BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut window 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


    What if the "Your Work" Exclusion is Inapplicable? ISO Classification and Construction Defect Claims.

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Coverage for Post-Completion Defects

    Wall Failure Due to Construction Defect Says Insurer

    Rich NYC Suburbs Fight Housing Plan They Say Will ‘Destroy’ Them

    Florida’s Supreme Court Resolves Conflicting Appellate Court Decisions on Concurrent Causation

    Duty to Defend Sorted Between Two Insurers Based Upon Lease and Policies

    Time to Update Your Virginia Mechanic’s Lien Forms (July 1, 2019)

    Oracle Sues Procore, Claims Theft of Trade Secrets for ERP Integration

    Foreman in Fatal NYC Trench Collapse Gets Jail Sentence

    Rescission of Policy for Misrepresentation in Application Reversed

    Florida Adopts Daubert Standard for Expert Testimony

    “Professional Best Efforts” part 2– Reservation of Rights for Engineers who agree to “best” efforts? (law note)

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds that Subrogation Waiver Does Not Violate Statute Prohibiting Limitation on Tort Liability in Construction Contracts

    New York Appellate Court Holds Insurer’s Failure to Defend Does Not Constitute a “Reasonable Excuse” Required to Overturn Judgment

    Techniques for Resolving Construction Disputes

    Georgia Court of Appeals Holds Lay Witness Can Provide Opinion Testimony on the Value of a Property If the Witness Had an Opportunity to Form a Reasoned Opinion

    Condos Down in Denver Due to Construction Defect Litigation

    Will Claims By Contractors on Big Design-Build Projects Ever End?

    Apple to Open Steve Jobs-Inspired Ring-Shaped Campus in April

    ASCE Statement on Passage of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2022

    Insurance Policies and Indemnity Provisions Are Not the Same

    Congratulations to Woodland Hills Partner Patrick Au and Senior Associate Ava Vahdat on Their Successful Motion for Summary Judgment!

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Confirms Carrier Owes No Duty to Defend Against Claims for Faulty Workmanship

    Foreclosures Decreased Nationally in September

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- The Claim

    Don’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public Project

    Will Future Megacities Be a Marvel or a Mess? Look at New Delhi

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

    Court’s Ruling on SB800 “Surprising to Some”

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose in June at a Slower Pace

    Business Risk Exclusion Dooms Coverage for Construction Defect Claim

    Insurer Has No Obligation to Cover Arbitration Award in Construction Defect Case

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Abandons "Integrated Systems Analysis" for Determining Property Damage

    City of Birmingham Countersues Contractor for Incomplete Work

    Mind Over Matter: Court Finds Expert Opinion Based on NFPA 921 Reliable Despite Absence of Physical Testing

    You’re Only as Good as Those with Whom You Contract

    Federal District Court Declines Invitation to Set Scope of Appraisal

    Common Construction Contract Provisions: No-Damages-for-Delay Clause

    The Top 10 Changes to the AIA A201: What You Need to Know

    Skyline Bling: A $430 Million Hairpin Tower and Other Naked Bids for Tourism

    California Court of Appeal Makes Short Work Trial Court Order Preventing Party From Supplementing Experts

    Am I Still Covered Under the Title Insurance Policy?

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    Whose Employee is it Anyway?: Federal Court Finds No Coverage for Injured Subcontractor's Claim Based on Modified Employer's Liability Exclusion

    Texas Mechanic’s Lien Law Update: New Law Brings a Little Relief for Subcontractors and a Lot of Relief for Design Professionals

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

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

    A Court-Side Seat – Case Law Update (February 2022)

    Boston Catwalk Collapse Injures Three Workers

    Contractual “Pay if Paid” and “Pay when Paid” Clauses? What is a California Construction Subcontractor to Do?
    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. Drawing 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

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- The Claim

    January 12, 2015 —
    A new year brings with it promise and challenges. The promise is a relatively clean slate and the thought that 2015 will be a great year for construction professionals and those that assist them. The challenges come from the almost inevitable issues that can arise on a construction site with its many moving parts and enough potential pitfalls to make even the most optimistic construction attorney, contractor, subcontractor or supplier think that Murphy was an optimist. In order to assist with the potential challenges, this post will be the first in a series of “musings” on the best way to handle a payment dispute arising from a construction contract. This week’s post will discuss what the first steps should be once a payment dispute or claim arises. We’ll assume that you, as a construction contractor, have taken early advantage of the services of a construction lawyer and have carefully reviewed your contract for issues before signing that contract. 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

    How Well Do You Know the 2012 IECC Code?

    January 31, 2014 —
    The online publication Big Builder reports that “only a handful of states have implemented the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC),” according to the International Code Council. However, because of “the aggressive 2015 IECC” approaching, they “anticipate wider implementation of the 2012 IECC to snowball.” Big Builder challenges their readers to test their knowledge of “2012 IECC mandates” by taking their quiz. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Not Remotely Law as Usual: Don’t Settle for Delays – Settle at Remote Mediation

    May 25, 2020 —
    The emergence and rapid spread of COVID-19 has created extraordinary circumstances that have significantly impacted how we go about living, working and interacting with one another. The practice of law is no exception. While most cases have been postponed and some extended indefinitely, the issues and disputes that first triggered the litigation remain. In fact, the burdens created by social distancing and other responses to the COVID-19 outbreak have served to only increase these disputes and create an urgent need in some for quick resolution. In our previous article, we summarized some of the best practices that should be applied when taking and defending depositions in a remote, virtual setting. That technology can also offer the same benefits for alternative dispute resolutions. If planned properly, the use of technology allows remote mediations to be conducted as seamlessly as in-person mediations and, in some circumstances, affords additional benefits that can achieve the best possible resolution for all sides. This article summarizes the opportunities technology has created by which parties can attempt to resolve their disputes through alternative dispute resolution methods, even in a time of social distancing. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys Victor J. Zarrilli, Robert G. Devine and Michael W. Horner Mr. Zarrilli may be contacted at zarrilliv@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Devine may be contacted at deviner@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Horner may be contacted at hornerm@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Washington Trial Court Narrows Definition of First Party Claimant, Clarifies Available Causes of Action in Commercial Property Loss Context

    January 04, 2021 —
    The law in the State of Washington, albeit clear on issues regarding first party claimants, was recently challenged in the matter of Eye Associates Northwest, P.C. v. Sedgwick et. al. However, despite this challenge of first impression, the court limited the application of the term “first party claimant” (a term of art akin to “insured”) based upon the wording of a loss payee clause, as well as taking into consideration and harmonizing the wording of the leases, other provisions in the policy regarding tenant improvements, and the simple fact that Eye Associates was not named in the policy whatsoever. In Eye Associates, the plaintiff leased office space in a high-rise medical office building, insured by three separate insurance companies. A water loss caused damage to the plaintiff’s leased space, and the plaintiff brought suit against the owner of the building, its insurers, the property manager, a third-party administrator (TPA), and two individual adjusters assigned to inspect and adjust the water loss claim. Reprinted courtesy of Kathleen A. Nelson, Lewis Brisbois and Jonathan R. Missen, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Nelson may be contacted at Kathleen.Nelson@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Missen may be contacted at Jonathan.Missen@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Conflict of Interest Accusations may Spark Lawsuit Against City and City Manager

    February 07, 2014 —
    Casper, Wyoming Councilman Craig Hedquist—who is also owner of Hedquist Construction—has been “accused of violating state and local conflict-of-interest laws,” according to the Star-Tribune. In response, Hedquist “is threatening a lawsuit against City Manager John Patterson, the city of Casper and ‘possibly others,’ according to a letter obtained by the Star-Tribune.” The letter, which was sent to City Attorney William Luben by Hedquist attorney John Robinson, “demands the city preserve, from Aug. 1, 2012, on, all records of communication and consultation with attorneys and investigators, along with minutes, notes, recordings, executive sessions and digital data regarding Hedquist and Hedquist Construction.” City Manager John Patterson told the Star-Tribune that “he was unaware of the letter and didn't know what the lawsuit might be about.” Hedquist maintains that there was never a conflict of interest: “The general and expected practice for the Casper City Council members is to not vote on matters in which a council member may have a personal interest and record this recusal in the public record,” Hedquist said, as reported by the Star-Tribune. “I have done this on all contract matters regarding Hedquist Construction.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    FEMA Administrator Slams Failures to Prepare, Evacuate Before Storms

    October 23, 2018 —
    Federal Emergency Management Agency Administrator Brock Long angrily criticized the failure of citizens to heed evacuation warnings and leaders to better prepare for natural disasters such as Hurricane Michael. "It's frustrating to us because we repeat this same cycle over and over again," Long said during a press briefing Friday at FEMA headquarters in Washington. "If you want to live in these areas, you've got to do it in a more resilient fashion." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Flavelle, Bloomberg

    California Fire Lawyers File Suit Against PG&E on Behalf of More Than 50 Wildfire Victims

    November 15, 2017 —
    Digital Journal reports that the California fire lawyers are comprised of four law firms, Baron & Budd, Singleton Law Firm, Dixon Diab & Chambers LLP, and Thornes Bartolotta McGuire. These firms filed suit against PG&E (Pacific Gas and Electric Company) on October 27th alleging that the brutal wildfires that swept through Northern California started when electrical infrastructure encountered vegetation. According to Digital Journal, more than 50 plaintiffs are being represented in this case who endured damages including “wrongful death, personal injuries, damage to or destruction of property, loss of cherished possessions, medical bills, evacuation expenses and lost wages.” John Fiske, an attorney at Baron & Budd stated, “through our team’s investigation to date, we believe that PG&E may have played a role in causing these fires.” Holding PG&E accountable for the 40 people killed, 8,400 structures destroyed, and 210,000 acres burned is their goal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Private Project Payment Bonds and Pay if Paid in Virginia

    January 05, 2017 —
    One of the many items of construction law that has always been about as clear as mud has been the interaction between a contractual pay if paid clause and payment bond claims either under the Federal Miller Act or Virginia’s “Little Miller Act.” While properly drafted contractual “pay if paid” clauses are enforceable by their terms in Virginia, what has always been less clear is whether a bonding company can take advantage of such a clause when defending a payment bond claim. As always, these questions are very fact specific both under the Federal Act and the state statute. I wish that this post would answer this question, but alas, it will not. A recent case from the City of Roanoke, Virginia looked at the interaction between a payment bond and a “condition precedent” pay if paid clause as it relates to a private project that is not subject to the Little Miller Act. In the case of IES Commercial, Inc v The Hanover Insurance Company, the Court examined a contractual clause between Thor Construction and IES Commercial in tandem with the bond language between Hanover Insurance Company and Thor as it related to a surprisingly familiar scenario. The general facts are these: IES performed, Thor demanded payment from the owner for the work that IES performed and the owner, for reasons that are left unstated in the opinion, refused to pay. IES sues Hanover pursuant to the payment bond and Hanover moves to dismiss the suit because Thor hadn’t been paid by the owner and therefore Hanover could take advantage of the pay if paid language. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com