BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnesses
    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


    Construction Defect Lawsuits May Follow Hawaii Condo Boom

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    Harrisburg Sought Support Before Ruinous Incinerator Retrofit

    Can Baltimore Get a Great Bridge?

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Water Damage Claims

    What to Expect From the New Self-Retracting Devices Standard

    Conditional Judgment On Replacement Costs Awarded

    Certificates Of Merit For NC Lawsuits Against Engineers And Architects? (Still No)(Law Note)

    McCarthy Workers Test Fall-Protection Harnesses Designed to Better Fit Women

    Perovskite: The Super Solar Cells

    Construction Payment Remedies: You May be Able to Skate by, But Why?

    2019 Promotions - New Partners at Haight

    Narrow Promissory Estoppel Exception to Create Insurance Coverage

    Builders Seek to Modify Scaffold Law

    Construction Defects in Roof May Close School

    68 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 5th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    Safeguarding the U.S. Construction Industry from Unfair Competition Abroad

    Commonwealth Court Holds That Award of Attorney's Fees and Penalties is Mandatory Under the Procurement Code Upon a Finding of Bad Faith

    Does a Landlord’s Violation of the Arizona Residential Landlord-Tenant Act Constitute Negligence Per Se?

    Buyer Beware: Insurance Agents May Have No Duty to Sell Construction Contractors an Insurance Policy Covering Likely Claims

    Newmeyer & Dillion Named for Top-Tier Practice Areas in 2018 U.S. News – Best Law Firms List

    The Impact of the Russia-Ukraine Conflict on the Insurance Industry, Part One: Coverage, Exposure, and Losses

    Reservation of Rights Letter Merely Citing Policy Provisions Inadequate

    Unit Owners Have No Standing to Sue under Condominium Association’s Policy

    Deterioration of Bridge Infrastructure Is Increasing Insurance Needs

    CGL Insurer’s Duty to Defend Insured During Pre-Suit 558 Process: Maybe?

    Lis Pendens – Recordation and Dissolution

    A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules

    GA Federal Court Holds That Jury, Not Judge, Generally Must Decide Whether Notice Was Given “As Soon as Practicable” Under First-Party Property Damage Policies

    California Condo Architects Not Liable for Construction Defects?

    Owners and Contractors Beware: Pennsylvania (Significantly) Strengthens Contractor Payment Act

    Nuclear Fusion Pushes to Reach Commercial Power Plant Stage

    Why’d You Have To Say That?

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Brokers' MSJ on Duties Owed In Construction Defect Case

    One Way Arbitration Provisions are Enforceable in Virginia

    Weed Property Owner Gets Smoked Under Insurance Policy

    The Heat Is On

    Policing Those Subcontractors: It Might Take Extra Effort To Be An Additional Insured

    EEOC Sues Whiting-Turner Over Black Worker Treatment at Tennessee Google Project

    2018 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!

    Fire Raging North of Los Angeles Is Getting Fuel From Dry Winds

    Leftover Equipment and Materials When a Contractor Is Abruptly Terminated

    Eighth Circuit Considers Judicial Estoppel in Hazardous Substance Release-Related Personal Injury Case

    New Jersey Imposes New Apprenticeship Training Requirements

    Pulling the Plug

    Small to Midsize Builders Making Profit on Overlooked Lots

    Melissa Pang Elected Vice President of APABA-PA Board of Directors

    Tesla’s Solar Roof Pricing Is Cheap Enough to Catch Fire

    Colorado Legislature Kills SB 20-138 – A Bill to Extend Colorado’s Statute of Repose

    Happenings in and around the 2016 West Coast Casualty Seminar
    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

    Colorado Court of Appeals’ Ruling Highlights Dangers of Excessive Public Works Claims

    August 26, 2024 —
    In the case of Ralph L. Wadsworth Construction Company, LLC v. Regional Rail Partners (2024 COA 78), the Colorado Court of Appeals reviewed a complex contract dispute related to the design and construction of a transit rail line. The project, commissioned by the Regional Transportation District (“RTD”), involved a collaboration between Regional Rail Partners and Ralph L. Wadsworth Construction Company (“Wadsworth”) to build the North Metro Rail Line between Denver Union Station and Thornton. Key Facts:
    1. Contracts and Payments: Regional Rail Partners contracted with Wadsworth to perform specific construction tasks with a total contract value of $60,210,783. By the time of the trial, Regional Rail had paid almost $58 million of this amount.
    2. Disputes and Delays: The project faced numerous delays and disputes, leading to Wadsworth claiming significant financial damages attributed to these disruptions. In April 2018, Wadsworth’s expert estimated that Regional Rail owed them $12,408,496.60.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    General Contractor Gets Fired [Upon] for Subcontractor’s Failure to Hire Apprentices

    September 23, 2024 —
    As most public works contractors know, Labor Code section 1777.5 requires the hiring of apprentices on public works projects and, under Labor Code section 1777.7, violations are subject to civil penalties of up $100/day and up to $300/day days for repeated violations within a three-year period. In Lusardi Construction Co. v. Dept. of Industrial Relations, 102 Cal.App.5th (2024), a prime contractor learned the hard way that not only could it be penalized for its failure to hire apprentices but that it could also be liable for its subcontractor’s failure to hire apprentices. Forewarned is to be forearmed. The Lusardi Construction Case In 2014, general contractor Lusardi Construction Company hired subcontractor Pro Works Contracting to perform iron reinforcing work on a public works project owned by the San Marcos Unified School District. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Homeowner's Claim for Collapse Survives Summary Judgment

    September 20, 2017 —
    The insurer failed to present adequate evidence on summary judgment that damage caused by the collapse of a swimming pool was not covered. Klein v. State Farm Ins. Co., 2017 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3030 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. July 11, 2017). Klein notified State Farm that his in-ground pool collapsed on February 5, 2014, with a side wall falling into the pool, causing damage to brick, borders and the patio around the pool. Upon inspection, State Farm's agent found that the cover of the pool had partially fallen into the pool, and that the vinyl pool liner had a tear. State Farm covered the damage to the pool liner, but denied coverage for the in-ground swimming pool walls, the brick border and the patio surrounding the pool. State Farm maintained that the loss was due to a "collapse," which was excluded under the homeowner's policy. 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

    Remote Trials Can Control Prejudgment Risk

    September 07, 2020 —
    While courts across the country are largely unavailable to litigants demanding a jury trial, pre-judgment interest rules present an increasing penalty risk to a defendant wanting its day in court and may not always make a plaintiff whole. The COVID-19 pandemic has altered the manner in which people and industries operate across the board. In light of the need to maintain social distancing whenever possible, the use of technology to replace in-person appearances is becoming more commonplace. As more attorneys become comfortable with the remote platform, the willingness to consider a remote trial grows. With in-person jury trials suspended until further notice, it is important for attorneys and parties to consider the attendant consequences of the indefinite delay in waiting for a traditional jury trial. Aside from general inconvenience, continued delays may have a substantial financial impact, particularly with regard to the accumulation of pre-judgment interest. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys Robert G. Devine, Victor J. Zarrilli and Kimberly M. Collins Mr. Devine may be contacted at deviner@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Zarrilli may be contacted at zarrilliv@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Collins may be contacted at collinsk@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Real Estate Crisis in North Dakota's Man Camps

    October 02, 2015 —
    Chain saws and staple guns echo across a $40 million residential complex under construction in Williston, North Dakota, a few miles from almost-empty camps once filled with oil workers. After struggling to house thousands of migrant roughnecks during the boom, the state faces a new real-estate crisis: The frenzied drilling that made it No. 1 in personal-income growth and job creation for five consecutive years hasn’t lasted long enough to support the oil-fueled building explosion. Civic leaders and developers say many new units were already in the pipeline, and they anticipate another influx of workers when oil prices rise again. But for now, hundreds of dwellings approved during the heady days are rising, skeletons of wood and cement surrounded by rolling grasslands, with too few residents who can afford them. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jennifer Oldham, Bloomberg

    Property Insurance Exclusion: Leakage of Water Over 14 Days or More

    July 10, 2018 —
    The recent opinion of Whitley v. American Integrity Ins. Co. of Florida, 43 Fla.L.Weekly D1503a (Fla. 5th DCA 2018), as a follow-up to this article on the property insurance exclusion regarding the “constant or repeated seepage or leakage of water…over a period of 14 or more days,” is a beneficial opinion to insureds. In this case, the insured had a vacation home. A plumbing leak occurred that caused water damage to the home. The plumbing leak occurred during a period of time that lasted approximately 30 days. For this reason, the property insurer denied the claim per the exclusion that the policy does not cover loss caused by repeated leakage of water over a period of 14 or more days from a plumbing system. Summary judgment was granted by the trial court in favor of the insurer based on this exclusion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Colorado SB 15-177 UPDATE: Senate Business, Labor, & Technology Committee Refers Construction Defect Reform Bill to Full Senate

    April 01, 2015 —
    On March 18th, following a lengthy hearing with testimony and questioning for and against Senate Bill 15-177, the Senate Business, Labor & Technology Committee voted 6 to 2 to refer the bill, with new amendments, to the full Senate. While the main points of the bill remain strongly intact (check here for Senate Bill 177’s particulars), bill sponsors Senators Scheffler and Ulibarri offered four amendments, designed to bring additional compromise and clarity to the bill. The committee ultimately adopted these amendments, described below. Amendment 16 removed a prior prohibition in the bill that would have prevented attorneys from assisting in the preparation of the notice required to be provided to all homeowners before the commencement of a construction defect claim. Amendment 19 complemented 16 by providing further clarification regarding the contents and specificities required in said notice, including a disclosure of projected attorneys’ fees, costs, duration, and financial impact of pursuing construction defect claims. Amendment 17 permitted homeowners to approve the pursuit of construction defect claims through written consent. Lastly, Amendment 18 provided clarification regarding the bill’s requirement that mediators and arbitrators be selected and approved through mutual agreement of the parties. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Derek J. Lindenschmidt, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Lindenschmidt may be contacted at lindenschmidt@hhmrlaw.com

    Chattanooga Bridge Collapse Likely Resulted From Impact

    April 17, 2019 —
    Tennessee highway officials believe an impact from a vehicle’s oversized load is likely to blame for the April 1 partial collapse of a ramp structure at the I-75/I-24 interchange in Chattanooga. The impact caused the outer box beam and railing of the 148-ft-long bridge’s nearly 51-ft main span to fall onto an access ramp, injuring a motorist whose vehicle collided with the debris. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com