BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management 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


    Investigators Explain Focus on Pre-Collapse Cracking in Florida Bridge

    Give Way or Yield? The Jurisdiction of Your Contract Does Matter! (Law note)

    Mitigating FCRA Risk Through Insurance

    Insurer Entitled to Reimbursement of Defense Costs Under Unjust Enrichment Theory

    Drafting the Bond Form, Particularly Performance Bond Form

    Clean Water Act Cases: Of Irrigation and Navigability

    Under Privette Doctrine, A Landowner Delegates All Responsibility For Workplace Safety to its Independent Contractor, and therefore Owes No Duty to Remedy or Adopt Measures to Protect Against Known Hazards

    Spreading Cracks On FIU Bridge Failed to Alarm Project Team

    Alleged Defective Water Pump Leads to 900K in Damages

    XL Group Pairs with America Contractor’s Insurance Group to Improve Quality of Construction

    Construction on the Rise in Washington Town

    New York Appeals Court Rekindles the Spark

    New Jersey Senate Advances Bad Faith Legislation

    Duty to Defend For Accident Exists, But Not Duty to Indeminfy

    After 15 Years, Settlement Arrested at San Francisco's Millennium Tower

    Unbilled Costs Remain in Tutor Perini's Finances

    Sierra Pacific v. Bradbury Goes Unchallenged: Colorado’s Six-Year Statute of Repose Begins When a Subcontractor’s Scope of Work Ends

    Vacation during a Project? Time for your Construction Documents to Shine!

    Instant Hotel Tower, But Is It Safe?

    Touchdown! – The Construction Industry’s Winning Audible to the COVID Blitz

    All Risk Policy Only Covers Repair to Portion of Dock That Sustains Damage

    With VA Mechanic’s Liens Sometimes “Substantial Compliance” is Enough (but don’t count on it) [UPDATE]

    Hawaii Supreme Court Says Aloha to Insurers Trying to Recoup Defense Costs From Policyholders

    Reasonable Expectations – Pennsylvania’s Case by Case Approach to the Sutton Rule

    Green Investigations Are Here: U.S. Department of Justice Turns Towards Environmental Enforcement Actions, Deprioritizes Compliance Assistance

    Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

    Construction Slow to Begin in Superstorm Sandy Cases

    New Case Alert: California Federal Court Allows Policy Stacking to Cover Continuous Injury

    But Wait There’s More: Preserving Claims on Commonwealth Projects

    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    Anatomy of a Data Center

    Court Rejects Efforts to Limit Scope of Judgment Creditor’s Direct Action Under Insurance Code Section 11580

    Claims Against Broker Dismissed

    Viewpoint: A New Approach to Job Site Safety Reaps Benefits

    U.K. Construction Growth Unexpectedly Accelerated in January

    How Will Artificial Intelligence Impact Construction Litigation?

    Insurance Law Alert: Ambiguous Producer Agreement Makes Agent-Broker Status a Jury Question

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Faulty Workmanship Denied

    Court Sharpens The “Sword” And Strengthens The “Shield” Of Contractors’ License Law

    A Court-Side Seat: Recent Legal Developments at Supreme and Federal Appeals Courts

    Georgia Amends Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Construction in the Time of Coronavirus

    Homeowners Must Comply with Arbitration over Construction Defects

    Congratulations 2022 DE, MA, NJ, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Retired Judge Claims Asbestos in Courthouse gave him Cancer

    Revamp to Nationwide Permits Impacting Oil and Gas Pipeline, Utility and Telecom Line Work

    Attorney Writing Series on Misconceptions over Construction Defects

    Kiewit and Two Ex-Managers Face Canada Jobsite Fatality Criminal Trial

    New York Instructs Property Carriers to Advise Insureds on Business Interruption Coverage

    Contractor to Repair Defective Stucco, Plans on Suing Subcontractor
    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

    Georgia State and Local Governments Receive Expanded Authority for Conservation Projects

    May 31, 2021 —
    In the 2020-2021 session, the Georgia General Assembly amended existing laws to expand state and local governments’ authority to enter conservation projects. In connection with these projects, the contractor guarantees that cost savings or revenue increases will cover any payments for the project. Read more about conservation projects, including Guaranteed Energy Savings Performance Contracts With regard to school systems, conservation projects had previously included facility alterations designed to reduce energy or water consumption or operation costs. But the new law expands the permitted projects to include equipment purchases used in new construction or building retrofit, addition, or renovation. It also adds training programs incidental to the contract. 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

    Drones, Googleplexes and Hyperloops

    March 05, 2015 —
    I don’t know if it’s just me, or if there has been a lot of news lately about technology and construction:
    Although flying in the face of some bad press recently, the use of drones in construction. And we’re talking about more than just cameras with propellers.
    Battle of the (tech) Titans, as Google battles it out with the likes of LinkedIn and Microsoft for development rights in Mountain View, California for its futuristic new Googleplex. And we’re talking about more than just cameras with propellers.. And Google is only the most recent tech titan with development plans. Facebook’s Frank Gehry-designed campus expansion is in the works and Apple’s “spaceship” campus has already broken ground. We’ve come a long way since the HP garage in Palo Alto, baby!
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    What are Section 8(f) Agreements?

    July 02, 2018 —
    Like many areas of federal labor law, there are different rules for construction industry employers. One major difference is in how employers become unionized. Typically, under Section 9(a) of the National Labor Relations Act, a union becomes a collective bargaining agent of employees only after a majority of employees show support for union representation. In other words, the employees chose whether to be represented by a particular union. However, under Section 8(f) of the NLRA, construction industry employers can choose to become union without any showing of majority support by employees. In fact, construction industry employers don’t need to have any employees at all to sign a “8(f) agreement.” Thus, these agreements have become known as pre-hire agreements. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    Time To “Construct” New Social Media Policies

    March 28, 2022 —
    1. The Social Media Dilemma Social media has significantly impacted all facets of society, especially the way people communicate. Its impact and application to the construction industry is no different. TikTok, the video-sharing platform, is one of the world’s most popular platforms today, with over one billion active users monthly. From just one video, users can gain thousands—if not millions—of followers overnight. Social media has been used to present a narrative that the workplace can be fun, or that employees are enjoying working together. Social media can also, however, serve as a tool to document a perfect storm of events, such as a building collapse or crane malfunction, which can then be misconstrued and smeared throughout the internet, all with your company’s logo in the background. So, what happens when an incident on your jobsite is branded across social media as a #constructionfail, and the project owner ultimately initiates legal action? Can this video be used against your company? Can employers limit or otherwise restrict employees’ social media activity to avoid potential liability? How does the existence of social media posts affect dispute resolution procedures? Reprinted courtesy of Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. (ConsensusDocs), Lauren Rayner Davis, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. (ConsensusDocs) and Jennifer Harris, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. (ConsensusDocs) Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com Ms. Davis may be contacted at ldavis@pecklaw.com Ms. Harris may be contacted at jharris@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractor Changes Contract After Signed, Then Sues Older Woman for Breaking It

    September 03, 2015 —
    Channel 13 Who TV reported, in Winterset, Iowa, Mary Gregory allegedly signed an estimate for hail damage repair to her home, and was later told by the contractor that it was a contract. When a crew showed up to her home to perform the work, she turned them away. Then, Gregory received a letter from an attorney demanding eight thousand dollars for breach of contract. It turns out that the contractor altered the estimate Gregory signed and submitted it to the insurance company. According to Who TV, the altered estimate “contained work that Gregory says she didn’t authorize and a price tag of $32,134.” Jim Nelle, the contractor, admitted that he added to the contract after it was signed. He claims he was only trying to help her. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer Must Defend and Indemnify Construction Defect Claims Under Iowa Law

    February 23, 2017 —
    Applying Iowa law, the federal district court found that the insurer had to defend and indemnify construction defect claims for damage to property caused by the insured's subcontractors. Van Der Weide v. Cincinnati Ins., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4469 (N.D. Iowa Jan. 12, 2017). Van Der Weide contracted with Bouma & Company, Inc. to construct a house in 1996. Before construction began, Bouma purchased a CGL policy and a separate umbrella policy from Cincinnati, which were in effect from January 30, 1996 to January 30, 1999. Bouma used various subcontractors to build the home, including Elkato Masonry, which did the brick veneer and masonry work. The house was completed in February 1998 and Van Der Weide moved in during August 1998. 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

    A Court-Side Seat: Waters, Walls and Pipelines

    August 03, 2020 —
    Several interesting decisions have recently been made by federal and state courts. FEDERAL APPELLATE COURTS The U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals – ARCO Shifts from State to Federal and No Vigor for VIM On June 18, 2020, the court decided the case of Baker, et al. v. ARCO, holding that the revised federal removal statutes authorize the removal to federal court of a state-filed complaint against several defendants by the former residents of an Indiana housing complex who contended that the defendants were responsible for the industrial pollution attributed to the operations of a now-closed industrial plant. The housing complex was constructed at the site of the former U.S. Smelter and Lead Refinery. During the Second World War, the plant produced products for the use of the government war effort, thus triggering the applicability of the federal removal statutes. On June 25, 2020, the court decided the case of Greene, et al. v. Westfield Insurance Company. As the court notes, this is a matter that “began as a case about environmental pollution and evolved into a joint garnishment action.” An Indiana wood recycling facility, VIM Recycling, was the subject of many complaints by nearby residents that its operations and waste disposal activities exposed then to dust and odors in violation of federal law and triggered state tort law claims. VIM was sued in state court, but neglected to notify its insurer, as required by its insurance policy with Westfield Insurance. One thing led to another, and a default judgment in the amount of $ 50 million was entered against VIM. Since VIM at that point had no assets, the plaintiffs and later VIM sought recovery from Westfield. When this dispute landed in federal court, the court, after reviewing the policy, concluded that there was a provision excluding coverage when the insured knew it had these liabilities when it purchased the insurance. As a result, the lower court dismissed the lawsuit, and this decision has been affirmed by the Seventh Circuit. 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

    Mexico Settles With Contractors for Canceled Airport Terminal

    August 26, 2019 —
    Mexico City's airport authority settled a dispute with builders on an 85 billion peso ($4.45 billion) contract for the terminal at a new Mexico City airport that President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador canceled a month before taking office. Grupo Aeroportuario Ciudad de la Mexico will pay 14.2 billion pesos, equivalent to 16.7% of the contract's total cost, to Constructora Terminal de Valle de Mexico, a consortium that includes Carlos Slim's Operadora Cicsa, the Communications and Transportation Ministry said in an emailed statement. The contracts represented 45% of the airport's total cost, the ministry said. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eric Martin, Bloomberg