BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering 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


    Home Prices Up in Metro Regions

    Portions of Policyholder's Expert's Opinions Excluded

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud

    Colorado Legislature Kills SB 20-138 – A Bill to Extend Colorado’s Statute of Repose

    Contractors Sued for Slip

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Rules General Contractors Can Contractually Subordinate Mechanics Lien Rights

    Couple Gets $79,000 on $10 Million Construction Defect Claim

    An Insurance Policy Isn’t Ambiguous Just Because You Want It to Be

    Safety, Technology Combine to Change the Construction Conversation

    Contract Change # 10: Differing Site Conditions (law note)

    Digitalizing the Hospital Design Requirements Process

    The Biggest Change to the Mechanics Lien Law Since 1963

    $24 Million Verdict Against Material Supplier Overturned Where Plaintiff Failed to Prove Supplier’s Negligence or Breach of Contract Caused an SB800 Violation

    The Future of Construction Work with Mark Ehrlich

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/17/23) – A Flop in Flipping, Plastic Microbes and Psychological Hard Hats

    Policy Sublimit Does Not Apply to Business Interruption Loss

    Jason Poore Receives 2018 Joseph H. Foster Young Lawyer Award

    The Quiet War Between California’s Charter Cities and the State’s Prevailing Wage Law

    Brooklyn’s Hipster Economy Challenges Manhattan Supremacy

    Florida Court of Appeals Rejects Insurer’s Attempt to Intervene in Underlying Lawsuit to Submit Special Interrogatories

    Harmon Tower Demolition on Hold Due to Insurer

    Maryland Contractor Documents its Illegal Deal and Pays $2.15 Million to Settle Fraud Claims

    Oklahoma Finds Policy Can Be Assigned Post-Loss

    Contractor Sues Construction Defect Claimants for Defamation

    Owner Can’t Pursue Statutory Show Cause Complaint to Cancel Lien… Fair Outcome?

    The Reptile Theory in Practice

    Determining Occurrence for Injury Under Commercial General Liability Policy Without Applying “Trigger Theory”

    House Passes Bill to Delay EPA Ozone Rule

    Timely Legal Trends and Developments for Construction

    Hudson River PCB Cleanup Lands Back in Court

    Colorado Trench Collapse Kills Two

    Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Duty to Defend When Case Law is Uncertain

    CGL Coverage for Liquidated Damages and the Contractual Liability Exclusion

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Congratulations 2016 DE, NJ, and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Fire Tests Inspire More Robust Timber Product Standard

    New World to Demolish Luxury Hong Kong Towers in Major Setback

    Don’t Forget to Mediate the Small Stuff

    Lightstone Committing $2 Billion to Hotel Projects

    Subcontractor Strikes Out in its Claims Against Federal Government

    20 Years of BHA at West Coast Casualty's CD Seminar: Chronicling BHA's Innovative Exhibits

    Account for the Imposition of Material Tariffs in your Construction Contract

    US Appeals Court Halts OSHA Vaccine Mandate, Unclear How Long

    Structural Problems May Cause Year-Long Delay Opening New Orleans School

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    Idaho Supreme Court Address Water Exclusion in Commercial Property Exclusion

    Leonard Fadeeff v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    The Ghosts of Baha Mar: How a $3.5 Billion Paradise Went Bust

    Nine Gibbs Giden Partners Listed in Southern California Super Lawyers 2022

    Hurricane Laura: Implications for Insurers in Louisiana
    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

    Sureties do not Issue Bonds Risk-Free to the Bond-Principal

    August 30, 2017 —
    If your construction company is bonded, then you have signed a General Agreement of Indemnity with your surety / bonding company. Stated another way, if a surety issued an obligee on behalf of your construction company, as the bond-principal, a payment or performance bond, then you have signed a General Agreement of Indemnity with your surety. The General Agreement of Indemnity is NOT to be taken lightly. Without the General Agreement of Indemnity, the surety is NOT issuing the bonds you need to work on a certain project. A bond is not insurance and sureties do not issue the bonds under a risk-free premise. Oh no! If a surety has to pay-out claims under a bond, the surety will be looking to recoup that loss from the indemnitors that executed the General Agreement of Indemnity. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at Dadelstein@gmail.com

    New Jersey Imposes New Apprenticeship Training Requirements

    February 11, 2019 —
    The New Jersey Senate and Assembly approved a bill (A-3666) that requires construction businesses to certify participation in a U.S. Department of Labor-approved apprenticeship program in order to obtain or renew a public works contractor registration certificate. The DOL-approved program requirements apply to every classification of worker employed on a public works jobsite. New Jersey businesses that don’t want to set up an in-house program can satisfy these mandates by participating in a trade association’s DOL-registered apprenticeship program. Reprinted courtesy of Joanna Masterson, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    August 04, 2011 —

    On July 28, the Washington Court of Appeals ruled in Clasen Fruit & Cold Storage v. Frederick & Michael Construction Co., Inc. that more than six years had passed since a contractor had concluded work and so granted a summary dismissal of the suit.

    Frederick & Michael Construction Co., Inc. (F&M) was contracted to construct several buildings for Clasen Fruit and Cold Storage. These were completed in March, 1999. The buildings suffered wind damage to the roofs in 2001, 2003, 2005, and 2006. In the first two incidents, F&M repaired the roofs with Clasen paying for repairs.

    In 2005, Clasen hired Continuous Gutter to make repairs. The final incident was the collapse of the roof of one building. This was attributed to “excessive moisture in the roof’s vapor barriers.” At this point, Clasen demanded that F&M pay for repair and replacement costs. In 2008, Clasen sued F&M for damages for breach of contract and negligent design and construction of the roof.

    The decision then covered the meanings, in Washington law, of “termination of services” and “substantial completion.” The panel concluded that construction was “substantially completed in 1997” and “relevant services” by 2001. “But Clasen did not sue until 2008, some seven years after termination of any roof related services.”

    Read the court’s decision…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Law Client Alert: Hirer Beware - When Exercising Control Over a Job Site’s Safety Conditions, You May be Held Directly Liable for an Independent Contractor’s Injury

    April 06, 2011 —

    On February 24, 2011, the California Court of Appeal held in Jeffrey Tverberg, et al v. Fillner Construction, Inc. that the imposition of direct liability on a hirer turns on whether the hirer exercised retained control of worksite safety in such a manner that affirmatively contributed to the independent contractor’s injury. Twice, Tverberg, an independent contractor hired by a general contractor's subcontractor, asked the general contractor to make the job site safe by covering up open holes created by another unrelated subcontractor while Tverberg was working at the site. After Tverberg was injured at the site by falling in a hole, he sued both the general contractor and the subcontractor which had hired him.

    The Court of Appeal reasoned that when the general contractor instructed another subcontractor to create a condition that was potentially dangerous (i.e., creating open and uncovered bollard holes), and simultaneously required Tverberg to perform unrelated work near the open holes, the general contractor s conduct may have constituted a negligent exercise of its retained control which affirmatively contributed to Tverberg’s injury. The Court also reasoned that the general contractor affirmatively assumed responsibility for the safety of the workers near the holes by only requiring stakes and safety ribbon, and negligently discharged that responsibility which resulted in injury.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Mark VonderHaar and Yvette Davis of Haight Brown & Bonesteel. Mr. VonderHaar can be contacted at mvonderhaar@hbblaw.com and Ms. Davis at ydavis@hbblaw.com.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Bay Area Firm Offers Construction Consulting to Remodels

    October 02, 2013 —
    Homeowners sometimes aren’t too clear on questions of “building codes, permit process or where to find the right materials,” according to Benoni Mocanu, the owner of MB Development. He’s ready to step in an help by offering construction consulting to homeowners doing their own remodeling projects. In addition to providing the advice to help them through their projects, they’re ready to step in if a homeowner finds that they can’t finish the project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    How Finns Cut Construction Lead Times in Half

    December 17, 2024 —
    Rakennustieto organized a Q&A on December 5, 2024, titled “Halving Construction Lead Times—Responsible or Irresponsible?” The discussion focused on speeding up residential construction and renovations. The experts answering questions were representatives from two Finnish contractors (COfLOW and Fira), a client organization (HOAS), a building materials retailer (STARK), and a research institute. Can you halve construction lead time without sacrificing quality? Jaana Matilainen of Rakennustieto asked the panelists whether halving construction time is a realistic goal today, whether they can provide any examples, and if the speed-up has increased or decreased quality. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Taylor Morrison v. Terracon and the Homeowner Protection Act of 2007

    June 11, 2014 —
    On January 30, 2014, the Colorado Court of Appeals decided the case of Taylor Morrison of Colorado, Inc. v. Bemas Construction, Inc. and Terracon Consultants, Inc. 2014WL323490. The case addressed a substantial issue of Colorado constitutional law, as well as a variety of procedural issues of potential importance to construction litigation attorneys. Of particular interest is the question of whether the provisions of the 2007 Homeowner Protection Act (“HPA”) are limited in application to contracts between residential homeowners and construction professionals, or whether they have broader application between commercial construction professional parties as well. As discussed below, the Court of Appeals stated that it would not answer the question, and then, separately, implied that the statute might only apply to homeowner transactions – with the resulting exclusion of commercial transactions. However, after its analysis, it left the actual decision of that issue to a future court in a later case. The factual background for the case involved claims of breach of a contract for soils engineering by Terracon Consultants, Inc. (“Terracon”) and negligent excavation work by Bemas Construction, Inc. (“Bemas”). Plaintiff was Taylor Morrison of Colorado (“Taylor Morrison”), the developer and general contractor for a residential subdivision called Homestead Hills. After it constructed many homes, Taylor Morrison began to receive complaints of cracking drywall resulting from foundation movement and it made repairs at significant expense. Taylor Morrison then filed suit against Terracon and Bemas in connection with their respective roles in the original construction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Buck Mann, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Mann may be contacted at mann@hhmrlaw.com

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

    June 27, 2022 —
    In managing a project as the design professional, you are called upon to wear many hats. One of those hats is that of material specifier and, at times, substitute material approver. What are your duties in looking at substitute materials? As always, the legal answer is “it depends”. In part, it will depend on your role on the project and what, specifically, the contract says. However, at its most basic, you can be sued for accepting an out of spec substitute material. This is so even if you believed the spec met requirements based on information that the contractor gave you. So, tread carefully in this area. Do not assume any information that the contractor presents to you– take the time to research for yourself, call the manufacturer, and otherwise ensure that the product will work. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com