• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expert
    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


    Texas Plans a Texas-Sized Response to Rising Seas

    County Officials Refute Resident’s Statement that Defect Repairs Improper

    ASCE Statement on House Passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Gets Construction Defect Bill to Committee

    New York Appellate Court Applies Broad Duty to Defend to Property Damage Case

    You Are Not A “Liar” Simply Because You Amend Your Complaint

    Return-to-Workplace Checklist: Considerations and Emerging Best Practices for Employers

    Contractors Should Be Optimistic that the Best Value Tradeoff Process Will Be Employed by Civilian Agencies

    Connecting Construction Project Information: Open Technology Databases Improve Project Communication, Collaboration and Visibility

    Word of the Day: “Contractor”

    Ruling Dealing with Constructive Changes, Constructive Suspension, and the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

    Agree to Use your “Professional Best"? You may Lose Insurance Coverage! (Law Note)

    Vaccine Mandate Confusion Continues – CMS Vaccine Mandate Restored in Some (But Not All) US States

    CGL Policy Covering Attorney’s Fees in Property Damage Claims

    Harmon Towers Demolition Still Uncertain

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (05/18/22)

    One More Thing Moving From California to Texas: Wildfire Risk

    New Jersey’s Proposed Construction Defect Law May Not Cover Everything

    The Practical Distinction Between Anticipatory Breach and Repudiation and How to Deal with Both on Construction Projects

    Pre-Judgment Interest Not Awarded Under Flood Policy

    Look Up And Look Out: Increased Antitrust Enforcement Of Horizontal No-Poach Agreements Signals Heightened Scrutiny Of Vertical Agreements May Be Next

    Netflix Plans $900M Facility At Former New Jersey Army Base

    What Does It Mean When a House Sells for $50 Million?

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2022 Southern California Rising Stars List

    Bond Principal Necessary on a Mechanic’s Lien Claim

    New Florida Bill Shortens Time for Construction-Defect Lawsuits

    Trump Administration Waives Border Wall Procurement Rules

    Cold Stress Safety and Protection

    Avoid the Headache – Submit the Sworn Proof of Loss to Property Insurer

    There’s an Unusual Thing Happening in the Housing Market

    Key Economic & Geopolitical Themes To Monitor In 2024

    How to Build a Water-Smart City

    Concerns About On-the-job Safety Persist

    Burg Simpson to Create Construction Defect Group

    Congress Addresses Homebuilding Credit Crunch

    Pool Contractor’s Assets Frozen over Construction Claims

    District Court's Ruling Affirmed in TCD v American Family Mutual Insurance Co.

    90 and 150: Two Numbers You Must Know

    $1.9 Trillion Stimulus: Five Things Employers Need to Know

    Sometimes You Get Away with Default (but don’t count on it)

    ASCE Statement On White House "Accelerating Infrastructure Summit"

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/2/24) – Increase in Commercial Property Vacancy Rates, Trouble for the Real Estate Market and Real Estate as a Long-Term Investment

    L.A. Mixes Grit With Glitz in Downtown Revamp: Cities

    Parol Evidence can be Used to Defeat Fraudulent Lien

    Illinois Town Sues over Construction Defects at Police Station

    Focusing on Design Elements of the 2014 World Cup Stadiums

    Federal District Court Declines Invitation to Set Scope of Appraisal

    New York’s Highest Court Reverses Lower Court Ruling That Imposed Erroneous Timeliness Requirement For Disclaimers of Coverage

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Collapse Coverage Fails

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces New Partner Bahaar Cadambi
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Ben L. Aderholt Joins Coats Rose Construction Litigation Group

    February 25, 2014 —
    According to a press release on PR Newswire, “Ben Aderholt has joined Coats Rose law firm's Houston office as Of Counsel.” Aderholt was a “past President of the Houston Bar Association, past Chair of the Mayor's Council and a Director of the State Bar of Texas.” Furthermore, he “has taught commercial law at the University of Houston” and “continues to be active on the Editorial Board of the Construction Law Journal.” Coats Rose has offices in Houston, Clear Lake, Dallas, Austin, San Antonio, and New Orleans. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Case Alert Update: SDV Case Tabbed as One of New York’s Top Three Cases to Watch

    January 10, 2018 —
    Argument before the Court of Appeals has now been scheduled for February 7, 2018, in Gilbane Building Co. v. St. Paul Insurance, with a long anticipated decision by New York’s highest court to be issued shortly thereafter. In its September 18, 2017 edition, Law360.com highlighted three major cases with significant implications on insurance coverage that will soon be decided by the New York Court of Appeals. Gilbane presents an opportunity for the Court to address the growing number of divergent decisions regarding the prerequisites for qualifying as an additional insured, as it considers an Appellate Division’s holding that a construction manager is not entitled to coverage as an additional insured under a contractor’s policy because the two companies did not enter into a direct contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard W. Brown, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Brown may be contacted at rwb@sdvlaw.com

    Code Changes Pave Way for CLT in Tall Buildings and Spark Flammability Debate

    May 13, 2019 —
    Although nothing new, the debate over which is better as a building material—wood or concrete—intensified in December following the preliminary approval of new codes for cross-laminated timber and mass timber in tall structures. The discussion among industry professionals has been less about CLT’s structural capabilities and more about its perceived flammability, with either side offering decidedly different perspectives. Comparatively new to the United States, CLT and mass timber products are constructed of several layers of pressed lumber board stacked in alternating directions. In December, the International Code Council released the unofficial voting results on several code change proposals, including passage of the entire package of 14 tall mass timber codes. The proposals were presented by the ICC’s Ad Hoc Committee on Tall Wood Buildings, comprised mostly of engineers, architects, building and fire code officials, fire service, materials and testing lab representatives. Reprinted courtesy of Sam Barnes, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Denies Bad Faith Claim in HO Policy Dispute

    September 24, 2014 —
    According to Patrick Nugent of Saul Ewing LLP’s article in JD Supra Business Advisor, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entered a summary judgment for the insurer on a statutory bad faith claim in a coverage dispute under a homeowner’s policy. The coverage dispute was over “the collapse of a wall in the plaintiffs’ home.” The Plaintiffs alleged that “the collapse resulted from excessive rainfall during a storm in March 2011.” However, Metropolitan Direct Property and Casualty Insurance Company’s engineer concluded that the collapse “resulted from long-term and on-going water infiltration attributable to poor maintenance.” Water damage had occurred a year prior to the collapse, but had not been repaired. In response, “Plaintiffs filed a complaint in Pennsylvania state court alleging breach of contract and statutory bad faith.” The court “determined that Metropolitan’s denial of benefits ‘was not only reasonable, but correct under the Policy language,’” and “ruled that the plaintiffs could not demonstrate that Metropolitan lacked a reasonable basis for denying their claim and entered summary judgment for Metropolitan on the plaintiffs’ bad faith claim.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court Dismisses Cross Claims Against Utility Based on Construction Anti-Indemnity Statute

    August 14, 2018 —
    When a plane crashed and several passengers and crew died or were injured, their representatives sued several defendants, including a nearby plant owner, Milliken & Company (“Plant Owner”), based on claims that transmission lines on Plant Owner’s property were too close to the runways, were too high, and encroached on the airport easements. Plant Owner cross claimed against utility owner, Georgia Power Company (“Utility”). Plant Owner’s claim was based on an easement it granted to Utility, which required Utility to indemnify it for any claims arising out of Utility’s construction or maintenance of the transmission lines. In defense, Utility argued that the easement’s indemnity provision violated Georgia’s construction anti-indemnity statute. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook, Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    Ceiling Collapse Attributed to Construction Defect

    May 19, 2011 —

    WSMV, Nashville reports that the ceiling collapse in a Franklin, Tennessee Kohl’s was attributed to a construction defect by fire officials. The officials noted that the ceiling was renovated at the time. No injuries were reported.

    The report notes that “inspectors were supposed to look at the renovations next week, but fire officials said that will have to be delayed until another time.”

    Read the full story…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    July 1, 2015 Statutory Changes Affecting Virginia Contractors and Subcontractors

    June 10, 2015 —
    As always seems to be the case, this year, as in others, the Virginia General Assembly has seen fit to “tweak” a few construction related statutes. All of these changes will go into effect on July 1, 2015. The big one, and one that I posted about a while back is the change to the Virginia mechanic’s lien statute to prohibit contractual waiver of lien, payment bond or claims for additional costs prior to the furnishing of labor or materials. This one is big because it relieves a bit of the angst in the pre-contract negotiations between subcontractors and general contractors. Another significant change, this one to the wording of Virginia Code 2.2-4309, found in House Bill 1628, clarifies the fact that this Virginia statute does not limit the amount a government contractor may claim or recover against a public body under a contract dispute. This is a big one considering the ruling in the Carnell Construction Corp. v. Danville Redevelopment Housing Authority LLC limiting such claims. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Gru Was Wrong About the Money: Court Concludes that Lender Owes Contractor “Contractually, Factually and Practically”

    November 07, 2022 —
    This weekend was all about The Rise of Gru. I love Gru so much that when my children ask for money, my best Gru-like voice belts back: “Now, I know there have been some rumors going around that the bank is no longer funding us….In terms of money, we have no money.” And that’s precisely what many lenders say on distressed projects when the owner fails to make final payment and the contractor looks to the bank for funding: “We have no money for you contractor!” In BCD Associates., LLC v. Crown Bank, CA No. N15c-11-062 (Super. Ct. Del, May 2, 2022), the trial court found that when a bank pays a contractor directly, it can create a legally binding relationship subject to the terms of the construction loan agreements with the owner. The project involved a $13m construction loan between the lender and the owner to renovate a hotel. The owner and contractor entered into an AIA Contract for the construction management services. During construction the contractor would submit payment applications to the lender, who would review and approve the invoices for payment. The lender then would pay 90% of the approved payment application and hold back the remaining 10% as retainage. The contractor was supposed to be paid the final retainage upon completion, which it did not receive in accordance with the terms of the AIA Contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Matthew DeVries, Burr & Forman LLP
    Mr. DeVries may be contacted at mdevries@burr.com