BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home 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
    Fairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction claims 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


    The Privilege Is All Mine: California Appellate Court Finds Law Firm Holds Attorney Work Product Privilege Applicable to Documents Created by Formerly Employed Attorney

    There Is No Sympathy If You Fail to Read Closely the Final Negotiated Construction Contract

    No Coverage for Sink Hole Loss

    Getting U.S to Zero Carbon Will Take a $2.5 Trillion Investment by 2030

    Don't Count On a Housing Slowdown to Improve Affordability

    Montana Significantly Revises Its Product Liability Laws

    Georgia Federal Court Says Fact Questions Exist As To Whether Nitrogen Is An “Irritant” or “Contaminant” As Used in Pollution Exclusion

    Happenings in and around the 2016 West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Reminder: Pay if Paid Not All Encompassing (but Could it be?)

    Brown and Caldwell Appoints Stigers as Design Chief Engineer

    Sixth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Under Kentucky Law

    Rights Afforded to Employees and Employers During Strikes

    Toronto Contractor Bondfield Wins Court Protection as Project Woes Mount

    Preliminary Notices: Common Avoidable But Fatal Mistakes

    Insolvency of Primary Carrier Does Not Invoke Excess Coverage

    Free Texas MCLE Seminar at BHA Houston June 13th

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    Do Municipal Gas Bans Slow the Clean Hydrogen Transition in Real Estate?

    Duty to Defend Broadly Applies to Entire Action; Insured Need Not Apportion Defense Costs, Says Maryland Appeals Court

    Construction Firm Settles Suit Over 2012 Calif. Wildfire

    Contractors with Ties to Trustees Reaped Benefits from LA Community College Modernization Program

    Daiwa House to Invest 150 Billion Yen in U.S. Rental Housing

    David McLain Recognized Among the 2021 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America© for Construction Law

    Arkansas: Avoiding the "Made Whole" Doctrine Through Dépeçage

    Yellowstone Park Aims for Quick Reopening After Floods

    Insurance and Your Roof

    Revisiting OSHA’s Controlling Employer Policy

    No Coverage for Defects in Subcontrator's Own Work

    Blackstone to Buy Chicago’s Willis Tower for $1.3 Billion

    Were Condos a Bad Idea?

    The Privacy Shield Is Gone: How Do I Now Move Data from the EU to the US

    Antitrust Walker Process Claims Not Covered Under Personal Injury Coverage for Malicious Prosecution

    Formaldehyde-Free Products for Homes

    Banks Rejected by U.S. High Court on Mortgage Securities Suits

    Was Jury Right in Negligent Construction Case?

    How Long does a Florida Condo Association Have to File a Construction Defect Claim?

    Arbitration Provisions Are Challenging To Circumvent

    Poor Record Keeping = Going to the Poor House (or, why project documentation matters)

    Ohio Supreme Court Case to Decide Whether or Not to Expand Insurance Coverage Under GC’s CGL Insurance Policies

    No Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Water Damage Claims

    Third Circuit Follows Pennsylvania Law - Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship Does Not Arise from an Occurrence

    A UK Bridge That Is a Lesson on How to Build Infrastructure

    Road to Record $199 Million Award Began With Hunch on Guardrails

    Be Mindful Accepting Payment When Amounts Owed Are In Dispute

    Florida’s Citizens Property Insurance May Be Immune From Bad Faith, But Is Not Immune From Consequential Damages

    Colorado Federal Court Confirms Consequetial Property Damage, But Finds No Coverage for Subcontractor

    Thank You to Virginia Super Lawyers

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Tender Is the Fight”

    When an Insurer Proceeds as Subrogee, Defendants Cannot Assert Contribution Claims Against the Insured
    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

    Maintenance Issues Ignite Arguments at Indiana School

    January 31, 2014 —
    Students and faculty at Roosevelt College and Career Academy in Gary, Indiana have dealt with the building’s burst pipes since last year, however, the recent cold temperatures have worsened the issue, “disrupting classes and causing costly repairs,” according to the Post-Tribune. EdisonLearning now runs the school: “The state tapped the private, for-profit education management company for Roosevelt after six straight years of anemically low test scores.” The “lengthy agreement” between EdisonLearning and the school district states holds the district “responsible for major repairs and to maintain the building just like the other schools it runs.” “The money we were provided is for academic purposes, not for the operation of the building,” said Michael Serpe, spokesman for EdisonLearning told the Post-Tribune. “If you rent a home and the heat doesn’t work, you contact the landlord.” “If the building is monitored properly, we could stop these problems but we have to get to them earlier,” said Charles Prewitt, the district’s director of building, grounds and maintenance, as reported by the Post-Tribune. Prewitt added that part of the maintenance problems is lack of access. He alleges that “EdisonLearning changed the locks and provided a swipe card for only one door.” “There always seem to be reasons that things don’t get fixed at Roosevelt when they get fixed everywhere else,” Serpe retorted. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Energy Company Covered for Business Interruption Losses Caused by Fire and Resulting in Town-Ordered Shutdown

    February 15, 2021 —
    In the case of NextSun Energy Littleton, LLC v. Acadia Ins. Co., the United States District Court of Massachusetts held that once direct physical damage from a covered peril causes a covered business interruption loss, any increase in the duration of such business interruption, due to the enforcement of an ordinance or law, extends the coverage period provided for lost income. The Court further held that a policy exclusion for business interruption due to the enforcement of any ordinance or law not in force at the time of the loss only applies when the ordinance or law itself, not the enforcement action that it authorizes, was not in force at the time of the loss. The case involved a solar panel company, NextSun Energy Littleton (NextSun), that operated solar panel arrays providing electricity to the town of Littleton, Massachusetts. Due to a fire, 88 of the solar panels were damaged, and the Town immediately issued a “red-tag” order halting all energy-generating activity pending a safety inspection. The plaintiff purchased insurance for its panels along with “Energy Generating Income” (EGI) coverage, from the defendant, Acadia Ins. Co. (Acadia). The EGI policy covered “direct physical loss or damage” to “renewable energy generating equipment” and also covered the actual loss of surplus power income incurred during the interruption period. However, it excluded interruption of energy-generating income “caused by the enforcement of any ordinance, law, or decree … not in force at the time of loss.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David G. Jordan, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Mr. Jordan may be contacted at DJordan@sdvlaw.com

    Chambers USA Names Peckar & Abramson to Band 1 Level in Construction Law; 29 P&A Lawyers Recognized as Leading Attorneys; Six Regions and Government Contracts Practice Recognized

    July 08, 2024 —
    Peckar & Abramson, P.C. (P&A) is pleased to announce that Chambers USA has recognized the firm at the Band 1 level nationwide in Construction Law. P&A stands alone in being named a Band 1 firm in Construction Law nationally and has been named in the position every year since Chambers USA began awarding the recognition. The firm was also recognized nationally in Government Contracts: Highly Regarded. P&A’s offices in New York, New Jersey, Florida, and Texas were ranked Band 1 in Construction Law, and the Firm’s California, Illinois, and Washington, DC practices were also highly rated. Additionally, 29 of P&A’s construction lawyers were named leading construction lawyers in their respective jurisdictions – more than any other construction law practice in the country. As demonstrated by its consistent Chambers USA Rankings, Peckar & Abramson has earned a national reputation for exceptional legal advocacy, representing construction industry members domestically and internationally. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Peckar & Abramson, P.C.

    MTA’S New Debarment Powers Pose an Existential Risk

    July 15, 2019 —
    The normal project and contractual risks faced by contractors, consultants and suppliers to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority are considerable. A new law and regulations mandating that the MTA debar contractors, consultants and suppliers for unexcused schedule and cost overruns creates a new and unfair existential risk. The new law, Public Authorities Law Section 1279-h, slipped into the New York State budget bill and passed without public comment, was enacted on April 12, 2019. Implementing regulations were issued on June 5, 2019, and mandate that the MTA debar contractors (defined to include consultants, vendors and suppliers) if they: (1) fail to achieve substantial completion of their contractual obligations within 10% of the adjusted contract time; or (2) present claims for additional compensation that are denied in an amount that exceeds the total adjusted contract amount by 10% or more.[1] To say that your business and your livelihood are at risk is not an overstatement. The MTA umbrella includes the New York City Transit Authority, MTA Capital Construction, Bridges & Tunnels, Long Island Railroad and Metro North, among others. A debarment by one of these authorities will lead to a debarment by all of them, and then to a debarment by all New York State agencies and authorities,[2] and possibly debarment across state lines. Public and major private owners, as part of their RFP and procurement processes, routinely inquire regarding a bidding contractor’s debarment history. The risk is to new contracts and, because the MTA has decided to give retroactive effect to the law and regulations, to contracts that are already ongoing (even though these risks could not have been considered, priced or agreed to by contractors or their sureties). Reprinted courtesy of Peckar & Abramson, P.C. attorneys Steven M. Charney, Gregory H. Chertoff and Paul Monte Mr. Charney may be contacted at scharney@pecklaw.com Mr. Chertoff may be contacted at gchertoff@pecklaw.com Mr. Monte may be contacted at pmonte@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    What to Know Before Building a Guesthouse

    September 17, 2014 —
    Those tiny, often very cute homes that people are adding on their properties seem to be popping up everywhere these days. The tiny buildings can provide extra rental income, offer a less-expensive housing option or provide a home for a relative. Accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, are second dwelling units created on a lot with an existing house or attached house. They’re often referred to as mother-in-law apartments, granny flats or studio apartments. As a homeowner, what are the legal issues to consider before building an ADU of your own? Different cities, different rules First off, different cities have different rules. Before plotting the space for your new tiny house, check with your city’s planning and zoning department to determine what those rules are. You can start online at accessorydwellings.org for a list of regulations by state and city. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cynthia Flash, Bloomberg

    Project Delivery Methods: A Bird’s-Eye View

    November 01, 2021 —
    For centuries the ability to construct sophisticated structures has been the yardstick for measuring civilizations. Naturally, as our knowledge and capacity to build has evolved and developed over the ages, the methods of project delivery have similarly progressed. From Design-Bid-Build to CM-at-Risk and Design-Build to Integrated Project Delivery, each method developed to fit a very specific need—but each carries its own set of inherent risks and rewards. In this article we explore key aspects and differences among the various delivery methods that are commonly used in today’s construction industry, and provide guidance related to the obligations and risk profiles of the parties involved. Ideally, contractors and construction managers may refer to the advice provided herein when determining whether a proposed delivery method properly fits the requirements of the project under consideration. Reprinted courtesy of Levi W. Barrett, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., Nathan A. Cohen, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Stewart Shurtleff, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Barrett may be contacted at lbarrett@pecklaw.com Mr. Cohen may be contacted at ncohen@pecklaw.com Mr. Shurtleff may be contacted at sshurtleff@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Structural Defects in Thousands of Bridges in America

    November 06, 2013 —
    Writing under the pseudonym “Babbage,” a technology blogger at The Economist takes note of some of the depressing facts about America’s infrastructure. Babbage notes that most of the United States’ transportation infrastructure was “built in a furious burst of road construction during the 1950s and 1960s.” Citing a report from the American Society of Civil Engineers, President Obama recently warned that “we’ve got about $2 trillion of deferred maintenance.” Some of this deferred maintenance can cost lives. The 2007 collapse of the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis killed 13 people and injured 145 others. The cost of fixing structural defects in the nation’s bridges was estimated at $32 billion in 2004. In that year, about 66,500 bridges were deemed structurally defective. Another 84,000 were termed “structurally obsolete,” meaning they could be used, but with restrictions on vehicle weight and speed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Allocating Covered and Uncovered Damages in Jury Verdict

    March 01, 2021 —
    When a liability insurer defends an insured from a third-party claim, they oftentimes do so under a reservation of rights. A reservation of rights letter is issued to the insured that identifies certain coverage exclusions or reservations relative to the insurance policy that may impact the insurer’s duty to indemnify the insured for damages. In other words, just because the insurer is defending its insured does not mean it will be indemnifying its insured for damages asserted in the third-party claim.
    Under Florida law, the party claiming insurance coverage has the initial burden to show that a settlement or judgment represents damages that fall within the coverage provisions of the insurance policy. An insured’s inability to allocate the amount of a judgment between covered and uncovered damages is therefore generally fatal to its indemnification claim. However, the burden of apportioning or allocating between covered and uncovered damages in a general jury verdict may be shifted to the insurer if the insurer did not adequately make known to the insured the availability and advisability of a special verdict. QBE Specialty Ins. Co. v. Scrap Inc., 806 Fed.Appx. 692, *695 (11th Cir. 2020) (internal citations omitted).
    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