BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expert
    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


    From the Ashes: Reconstructing After the Maui Wildfire

    N.J. Voters Approve $116 Million in School Construction

    When Cyber Crooks Steal Payments, Think Insurance Makes Up The Loss? Think Again.

    Crumbling Roadways Add Costs to Economy, White House Says

    Construction Executives Expect Improvements in the Year Ahead

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “A Close Call?”

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

    BWB&O Partners are Recognized as 2022 AV Preeminent Attorneys by Martindale-Hubbell!

    NYC Condo Skyscraper's Builder Wins a Round -- With a Catch

    UK Construction Defect Suit Lost over One Word

    NY Construction Safety Firm Falsely Certified Workers, Says Manhattan DA

    Surviving the Construction Law Backlog: Nontraditional Approaches to Resolution

    Yellen Has Scant Power to Relieve U.S. Housing Slowdown

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

    How Algorithmic Design Improves Collaboration in Building Design

    The Golden State Commits to Going Green – Why Contractors Will be in High Demand to Build the State’s Infrastructure

    Seller Faces Federal Charges for Lying on Real Estate Disclosure Forms

    Paris ‘Locks of Love’ Overload Bridges, Threatening Structures

    Affordable Global Housing Will Cost $11 Trillion

    Seattle Expands Bridge Bioswale Projects

    Ben L. Aderholt Joins Coats Rose Construction Litigation Group

    Depreciating Labor Costs May be Factor in Actual Cash Value

    What You Don’t Know About Construction Law Can Hurt Your Engineering Firm (Law Note)

    Just When You Thought the Green Building Risk Discussion Was Over. . .

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

    The Investors Profiting Off Water Scarcity

    Commerce City Enacts Reform to Increase For-Sale Multifamily Housing

    Ensuing Loss Provision Found Ambiguous

    White and Williams Announces the Election of Five Lawyers to the Partnership and the Promotion of Five Associates to Counsel

    Another Worker Dies in Boston's Latest Construction Accident

    New Mandatory Bond Notice Forms in Florida

    Does Arbitration Apply to Contemporaneously Executed Contracts (When One of the Contracts Does Not Have an Arbitration Provision)?

    Contractors and Force Majeure: Contractual Protection from Hurricanes and Severe Weather

    Foreclosing Junior Lienholders and Recording A Lis Pendens

    School System Settles Design Defect Suit for $5.2Million

    Plaintiffs Not Barred from Proving Causation in Slip and Fall Case, Even With No Witnesses and No Memory of Fall Itself

    Federal Court Rejects Insurer's Argument that Wisconsin Has Adopted the Manifestation Trigger for Property Policy

    Insurer's Motion in Limine to Dismiss Case for Lack of Expert Denied

    Circuit Court Lacks Appellate Jurisdiction Over Order Compelling Appraisal

    Nevada Update: Nevada Commissioner of Insurance Updates Burning Limits Statute with Emergency Regulation

    Denver Court Rules that Condo Owners Must Follow Arbitration Agreement

    Additional Insured Not Covered Where Injury Does Not Arise Out Of Insured's Work

    Attorneys' Fee Clauses are Engraved Invitations to Sue

    Jersey Shore Town Trying Not to Lose the Man vs. Nature Fight on its Eroded Beaches

    Water Alone is Not Property Damage under a CGL policy in Connecticut

    The Courts and Changing Views on Construction Defect Coverage

    Get Smarter About Electric Construction Equipment

    Fourth Circuit Holds that a Municipal Stormwater Management Assessment is a Fee and Not a Prohibited Railroad Tax

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

    Two New Developments in Sanatoga, Pennsylvania
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Business Risk Exclusions Do Not Preclude Coverage

    November 13, 2013 —
    The court rejected the insurer's arguments that the business risk exclusions barred coverage for a contractor. Gen. Cas. Co. of Wisconsin v. Five Star Bldg. Corp., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134122 (D. Mass. Sept. 19, 2013). Five Star was hired by the University of Massachusetts to upgrade the ventilation (HVAC) system on a portion of a building. The large majority of the work involved work in the interior of the building, but a small portion required installation of duct work and supports on top of the roof of the complex. Five Star also penetrated the roof at numerous locations to install supports for duct work and other rooftop structures for the ventilation system. Other subcontractors then secured supports to the concrete roof deck and installed permanent patches where Five Star had penetrated the roofing system. On same days, Five Star could not accomplish the process in a single day after penetrating the roof. It would install temporary patches until the next day. This was the only work on the roof performed by Five Star. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    A Court-Side Seat: A FACA Fight, a Carbon Pledge and Some Venue on the SCOTUS Menu

    November 02, 2020 —
    In this summary of recent developments in environmental and regulatory law, venues are challenged, standing is upheld, statutory exemption is disputed and more. THE U.S. SUPREME COURT Change Must Come from Within … Maryland? As the new term begins, the Court has agreed to review BP PLC v. Mayor and City Council of Maryland, a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit which held that a climate change damages case filed against many energy companies must be heard in the state courts of Maryland and not the federal courts. The petitioners argue that the federal office removal statute authorizes such removal, and the Fourth Circuit’s contrary decision conflicts with rulings from other circuit courts. THE FEDERAL COURTS Where Is the Fund in That? On September 25,2020, in U.S. House of Representatives v. Mnuchin, et al., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held that the lower court should not have dismissed a lawsuit filed by the U.S. House of Representatives challenging the Executive Branch’s transferal of appropriated funds to the Department of Defense to build a physical barrier along the southern border of the United State. The case is More than $8 billion is at stake, a sum that had been transferred from various federal accounts not involved with building the wall. The appeals court held that the lower court should not have dismissed this lawsuit because the House of Representatives had standing to bring this lawsuit even if the U.S. Senate was not involved with this litigation. Accordingly, the case was returned to the lower court for additional findings, with the appeals court noting that the Constitution’s Appropriation’s Clause serves as an important check on the Executive Branch. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Pacing in Construction Scheduling Disputes

    September 14, 2017 —
    On a high level, construction delay litigation involves sorting out the impacts to the critical project path and determining which party is responsible for those impacts. One of the more difficult elements of this process is determining whether a delay would have occurred regardless of one party’s critical path impact due to a separate, independent impact to the critical path by the other party. For example, a contractor cannot collect delay damages for delays caused by the owner if the contractor itself was causing independent impacts that would have pushed off the completion date anyway. However, the concept of “pacing” provides a potential defense for a party who is not on pace with the as-planned schedule for noncritical activities, even where those activities are still ongoing after the planned completion date. “Pacing delays” are a type of concurrent delay that occur when one party makes a conscious decision to decelerate or slow down the pace of noncritical activities to keep pace with the critical delays of another party. A more formal definition would be “deceleration of the work of the project, by one of the parties to a contract, due to a delay caused by the other party, so as to maintain steady progress with the revised overall project schedule.” Zack, Pacing Delays–The Practical Effect, Construction Specifier 47, 48 (Jan. 2000). A party to the construction process may decide to slow down its performance of noncritical activities to keep pace with the delayed progress. For example, contractors may adjust the pace of their work in light of delays in owner-furnished equipment, delays by other multiple prime contractors, delays in permits, limited access, or differing site conditions. Owners may slow down their response time to requests for information or submittals, or postpone the delivery of owner-furnished equipment or the processing of change orders. Id. at 48. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    New York Converting Unlikely Buildings into Condominiums

    July 23, 2014 —
    The New York Times reported that New York has seen a boom of buildings such as power plants, churches, schools, parking garages, and theaters converted to apartment and condo spaces. Part of the reason for the surge was due to land scarcity—but the New York Times also stated that zoning on the “old-time structures are far bigger than what zoning would allow on their lots today.” Plus, “[a]daptive reuse can also be speedier.” However, Toby Moskovits, president of Heritage Equity Partners, stated that the real reason might be curb appeal: “There’s a general movement now that goes beyond real estate, a reaction to a world that’s become increasingly electronic. People are more comfortable with something that feels authentic.” Heritage Equity Partners is currently converting a church-and-school complex into apartments in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Investigation Continues on Children Drowning at Construction Site

    August 13, 2014 —
    Two months ago, in Hobart, Illinois, two young boys (brothers) “drowned in an unsecured, excavated pit that filled with water” on a site owned by Goldschmidt Construction Services LLC of Hobart. The Post-Tribune reported that “Police Chief Richard Zormier said the department is waiting on reports from other agencies as it continues to investigate circumstances surrounding” the accident. “We want to be thorough. The young boys deserve it. Their family deserves it,” Zormier told the Post-Tribune. The family of the victims has filed a $60 million lawsuit against Goldschmidt Construction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York Bars Developers from Selling Condos due to CD Fraud Case

    October 15, 2014 —
    According to GlobeSt, New York “Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman has announced a settlement agreement that bars developers Joseph Scarpinito and Shiraz Sanjana—and five affiliated entities they own and operate—from offering or selling securities, including condo and coop sales, in or from New York State.” The settlement is in “result of an investigation by the Attorney General’s real estate finance bureau into allegations of fraud by the developers of the Mirada, an eight-story Harlem condominium.” GlobeSt also stated that the agreement “provides for binding arbitration with the condo purchasers for alleged construction defects, and requires the developers to pay $500,000 in penalties and fines to New York State.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    July 28, 2018 —
    I have spoken often regarding the need for a well written construction contract that sets out the “terms of engagement” for your construction project. A written construction contract sets expectations and allows the parties to the contract to determine the “law” of their project. An unwritten “gentleman’s agreement” can lead to confusion, faulty memories, and more money paid to construction counsel than you would like as we lawyers play around in the grey areas. One other area where the written versus unwritten distinction makes a difference is in the calculation of the statute of limitations. In Virginia, a 5 year statute of limitations applies to written contracts while a 3 year statute of limitations applies to unwritten contracts. This distinction came into stark relief in the case of M&C Hauling & Constr. Inc. v. Wilbur Hale in the Fairfax, Virginia Circuit Court. In M&C Hauling, M&C provided hauling services to the defendant through a subcontract with Hauling Unlimited in 2014, the last of which was in July. M&C provided over 2000 hours of hauling and provided time tickets (that were passed to Mr. Hale on Hauling Unlimited letterhead and signed by Mr. Hale or his agent) and an invoice stating the price term of $75.00 per hour. No separate written contract between M&C and Hauling Unlimited or Mr. Hale existed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Will The New U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Deal Calm Industry Jitters?

    January 13, 2020 —
    News that House Democrats and the Trump administration have come to an agreement on the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) provided a bit of calm in the storm over trade policies that have roiled the construction market since 2017. Bruce Buckley, 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