BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimony
    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


    Drafting a Contractual Arbitration Provision

    DIR Reminds Public Works Contractors to Renew Registrations Before January 1, 2016 to Avoid Hefty Penalty

    Virginia Families Hope to Sue over Chinese Drywall

    A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

    New Jersey Federal Court Examines And Applies The “j.(5)” Ongoing Operations Exclusion

    Colorado Introduces Construction Defect Bill for Commuter Communities

    No Third-Quarter Gain for Construction

    Reconciling Prompt Payments and Withholding of Retention Payments

    Don’t Ignore a Notice of Contest of Lien

    Effectively Managing Project Closeout: It Ends Where It Begins

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation: A Redux

    First-Time Buyers Shut Out of Expanding U.S. Home Supply

    Partner Vik Nagpal is Recognized as a Top Lawyer of 2020

    Texas Walks the Line on When the Duty to Preserve Evidence at a Fire Scene Arises

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

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

    Absence of Property Damage During Policy Period Equates to No Coverage

    SunEdison Gets Shinsei Bank Funding for Japan Solar Power Plant

    "On Second Thought"

    Lumber Liquidators’ Home-Testing Methods Get EPA Scrutiny

    Extreme Weather Events Show Why the Construction Supply Chain Needs a Risk-Management Transformation

    Illinois Insureds are Contesting One Carrier's Universal Denial to Covid-19 Losses

    The Construction Industry's Health Kick

    Injury to Employees Endorsement Eliminates Coverage for Insured Employer

    Homebuilders Offer Hope for U.K. Economy

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Museums

    New York Court Holds Insurer Can Recover Before Insured Is Made Whole

    Massachusetts High Court: Attorney's Fee Award Under Consumer Protection Act Not Covered by General Liability Insurance Policy

    Architecture, Robotics, and the Importance of Human Interaction – An Interview with Prof. Kathrin Dörfler

    Home Construction Slows in Las Vegas

    KB Homes Sues Condo Buyers over Alleged Cybersquatting and Hacking

    Subcontractors Have Remedies, Even if “Pay-if-Paid” Provisions are Enforced

    Appraisal Ordered After Carrier Finds Loss Even if Cause Disputed

    What Should Business Owners Do If a Customer Won’t Pay

    Chambers USA Names Peckar & Abramson to Band 1 Level in Construction Law; 29 P&A Lawyers Recognized as Leading Attorneys; Six Regions and Government Contracts Practice Recognized

    Want to Use Drones in Your Construction Project? FAA Has Just Made It Easier.

    Contract Void Ab Initio: Key Insights into the KBR vs. Corps of Engineers Affirmative Defense

    Insolvency of Primary Carrier Does Not Invoke Excess Coverage

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    Fannie Mae Says Millennials Are Finally Leaving Their Parents' Basements

    You Cannot Arbitrate Claims Not Covered By The Arbitration Agreement

    Washington Supreme Court Interprets Ensuing Loss Exception in All-Risk Property Insurance Policy

    Hartford Stadium Controversy Still Unresolved

    Protecting Your Business From Liability Claims Stemming From COVID-19 Exposure

    Locating Construction Equipment with IoT and Mobile Technology

    Florida Passes Tort Reform Bill

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “It’s One, Two… Eight Strikes: You’re Out!”

    GA Federal Court Holds That Jury, Not Judge, Generally Must Decide Whether Notice Was Given “As Soon as Practicable” Under First-Party Property Damage Policies

    Confidence Among U.S. Homebuilders Declines to Eight-Month Low

    Latosha Ellis Selected for 2019 Leadership Council on Legal Diversity Pathfinder Program
    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. Leveraging 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

    Construction of World's Tallest Building to Resume With New $1.9B Contract for Jeddah Tower

    October 28, 2024 —
    Construction of the Jeddah Tower in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia—which is planned to be the world’s tallest building—is set to resume with original contractor Saudi Binladin Group Co. after a years-long pause, owner Jeddah Economic Co.'s parent company, Kingdom Holding Co., announced Oct. 2. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Third-Quarter Gain for Construction

    November 18, 2011 —

    The Associated Builders and Contractors released their analysis of construction work under contract and found that there was no increase in construction backlog from the second quarter of 2011. There was still improvement, however, over 2010, as the third quarter backlog is 16.3 percent higher than that of a year ago.

    The current backlog is 8.1 months, which according to Anirban Basu, the chief economist of the ABC, “is consistent with flat construction spending.” He noted that less than 8 months indicated a decline.

    Read the full story…

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

    Reasons to Be Skeptical About a Millennial Homebuying Boom in 2016

    December 10, 2015 —
    Predicting whether millennials are finally going to start buying homes in large numbers has become a seasonal sporting event for real estate experts (also something resembling a periodic parental nag). There's good reason for the abiding fixation. Millennials are the largest generation in the U.S. labor force and something akin to guppies in the housing market food chain: When a first-time buyer moves into an entry-level house, it lets the sellers upgrade. But they've been held back by housing price increases that outpace wage hikes, not to mention limited access to credit, and rising rents that make it harder to save for a down payment. Will next year be the year that millennials1 finally satisfy builders and real estate agents (not to mention mom and dad) by making their presence felt in the housing market? Yes, but not to the degree that many might hope. Millennials will make up the largest share of homebuyers in 2016 This is more of a demographic inevitability than a prediction. Historically, the largest share of U.S. homebuyers have been between 25 and 34 years old. Millennials will buy one out of three homes in 2016, predicts Jonathan Smoke, chief economist for Realtor.com, a small uptick from this year. If you prefer your glass half empty, though, Zillow Chief Economist Svenja Gudell thinks the median age of first-time home buyers will hit a new high next year. In either case, Americans will continue the trend of buying their first homes later in life than they did in past decades, as the chart below shows—likely due to some mix of wage stagnation, rising housing costs, and a tendency to start families later in life. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Clark, Bloomberg

    Enforceability Of Subcontract “Pay-When-Paid” Provisions – An Important Update

    June 15, 2020 —
    A California Court of Appeals opinion published earlier this month brings a change to payment bond claims brought by unpaid subcontractors and suppliers. The decision (Crosno Construction, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America) places limitations on a payment bond surety’s ability to rely on subcontract “pay-when-paid” language, stating that a payment provision typically found in subcontracts is contrary to the “reasonable time” statutory requirement and will not be enforced. This represents a major shift in California construction payment bond claim rights. Plaintiff Crosno Construction, Inc. (“Crosno) was a subcontractor to general contractor Clark Brothers (“Clark”), who was principal on a public works payment bond issued by Travelers. The owner was a public agency district (“District.”) Crosno had completed most of its subcontract work when a dispute between District and Clark arose, causing the project to stop. Crosno then sought payment through a payment bond claim against Travelers. Travelers denied the claim, relying on the subcontract’s payment provisions and asserting the defense that it had no obligation to pay on the bond claim because the litigation between Clark and the District had not yet reached its conclusion. Subcontract. The subcontract between Clark and Crosno contained a “pay-when-paid” provision stating that Clark would pay Crosno within a reasonable time after receiving payment from the District. In defining “a reasonable time,” the subcontract language provided that the time for payment “in no event shall be less than the time [Clark] and [Crosno] require to pursue to conclusion their legal remedies against [District] or other responsible party to obtain payment.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick McNamara, Porter Law Group
    Mr. McNamara may be contacted at pmcnamara@porterlaw.com

    Construction Contract Clauses That May or May Not Have Your Vote – Part 3

    November 23, 2016 —
    Scope, time and cost provisions may be the most important clauses in your construction contract but they’re not the only ones which can impact your bottom line. The third in a multi-part series, here are some other important construction contract clauses that may determine whether you come out a winner.
      Provision: Supervisory Personnel, Employees, and Authority to Bind Provisions
    • Typical Provision: ”At all times during performance of the Work, Subcontractor shall have at the job site a competent supervisor approved by Owner. Subcontractor’s supervisor shall be deemed a representative of Subcontractor and all communications given to Subcontractor’s supervisor shall be as binding as if such communications were given to Subcontractor. Should Contractor object to Subcontractor’s supervisor’s presence at the job site, or the presence at the job site, or the presence at the job site of any other employee or agent of Subcontractor or any employee or agent of Subcontractor of Subcontractor, Subcontractor shall cause such persons to be replaced immediately as directed by Contractor.”
    • What it Means: Higher-tiered parties have a legitimate interest in ensuring that only competent individuals are allowed to perform work on a project and in ensuring that there are peaceable relations at a job site. Higher-tiered parties also have an interest in ensuring that directives and agreements made and reached in the field are followed. However, it is unreasonable for higher-tiered party or to require that such personnel be able to bind that lower-tiered party to agreements best decided by others.
    • What You Can Do: Lower-tiered parties should seek to include language which provides that only “reasonable” changes to personnel are allowed and, as necessary, limit by category or issue the types of items on-site personnel can bind the lower-tiered party to.
    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

    Insurer Must Defend Additional Insured Though Its Insured is a Non-Party

    November 18, 2019 —
    The plaintiff insurer's motion for partial summary judgment seeking an order that defendant insurer was obligated to defend a non-party as an additional insured was granted. Am Empire Surplus Lines Ins. Co. v. Burlington Ins. Co., 2019 N. Y. Misc. LEXIS 4145 (N. Y. Sup. Ct. July 25, 2019). Quality Building Construction, LLC was the contractor hired to work on exterior facade of a building owned by Central Park West Corporation. The underlying complaint alleged that Quality caused plastic spacers and pedestals used for the penthouse terrace to fall down the roof drain riser. A clog and rainwater backup resulted in water damage to apartment 8A. The resulting damage was allegedly due to the clogged roof drain riser. Quality subcontracted the work to Mega State, Inc. The subcontract required Mega to indemnify and hold Quality harmless against claims in connection with Mega's work, as well as name Quality as an additional insured on a primary, non-contributory bases under Mega's CGL policy. Burlington issued a policy to Mega naming Quality as an additional insured. American Empire issued a CGL policy to Quality. Quality was sued in the underlying action, but Mega was not. American Empire tendered a demand for coverage to Mega and Burlington, relying on the agreement between Quality and Mega. Burlington responded that Mega was not liable for the alleged damages. American Empire sued Burlington. Subsequently, Burlington accepted the tender to defend Quality in the underlying action, and reserved rights as to whether Burlington's policy was primary and on the question of indemnification. American Empire agreed to withdraw its suit if Burlington would modify its reservation of rights. Burlington refused. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Primer Debuts on Life-Cycle Assessments of Embodied Carbon in Buildings

    August 20, 2018 —
    A recently released primer for the use of a life-cycle assessment approach to analyze the environmental impacts of buildings is considered a small but necessary step toward the ambitious goal of getting to net-zero embodied carbon and operational greenhouse gas emissions in the construction, operation and decommissioning of buildings. The LCA guide comes after the release of the first-of-its-kind benchmarking database of embodied carbon in existing buildings. And another first—a tool to calculate embodied carbon in construction—is on the horizon. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    The Contingency Fee Multiplier (For Insurance Coverage Disputes)

    September 10, 2018 —
    The contingency fee multiplier: a potential incentive for taking a case on contingency, such as an insurance coverage dispute, where the insured sues his/her/its insurer on a contingency fee basis. In a recent property insurance coverage dispute, Citizens Property Ins. Corp. v. Agosta, 43 Fla.L.Weekly, D1934b (Fla. 3d DCA 2018), the trial court awarded the insured’s counsel a contingency fee multiplier of two times the amount of reasonable attorney’s fees. The insurer appealed. The Third District affirmed the contingency fee multiplier. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com