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


    Contractors Prepare for a Strong 2021 Despite Unpredictability

    Prevailing Payment Bond Surety Entitled to Statutory Attorneys’ Fees Even if Defended by Principal

    Construction Recovery Still Soft in New Hampshire

    New York Appellate Division Reverses Denial of Landlord’s Additional Insured Tender

    Barratt Said to Suspend Staff as Contract Probe Continues

    Hudson Tunnel Plan Shows Sign of Life as U.S. Speeds Review

    New York’s Second Department Holds That Carrier Must Pay Judgment Obtained by Plaintiff as Carrier Did Not Meet Burden to Prove Willful Non-Cooperation

    How BIM Can Serve Building Owners

    Is It Time to Revisit Construction Defects in Kentucky?

    Floating Crane on Job in NYC's East River Has a Storied Past of Cold War Intrigue

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Preserves Possibility of Coverage

    Coverage for Construction Defects Barred By Exclusion j (5)

    Washington State Enacts Law Restricting Non-Compete Agreements

    Foreign Entry into the United States Construction, Infrastructure and PPP Markets

    John Aho: Engineer Pushed for Seismic Safety in Alaska Ahead of 2018 Earthquake

    Dreyer v. Am. Natl. Prop. & Cas. Co. Or: Do Not Enter into Nunn-Agreements for Injuries that Occurred After Expiration of the Subject Insurance Policy

    Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal Secured by Lewis Brisbois in Coverage Dispute Involving San Francisco 49ers’ Levi Stadium

    What Happens When Dave Chappelle Buys Up Your Town

    Red Wings Owner, Needing Hockey-Arena Neighborhood, Builds One

    Florida “get to” costs do not constitute damages because of “property damage”

    FEMA Offers to Review Hurricane Sandy Claims

    Federal Magistrate Judge Recommends Rescission of Policies

    E-Commerce Logistics Test Limits of Tilt-Up Construction

    Whitney Stefko Named to ENR’s Top Young Professionals, formerly ENR’s Top 20 Under 40, in California

    Federal Court Opinion Has Huge Impact on the Construction Industry

    Eleventh Circuit Rules That Insurer Must Defend Contractor Despite “Your Work” Exclusion, Where Damage Timing Unclear

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2022 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    Insurers Dispute Sharing of Defense in Construction Defect Case

    Federal Courts Keep Chipping Away at the CDC Eviction Moratorium

    House of Digital Twins

    The Regulations on the Trump Administration's Chopping Block

    Poor Pleading Leads to Loss of Claim for Trespass Due to Relation-Back Doctrine, Statute of Limitations

    Recovering Unabsorbed Home Office Overhead Due to Delay

    Chicago Aldermen Tell Casino Bidders: This Is a Union Town

    The Godfather of Solar Predicts Its Future

    What You Need to Know About CARB’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel Regulations

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/02/22) – Flexible Workspaces, Sustainable Infrastructure, & Construction Tech

    New Orleans Drainage System Recognized as Historic Civil Engineering Landmark

    Natural Hydrogen May Seem New in Town, but It’s Been Here All Along

    New Jersey Construction Worker Sentenced for Home Repair Fraud

    Save A Legal Fee? Sometimes You Better Talk With Your Construction Attorney

    Loss of Use From Allegedly Improper Drainage System Triggers Defense Under CGL Policy

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says South Carolina High Court

    Additional Insured Coverage Confirmed

    Alarm Cries Wolf in California Case Involving Privette Doctrine

    Blurred Lines: New York Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Privileged Documents in Connection with Pre-Denial Communications Prepared by Insurer's Coverage Counsel

    Did Deutsche Make a Deal with the Wrong Homeowner?

    Federal Judge Strikes Down CDC’s COVID-19 Eviction Moratorium

    A Court-Side Seat: Citizen Suits, “Facility” Management and Some Nuance for Your Hazard Ranking

    Safety, Technology Combine to Change the Construction Conversation
    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

    It Has Started: Supply-Chain, Warehouse and Retail Workers of Essential Businesses Are Filing Suit

    June 22, 2020 —
    Supply-chain businesses that are appropriately characterized as “essential” have remained open for the delivery of critical supplies while everyone else has been told to close up shop and stay home. Now essential-business employees are contracting COVID-19 and filing suit. Following up on our earlier piece — “Is a Violation of a COVID-19 Order the Basis For Civil Liability?” — it is important to recognize that government directives, oftentimes couched as “recommendations,” can come to define what it means to provide a reasonably safe workplace that protects employees from COVID-19. While common law negligence defenses consider the reasonableness of conduct, these directives will likely become the standard. The cases that have been filed are overwhelmingly premised upon the timeless negligence construct. The negligence construct, simply put, imposes a duty to act as a reasonable person would under the circumstances. Nonetheless, while the negligence construct lives in the ordinary world of “reasonableness,” infection-control guidance lives in the rapidly developing world of the science of COVID-19. Guidance on seemingly basic questions, such as the methods of transmission (e.g., personal contact, mucus membrane only, airborne transmission) or even the virus’s shelf life on different surfaces, of particular interest packaging and material handling equipment, can change by the day. All of this provides challenges for the supply-side business looking to protect its workforce. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys James Burger, Robert Devine and Douglas Weck Mr. Burger may be contacted at burgerj@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Devine may be contacted at deviner@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Weck may be contacted at weckd@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Alabama Court Upholds Late Notice Disclaimer

    August 20, 2018 —
    In its recent decision in Evanston Ins. Co. v. Yeager Painting, LLC, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130316 (N.D. Ala. Aug. 3, 2018), the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama had occasion to consider an insured’s reporting obligations under a general liability policy. Evanston’s insured, Yeager, was hired to sandblast water tanks, and in turn, subcontracted out the work to a third party. On May 19, 2012, an employee of the subcontractor was severely injured in connection with a work-site accident. It is not entirely clear when Yeager provided notice of occurrence to Evanston, although Evanston advised by letter dated January 30, 2013 that it would be further investigating the matter subject to a reservation of rights. Evanston subsequently denied coverage by letter dated April 10, 2013, the disclaimer based on a subcontractor exclusion on the policy. Notably, Evanston’s letter advised that Yeager should immediately contact Evanston if any facts changed or if it had any additional information concerning the matter. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Margolies, Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
    Mr. Margolies may be contacted at bmargolies@tlsslaw.com

    Why Insurers and Their Attorneys Need to Pay Close Attention to Their Discovery Burden in Washington

    March 28, 2018 —
    As previously reported in this blog, Washington case law generally affords insureds a broad right to the discovery of claim file materials, including information that should be protected from disclosure by attorney/client privilege or the work product doctrine. Cedell v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Washington, 176 Wn.2d 686, 295 P. 3d 239 (2013). The discovery pitfalls created by Cedell were on full display in a recent Western District of Washington decision that granted an insured’s motion to compel production of work product and attorney/client communications from an insurer’s claims file. Westridge Townhomes Owners Ass’n v. Great American Assur. Co., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27960 (W.D. Wash. February 21, 2018) The background facts are somewhat unclear, but it appears that the insured in this case made a claim for coverage under two insurance policies and there was an allegedly inadequate response from the insurers. The insured sued its insurers for coverage in 2016 before the insurers issued a declination of coverage letter. The two insurers retained the same attorney to represent them, and that attorney subsequently wrote a declination letter on behalf of the insurers, which was sent to the insured on April 12, 2017. The insured ultimately sought production of the entire claim file, which had not been split between the claim investigation and the coverage litigation. The insurers argued, among other things, that the insured was not entitled to anything after the litigation commenced in 2016 on work product grounds, and certainly was not entitled to communications with their attorney. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Neal Philip, Gordon, Reese, Scully, & Mansukhani
    Mr. Philip may be contacted at nphilip@grsm.com

    It’s All a Matter of [Statutory] Construction: Supreme Court Narrowly Interprets the Good Faith Dispute Exception to Prompt Payment Requirements in United Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron & Steel Co.

    May 30, 2018 —
    On May 14, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in United Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron & Steel Co., No. S231549, slip. op. (Cal. Sup. Ct. May 14, 2018). In it, the Court narrowly construed the “good faith” exception to the general rule that a direct contractor must make retention payments to its subcontractors within 10 days of receiving any retention payment. The exception provides that “[i]f a good faith dispute exists between the direct contractor and a subcontractor, the direct contractor may withhold from the retention to the subcontractor an amount not in excess of 150 percent of the estimated value of the disputed amount.” Cal. Civ. Code section 8814(c). Reprinted courtesy of Erinn Contreras, Sheppard Mullin and Joy O. Siu, Sheppard Mullin Ms. Contreras may be contacted at econtreras@sheppardmullin.com Ms. Siu may be contacted at jsiu@sheppardmullin.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Risk of A Fixed Price Contract Is The Market

    August 03, 2022 —
    When performing work on a fixed price or unit, there is risk that is being assumed on your end. One risk is the market. You are ultimately banking on the fact that the market is not going to make your fixed prices unprofitable. That’s not an unforeseeable occurrence because the market shifts and that shift can have a negative ripple effect. In a recent case out of the Federal Circuit, U.S. Aeroteam, Inc. v. U.S., 2022 WL 243176 (Fed.Cir. 2022), this market risk played a role in a fixed price contract. Here, a contractor was hired by the federal government to produce ground support trailers. A key component of these trailers was a running gear. The contractor relied on a vendor for these running gears. Due to financial difficulties, the vendor had to raise its unit price for the running gears. Based on the increased price, the contractor elected to manufacture the running gears itself. The contractor asked the government if this was ok and the government approved the request. Once the contractor started manufacturing these running gears, it had an “awe” moment – the manufacturing costs were higher than anticipated. The contractor submitted a request for equitable adjustment which the government denied. The Contractor than sued the government raising three arguments to support its entitlement to additional costs: (1) constructive change; (2) cardinal change; and (3) commercial impracticability. The contractor lost on all arguments. It probably should have lost on all arguments. 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

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: LESLIE KING O'NEAL

    January 29, 2024 —
    Company: JAMS Office Location: Orlando, FL Email: lkoneal1117@gmail.com Website: https://www.jamsadr.com/oneal/ Law School: University of Florida, J.D. (1977) Types of ADR services offered: Mediation, arbitration, neutral evaluation Geographic area served: Nationwide Q: Describe the path you took to becoming an ADR neutral. A: Florida was one of the first states to allow judges to send civil cases to mediation. When I was an advocate, nearly all my cases went to mediation at least once—sometimes more than once! I became a firm believer in the value of mediation and other ADR methods. I became a Florida certified circuit court mediator in 2021 and I joined JAMS in 2022, after retiring as in-house counsel with Brasfield & Gorrie, a large commercial general contractor. I am also an adjunct professor at Pepperdine Law School, teaching arbitration theory and practice in its master of dispute resolution and master of laws programs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Marissa L. Downs, Laurie & Brennan, LLP
    Ms. Downs may be contacted at mdowns@lauriebrennan.com

    Yes, Indeedy. Competitive Bidding Not Required for School District Lease-Leasebacks

    October 01, 2014 —
    Remember when you discovered that the tooth fairy wasn’t real? It was kind of a bummer on one hand learning that it wasn’t a fairy that magically appeared to swap your tooth for cold hard cash, but rather your mom or, visual horrors, dad. At the same time, it was, to your nearly-halfway-to-a-decade-on-this-planet-wizened-six-year-old mind, confirmation of what you had a sneaking suspicion was the case in any event. And, so it is with the next case. Lease-Leasebacks In California, most public school construction projects are built using the traditional design-bid-build project delivery method in which a design professional designs the project, the project is put out for competitive bid and the selected contractor builds the project. But not all school construction projects are built this way. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@kmtg.com

    What is the Implied Warranty of Habitability?

    October 02, 2018 —
    The implied warranty of habitability plays an important role in our understanding of the relationship between tenant and landlord; it helps to define the parameters and requirements of contracts between tenant and the owner. In doing so, the implied warranty of habitability is meant to ensure that a home or rental unit is in a livable condition. In this article, we’ll take a look at what the warranty of habitability is, how it developed, and what differentiates the warranty of habitability from the previous landlord-tenant law. Background of the Implied Warranty of Habitability When someone hears about the warranty of habitability, their first question is usually “what is the implied warranty of habitability?” This is understandable, given that the implied warranty of habitability isn’t exactly well known. Most renters have probably never heard of the implied warranty of habitability, despite the fact that it provides important safeguards for tenant’s rights. In order to gain a better understanding of what the implied warranty of habitability is, it is helpful to understand what state of affairs existed prior to the adoption of an implied warranty of habitability. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara