BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut construction safety 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


    Ninth Circuit: Speculative Injuries Do Not Confer Article III Standing

    Delaware “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6)

    Substitute Materials — What Are Your Duties? What Are Your Risks? (Law Note)

    Colorado Senate Bill 13-052: The “Transit-Oriented Development Claims Act of 2013.”

    Daily Reports – The Swiss Army Knife of Project Documentation

    Connecticut Federal District Court Follows Majority Rule on Insurance Policy Anti-Assignment Clauses

    Attorneys' Fees Awarded "Because Of" Property Damage Are Covered by Policy

    When Are General Conditions and General Requirements Covered by Builder's Risk

    How is Negotiating a Construction Contract Like Buying a Car?

    Owner’s Obligation Giving Notice to Cure to Contractor and Analyzing Repair Protocol

    WARN Act Exceptions in Response to COVID-19

    Injury to Employees Endorsement Eliminates Coverage for Insured Employer

    New LG Headquarters Project Challenged because of Height

    The Case For Designers Shouldering More Legal Responsibility

    Congratulations to Nicole Whyte, Keith Bremer, John Toohey, and Tyler Offenhauser for Being Recognized as 2022 Super Lawyers!

    Appraisal Goes Forward Even Though Insurer Has Yet to Determine Coverage on Additional Claims

    Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Holds that Nearly All Project Labor Agreements are Illegal

    Is A Miller Act Payment Bond Surety Bound by A Default or Default Judgment Against Its Principal?

    How the New Dropped Object Standard Is Changing Jobsite Safety

    Colorado Temporarily Requires Employers to Provide Sick Leave While Awaiting COVID-19 Testing

    Construction Bidding for Success

    Domtar Update

    Landmark Contractor Licensing Case Limits Disgorgement Remedy in California

    Everybody Is Going to End Up Paying for Texas' Climate Crisis

    Minimum Wage on Federal Construction Projects is $10.10

    Cuba: Construction Boom Potential for U.S. Construction Companies and Equipment Manufacturers?

    Anatomy of an Indemnity Provision

    Full Extent of Damage From Turkey Quakes Takes Shape

    Acceptable Worksite: New City of Seattle Specification Provisions Now In Effect

    California Court Holds No Coverage Under Pollution Policy for Structural Improvements

    Indicted Union Representatives Try Again to Revive Enmons

    Idaho District Court Affirms Its Role as the Gatekeeper of Expert Testimony

    Residential Building Sector: Peaking or Soaring?

    America’s Infrastructure Gets a D+

    Motion to Dismiss COVID Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    Commonwealth Court Strikes Blow to Philly Window and Door Ordinance

    Kansas City Airport Terminal Project Faces Delays, Rising Costs

    Coverage Doomed for Failing Obtain Insurer's Consent for Settlement

    Construction Defects Checklist

    Understanding the California Consumer Privacy Act

    Serial ADA Lawsuits Targeting Small Business Owners

    Florida Former Public Works Director Fined for Ethics Violation

    To Arbitrate or Not to Arbitrate? That is the Question

    New York Court Rules on Architect's Duty Under Contract and Tort Principles

    Construction Calamity: Risk Transfer Tips for Contractors After a Catastrophic Loss

    Steven Cvitanovic Recognized in JD Supra's 2017 Readers' Choice Awards

    Saving Manhattan: Agencies, Consultants, Contractors Join Fight to Keep New York City Above Water

    Earthquake Hits Mid-Atlantic Region; No Immediate Damage Reports

    Lewis Brisbois Launches New Practice Focusing on Supply Chain Issues

    CDJ’s Year-End Review: The Top 10 CD Topics of 2014
    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

    URGENT: 'Catching Some Hell': Hurricane Michael Slams Into Florida

    October 16, 2018 —
    Panama City, Fla. (AP) -- Powerful Hurricane Michael slammed into the Florida Panhandle with terrifying winds of 155 mph Wednesday, splintering homes and submerging neighborhoods before continuing its destructive march inland across the Southeast. It was the most powerful hurricane to hit the continental U.S. in nearly 50 years and at least one death was reported during its passage. Supercharged by abnormally warm waters of the Gulf of Mexico, the Category 4 storm crashed ashore in the early afternoon near Mexico Beach, a tourist town about midway along the Panhandle, a 200-mile (320-kilometer) stretch of white-sand beach resorts, fishing towns and military bases. After it ravaged the Panhandle, Michael entered south Georgia as a Category 3 hurricane — the most powerful in recorded history for that part of the neighboring state. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg

    Home Building Mergers and Acquisitions 2014 Predictions

    March 19, 2014 —
    John McManus, writing for Big Builder, discusses the various predictions for mergers and acquisitions in the home building field for 2014. While predictions vary between individuals, it seems to hover between 15 and 30. McManus lists several home building seller motivations, such as a “[n]eed for cash infusion to buy and develop new lot pipeline” and “[s]uccession planning.” Finally, McManus points out that not every merger and acquisition discussion will lead to a deal: “We've recently seen a combination or three flounder on the issue of price. This occurs partly as the home builder buyer community becomes more discriminating as to what truly fits their program, and partly as smaller builders attain options as regional and national lenders awaken and look to reenter project financing in a bigger way.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Illinois Court of Appeals Addresses Waiver and Estoppel in Context of Suit Limitation Provision in Property Policy

    February 05, 2024 —
    In Naperville Hotel Partners, LLC v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 2023 IL App (3d) 220440-U the Illinois Third District Court of Appeals addressed whether failure to include reference to a limitations provision in reservation of rights correspondence to an insured can be deemed a waiver of the provision or otherwise estop the insurer from relying on the provision. The claim involved water damage sustained at the Insured’s motel as a result of numerous rain events that occurred between 2015 and 2020. Liberty Mutual issued an insurance policy that covered several buildings including the subject hotel. The policy required that any legal action based on the coverage had to be brought "within two (2) years after the date on which the physical damage occurred, extended by the number of days between the date you submitted the statement of loss to us and the date we deny the claim in whole or in part." Plaintiffs filed their claim with Liberty Mutual in May 2019. In June of 2019 Liberty Mutual sent a reservation of rights letter to the Insured which requested more information and listed the "immediate written notice of loss" provision as a potential basis for excluding coverage but did not list the two-year time-limitation on legal action. Liberty Mutual also did not mention the provision in subsequent communications with the Insured. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James M. Eastham, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Eastham may be contacted at jeastham@tlsslaw.com

    NY Construction Safety Firm Falsely Certified Workers, Says Manhattan DA

    March 25, 2024 —
    A New York-based construction safety firm and 25 individuals were indicted Feb. 28 for allegedly operating a bogus safety training school, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office says. The firm, Valor Security & Investigations is also linked to “endangering the life” of Ivan Frias, who fell to his death from the 15th floor of a New York City construction site in 2022. Reprinted courtesy of Johanna Knapschaefer, Engineering News-Record Ms. Knapschaefer may be contacted at knapj@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Workers at Two NFL Stadiums Test Positive for COVID-19, But Construction Continues

    April 13, 2020 —
    Construction at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, Calif., and Allegiant Stadium outside Las Vegas—two new NFL stadiums scheduled to open in 2020—continue forward despite a worker at each location testing positive for COVID-19. Tim Newcomb, 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

    Construction Warranties and the Statute of Repose – Southern States Chemical, Inc v. Tampa Tank & Welding Inc.

    January 20, 2020 —
    In a recent holding by the Georgia Court of Appeals, the court held that Georgia’s eight-year statute of repose applied to bar the project owner’s warranty claims. The renovation work by the contractor on the owner’s chemical tank constituted an improvement of real property, and thus, the statute of repose bared any claims eight years after substantial completion thereof. In addition, the court rejected the project owner’s claim that it qualified as a third-party beneficiary of an extended warranty contained in a report given by a subcontractor to the contractor. Factual Background In 2000, Southern States Phosphate and Fertilizer Company (“Southern States”) hired Tampa Tank & Welding, Inc (“Tampa Tank”) to renovate a tank to hold sulfuric acid. The parties’ written contract contained an express one-year warranty for material and workmanship from the date of completion. Two years later, in January 2002, the tank renovation was completed. Tampa Tank contracted with Corrosion Control Inc. (“CCI”) to design, assist with, and test the cathodic corrosion system. CCI provided only consultation and did not provide any onsite installation. Upon completion of installation, CCI supplied a report to Tampa Tank that the system was properly installed and fully functioning. Additionally, a post–installation report from CCI to Tampa Tank calculated an estimated life expectancy of forty-three to forty-five years. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook, Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    Washington State Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision on Spearin Doctrine

    September 29, 2021 —
    The Washington State Supreme Court’s recent decision in Lake Hills Invs., LLC v. Rushforth Constr. Co. No. 99119-7, slip op. at 1 (Wash. Sept. 2, 2021) marks the first time in over 50 years that it has ruled on the Spearin doctrine. The Court’s opinion clarified the contractor’s burden when asserting a Spearin defense and affirmed the jury’s verdict in favor of contractor AP Rushforth Construction Company (AP). The decision is a major win for Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC attorneys Scott Sleight, Brett Hill, and Nick Korst, who represented AP throughout its long-running dispute with Lake Hills Investments, LLC (LH), including the two-month jury trial and the appeal. Leonard Feldman of Peterson | Wampold | Rosato | Feldman | Luna and Stephanie Messplay of Van Siclen Stocks & Firkins also represented AP on appeal. At trial, the owner—Lake Hills Investments, LLC (LH)—asserted it was entitled to $3 million in liquidated damages and $12.3 million for defects it alleged were caused by AP’s deficient workmanship. AP denied responsibility for the delays and most of the defects and requested payment of $5 million. Regarding LH’s defect claims, AP argued as an affirmative defense that the defects were caused by deficiencies in the plans and specifications provided by LH. This affirmative defense was rooted in the Spearin doctrine, which states that when the contractor follows plans and specifications provided by the owner, the contractor is not responsible for defects caused by the plans and specifications. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cameron Sheldon, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Ms. Sheldon may be contacted at cameron.sheldon@acslawyers.com

    Massachusetts SJC Clarifies “Strict Compliance” Standard in Construction Contracts

    January 02, 2019 —
    In Massachusetts, it is well established that a contractor cannot recover damages from a construction contract without first showing that the contractor completely and strictly performed on all of the contract’s terms. Recently, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court narrowed the rule by concluding that complete and strict performance is only required for contract terms relating to the design and construction itself. The high Court explained that non-design / non-construction contract terms are governing by “ordinary contract principles, including the traditional Massachusetts materiality rule.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jacob Goodelman, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Mr. Goodelman may be contacted at jgoodelman@grsm.com