BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing 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


    Got Licensing Questions? CSLB Licensing Workshop November 17th and December 15th

    Seattle Council May Take a New Look at Micro-Housing

    Judge Dismisses Suit to Block Construction of Obama Center

    Are Modern Buildings Silently Killing Us?

    Planned Everglades Reservoir at Center of Spat Between Fla.'s Gov.-Elect, Water Management District

    Construction Law Client Advisory: What The Recent Beacon Decision Means For Developers And General Contractors

    DIR Public Works Registration System Down, Public Works Contractors Not to be Penalized

    LA Metro To Pay Kiewit $297.8M Settlement on Freeway Job

    A Court-Side Seat: Clean Air, Clean Water, Endangered Species and Deliberative Process Privilege

    Tejon Ranch Co. Announces Settlement of Litigation Related to the Tejon Ranch Conservation and Land Use Agreement

    New York State Trial Court Addresses “Trigger of Coverage” for Asbestos Claims and Other Coverage Issues

    Ninth Circuit Court Weighs In On Insurance Coverage For COVID-19 Business Interruption Losses

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/10/24) – Strong Construction Investment in Data Centers, Increase Use of Proptech in Hospitality and Effects of Remote-Work on Housing Market

    Here's How Much You Can Make by Renting Out Your Home

    Office REITs in U.S. Plan the Most Construction in Decade

    Florida Former Public Works Director Fined for Ethics Violation

    The Activist Group Suing the Suburbs for Bigger Buildings

    Richest NJ Neighborhood Fights Plan for Low-Cost Homes on Toxic Dump

    Significant Victory for the Building Industry: Liberty Mutual is Rejected Once Again, This Time by the Third Appellate District in Holding SB800 is the Exclusive Remedy

    Haight Welcomes Robert S. Rucci

    Top 10 Hurricane Preparedness Practices for Construction Sites

    California Contractors – You Should Know That Section 7141.5 May Be Your Golden Ticket

    Nine Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch 2021

    Rooftop Solar Leases Scaring Buyers When Homeowners Sell

    Congratulations to Partner John O’Meara for Being Named as One of America’s Top 100 Civil Defense Litigators for Three Consecutive Years!

    How to Get Your Bedroom Into the Met Museum

    Melissa Dewey Brumback Invited Into Claims & Litigation Management Alliance Membership

    English v. RKK. . . The Rest of the Story

    Punchlist: The News We Didn’t Quite Get To – May 2016

    The Greenest U.S. Cities & States

    Tighter Requirements and a New Penalty for Owners of Vacant or Abandoned Storefronts in San Francisco

    Insurer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Earth Movement Exclusion Denied

    While You Were Getting Worked Up Over Oil Prices, This Just Happened to Solar

    Supreme Court Rejects “Wholly Groundless” Exception to Question of Arbitrability

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    Exculpatory Provisions in Business Contracts

    Free Texas MCLE Seminar at BHA Houston June 13th

    David A. Frenznick Awarded Multiple Accolades in the 2020 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America

    “You’re Out of Here!” -- CERCLA (Superfund) Federal Preemption of State Environmental Claims in State Courts

    Zetlin & De Chiara Ranked in the Top Tier for Construction Law by Legal 500 USA

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa Rolle Wins Summary Judgment on Behalf of Contract Utility Company in Personal Injury Action

    Court Slams the Privette Door on Independent Contractor’s Bodily Injury Claim

    Insurer Prevails on Summary Judgment for Bad Faith Claim

    Texas Supreme Court: Breach of Contract Not Required to Prevail on Statutory Bad Faith Claim

    Construction Defect Not a RICO Case, Says Court

    Allegations that Carrier Failed to Adequately Investigate Survive Demurrer

    The Law of Patent v Latent Defects

    Boys (and Girls) of Summer: New Residential Solar Energy System Disclosures Take Effect January 1, 2019

    LEEDigation: A Different Take

    Rio de Janeiro's Bursting Real-Estate Bubble
    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

    Federal Miller Act Payment Bond Claim: Who Gets Paid and Who Does Not? What Are the Deadlines?

    September 16, 2019 —
    When working on federal public works construction projects there are no Stop Payment Notice or Mechanics Lien remedies available to protect subcontractors’ and suppliers’ right to payment. Instead, unpaid subcontractors and suppliers must resort to making a claim for payment under a federal law known as the AMiller Act@ (40 USCS 3131 et seq.). Many claimants however, do not realize that the right to make a Miller Act claim is not available to all subcontractors and suppliers. Before committing to performing work on a federal project it is important for subcontractors and suppliers to understand whether or not a Miller Act claim will be available. For those who have no Miller Act rights, careful consideration must be given to whether it is worth the risk to take on the project. For those who have valid Miller Act claim rights, important deadlines must be considered. Who Gets Paid Under a Miller Act and Who Does Not For federal projects in excess of $100,000, contractors who have a contract directly with the Federal Government must obtain Miller Act Payment Bond intended for the protection of Subcontractors, laborers and material suppliers to the project. As a general rule, every subcontractor, laborer, or material supplier who deals directly with the prime contractor and is unpaid may bring a lawsuit for payment against the Miller Act Payment Bond. Further, every unpaid subcontractor, laborer, or material supplier who has a direct contractual relationship with a first-tier subcontractor may bring such an action. The deadlines for these claims are described below. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    UPDATE: Trade Secrets Pact Allows Resumed Work on $2.6B Ga. Battery Plant

    April 19, 2021 —
    Construction on a $2.6-billion battery manufacturing plant near Atlanta can continue under an agreement reached April 11 between two rival South Korean auto battery makers—including SK Innovation, which is owner of the half-completed project. Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Homebuilders Call for Housing Tax Incentives

    May 10, 2013 —
    The National Association of Home Builders has asked Congress to support tax incentives for home buyers and renters, including the Low Income Housing Tax Credit and the mortgage interest deduction. Robert Dietz, an economist at the NAHB, noted that in 2009, 35 million home owners were able to claim the mortgage deduction. Dietz responded to arguments that the deduction simply lead to people buying bigger homes by saying that “the need for a larger home created the higher loan deduction, not the other way around.” The NAHB notes that one hundred new single-family homes creates more than 300 jobs and generates substantial tax revenues. “Housing provides the momentum behind an economic recovery because home building and associated businesses employ such a wide range of workers” said Dietz. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Triple Points to the English Court of Appeal for Clarifying the Law on LDs

    July 01, 2019 —
    Can an employer recover liquidated damages (LDs) from a contractor if the contract terminates before the contractor completes the work? Surprisingly, heretofore, English law provided no clear answer to this seemingly straightforward question, and inconsistent case law over the past century has left a trail of confusion. Given the widespread use of English law in international construction contracts, this uncertainty had gone on far too long. The good news is that drafters of construction contracts throughout the world can now have a well-deserved good night’s sleep courtesy of the English Court of Appeal’s March 2019 decision in Triple Point Technology, Inc. v PTT Public Company Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 230. The Triple Point case concerned the delayed supply by Triple Point (the “Contractor”) of a new software system to employer PTT. The contract provided for payments upon achievement of milestones, however order forms incorporated into the contract set out the calendar dates on which fixed amounts were payable by PTT, resulting in an apparently contradictory requirements on when payment was due. Triple Point achieved completion (149 days late) of a portion of the work milestones, and were paid for that work. Triple Point then sought payment for the work which was not yet completed, relying on the calendar dates in the order forms rather than achievement of milestone payments. Things got progressively worse as PTT refused payment, Triple Point suspended the work for PTT’s failure to pay, PTT terminated the contract and then appointed a new contractor to complete the work. Reprinted courtesy of Vincent C. Zabielski, Pillsbury and Julia Kalinina Belcher, Pillsbury Mr. Zabielski may be contacted at vincent.zabielski@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Belcher may be contacted at julia.belcher@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Big Policyholder Win in Michigan

    January 05, 2017 —
    Jeremiah Welch and Michael Barrese recently had a big win in front of the Michigan Court of Appeals. The case (Skanska-Schweitzer v. Farm Bureau General Insurance Company of Michigan) involved Skanska’s claim for defense and indemnity from Farm Bureau Ins. Co. of Michigan for an injury to an elementary school student arising out of the removal of playground equipment by a landscaping company, Horrocks. Farm Bureau denied coverage because it claimed that the work was not part of Horrocks’ contract with the project owner and therefore Skanska, the construction manager, did not qualify as an additional insured on the policy. SDV argued that the AI endorsement did not specify that Horrocks’ work be performed as part of its contract with the owner; it only required that the work be performed “for Skanska.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremiah M. Welch, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Welch may be contacted at jmw@sdvlaw.com

    Construction Resumes after Defects

    June 28, 2013 —
    When inspectors found defective bolts in the construction of the Media Arts Center at L. A. Mission College, the contractor walked off the job. The project had been underway for about eighteen months. After problems were found with welds and bolts, the contractor informed the school that it could not complete the job. The California Division of the State Architect then required inspection of every weld and joint, leading to a dispute as to who was going to pay for it. At this point, only the first story has been inspected. Although the other two stories must be inspected, the new contractor is about to begin work on the building. James O’Reilly, the executive director for facilities, planning and development, said that “the main focus is on fixing the defective issues and getting construction completed so we can serve the Mission campus.” Still at question is how much SMC Construction received before they walked off the job. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Allegations Versus “True Facts”: Which Govern the Duty to Defend? Bonus! A Georgia Court Clears Up What the Meaning of “Is” Is

    December 11, 2023 —
    Courts scrutinize a complaint’s factual allegations to decide whether the allegations trigger a duty to defend. [1] If the facts unambiguously exclude coverage, there is no duty to defend. [2] But what if the factual allegations fall within a policy exclusion, but the allegations are untrue or questionable? What if the true facts would mean the exclusion doesn’t apply? In that case, many courts have found that the insurer should base its decision on the policyholder’s version of the “true facts.” [3] An insurer can’t rely on the complaint’s allegations to deny coverage when the facts that the insurer knows or can ascertain show that the claim is covered. [4] A recent case, United Minerals & Properties Inc. v. Phoenix Insurance Co., No. 4:23-cv-00050 (N.D. Ga.), illustrates these policy interpretation principles. Reprinted courtesy of Rachel E. Hudgins, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Syed S. Ahmad, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Hudgins may be contacted at rhudgins@HuntonAK.com Mr. Ahmad may be contacted at sahmad@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Inspired by Filipino Design, an Apartment Building Looks Homeward

    May 22, 2023 —
    Austerity and efficiency aren’t the first words that come to mind when you see the angled sawtooth bays of Tahanan Supportive Housing, or catch a glimpse of a rainbow through its lobby. But the dramatic exterior and joyful interior of this San Francisco building are both products of their constraints. When David Baker Architects was approached to design the six-story development, the goal was aggressive: Produce 145 units of permanent supportive housing at under $400,000 a unit, and have the operation up and running in less than three years. The firm accepted the challenge, and by 2022, Tanahan was fully leased to residents, all of whom are San Franciscans who have struggled with chronic homelessness. In a city where affordable units typically cost $600,000 to $700,000 each to construct, keeping in budget and meeting the deadline meant turning to the modular building company Factory OS. It also meant keeping variation at a minimum. The studios are identical, like Lego blocks; instead of being mirrored across a hallway, they’re just rotated 180 degrees. But nothing else about the building feels utilitarian. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sarah Holder, Bloomberg