BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design 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


    Boston Contractor Faces More OSHA Penalties

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

    Texas Supreme Court to Review Eight-Corners Duty-to-Defend Rule

    Contractors: Beware the Subordination Clause

    Illinois Couple Files Suit Against Home Builder

    BUILD Act Inching Closer To Reality

    Increases in U.S. Office Rents Led by San Jose and Dallas

    Creative Avenue for Judgment Creditor to Collect a Judgment

    Port Authority Reaches Deal on Silverstein 3 World Trade

    End of an Era: Los Angeles County Superior Court Closes the Personal Injury Hub

    Eleventh Circuit Set to Hear Challenge to Florida Law Barring Foreign Citizens From Buying Real Property

    Nebraska Joins the Ranks—No CGL Coverage for Faulty Work

    More Musings From the Mediation Trenches

    Court Throws Wet Blanket On Prime Contractor's Attorneys' Fees Request In Prompt Payment Case

    South Carolina Couple Must Arbitrate Construction Defect Claim

    The Most Expensive Travel Construction Flops

    Renovate or Demolish Milwaukee’s Historic City Hall?

    Safe Harbors- not just for Sailors anymore (or, why advance planning can prevent claims of defective plans & specs) (law note)

    New Home for the Aged Suffers Construction Defects

    Partners Jeremy S. Macklin and Mark F. Wolfe Secure Seventh Circuit Win for Insurer Client in Late Notice Dispute

    Third Circuit Holds That Duty to Indemnify "Follows" Duty to Defend

    A Primer on Insurance for Construction Projects

    Design Immunity Does Not Shield Public Entity From Claim That it Failed to Warn of a Dangerous Condition

    Timber Prices Likely to Keep Rising

    Slowing Home Sales Show U.S. Market Lacks Momentum: Economy

    Arbitration Denied: Third Appellate District Holds Arbitration Clause Procedurally and Substantively Unconscionable

    Warranty of Workmanship and Habitability Cannot Be Disclaimed or Waived Under Any Circumstance

    Amazon HQ2 Puts Concrete on an Embodied Carbon Diet

    Architect Blamed for Crumbling Public School Playground

    Competitive Bidding Statute: When it Applies and When it Does Not

    California Supreme Court Addresses “Good Faith” Construction Disputes Under Prompt Payment Laws

    Former Zurich Executive to Head Willis North America Construction Insurance Group

    Florida trigger

    Federal Court Requires Auto Liability Carrier to Cover Suit Involving Independent Contractor Despite “Employee Exclusion”

    It’s a Jolly Time of the Year: 5 Tips for Dealing with Construction Labor Issues During the Holidays

    Indemnity: What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You!

    What Should Business Owners Do If a Customer Won’t Pay

    Pennsylvania: Searching Questions Ahead of Oral Argument in Domtar

    Association Insurance Company v. Carbondale Glen Lot E-8, LLC: Federal Court Reaffirms That There Is No Duty to Defend or Indemnify A Builder For Defective Construction Work

    Understanding the Details: Suing Architects and Engineers Can Get Technical

    Construction Injuries Under the Privette Doctrine. An Electrifying, but Perhaps Not Particularly Shocking, Story . . .

    ABC Safety Report: Construction Companies Can Be Nearly 6 Times Safer Than the Industry Average Through Best Practices

    BWB&O’s Los Angeles Partner Eileen Gaisford and Associate Kelsey Kohnen Win a Motion for Terminating Sanctions!

    First Trump Agenda Nuggets Hit Construction

    Noncumulation Clause Limits Coverage to One Occurrence

    Insurer’s Confession Of Judgment Through Post-Lawsuit Payment

    Delays and Suspension of the Work Under Fixed Price Government Contract

    Erasing Any Doubt: Arizona FED Actions Do Not Accrue Until Formal Demand for Possession is Tendered

    2023 Executive Insights From Leaders in Construction Law

    Contractor Gets Green Light to Fix Two Fractured Girders at Salesforce Transit Center
    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

    2015-2016 California Labor & Employment Laws Affecting Construction Industry

    October 28, 2015 —
    Earlier this month, California Governor Jerry Brown signed dozens of bills that affect employers. Many of these bills have special significance to the construction industry. Here is a brief review: Assembly Bill 219 – Prevailing Wages for Concrete Delivery on Public Projects AB 219 continues California’s aggressive expansion of prevailing wages. This bill expands the definition of “public works” for purposes of state prevailing wage law to include the hauling or delivery of ready-mixed concrete for a public works project. Previously, delivery drivers hired by a material supplier were exempted from the prevailing wage. Before AB 219, labor law made a distinction between “suppliers” and “contractors.” Thus, ready-mixed concrete was held to be a finished product, and treated differently from a product that was assembled on site. The new law eliminates this distinction. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel attorneys Steven M. Cvitanovic, David A. Harris and Kristen Lee Price Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com Mr. Harris may be contacted at dharris@hbblaw.com Ms. Price may be contacted at kprice@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Jersey Legislation Would Bar Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause in Homeowners' Policies

    June 08, 2020 —
    A bill prohibiting the use of anti-concurrent causation clauses in homeowners' insurance policies has been introduced before the New Jersey legislature. The bill is here. Under an anti-concurrent causation clause, the policy bars coverage if two perils (i.e., wind and water damage) contribute to a loss and one peril is excluded from coverage. For example, wind damage alone may be covered, while water damage is excluded. If both wind and water contribute to the loss, regardless of the degree to which each peril contributes, the anti-concurrent causation clause would bar coverage. New Jersey S 217 states,
    An insurer authorized to transact the business of homeowners insurance in this state shall not exclude coverage in a homeowners insurance policy for loss or damage caused by a peril insured against under the terms of the policy on the grounds that the loss or damage occurred concurrently or in any sequence with a peril not insured against under the terms of the policy. Any such provision to exclude coverage shall be void and unenforceable.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Chinese Telecommunications Ban to Expand to Federally Funded Contracts Effective November 12, 2020

    September 21, 2020 —
    In our previous alert, we discussed the Federal Government’s Ban (the “Ban”) on certain Chinese covered telecommunications and video surveillance equipment and services in federal government contracts. The ban prohibits government contractors and subcontractors from supplying to the Federal Government or using in their own internal operations certain telecommunications or video surveillance equipment or services produced by Huawei Technologies Company, ZTE Corporation, Hytera Communications Corporation, Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Company, and Dahua Technology Company, as well as their subsidiaries and affiliates. The Ban currently applies to companies contracting directly with the Federal Government. Soon, however, the Ban – at least in part – will expand to contractors and subcontractors who are awarded certain federally assisted contracts and subcontracts. On August 13, 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) published Final Guidance revising its grants and agreements regulations (2 CFR Part 200) to prohibit recipients and subrecipients from using loan or grant funds to purchase or obtain covered telecommunications and video surveillance equipment or services. Effective November 12, 2020, recipients and subrecipients are prohibited from obligating or expending loan or grant funds to:
    1. Procure or obtain;
    2. Extend or renew a contract to procure or obtain; or
    3. Enter into a contract (or extend or renew a contract) to procure or obtain equipment, services, or systems that use covered telecommunications equipment or services as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical technology as part of any system.
    Reprinted courtesy of Lori Ann Lange, Peckar & Abramson and Sabah Petrov, Peckar & Abramson Ms. Lange may be contacted at llange@pecklaw.com Ms. Petrov may be contacted at spetrov@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Toronto Skyscraper With $1.2 Billion of Debt Has Been Put in Receivership

    November 16, 2023 —
    A landmark condominium project in one of Toronto’s ritziest neighborhoods has been put into receivership after construction delays and cost overruns. Construction of the 85-story tower will be taken over by a court-appointed receiver after its owners, developer Sam Mizrahi and investor Jenny Coco, defaulted on part of the project’s nearly C$1.7 billion in debt ($1.2 billion), according to a Wednesday order from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Two funds run by South Korea-based IGIS Asset Management Co. applied for the receivership. Another IGIS fund will extend at least another C$315 million to continue work on the project, court documents said. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ari Altstedter, Bloomberg

    WARN Act Exceptions in Response to COVID-19

    April 13, 2020 —
    California’s WARN Act requires employers of certain covered establishments to provide 60 days written notice of any mass layoff, relocation, or termination. This notice is required to be given to employees and the Employment Development Department. An employer’s failure to comply with this requirement can result in being held liable for back-pay and value of the cost of any benefits to which the affected employee(s) may have been entitled for up to a maximum of 60 days. Due to the COVID-19 crisis and emergency circumstances in which many employers now find themselves, the Governor of California has issued Executive Order N-31-20, which temporarily suspends the 60-days advance notice requirement and the provisions that impose liability and penalties on an employer for the duration of the COVID-19 emergency. Reprinted courtesy of Yvette Davis, Haight Brown & Bonesteel and Kyle R. DiNicola, Haight Brown & Bonesteel Ms. Davis may be contacted at ydavis@hbblaw.com Mr. DiNicola may be contacted at kdinicola@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    United States Supreme Court Upholds Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements

    May 24, 2018 —
    On May 21, 2018, the United States Supreme Court held, in a 5-4 decision, that arbitration agreements which mandate individualized resolution of claims (as opposed to class or collective resolution) are enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"). In doing so, the Court rejected the argument that such "class action waivers" violate Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA"), which generally protects employees' rights to act "in concert" with one another. The Court addressed a split created by decisions from three Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal: Epic Systems Corp v. Lewis (7th Circuit), Ernst & Young v. Morris (9th Circuit) and National Labor Relations Board v. Murphy Oil USA (5th Circuit). All three cases involved employees who sought to bring collective or class actions under the Fair Labor Standards Act (the "FLSA"), and their respective employers who sought to enforce pre-dispute arbitration agreements which waived such collective actions and mandated "one-on-one" arbitration of wage disputes. In support of their position, the employees argued that the class and collective action waivers were illegal because they violated the NLRA's prohibition on barring employees from engaging in "concerted activities." Reprinted courtesy of Payne & Fears LLP attorneys Amy R. Patton, Jason I. Bluver and Jeffrey K. Brown Ms. Patton may be contacted at arp@paynefears.com Mr. Bluver may be contacted at jib@paynefears.com Mr. Brown may be contacted at jkb@paynefears.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Found In South Dakota

    October 11, 2017 —
    The South Dakota Supreme Court found coverage in favor of the general contractor who was sued for alleged faulty workmanship. Owners Ins. Co. v. Tibke Constr., Inc., 2017 S.D. LEXIS 106 (S.D. Aug. 23, 2017). The homeowners hired Tibke Construction Inc. as general contractor to build a new house. Tibke hired Jerry's Excavating Inc. as a subcontractor to prepare the soil and perform excavation work. After the project was completed, the homeowners sued Tibke and Jerry's Excavating for negligent construction and breach of contract. The homeowners alleged that Jerry's Excavating failed to conduct soil-compaction testing before construction. They alleged that the home was built upon highly expansive soils, resulting in damage to the home by "excessive settlement, cracking, structural unsoundness and other damages." The complaint further alleged that damages existed only on portions of the home not worked on by Jerry's Excavating. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Construction Workers Unearth Bones

    June 28, 2011 —

    While digging for a new steam line at Eastern Michigan University, workers unearthed some old bones. Experts have yet to determine if the bones are human or animal, however Walter Kraft, the EMU vice president of communications, noted that a handle also unearthed might have come from a casket. Cindy Heflin, reporting in AnnArbor.com notes that until 1900 a Catholic cemetery was located in the area. Although the bodies were relocated, these may have been left behind.

    Read the full story…

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