BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield 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


    No Damages for Delay May Not Be Enforceable in Virginia

    Contractor Gets Benched After Failing to Pay Jury Fees

    Courthouse Reporter Series: The Travails of Statutory Construction...Defining “Labor” under the Miller Act

    Insurance Client Alert: Mere Mailing of Policy and Renewals Into California is Not Sufficient Basis for Jurisdiction Over Bad Faith Lawsuit

    Couple Sues Attorney over Construction Defect Case, Loses

    Fifth Circuit Holds Insurer Owes Duty to Defend Latent Condition Claim That Caused Fire Damage to Property Years After Construction Work

    17 Snell & Wilmer Attorneys Ranked In The 2019 Legal Elite Edition Of Nevada Business Magazine

    Be Careful How You Terminate: Terminating for Convenience May Limit Your Future Rights

    Cross-Office Team Secures Defense Verdict in Favor of Client in Asbestos Case

    United States Supreme Court Backtracks on Recent Trajectory Away from Assertions of General Jurisdiction in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern

    Insured's Remand of Bad Faith Action Granted

    Insurance Policies Broadly Defining “Suits” May Prompt an Insurer’s Duty to Defend and Indemnify During the Chapter 558 Pre-Suit Notice Process

    Michigan Court Waives Goodbye to Subrogation Claims, Except as to Gross Negligence

    Equipment Costs? It’s a Steal!

    Insured Cannot Sue to Challenge Binding Appraisal Decision

    CSLB’s Military Application Assistance Program

    Caterpillar Said to Be Focus of Senate Overseas Tax Probe

    Construction Defect Bill Removed from Committee Calendar

    Texas Supreme Court Holds that Invoking Appraisal Provision and Paying Appraisal Amount Does Not Insulate an Insurer from Damages Under the Texas Prompt Payment of Claims Act

    "Your Work" Exclusion Bars Coverage for Contractor's Faulty Workmanship

    Wilke Fleury ranked in Best Lawyers’ Best Law Firms!!

    The 2021 Top 50 Construction Law Firms™

    Insurer Motion to Intervene in Underlying Case Denied

    Sales Pickup Shows Healing U.S. Real Estate Market

    Architect Sues over Bidding Procedure

    Illinois Appellate Court Finds Insurer Estopped From Denying Coverage Where Declaratory Judgment Suit Filed Too Late

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    Insurance Client Alert: Denial of Summary Judgment Does Not Automatically Establish Duty to Defend

    Navigating Abandonment of a Construction Project

    Construction Bidding for Success

    Investigators Eye Fiber Optic Work in Deadly Wisconsin Explosion

    Carwash Prosecutors Seek $1.6 Billion From Brazil Builders

    Granting of Lodestar Multiplier in Coverage Case Affirmed

    DE Confirms Robust D&O Protection Despite Company Demise

    Once Again: Contract Terms Matter

    Broken Buildings: Legal Rights and Remedies in the Wake of a Collapse

    Massachusetts Judge Holds That Insurer Breached Its Duty To Defend Lawsuit After Chemical Spill

    Insured's Complaint for Breach of Contract and Bad Faith Adequately Pleads Consequential Damages

    Court Upholds Plan to Eliminate Vehicles from Balboa Park Complex

    Detroit Showed What ‘Build Back Better’ Can Look Like

    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

    Housing Inventory Might be Distorted by Pocket Listings

    Illinois Appellate Court Finds That Damages in Excess of Policy Limits Do Not Trigger Right to Independent Counsel

    Are Construction Defect Laws a Factor in Millennials Home Buying Decisions?

    David M. McLain named Law Week Colorado’s 2015 Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants

    Contractor Prevailing Against Subcontractor On Common Law Indemnity Claim

    City of Aspen v. Burlingame Ranch II Condominium Owners Association: Clarifying the Application of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act

    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

    Gordie Howe Bridge Project Team Looks for a Third Period Comeback

    11th Circuit Affirms Bad Faith Judgement Against Primary Insurer
    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

    Planes, Trains and Prevailing Wages. Ok, No Planes, But Trains and Prevailing Wages Yes

    October 25, 2021 —
    The California Supreme Court doesn’t often delve into construction-related issues, but this year we’ve got two cases, both related to the payment of prevailing wages on California public works projects. The first, Mendoza v. Fonseca McElroy Grinding Co., Inc. (2021) 11 Cal.5th 1118 which we discussed in our last blog post, concerned whether mobilization work qualifies as a “public work” and in turn requires the payment of prevailing wages. On the same day that the Supreme Court issued its decision in Mendoza, it issued a decision in Busker v. Wabtec Corporation, et al. , Case No. S251135 (August 16, 2021). This is the equivalent of being struck by lightning twice. In Busker, the California Supreme Court considered whether on a public transportation project “field work” (e.g., building and outfitting radio towers on land adjacent to train tracks) and “onboard work” (e.g., installing electronic components on train cars and locomotives”) requires the payment of prevailing wage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    New Home Sales Slip, but Still Strong

    December 30, 2013 —
    Economists say that prospective home buyers have adjusted to the increase in mortgage rates, according to AZCentral.com. And while there was a 2.1 percent drop in new home sales in November, estimates for the preceding months were revised upwards, beating estimates. October new home sales were at the highest they had been since the beginning of the recession. The Federal Reserve plans to taper off of economic stimulus, which should send interest rates even higher. This may have prompted some home buyers to get in the market sooner, rather than later, according to Sara Watt House, and economist with Wells Fargo. “It’s not really derailing people’s purchase plans,” said Ms. House. With reduction in inventory has come an increase in prices, which also could slow down sales of new homes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Indiana Court Enforces Contract Provisions rather than Construction Drawing Markings

    January 14, 2015 —
    Timothy J. Abeska, a vice-chair of Barnes & Thornburg LLP’s Construction Law Practice Group, analyzed Goodrich Quality Theaters, Inc. v. Fostcorp Heating and Cooling, Inc., 16 N.E.3d 426 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), which “provides an example of a court enforcing contract provisions rather than markings on construction drawings that are inconsistent with contract requirements.” The case evolved from a dispute on a construction of an IMAX theater, when the general contractor did not understand the architect’s markings for non-standard joist girders, and ordered standard joist girders, per the contract. The error created delays and other problems, which led to payment disputes and mechanic’s liens against the project. Abeska stated that “[t]his case shows the importance of making sure all documents which comprise a construction contract are consistent with each other, as courts will enforce contracts negotiated by the parties. The case also demonstrates that litigation is not a quick process, as the Court of Appeals Opinion was issued more than seven years after the project was completed.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Best Lawyers Honors Hundreds of Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Names Four Partners ‘Lawyers of the Year’

    September 16, 2024 —
    (August 15, 2024) - Best Lawyers has selected 171 Lewis Brisbois attorneys across 47 offices for its 31st edition of The Best Lawyers in America. It has also recognized four Lewis Brisbois partners on its "Lawyers of the Year" list: San Diego Partner Gary K. Brucker Jr. (Litigation - Real Estate); Weirton Managing Partner Michelle L. Gorman (Mass Tort Litigation/Class Actions - Defendants); Roanoke Partner Paul C. Kuhnel (Medical Malpractice Law - Defendants); and Los Angeles Co-Administrative Partner Steven R. Lewis (Product Liability Litigation - Defendants). Please join us in congratulating the following attorneys on their Best Lawyers recognition! You can see the full list of attorneys named to Best Lawyers' Ones to Watch in America here. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Colorado Supreme Court to Hear Colorado Pool Systems, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance Company, et al.

    October 10, 2013 —
    The Colorado Pool case has been featured in two past blog entries, including: “An Arapahoe County District Court Refuses to Apply HB 10-1394 Retrospectively,” which discussed the case at the trial court level, and “Colorado Court of Appeals Finds Damages to Non-Defective Property Arising From Defective Construction Covered Under Commercial General Liability Policy,” which discussed the case at the Court of Appeals level. In both instances, the courts held that retroactively applying C.R.S. C.R.S. § 13-20-808 to policies in effect prior to the date of the statute’s enactment would be impermissibly retrospective because it would change the coverage under the policy for which the parties had originally bargained. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain
    David M. McLain can be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Caltrans Reviewing Airspace Program in Aftermath of I-10 Fire

    July 02, 2024 —
    The California Dept. of Transportation has indefinitely suspended approving any new leases, subleases, and renewals of open storage properties in the wake of a fire that damaged a section of Interstate 10 through downtown Los Angeles last fall. Reprinted courtesy of Aileen Cho, Engineering News-Record Ms. Cho may be contacted at choa@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Disaster Remediation Contracts: Understanding the Law to Avoid a Second Disaster

    August 30, 2017 —
    In the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey, consumers and contractors should be aware of protections prescribed by the Texas Legislature for Disaster Remediation Contracts. Chapter 58 of the Texas Business and Commerce Code includes several important consumer protections. Consumers should be aware of these protections, and contractors should take care to avoid inadvertent violations. This statute applies to a contractor engaged in “disaster remediation,” in a county subject to a disaster declaration. Those contracts are subject to certain notice provisions and limitations. A violation of Chapter 58 is considered a Deceptive Trade Practice and could subject a violator to both public and private remedies. The full text of Chapter 58 is found here: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/BC/htm/BC.58.htm. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Todd Colvard, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Colvard may be contacted at tcolvard@pecklaw.com

    Can a Receiver Prime and Strip Liens Against Real Property?

    September 20, 2021 —
    Courts overseeing receivers generally enjoy broad discretion in directing and approving a receiver’s proposed actions. But does that authority extend to a receiver not only granting a super-priority lien ahead of existing liens, but also selling the real property free and clear of all liens? In County of Sonoma v. Quail, 56 Cal.App.5th 657 (Ct. App. 2020), the California Court of Appeals answered that question in the affirmative. Quail involved a 47,480 square-foot lot with two houses, a few garages, several outbuildings, and numerous trailers surrounded by a veritable junk yard. Despite many of these structures being uninhabitable, unsanitary, and dangerous, multiple families resided on the lot. Although Sonoma County (the “County”) ordered the owner to remediate the property several times, he failed and refused to do so. After several years of these violations going unabated, the County ultimately sought and obtained the appointment of a receiver over the real property. To obtain funds necessary to repair the property, the receiver asked the court for permission to borrow money through the issuance of a receivership certificate to be secured by a super-priority lien—i.e., a lien ahead of all other liens—against the real property. Although the trial court initially declined to prime existing liens, when the receiver could find no one to lend money (since the land lacked equity), the trial court relented and approved a super-priority lien despite the senior secured lender’s objection (the “lender”). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ben Reeves, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Reeves may be contacted at breeves@swlaw.com