BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineer
    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


    Reminder: A Little Pain Now Can Save a Lot of Pain Later

    NYC Luxury-Condo Buyers Await New Towers as Sales Slow

    Part of the Whole: Idaho District Court Holds Economic Loss Rule Bars Tort Claims Related to Water Supply Line that was Part of Home Purchase

    Trial Court Abuses Discretion in Appointing Unqualified Umpire for Appraisal

    Outcry Over Peru’s Vast Graft Probe Prompts Top Lawyer to Quit

    Do You Have the Receipt? Pennsylvania Court Finds Insufficient Evidence That Defendant Sold the Product

    The Little Ice Age and Delay Claims

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

    Florida Continues Enacting Tort Reforms, This Time Shortening the Statute of Repose

    New Illinois Supreme Court Trigger Rule for CGL Personal Injury “Offenses” Could Have Costly Consequences for Policyholders

    Part II: Key Provisions of School Facility Construction & Design Contracts

    Florida Self-Insured Retention Satisfaction and Made Whole Doctrine

    Lawyer Claims HOA Scam Mastermind Bribed Politicians

    Mediation Clause Can Stay a Miller Act Claim, Just Not Forever

    Over a Hundred Thousand Superstorm Sandy Cases Re-Opened

    The Argument for Solar Power

    Plaza Construction Negotiating Pay Settlement for Florida Ritz-Carlton Renovation

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

    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara LLP Attorneys to Speak at the 2016 National Construction Claims Conference

    Federal Court Holds That Other Insurance Analysis Is Unnecessary If Policies Cover Different Risks

    Green Energy Can Complicate Real Estate Foreclosures

    Beware of Design Pitfalls In Unfamiliar Territory

    WCC and BHA Raised Thousands for Children’s Cancer Research at 25th West Coast Casualty CD Seminar

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2022 Illinois Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    Hunton Offers Amicus Support in First Circuit Review of “Surface Water” Under Massachusetts Law

    Newmeyer & Dillion Ranked Fourth Among Medium Sized Companies in 2016 OCBJ Best Places to Work List

    California Supreme Court Protects California Policyholders for Intentional Acts of Employees

    Colorado House Bill 20-1290 – Restriction on the Use of Failure to Cooperate Defense in First-Party Claims

    Encinitas Office Obtains Complete Defense Verdict Including Attorney Fees and Costs After Ten Day Construction Arbitration

    New Safety Requirements added for Keystone Pipeline

    You Don’t Have To Be a Consumer to Assert a FDUTPA Claim

    Minimum Wage on Federal Construction Projects is $10.10

    “Freelance Isn’t Free” New Regulations Adopted in New York City Requiring Written Contracts with Independent Contractors

    Builders Can’t Rely on SB800

    Serving the 558 Notice of Construction Defect Letter in Light of the Statute of Repose

    Homebuilding Down in North Dakota

    Construction Delays: Which Method Should Be Used to Calculate Delay?

    Taylor Morrison Home Corp’ New San Jose Development

    Quick Note: Subcontractor Payment Bond = Common Law Payment Bond

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

    In a Win for Property Owners California Court Expands and Clarifies Privette Doctrine

    Disputed Facts on Cause of Collapse Results in Denied Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment

    NY Construction Safety Firm Falsely Certified Workers, Says Manhattan DA

    NYC-N.J. Gateway Rail-Tunnel Work May Start in 2023

    WSHB Ranked 4th Most Diverse Law Firm in U.S.

    The Biggest Trials Coming to Courts Around the World in 2021

    Can’t Get a Written Change Order? Document, Document, Document

    Insurer’s Discovery Requests Ruled to be Overbroad in Construction Defect Suit

    Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Damage Caused by Tar Escaping From Roof

    Fatal Boston Garage Demolition Leaves Long Road to Recovery
    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

    Federal Court of Appeals Signals an End to Project Labor Agreement Requirements Linked to Development Tax Credits

    October 20, 2016 —
    What Action Should Owners, Developers and Contractors Take in Anticipation of Successful Challenges to PLA Requirements? Recently, a federal court in New Jersey issued a decision which very well may invalidate all Project Labor Agreements (“PLA’s”) entered into as a condition to receipt of tax incentives for private development. Tax incentives utilized to promote private development are different, according to the court, than typical public works projects where PLA requirements have generally been held valid. Owners, developers, contractors and governmental entities must assess the consequences of this decision upon contracts already and to be awarded in the future where tax benefits may be linked to a PLA requirement. In 1993, in what has become known as the Boston Harbor Case, the United States Supreme Court held that state and local governmental entities may condition the award of public works contracts on the contractor’s agreement to enter into PLA’s. That decision has been followed nationwide since then to uphold the validity of various state and local law bidding conditions requiring successful bidders to negotiate and enter into project labor agreements as a condition to the award of public works contracts. The rationale is that when the government, like any other private party, is participating in an economic market, it may exercise its discretion in setting terms and conditions it believes best suit its interests in the efficient procurement of goods and services in that market. Therefore, a PLA requirement by a governmental entity engaged in market activity is no more or less valid than a PLA requirement on a purely private project. Reprinted courtesy of Gregory R. Begg, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Begg may be contacted at gbegg@pecklaw.com Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Three Construction Workers Injured at Former GM Plant

    March 26, 2014 —
    In Linden, New Jersey, three construction workers were injured “when they were apparently struck by steel girders while working at the former General Motors site” police told NJ.com. Mayor Richard Gerbounka stated that the “[s]ix struts that would support the deck or ceiling of a warehouse collapsed.” He also mentioned that the city “has been trying to redevelop the former General Motors site for years, but has run into several obstacles, including lawsuits from nearby businesses opposed to retail construction.” Several construction vehicles were “nearly buried under” debris and “[a]t least one I-beam girder and several decking struts—all metal—remain across several heavy construction vehicles,” NJ.com reported. The owner of the vehicles stated “he was told that workers were standing around the vehicles preparing to start their day when high winds knocked down at least one I-beam and several metal decking struts.” In another article published late afternoon on March 26th, NJ.com reported that “high winds” were the cause of the accident. “The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration is investigating the accident and all work at the site has been suspended pending the investigation,” according to the article. “Officials said OSHA inspectors had been at the scene once before, but declined to give details because of a continuing investigation.” Read the full story, NJ.com AM... Read the full story, NJ.com PM... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Stick to Your Guns on Price and Pricing with Construction Contracts

    December 20, 2021 —
    In recent posts here at Construction Law Musings, I have discussed the need for clarity of contract, trusting your gut, and assuring that your contract has the necessities. All of these bits of advice (along with my usual advice of working with an experienced construction attorney) are true with regard to commercial construction contracts and apply ten fold in a residential construction (read working for a single/family owner on their house). With a residential project, you, as a construction contractor, are likely to be dealing with the difficult combination of an owner with little or no experience relating to how a construction project is supposed to work and an owner that is emotionally invested in the project because it is their home. Because of the above, and the fact that your project is likely the biggest single investment that the owner has made outside of possibly a prior house, the residential owner will likely be looking over your shoulder and may very well attempt to negotiate down some of the costs that they perceive as the project moves forward. In short, the average person 1. does not know how much the project truly costs the contractor, and 2. feels that because they hold the cash, they can and should have some control over the individual costs of the construction thus making those costs, and by extension, their contract, negotiable right up until the end. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    68 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 5th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    September 23, 2024 —
    (August 15, 2024) – 68 Lewis Brisbois attorneys across 26 offices have been named to the 5th edition of “Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America.” Congratulations to the following attorneys on this recognition! You can see the list of Lewis Brisbois attorneys named to Best Lawyers' 30th edition of The Best Lawyers in America here. Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Pending Home Sales in U.S. Increase Less Than Forecast

    October 29, 2014 —
    The number of contracts to buy existing homes rose less than forecast in September, signaling demand will probably plateau heading into the end of 2014. The pending home sales index increased 0.3 percent after dropping 1 percent in August, the National Association of Realtors said today in Washington. The median projection in a Bloomberg survey of economists called for a 1 percent gain. Home resales have yet to regain last year’s peak as still-tight credit and low inventories remain hurdles for the industry, which means residential real estate will make a limited contribution to the expansion. The recent drop in mortgage rates and pickup in hiring will probably help underpin demand, even as first-time buyers struggle to enter the market. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michelle Jamrisko, Bloomberg
    Ms. Jamrisko may be contacted at mjamrisko@bloomberg.net

    Pennsylvania Mechanics’ Lien “Waivers” and “Releases”: What’s the Difference?

    March 19, 2015 —
    In the world of Pennsylvania mechanics’ liens there is much confusion about the interchangeable use of the words mechanics lien “waiver” and mechanics’ lien “release.” Many who work in the world of real estate in Pennsylvania, be they contractors, subcontractors, developers, lenders, or attorneys, use these terms interchangeably without understanding that there is a meaningful difference. Failure to understand the difference creates confusion when discussing issues and drafting documents regarding mechanics’ liens. In Pennsylvania a mechanics’ lien “waiver” is the pre-construction waiver of liens that was historically executed by a general contractor and an owner and filed with the Prothonotary in the county in which construction is located. These pre-construction lien “waivers,” assuming they were properly prepared, signed by the contractor and owner and filed in accordance with applicable law, negated the ability of that contractor and its subcontractors to file a mechanics’ lien on the subject property. These pre-construction lien “waivers” were part of every construction loan closing up through the amendments to the Pennsylvania Mechanics’ Lien Act that went into effect in 2007. Since 2007, the Mechanics’ Lien Act has been amended twice to further address those circumstances in which pre-construction lien waivers still have vitality. Except with respect to those narrow situations specifically provided for in the statute, pre-construction lien “waivers” are against public policy in Pennsylvania. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Thomas C. Rogers, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Rogers may be contacted at rogerst@whiteandwilliams.com

    Protecting Expert Opinions: Lessons Regarding Attorney-Client Privilege and Expert Retention in Construction Litigation

    August 19, 2024 —
    The Hill Hotel Owner LLC v. Hanover Insurance Company case has garnered attention due to its implications on the scope of attorney-client privilege in construction litigation. This blog post delves into the project’s background, the ensuing litigation, and the intricate work undertaken by attorneys and experts, highlighting the potential pitfalls associated with assumptions about privilege protections. Background of the Project Hill Hotel Owner LLC initiated a construction project in Boulder, Colorado, which included building a basement-level parking garage with an 18” thick concrete slab floor. The project utilized “void form,” a cardboard underlayment intended to create a gap between the foundation and the underlying soil. Unfortunately, the void form became wet and collapsed under the weight of the fresh concrete, causing considerable damage, and necessitating millions of dollars in remediation costs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Condominium Association Wins $5 Million Judgment against Developer

    July 31, 2013 —
    Belgravia Condominium Association, a group of condo owners in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, have secured a $5.05 million judgment against the contractor who converted their 1902 building into condominiums. The suit alleged that the developers and engineers failed to disclose structural problems to the condominium buyers. One issue at hand was the maintenance of the building’s façade which has historic status. Repairs to the façade alone are expected to require $2 million. Ronald Williams, the lawyer for the association, noted that the iron canopy at the entrance had begun to break away and fall even before the condominium association came into being. The decision isn’t yet final, as the developer has an opportunity to appeal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of