BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure 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


    New York Regulator Issues Cyber Insurance Guidelines

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

    MBIA Seeks Data in $1 Billion Credit Suisse Mortgage Suit

    The Uncertain Future of the IECC

    Greg Dillion & Newmeyer Dillion Named 2019 Good Scout Award Recipient

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Super Lawyers

    Arkansas: Avoiding the "Made Whole" Doctrine Through Dépeçage

    Tidal Lagoon Plans Marine Project to Power Every Home in Wales

    The Unthinkable Has Happened. How Should Contractors Respond?

    Alabama Court Upholds Late Notice Disclaimer

    No Damage for Delay? No Problem: Exceptions to the Enforceability of No Damage for Delay Clauses

    Windstorm Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    Turkey to Start Building 200,000 Homes in March, Erdogan Says

    Funding the Self-Insured Retention (SIR)

    Construction Warranties: Have You Seen Me Lately?

    Slavin Doctrine and Defense from Patent Defects

    Pollution Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Denies Review of Pro-Policy Decision

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

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2022 Top Lawyers!

    CA Court of Appeal Reinstates Class Action Construction Defect Claims Against Homebuilder

    The Need for Situational Awareness in Construction

    Pancakes Decision Survives Challenge Before Hawaii Appellate Court

    SCOTUS Opens Up Federal Courts to Land Owners

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

    Construction Robots 2023

    Insurers Need only Prove that Other Coverage Exists for Construction Defect Claims

    Pennsylvania Federal Court Addresses Recurring Asbestos Coverage Issues

    Real Estate Trends: Looking Ahead to 2021

    High Court Case Review Frees Jailed Buffalo Billions Contractor CEO

    A Survey of New Texas Environmental Laws

    How Drones are Speeding Up Construction

    Colorado’s New Construction Defect Law Takes Effect in September: What You Need to Know

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 49 White and Williams Attorneys

    Lawsuits over Roof Dropped

    Maine Court Allows $1B Hydropower Transmission Project to Proceed

    The Riskiest Housing Markets in the U.S.

    "Abrupt Falling Down of Building or Part of Building" as Definition of Collapse Found Ambiguous

    Get Smarter About Electric Construction Equipment

    Where Mechanic’s Liens and Contracts Collide

    The EEOC Targets Construction Industry For Heightened Enforcement

    Ex-Construction Firm That Bought a $75m Michelangelo to Delist

    California Rejects Judgments By Confession Pursuant to Civil Code Section 1132

    Judicial Panel Denies Nationwide Consolidation of COVID-19 Business Interruption Cases

    Labor Shortage Confirmed Through AGC Poll

    Indemnity Payment to Insured Satisfies SIR

    MTA Debarment Update

    Disappointment on an Olympian Scale After Rio 2016 Summer Games

    Nevada Judge says Class Analysis Not Needed in Construction Defect Case

    Settlement Reached in Bridge Failure Lawsuit
    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

    Partner Denis Moriarty and Of Counsel William Baumgaertner Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2017

    September 08, 2016 —
    Partner Denis Moriarty and Of Counsel William Baumgaertner were selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America© 2017. This marks the fifth consecutive year Mr. Moriarty has been listed for his work in insurance law, and this marks the eleventh year Mr. Baumgaertner has been listed for his defendants’ and plaintiffs’ work in personal injury and product liability litigation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Earthquake Hits Mid-Atlantic Region; No Immediate Damage Reports

    November 30, 2017 —
    Dover, Del. (AP) -- An earthquake has jolted the Mid-Atlantic region of the East Coast, but there are no immediate reports of damage or injuries. The U.S. Geological Survey says the 4.1 magnitude quake struck just after 4:45 p.m. Thursday, and was centered about 6 miles (10 kilometers) east-northeast of Dover, Delaware. It was felt as far away as Baltimore. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Associated Press (Randall Chase), Bloomberg

    Beware of Personal-Liability Clauses – Even When Signing in Your Representative Capacity

    January 31, 2018 —
    When a contract is drafted by a party, the other party expects some level of one-sidedness in favor of the drafter. But there are times when a contract goes too far. There are certain provisions that most persons in the construction industry would find unacceptable, unfair, and beyond the pale – even for a one-sided contract. Such a provision was arguably found in an electrical subcontract at issue in a 2014 opinion by a three-judge panel of the Georgia Court of Appeals. Unfortunately, due to long-standing Georgia law, the panel was forced to apply the provision as written. In the case, a contractor hired a subcontractor to perform the electrical scope of work. When the subcontractor failed to pay a sub-subcontractor, the sub-subcontractor filed suit against the subcontractor, contractor, and the payment-bond surety. The contractor asserted a claim of indemnity against the subcontractor based on the sub-subcontractor’s claim. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook Jr., Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    Insurer Springs a Leak in Its Pursuit of Subrogation

    August 21, 2023 —
    In Nationwide Prop & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Fireline Corp., No. 1:20-cv-00684, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104241, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland (District Court) considered whether the events giving rise to the plaintiff’s claims fell within the scope of a previously formed agreement, thereby rendering the plaintiff’s claims subject to the agreement’s time limitation and waiver of subrogation provisions. The District Court found that the claims fell within the scope of the agreement. The plaintiff, Nationwide Property & Casualty Insurance Company (Insurer), provided property insurance to Maple Lawn Homeowners Association, Inc. (Maple Lawn) for common property located in Fulton, Maryland, including a community center (the Subject Premises). On January 18, 2018, Maple Lawn entered into an Inspection Agreement (the Agreement) with defendant, Fireline Corporation (Fireline), wherein Fireline agreed to provide:
    • annual fire alarm inspection and testing services,
    • quarterly sprinkler inspection and testing, and
    • annual portable fire extinguisher testing and inspection.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Katherine Dempsey, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Dempsey may be contacted at dempseyk@whiteandwilliams.com

    Veolia Agrees to $25M Settlement in Flint Water Crisis Case

    February 19, 2024 —
    Engineering firm Veolia North America agreed to a $25-million settlement to resolve a federal class action case related to its work for the city of Flint, Mich., during the city’s lead-in-water crisis, the company and attorneys for the plaintiffs announced Feb. 1. Veolia is the second engineering firm that worked for the city to settle with city residents, and the deal came ahead of a class-action trial scheduled to start later this month. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    ASCE Statement on Calls to Suspend the Federal Gas Tax

    June 27, 2022 —
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – ASCE strongly opposes the recent announcement from the Biden Administration to suspend the current 18.4 cents-per-gallon federal gasoline tax for three months. Even at the same modest figure of 18 cents per gallon for over 25 years since 1993, the motor fuel tax has represented a reliable federal revenue source for communities to fix and modernize their network of roads, bridges, and transit systems. Suspending the gas tax would result in the loss of billions in revenue from the Highway Trust Fund (HTF), significantly diminishing much of the progress made in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law at a time when Americans expect improvements to the nation's roads, bridges, and transit systems. Replacing this lost revenue with funds from other sources is not a viable long-term solution and sets a damaging precedent. Encouraging states to follow suit will compound this bad idea and further exacerbate our nation's infrastructure funding challenges. Our transportation system, including roadways, bridge spans, and transit networks, can't rely on novel, unpredictable funding. Further, there is little guarantee that motorists will see any real relief at the pump. Gas holidays aren't price controls; the manager at the gas station still gets to set their price. Oil producers have benefited significantly in the past from previous state-level gas tax holidays. There is no mechanism to ensure that these "savings" are passed on to consumers, but there is a virtual guarantee of disrupting transportation dollars and the HTF. While it sounds like an enticing solution when pocketbooks are strained, Congress knows that a variety of factors, including plain supply and demand, affect the prices that people see at fuel stations. Now is the time to build on the momentum of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law which, for the first time in decades, takes significant steps to revitalize our nation's aging infrastructure, improve public safety, strengthen our economy, and deliver well-paying jobs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Illinois Couple Files Suit Against Home Builder

    January 15, 2014 —
    Last December, Norman and Valerie Adkins, a couple in Edwardsville, Illinois, filed suit against their home builder, Customary Construction, and contractor Kevin M. Kahrig, alleging that the defendants did not build their deck according to code, Kelly Holleran of the Madison Record reported. According to the complaint as stated by the Madison Record, the Adkins purchased the home from the defendants in October of 2010. The couple notified Kahrig (the Customary Construction owner) regarding cracks along the perimeter of their deck that had not been caulked. Kahrig sent a crew to fix the cracks, but the Adkins were unhappy with the work, the complaint states. The Adkins hired a masonry contractor to fix the deck, and the contractor found “structural issues with the arches and brick columns supporting the deck at the back of their home,” reported the Madison Record. The Adkins then hired an engineer who “inspected the deck and reported that it had been improperly constructed and needed to be removed and replaced,” according to the complaint. The engineer continued, “The current condition of the deck is a safety hazard, as there is a risk of collapse and loose bricks or other masonry materials falling and striking a person within the proximity of the deck.” The Adkins are seeking “a judgment of more than $150,000, plus costs and attorney’s fees,” the Madison Record claims. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Changes and Extra Work – Is There a Limit?

    October 09, 2018 —
    Design and construction changes can be a challenge for everyone involved in a construction project. Designers and contractors endeavor to deliver a project that meets the owner’s needs, budget, and aesthetic considerations. As a project comes to fruition, the project frequently changes, and the parties must address and resolve the financial considerations of those changes and implement the changes at the project level. Often times the most critical aspect of a contractor’s financial success or failure of a construction project is its ability to manage changes. Contractors are sometimes faced with changes that are beyond the reasonable expectation of the original undertaking and have significant planning, scheduling, and cost implications that may not be considered or addressed in the contract’s changes clause. Changes of this magnitude may be considered “cardinal changes” and provide the contractor with recourse beyond restrictions imposed by the contract’s changes clause. But cardinal change is a risky basis for a contractor to refuse to perform additional or changed work. Even major changes can probably be more safely handled within the terms of the contract’s changes clause. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joseph R. Young, Smith Currie
    Mr. Young may be contacted at jryoung@smithcurrie.com