BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofing
    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


    Noteworthy Construction Defect Cases for 1st Qtr 2014

    Making the Construction Dispute Resolution Process More Efficient and Less Expensive, Part 2

    Landmark Towers Association, Inc. v. UMB Bank, N.A. or: One Bad Apple Spoils the Whole Bunch

    A Murder in Honduras Reveals the Dark Side of Clean Energy

    LEEDigation: A Different Take

    Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case Triggered by Complaint's Allegations

    China Home Glut May Worsen as Developers Avoid Price Drop

    Hail Drives Construction Spending in Amarillo

    When it Comes to COVID Emergency Regulations, Have a Plan

    Construction Worker Falls to His Death at Kyle Field

    Insurer Must Pay Portions of Arbitration Award Related to Faulty Workmanship

    Filling Out the Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    Quick Note: Mitigation of Damages in Contract Cases

    There Are Consequences to Executed Documents Such as the Accord and Satisfaction Defense

    Congress Passes, President Signs Sweeping Energy Measure In Spend Bill

    Earth Movement Exclusion Bars Coverage

    XL Group Pairs with America Contractor’s Insurance Group to Improve Quality of Construction

    NYC Supertall Tower Condo Board Sues Over Alleged Construction, Design 'Defects'

    Natural Disasters’ Impact on Construction in the United States

    SFAA Commends Congress for Maintaining Current Bonding Protection Levels in National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)

    Your “Independent Contractor” Clause Just Got a Little Less Relevant

    Judge Gives Cintra Bid Protest of $9B Md. P3 Project Award New Life

    Development in CBF Green Building Case in Maryland

    Dozens Missing in LA as High Winds Threaten to Spark More Fires

    Nine Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch 2021

    Marlena Ellis Makes The Lawyers of Color Hot List of 2022

    The Results are in, CEO/Founding Partner Nicole Whyte is Elected to OCBA’s 2024 Board of Directors!

    What The U.S. Can Learn from China to Bring Its Buildings to New Heights

    How Fort Lauderdale Recovered a Phished $1.2M Police HQ Project Payment

    Design Firm Settles over Construction Defect Claim

    Pre-Covid Construction Contracts Unworkable as Costs Surge, Webuild Says

    Jury's Verdict for Loss Caused by Collapse Overturned

    Difficulty in Defending Rental Supplier’s Claim Under Credit Application

    Ten Years After Colorado’s Adverse Possession Amendment: a brief look backwards and forwards

    Brenner Base Tunnelers Conquer Peaks and Valleys in the Alps

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    Modification: Exceptions to Privette Doctrine Do Not Apply Where There is No Evidence a General Contractor Affirmatively Contributed to the Injuries of an Independent Contractor’s Employee

    Beyond the Statute: How the Colorado Court Upheld Modified Accrual in Construction Contracts

    Tighter Requirements and a New Penalty for Owners of Vacant or Abandoned Storefronts in San Francisco

    No Duty to Defend Additional Insured for Construction Defects

    Affirmed: Nationwide Acted in Bad Faith by Failing to Settle Within Limits

    What is Bad Faith?

    Contractor Underpaid Workers, Pocketed the Difference

    Social Distancing and the Impact on Service of Process Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic

    Employee Exclusion Bars Coverage for Wrongful Death of Subcontractor's Employee

    Does Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code Impact Your Construction Project?

    Supreme Court’s New York Harbor Case Isn’t a ‘Sopranos’ Episode

    First-Time Buyers Shut Out of Expanding U.S. Home Supply

    Unlicensed Contractor Shoots for the Stars . . . Sputters on Takeoff

    Nevada Governor Signs Construction Defect Reform Bill
    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

    New York Office Secures Appellate Win in Labor Law 240(1) Fall in Basement Accident Case

    March 20, 2023 —
    New York, N.Y. (March 14, 2023) – New York Appellate Partner Nicholas P. Hurzeler and Managing Partner Gregory S. Katz recently prevailed when the New York Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the dismissal of a Labor Law 240(1) claim involving an accident that occurred in the basement of a house under construction. Balfe v. Graham, ___ AD3d ___ (2d Dept. 2023), decided March 8, 2023. In this matter, the plaintiff was installing ductwork in the basement of a house that had been stripped down to its foundation when he stepped backwards into an open hole that had been dug out of a concrete floor to accommodate the installation of an ejector pump. The lower court dismissed the plaintiff’s claim based on Labor Law 240(1), and he appealed. The plaintiff argued that he fell into an unprotected opening that should have been covered or barricaded. He further claimed the accident qualifies as a typical “falling worker” case within the scope of Labor Law 240(1), citing the depth of the hole needed to accommodate the ejector pump, and the size of the pump. Under the case law, a worker who falls into an uncovered opening on a construction site will typically be covered by Labor Law 240(1). Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas P. Hurzeler, Lewis Brisbois and Gregory S. Katz, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Katz may be contacted at Greg.Katz@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Hurzeler may be contacted at Nicholas.Hurzeler@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/10/24) – Strong Construction Investment in Data Centers, Increase Use of Proptech in Hospitality and Effects of Remote-Work on Housing Market

    August 05, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, renters stay in their units longer, GenAI change how commercial real estate operates, and banks continue high exposure due to commercial real estate.
    • Strong investor interest, particularly in opportunistic and value-add segments, signals a strong market for construction firms specializing in high-yield projects. (Sebastian Obando, Construction Dive)
    • A growing number of renters are staying in their units for longer periods of time than they did a decade ago with over one-third of U.S. renters have lived in the same apartment for more than five years. (Mary Salmonsen, Multifamily Dive)
    • Several U.S. regional and mid-sized banks continue to face the squeeze from high exposure to the commercial real estate sector that has been shaken by higher-for-longer interest rates and empty office buildings. (Reuters)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    One-Upmanship by Contractors In Prevailing Wage Decision Leads to a Bad Result for All . . . Perhaps

    July 19, 2021 —
    Fights between contractors can be a bit like Mad magazine’s “Spy vs. Spy” with each side trying to out outwit and one-up one another. The next case, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement v. Built Pacific, Inc., Case No. D076601 (March 15, 2021), is a case in point. The Built Pacific Case Built Pacific, Inc. was a subcontractor to Austin Sundt Joint Venture on a public works project known as the San Diego Regional Airport Authority Project. In 2015, following an investigation by the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE), the DLSE issued a Civil Wage Penalty Assessment of $119,319.76 based on Built Pacific’s failure to pay prevailing wages. The DLSE also named Austin Sundt in the Civil Wage Assessment pursuant to Labor Code 1743 which makes contractors and subcontractors jointly and severally liable for wage violations. As a result of the Civil Wage Assessment, Austin Sundt withheld approximately $70,000 in retention from Built Pacific. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Beyond Inverse Condemnation in Wildfire Litigation: An Oregon Jury Finds Utility Liable for Negligence, Trespass and Nuisance

    July 10, 2023 —
    On June 10, 2023, a jury in Portland, Oregon found PacifiCorp and Pacific Power (collectively, “PacifiCorp”) liable for negligence, trespass, and nuisance based on a series of four wildfires that occurred during Labor Day weekend in 2020. PacifiCorp prevailed against the plaintiffs on the claim of inverse condemnation. With respect to the tort-based claims, the jury awarded approximately $72 million in compensatory damages to 17 plaintiffs. The jury later found PacifiCorp liable for $18 million in punitive damages, or one quarter of the compensatory damages that the jury awarded to the 17 plaintiffs. The jury’s liability findings apply to a broader class of owners, whose damages will need to be individually proven in a yet-to-be defined second phase of proceedings. Post-verdict motion practice and appeals may affect the jury’s findings. Reprinted courtesy of Marisa Miller, Sheppard Mullin, John Yacovelle, Sheppard Mullin and Kazim Naqvi, Sheppard Mullin Ms. Miller may be contacted at mmiller@sheppardmullin.com Mr. Yacovelle may be contacted at jyacovelle@sheppardmullin.com Mr. Naqvi may be contacted at knaqvi@sheppardmullin.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Killer Subcontract Provisions

    January 20, 2020 —
    We are frequently requested by subcontractor clients to review the subcontract that has been prepared by the prime contractor, before our client signs it. While no two agreements are identical, there are a number of problematic contract provisions that appear in many agreements. Here is a list of ten such provisions (and their variations) that are potential “deal breakers”:
    1. PAY IF/WHEN PAID (e.g. “Contractor shall have the right to exhaust all legal remedies, including appeals, prior to having an obligation to pay Subcontractor.”) “Pay-if-paid” provisions (“Receipt of payment from Owner shall be a condition precedent to Contractor’s duty to pay Subcontractor”) are illegal in California. However, the only legal limit on “Pay-When-Paid” provisions is that payment must be made “within a reasonable time.” The example above, as written, essentially affords the prime contractor a period of several years following completion of the project before that contractor has an independent duty to pay its subcontractors – not a “reasonable” amount of time, to those waiting to be paid. A compromise is to provide a time limit, such as 6 months or one year following substantial completion of the project.
    2. CROSS-PROJECT SET-OFF (e.g. “In the event of disputes or default by Subcontractor, Contractor shall have the right to withhold sums due Subcontractor on this Project and on any other project on which Subcontractor is performing work for Contractor.”) Such provisions are problematic and likely unenforceable, as they potentially bar subcontractors’ lien rights. Such provisions should be deleted.
    3. CONTRACTOR/SUBCONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR DESIGN QUALITY (e.g. “Subcontractor warrants that the Work shall comply with all applicable laws, codes, statutes, standards, and ordinances.”) Unless a subcontractor’s scope of work expressly includes design work, this provision should either be deleted or modified, with the addition of the following phrase: “Subcontractor shall not be responsible for conformance of the design of its work to applicable laws, codes, statutes, standards, and ordinances.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick McNamara, Porter Law Group
    Mr. McNamara may be contacted at pmcnamara@porterlaw.com

    The Partial Building Collapse of the 12-Story Florida Condo

    June 28, 2021 —
    On Thursday, the Champlain Towers South Condo building in Surfside, Florida suffered a partial collapse. As of Monday morning, the official death toll stood at 10 with 151 persons unaccounted for, according to the Miami Herald. NPR uncovered minutes from a November 15th, 2018 Chaplain Tower South Condominium Association board meeting where the inspector made assurances that “the building was ‘in very good shape.’” However, “an engineering report from five weeks earlier” alleged “that failed waterproofing in a concrete structural slab needed to be replaced ‘in the near future.’” Daniella Levine Cava, the Miami-Dade County mayor, told reporters that “officials ‘knew nothing’ about the report.” The New York Times on Sunday reported that experts looking at video footage of the incident believe that the cause is centered on a location “in the lowest part of the condominium complex — possibly in or below the underground parking garage — where an initial failure could have set off a structural avalanche.” The cause of the incident remains unclear, however. This “progressive collapse” could have been caused by a number of different factors “including design flaws or the less robust construction allowed under the building codes of four decades ago.” A witness, according to the New York Times, saw a hole appear near the pool: “Michael Stratton said his wife, Cassie Stratton, who is missing, was on the phone with him and was looking out through the window of her fourth-floor unit when, she told him, the hole appeared. After that, the call cut off.” Possible reasons for the “initial failure at the bottom of the building could include a problem with the deep, reinforced concrete pilings on which the building sits — perhaps set off by an unknown void or a sinkhole below — which then compromised the lower columns. Or the steel reinforcing the columns in the parking garage or first few floors could have been so corroded that they somehow gave way on their own. Or the building itself could have been poorly designed, built with substandard concrete or steel — or simply with insufficient steel at critical points.” "It will take many months to complete the analysis necessary to understand the cause or causes of the collapse,” Eric Ruzicka, a partner at the international law firm Dorsey & Whitney and a commercial litigator who specializes in the area of construction and real estate litigation, stated in a media release. “Often, information that comes out early can be very misleading or misunderstood unless the full context of the information is known.” Ruzicka explained that Florida’s statues of limitations and repose may be relevant. “These statutes will likely eliminate the liability of those involved in the original development, design and construction of the building. Rather, victims and their families' recovery will be limited to those involved in the building's maintenance and those assessing the condition of the building over the past four years.” Miami and Sunny Isles Beach have announced they will audit older structures in their communities “ahead of the mandatory 40-year recertification,” the Miami Herald reported. Read the full story (Miami Herald)... Read the full story (NPR)... Read the full story (NY Times)... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Breach Of Duty of Good Faith And Fair Dealing Packaged With Contract Disputes Act Claim

    March 27, 2023 —
    An interesting opinion on a motion to dismiss came out of the United States Court of Federal Claims dealing with the claim that the government breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing in administering the prime contract. The contractor’s argument was that the government breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing by denying the contractor’s claim under the Contract Disputes Act (CDA). This was a creative claim and argument that deserves consideration because it tied in the contracting officer’s denial of the CDA claim for additional money with a breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. In this case, Aries Construction Corp. v. U.S., 2023 WL 2146598 (Fed. Cl. 2023), a prime contractor was hired for a water pipeline construction project. The contractor encountered unexpected difficult site conditions that required additional equipment and labor. The contractor informed the contracting officer and alleged it was instructed to proceed with the additional equipment and labor. The contractor submitted a claim under the CDA but the contracting officer denied the claim. The contractor pursued the claim in the United States Court of Federal Claims arguing the government breached the contract and, of interest, breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing. The government moved to dismiss the breach of good faith and fair dealing claim arguing that besides failing to state a cause of action the Court of Federal Claims had no jurisdiction because the breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing was not properly presented to the contracting officer under the CDA. The Court of Federal Claims denied the government’s motion. 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

    Mich. AG Says Straits of Mackinac Tunnel Deal Unconstitutional

    June 03, 2019 —
    Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel (D) has declared unconstitutional a late-2018 law that would create an authority to oversee construction of a key tunnel. The tunnel would house an oil-and-gas pipeline under the Straits of Mackinac. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeff Yoders, ENR
    Mr. Yoders may be contacted at yodersj@enr.com