BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco 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


    Hurry Up and Wait! Cal/OSHA Hits Pause on Emergency Temporary Standards for COVID-19 Prevention

    16 Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2021 Top Lawyers!

    Wall Street Is Buying Starter Homes to Quietly Become America’s Landlord

    Congratulations 2019 DE, NJ and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Instant Hotel Tower, But Is It Safe?

    A Closer Look at an HOA Board Member’s Duty to Homeowners

    How California’s Construction Industry has dealt with the New Indemnity Law

    Manhattan Developer Wants Claims Dismissed in Breach of Contract Suit

    EPA and the Corps of Engineers Repeal the 2015 “Waters of the United States” Rule

    "Decay" Found Ambiguous in Collapse Case

    $24 Million Verdict Against Material Supplier Overturned Where Plaintiff Failed To Prove Supplier’s Negligence Or Breach Of Contract Caused A SB800 Violation

    Hurricane Laura: Implications for Insurers in Louisiana

    The Biggest Thing Keeping Young Homebuyers out of the Market Isn't Student Debt

    When is Forum Selection in a Construction Contract Enforceable?

    Hawaiian Electric Finalizes $2 Billion Maui Fire Settlement

    Property Damage to Non-Defective Work Is Covered

    Texas Shortens Cut-Off Date for Suits Against Homebuilders Who Provide a 6-Year Written Warranty

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Clarifies Standard for Imposing Spoliation Sanctions

    Florida Supreme Court Adopts Federal Summary Judgment Standard, Substantially Conforming Florida’s Rule 1.510 to Federal Rule 56

    Bert L. Howe & Associates Brings Professional Development Series to Their San Antonio Office

    BHA Sponsors the 9th Annual Construction Law Institute

    A Win for Policyholders: California Court of Appeals Applies Vertical Exhaustion for Continuous Injury Claims

    LA’s $1.2 Billion Graffiti Towers Put on Sale After Bankruptcy

    Michigan Supreme Court Concludes No Statute of Repose on Breach of Contract

    Quick Note: Steps to Protect and Avoid the “Misappropriation” of a “Trade Secret”

    Residential Interior Decorator Was Entitled to Lien and Was Not Engaging in Unlicensed Contracting

    “Rip and Tear” Damage Remains Covered Under CGL Policy as “Accident”—for Now.

    Kahana Feld LLP Senior Attorney Rachael Marvin and Partner Dominic Donato Obtain Complete Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Labor Law Claims on Summary Judgment

    Dot I’s and Cross T’s When It Comes to Construction Licensure Requirements

    Understand Agreements in Hold Harmless and Indemnity Provisions

    Four Companies Sued in Pool Electrocution Case

    Allegations That COVID-19 Was Physically Present and Altered Property are Sufficient to Sustain COVID-19 Business Interruption Suit

    Mixed Reality for Construction: Applicability and Reality

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/13/22

    Out of the Black

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

    Know When Your Claim “Accrues” or Risk Losing It

    There’s the 5 Second Rule, But Have You Heard of the 5 Year Rule?

    Powering Goal Congruence in Construction Through Smart Contracts

    A New Perspective on Mapping Construction Sites with the Crane Camera System

    Limiting Plaintiffs’ Claims to a Cause of Action for Violation of SB-800

    Your “Independent Contractor” Clause Just Got a Little Less Relevant

    Meet the Forum's Neutrals: TOM DUNN

    Insurance Companies Score Win at Supreme Court

    Revisiting Statutory Offers to Compromise

    Construction Problems May Delay Bay Bridge

    Were Condos a Bad Idea?

    Form Contracts are Great, but. . .

    Economic Loss Rule Bars Claims Against Manufacturer

    California Supreme Court Declines Request to Expand Exceptions to Privette Doctrine for Known Hazards
    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

    Navigating the New Landscape: How AB 12 and SB 567 Impact Landlords and Tenants in California

    March 11, 2024 —
    There are various changes in the Landlord-Tenant laws in CA that became effective in 2024. For the purposes of this article, I wanted to focus on Assembly Bill (AB) 12 and Senate Bill (SB) 567 only. Governor Gavin Newsom recently signed AB 12 into law, a legislation that limits the amount landlords can charge for security deposits to just one month’s rent for unfurnished apartments. While the law aims to make housing more accessible, it raises several concerns for landlords and tenants alike. AB 12, was authored by Assemblyman Matt Haney, D-San Francisco; it passed both the Senate and the Assembly houses in September. The legislation introduces a notable shift from existing law, under which landlords can charge up to two months’ rent for an unfurnished unit and three months’ rent for a furnished one. This exception does not apply when the prospective tenant is a military service member, however. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sharon Oh-Kubisch, Kahana Feld
    Ms. Oh-Kubisch may be contacted at sokubisch@kahanafeld.com

    Does Your U.S. Company Pull Data From European Citizens? Fall In Line With GDPR by May 2018 or Suffer Substantial Fines

    November 15, 2017 —
    The European Union (“EU”) has enacted a strict, comprehensive framework of security regulations aimed to protect its citizens. These regulations, known as the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), provide a blueprint for a combination of required legal, technological and work habits within an organization. Although this is an EU regulation, the new laws will apply to any organization within or outside the EU that collects or processes data of EU citizens. Therefore, U.S. companies must analyze their data and processes to determine whether compliance with the GDPR is necessary. A quickly-approaching deadline of May 25, 2018 must be met to avoid massive fines. What is the GDPR? In order to address the creation of social networking sites, cloud computing, and location-based services, the EU set in motion a process to implement a vigorous set of rules to ensure the right to personal data protection for all European citizens. In April 2016 the European Parliament, the Council, and the Commission adopted a new GDPR, which will take affect on May 25, 2018. This GDPR will streamline cooperation between the data protection authorities on personal data issues allowing companies to deal with one authority - not each of the 28 EU member states. This will allow for quicker decisions by the data protection authorities and greatly reduce the red tape in both compliance and enforcement under the GDPR. This will also create a level playing field by forcing non-EU companies to comply with the same strict regulations - regardless of whether or not the company is established in the EU. Territorial scope of the GDPR The GDPR applies directly to the processing of personal data in the context of the activities of an establishment of a controller or a processor in the EU - regardless of whether the processing takes place in the EU. Additionally, there are specific provisions under the GDPR that apply to non-EU companies if their processing activities relate to (a) the offering of goods or services (irrespective of whether a payment of the data subject is required) or (b) monitoring the behavior of individuals within the EU. Therefore, all companies must determine whether they process or monitor information of EU citizens. If a company falls within one of these categories, compliance with the GDPR is mandatory. What happens if a company fails to comply with the GDPR? Failure to comply with the GDPR could subject a company to crushing administrative fines. The supervisory authority has the power to impose administrative fines under the GDPR. The following violations and breaches would subject a company to administrative fines:
    • Not adhering to the core principles of processing personal data,
    • Breach of notification to EU citizens by controllers and processors,
    • Wrongful transfer of personal data to non-EU countries,
    • Breach of obligations regarding certification,
    • Ignoring the mandates asserted by the supervisory authority,
    • Breach by those responsible for impact assessment, and
    • Wrongful processing of employee data.
    The extent of the violation and type of personal data involved will dictate the severity of the administrative fines imposed on a company. For example, under the GDPR, a company could be subject to administrative fines up to 20,000,000 EUR, or up to 4% of the total worldwide annual revenue of the preceding financial year. Obviously, these fines would be financially crippling to any company. Preparing for May 25, 2018 The May 25, 2018 deadline is fast approaching and preparing for full compliance with the GDPR is paramount. Simple steps should be taken to ensure compliance including to: (1) Review and analyze data repositories for sensitive data, (2) Perform an analysis/accounting of procedure for data collection, and (3) Create an oversite committee dedicated to data activities and compliance. Most importantly, however, is to determine whether compliance with the GDPR is necessary, and strictly follow the requirements of the GDPR to protect from potentially massive fines. Jeffrey M. Dennis currently serves as Newmeyer & Dillion’s Managing Partner and as a business leader, advises his clients on cybersecurity related issues, introducing contractual and insurance opportunities to lessen their risk. You can reach Jeff at jeff.dennis@ndlf.com. Ivo Daniele is a seasoned associate in Newmeyer & Dillion’s Walnut Creek office. His practice includes representing private and public companies with both their transactional and litigation needs. You can reach Ivo at ivo.daniele@ndlf.com. About Newmeyer & Dillion For more than 30 years, Newmeyer & Dillion has delivered creative and outstanding legal solutions and trial results for a wide array of clients. With over 70 attorneys practicing in all aspects of business, employment, real estate, construction and insurance law, Newmeyer & Dillion delivers legal services tailored to meet each client’s needs. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, with offices in Walnut Creek, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, Newmeyer & Dillion attorneys are recognized by The Best Lawyers in America©, and Super Lawyers as top tier and some of the best lawyers in California, and have been given Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review's AV Preeminent® highest rating. For additional information, call 949-854-7000 or visit www.ndlf.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Does Your U.S. Company Pull Data From European Citizens? Fall In Line With GDPR by May 2018 or Suffer Substantial Fines

    Lien Actions Versus Lien Foreclosure Actions

    June 02, 2016 —
    The lawsuits required to perfect and foreclose upon a lien have confused lien claimants and their attorneys for years. This confusion was recently demonstrated in a recent case entitled Founders Kitchen and Bath, Inc. v. Alexander, No. A15A1262, 2015 WL 6875026 (Ga. App. 2015). In the case, the trial court granted an owner’s motion for summary judgment against a subcontractor that sought to foreclose on its materialman’s lien. In deciding to reverse the trial court’s decision, the Court held that issues of material fact still existed as to whether the owner and subcontractor were in privity of contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook Jr., Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    How Contractors Can Prevent Fraud in Their Workforce

    August 13, 2019 —
    The word fraud might conjure up images of Wall Street executives led out to police cars in cuffs, or sleazy conmen with slicked-back hair. While these ideas might be popular in movies and TV, and often in the news, many small and large businesses fall victim to fraud. Whether it’s a trusted site manager who needed a little extra cash to cover an unexpected bill or the accountant who’s been on board for years and has been slowly siphoning an extra paycheck through a ghost employee each month, fraud might be hitting businesses without them even knowing it. The construction industry is hardly immune to such schemes. According to the ACFE’s 2018 Report to the Nations on Occupational Fraud and Abuse, organizations lose an estimated 5% of their revenue each year to fraud. The median amount lost per instance of fraud was $130,000 across all industries, but fraud cases in the construction industry cost almost twice that much at $227,000 per fraud. They also last longer on average: fraud schemes in the construction industry continue for 24 months before being detected versus the overall median average of 16 months. The more time a scheme continues, the more money is lost for organizations. What types of fraud schemes are most common in the construction industry? The construction industry is more susceptible to certain types of fraud than other industries due to the nature of the work. The companies may be smaller in size leading to fewer resources to combat fraud and more trust among employees. Also, construction companies inherently deal with many vendors, subcontractors, bidding organizations and other various third parties, which can all pose fraud risks. Reprinted courtesy of Sarah Hofmann, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Are We Headed for a Work Shortage?

    June 17, 2015 —
    A recent Wall Street Journal article, Worker Shortage Hammers Builders, noted that construction industry employers are facing a tight labor market. “U.S. builders shed more than 2 million jobs during and after the housing bust. Now they say they can’t find enough carpenters, electricians, plumbers and other craftsmen for a growing pipeline of work.” That is certainly consistent with everything that I’ve heard and read about construction companies in the Midwest. Unfortunately, it seems as though the problem is only going to get worse. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    The Starter Apartment Is Nearly Extinct in San Francisco and New York

    October 28, 2015 —
    So you’re looking for a one-bedroom apartment in San Francisco, and you have about $2,000 a month to spend. You know the city’s median rent is more than $4,200 a month, but median means half the apartments cost less. Surely there are larger, more expensive apartments pulling up the midpoint. Perhaps. But there’s a reason Google employees are sleeping in their trucks. Ninety-one percent of one-bedroom apartments in San Francisco cost more than $2,000 a month. Perhaps more surprising is the number of apartments that occupy the high end of rental rates: In Manhattan, a fifth of one-bedrooms rent for more than $4,000. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Clark, Bloomberg

    San Diego Developer Strikes Out on “Disguised Taking” Claim

    October 26, 2017 —
    In Dryden Oaks, LLC v. San Diego County Regional Airport Authority et al.(D068161, filed 9/26/17, publication order 10/19/17), the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District held that the County of San Diego (County) and the San Diego Regional Airport Authority (Authority) were entitled to summary judgment on a developer’s “disguised taking” theory of inverse condemnation. In 2001, the developer purchased two large lots (designated Lot 24 and Lot 25) adjacent to the end of a runway at the Palomar Airport in Carlsbad. Plaintiff obtained the necessary permits from the City of Carlsbad and successfully completed construction of an industrial building on Lot 24 in 2005. However, the plaintiff never began development of Lot 25 and the building permit for the property expired in 2012. The developer was then unable to renew the building permit because the Authority had adopted the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) in the interim period, which reclassified the Lots as part of a Runway Protection Zone (RPZ). The developer received a letter explaining that “despite the earlier approval the proposed development was no longer feasible because the ALUCP was more restrictive than the prior compatibility plan and the application's proposed use of ‘research and development’ was not permissible.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael C. Parme, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
    Mr. Parme may be contacted at mparme@hbblaw.com

    EPA Looks to Reduce Embodied Carbon in Materials With $160M in Grants

    August 19, 2024 —
    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that construction materials used for buildings and built infrastructure account for more than 15% of global greenhouse gas emissions. The agency now hopes to boost adoption of materials with lower embodied emissions by offering $160 million in grants to better track and ultimately reduce climate pollution associated with those materials. 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