting for a determination on consolidation. One such case is Pigment Inc. v. Hartford Fin. Servs. Group, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133230 (S.D. Cal. July 27, 2020), where the court granted a stay pending a decision by the JPML. The case is a class action based on denial of coverage under business interruption insurance. Plaintiff's case alleged a bad faith denial that risked the permanent closure of its business due to unexpected temporary shutdowns from the COVID-19 pandemic. Plaintiff sought a stay pending the decision of the JPML. The court considered the possible damage which could result from granting a stay, the hardship which a party could suffer in being required to go forward, and the orderly course of justice measured by the simplifying or complicating of issues, proof, and questions of law which could be expected to result from a stay. 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

    Why Is It So Hard to Kill This Freeway?

    April 18, 2023 —
    Keith Pete remembers what Claiborne Avenue was like before the interstate. As a child in the early 1960s, the native New Orleanian would come to Claiborne Avenue with his dad to buy chickens from the local grocers. Sometimes, as a treat, father and son would get hamburgers on French rolls and pineapple juice and picnic on the neutral ground — the avenue’s wide, grassy median, which was thick with live oak trees and azaleas. “People used to sit and enjoy the weather,” Pete, 68, recalls. “There was beautiful grass all the way down. It was gorgeous.” At the time, Claiborne Avenue coursed through the heart of New Orleans’ Tremé neighborhood and a major center of Black commerce and culture. “It was safe; it was thriving,” Pete said. “It was mostly wiped out.” In 1966, workers began removing the avenue’s oaks and driving the pilings that would transform 18 blocks of the tree-lined boulevard into a viaduct carrying Interstate 10. While plans for a Robert Moses-designed waterfront freeway through the French Quarter were halted in 1969 after intense resistance from historic preservationists, the state- and city-backed Claiborne Expressway proceeded. The elevated highway and its tangle of off-ramps destroyed some 500 homes and 326 Black-owned businesses. The once-thriving corridor became a dark, noisy netherworld, unsafe for pedestrians and unhealthy for anyone who breathes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Benjamin Schneider, Bloomberg

    Federal Contractors – Double Check the Terms of Your Contract Before Performing Ordered Changes

    July 08, 2019 —
    As federal contractors may be aware, the general rule when performing a contract for the federal government is that only the contracting officer (“CO”) can bind the government. Often, the CO delegates responsibility to a contracting officer’s representative (“COR”). While in some cases a COR may be able to bind the federal government, the contract may limit that ability exclusively to the CO. Important for our clients, it is the responsibility of the contractor to determine whether the COR can legally bind the federal government when ordering changes to the scope of work. [1] This is true even when a COR possesses apparent authority to order changes to the work, and when the project is almost exclusively overseen by COR’s. [2] A recent case highlights the dangers of a contractor relying on the orders of a COR when performing work outside the scope of a contract. In Baistar Mechanical Inc., a contractor was awarded a maintenance and snow removal contract with the federal government. The contract expressly stated that only the CO had contracting authority regarding additional or changed work. [3] However, Baistar, the contractor, argued it was directed by the contracting officer’s representatives to perform work outside of the contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jonathan Schirmer, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Schirmer may be contacted at jonathan.schirmer@acslawyers.com

    County Sovereign Immunity Invokes Change-Order Ordinance

    December 20, 2017 —
    The recent case of Fulton County v. Soco Contracting Company, Inc. addresses two very interesting questions for local government attorneys. First, can a county ordinance bolster a defense of sovereign immunity against a contractor’s claims? Second, can a county waive sovereign immunity by failing to respond to Requests for Admission? Facts: County hired Contractor to construct a facility near the airport. The contract provided that change orders must satisfy a county ordinance, which required approval by the Board of Commissioners. But in emergency situations, the County Manager could approve change orders, as long as the contractor executes a proposed modification and the purchasing agent approves it. The project suffered substantial delays, which Contractor attributed to weather, design delays, delays by the County in providing decisions on changes, and delays in obtaining permits during the federal government’s shutdown. As a result of these issues, Contractor comes County changed the scope of the contract. Contractor asserted claims against County for the delays and the changes to the work. The appellate opinion addresses the change order claims. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lizbeth Dison, Autry Hall & Cook, LLP

    Hunton Andrews Kurth’s Insurance Recovery Practice, Partners Larry Bracken and Mike Levine Receive Band 1 Honors from Chambers USA in Georgia

    June 14, 2021 —
    The 2021 Chambers and Partners rankings for Georgia insurance recovery practices and lawyers are out and Hunton Andrews Kurth has received top honors. The rankings include Hunton Andrews Kurth’s Insurance Recovery practice and partners Lawrence J. Bracken II and Michael S. Levine, with all receiving Band 1 honors – the organization’s top-tier ranking. “The top-level ranking of our practice in Georgia, and the work that Larry and Mike bring to our clients in Georgia, specifically, is emblematic of the work our team is doing nationwide,” said Insurance Recovery Practice Head, Walter J. Andrews. “The Firm and I could not be more proud,” he added. Chambers and Partners is an independent research company operating across more than 200 jurisdictions delivering detailed rankings and insight into the world’s leading lawyers. Its rankings are viewed as one of the most credible and reliable industry benchmarks. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Walter J. Andrews, Hunton Andrews Kurth
    Mr. Andrews may be contacted at wandrews@HuntonAK.com

    Environmental Roundup – May 2019

    July 09, 2019 —
    Federal Courts of Appeal Dam Claims Collapse On May 7, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit decided the case of Navelski, et al. v. International Paper Company. After a major storm, a dam constructed by International Paper to serve the operations of its local paper mill, was breached, releasing millions of gallons of water into a nearby creek resulting in the flooding of many homes located downstream from the creek. IP was sued by the homeowners in a class action, alleging negligence and strict liability for conducting an abnormally dangerous activity. The trial court dismissed the strict liability claim, and the jury found IP was not negligent in the operation of the dam. On appeal, the court upheld the jury verdict, agreeing that the verdict was supported by the evidence heard by the jury. The appeals court also agreed that the strict liability claim was properly dismissed as a matter of law because the operation of this dam was not an abnormally dangerous activity under Florida law. The plaintiffs had also argued that the jury should not have been advised that the home county, Escambia County, has applied for a FEMA grant which apparently made the case that some of the downstream homes were naturally prone to flooding. A redacted version of the application was allowed to be shown to the jury, but the appeals court held that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated that the court ruling was prejudicial. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com