BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut architectural 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


    Jury Trials and Mediation in Philadelphia County: Virtually in Person

    Panthers Withdraw City, County Deal Over Abandoned Facility

    President Trump’s Infrastructure Plan Requires a Viable Statutory Framework (PPP Statutes)[i]

    Revised Cause Identified for London's Wobbling Millennium Bridge After Two Decades

    Resolving Subcontractor Disputes with Pass-Through Claims and Liquidation Agreements

    Builder Must Respond To Homeowner’s Notice Of Claim Within 14 Days Even If Construction Defect Claim Is Not Alleged With The “Reasonable Detail”

    Party Loses Additional Insured Argument by Improper Pleading

    Assert a Party’s Noncompliance of Conditions Precedent with Particularity

    Consultant’s Corner: Why Should Construction Business Owners Care about Cyber Liability Insurance?

    Construction Contract Clauses Only a Grinch Would Love – Part 4

    Sioux City Building Owners Sue Architect over Renovation Costs

    New Hampshire Applies Crete/Sutton Doctrine to Bar Subrogation Against College Dormitory Residents

    Virtual Jury Trials of Construction Disputes: The Necessary Union of Both Sides of the Brain

    Value In Being Deemed “Statutory Employer” Under Workers Compensation Law

    How Many Homes have Energy-Efficient Appliances?

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (05/11/22)

    Cameron Pledges to Double Starter Homes to Boost Supply

    Sacramento’s Commercial Construction Market Heats Up

    Over 70 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 4th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    Colorado Senate Voted to Kill One of Three Construction Defect Bills

    Eleven WSHB Lawyers Honored on List of 2016 Rising Stars

    Haight Celebrates 2024 New Partner Promotions!

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Louisiana Supreme Court Holds Architect Has No Duty to Safeguard Third Parties Against Injury, Regardless of Knowledge of Dangerous Conditions on the Project

    Big League Dreams a Nightmare for Town

    Colorado’s Need for Condos May Spark Construction Defect Law Reform

    Andrea DeField Recognized In 2024 List of Influential Business Women By South Florida Business Journal

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Hundreds of Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Honors Four Partners as ‘Lawyers of the Year’

    Unrelated Claims Against Architects Amount to Two Different Claims

    Dump Site Provider Has Valid Little Miller Act Claim

    Schools Remain Top Priority in Carolinas as Cleanup From Storms Continues

    Illinois Non-Profit Sues over Defective Roof

    Distinguishing Hawaii Law, New Jersey Finds Anti-Assignment Clause Ineffective

    Mississippi exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    Illinois Appellate Court Finds Insurer Estopped From Denying Coverage Where Declaratory Judgment Suit Filed Too Late

    Subcontract Requiring Arbitration Outside of Florida

    Reminder: Always Order a Title Search for Your Mechanic’s Lien

    California Case Is a Reminder That Not All Insurance Policies Are Alike Regarding COVID-19 Losses

    Wyncrest Commons: Commonly Used Progress Payments in Construction Contracts Do Not Render Them Installment Contracts

    ASCE Statement on Congress Passage of National Debt Limit Suspension

    Kiewit Hired as EPC for Fire-Damaged Freeport Gas Terminal Fix

    Court Holds That Parent Corporation Lacks Standing to Sue Subsidiary’s Insurers for Declaratory Relief

    London Office Builders Aren’t Scared of Brexit Anymore

    $109-Million Renovation Begins on LA's Willowbrook/Rosa Parks Station

    Partner Denis Moriarty and Of Counsel William Baumgaertner Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2017

    CFTC Establishes Climate-Risk Unit, Echoing Other Biden Administration Agency Themes

    U.S. Codes for Deck Attachment

    Legal Disputes Soar as Poor Information Management Impacts the AEC Industry

    Following Pennsylvania Trend, Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Construction Defect

    Updated 3/13/20: Coronavirus is Here: What Does That Mean for Your Project and Your Business?

    Water Drainage Case Lacks Standing
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Montreal Bridge Builders Sue Canada Over New Restrictions

    April 13, 2017 —
    The consortium building the $3.2-billion Champlain Bridge in Montreal has sued Canada’s government for $93 million, claiming transportation officials gave it late notice of stricter load limits that could add to delay and make it liable for tens of millions of dollars in penalties, according to Canadian press reports and a stock analyst’s comments. A spokeswoman for the team’s lead firm, engineer-contractor SNC-Lavalin, confirms the March 28 filing in Quebec Superior Court but declined further comment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott Van Voorhis, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Spearin Doctrine 100 Years Old and Still Thriving in the Design-Build Delivery World

    January 09, 2019 —
    The Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Spearin, [1] also referred to as the Spearin doctrine, is a landmark construction decision.[2] The Spearin doctrine provides that the Owner impliedly warrants the information, plans and specifications which an Owner provides to a General Contractor. If a Contractor is bound to build according to plans and specifications prepared by the Owner, the Contractor will not be responsible for the consequences of defects in the plans and specifications. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at john.ahlers@acslawyers.com

    New York Shuts Down Majority of Construction

    March 30, 2020 —
    Due to pressure from construction workers, officials, and some construction workers having tested positive for COVID-19, the Empire State Development Corp. (acting on behalf of Governor Cuomo) has frozen all construction in New York today, with the exception of work on hospitals and health care facilities, transit facilities, roads and bridges, affordable housing and homeless shelters. As a result, commercial construction and condominium projects are on hold, with the exception of work that must be completed to prevent unsafe conditions. Until now, construction has been considered “essential” in New York. Reprinted courtesy of Laura Bourgeois LoBue, Pillsbury and Matthew D. Stockwell, Pillsbury Ms. LoBue may be contacted at laura.lobue@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Stockwell may be contacted at matthew.stockwell@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Denial of Motion to Dissolve Lis Pendens Does Not Automatically Create Basis for Certiorari Relief

    November 16, 2023 —
    A recent appellate decision out of Florida’s Sixth District Court of Appeal holds that a trial court’s denial of motion to dissolve a lis pendens does NOT automatically give a basis for a petition for a writ of certiorari. Generalized allegations of “irreparable harm” to support the basis for the petition for writ of certiorari are insufficient. Rather, the party moving for the petition MUST clearly demonstrate the irreparable harm; otherwise, the petition for writ of certiorari will fail. A lis pendens has legal significance. It is a recorded document that notifies the world that there is a pending lawsuit dealing with the real property at issue. This is important because who wants to buy a piece of property that is subject to litigation – that would be a risky transaction! In CPPB, LLC v. Taurus Apopka City Center, LLC, 48 Fla.L.Weekly D1837a (Fla. 6th DCA 2023), a dispute arose as to a real estate transaction. The owner sold a parcel to a buyer. The owner also owned three adjacent parcels. As part of the transaction, the buyer agreed to perform certain improvements to all of the parcels including those adjacent parcels owned by the owner. The owner deposited funds in escrow for purposes of its share of the improvements. A payment dispute arose regarding the improvements and the buyer sued the seller. The seller filed a counterclaim to rescind the transaction along with a recorded lis pendens on the parcel purchased by the buyer. The buyer moved to dissolve the lis pendens which the trial court denied. This prompted the appeal – a petition for a write of certiorari based on the trial court’s denial of the motion to dissolve the lis pendens. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Texas Central Wins Authority to Take Land for High-Speed Rail System

    October 03, 2022 —
    Move over luxury bus lines and quick flights. Central Texans should be on the lookout for bulldozers and train stops. On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of Texas held that Texas Central Railroad & Infrastructure, Inc. and related entities (collectively “Texas Central”) have eminent domain authority to acquire property for a proposed high-speed rail system between Dallas and Houston.[1] Specifically, the Court held that the corporation qualifies as an “interurban electric railway company” under the Texas Transportation Code. This ruling grants Texas Central the broad condemnation authority to procure land for the project. Texas Central has Statutory Authority to Take Land The plaintiff in the matter, a farm owner with property south of Dallas along the proposed path of the bullet train, challenged the companies power to condemn land. The landowner’s declaratory judgment action challenged Texas Central’s eminent-domain authority. Under Texas law, condemnation power must be conferred by the legislature, either expressly or by necessary implication.[2] Here, Texas Central was created for the purpose of constructing, acquiring, maintaining, or operating lines of electric railway between Texas municipalities. The Court found that Texas Central is engaged in activities to further that purpose. Therefore, the Court concluded, that although legislators did not contemplate high-speed railways at the time of drafting the Transportation Code, Texas Central nonetheless qualified as “interurban electric railway companies” under the statute. Reprinted courtesy of Barclay Nicholson, Sheppard Mullin and Erica Gibbons, Sheppard Mullin Mr. Nicholson may be contacted at bnicholson@sheppardmullin.com Ms. Gibbons may be contacted at egibbons@sheppardmullin.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    DC Circuit Upholds EPA’s Latest RCRA Recycling Rule

    September 23, 2019 —
    On July 2, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decided the case of California Communities Against Toxics, et al. v. EPA. In this decision, the court rejected the latest petition to strike or vacate EPA’s 2018 revisions to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste recycling rules. In 1985, EPA promulgated a new regulatory definition of “solid waste,” which is the linchpin of the agency’s very stringent hazardous waste management rules. (See the rules located at 40 CFR Sections 260-268.) Unless a material is a “solid waste” as defined by the rules, it cannot also be a hazardous waste. The 1985 rules grappled with the challenges posed by recycling practices, and attempted to distinguish between legitimate recycling which is not subject to hazardous waste regulation, and other more suspect forms of recycling. The rules are complex and replete with nuance. In doing so, EPA was adhering to RCRA’s statutory mandate that it develop appropriate rules to govern the treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous waste, while also promoting “properly conducted recycling and reuse.” The DC Circuit reviewed the 1985 rules in the seminal case of American Mining Congress v EPA, 824 F.2d 1177 (1987), (AMC) and stressed that only those materials that were truly discarded could be regulated as solid waste; for instance, those materials that were destined for immediate recycling or recovery in an ongoing production process were not discarded and hence were not solid waste. Over the years, the court has struggled to clarify the basic holding of AMC in numerous cases while EPA has frequently revised and amended the RCRA rules, and in particular the definition of solid waste, in an attempt to balance the policies mandated by the statute. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Harmon Tower Demolition on Hold Due to Insurer

    November 27, 2013 —
    Permission for CityCenter to demolish Harmon Tower over claims of dangerous construction defects have been withdrawn by the judge in the case after the building’s insurer said it needed more time to investigate. After they were granted permission to demolish the building on August 23, CityCenter filed a claim of total loss with their insurer FM Global on August 27. Now FM Global is saying that they need to further inspect the building. Meanwhile, a demolition contractor has already gained approval to start removing the exterior glass. And things stand, it looks as if that won’t be happening on the planned date of December 2. CityCenter contends that FM Global has already done their inspections, describing FM Global’s prior actions as “the most extensive investigation of anyone,” according to Mark Ferrario, an attorney for CityCenter. Also, the initial plan to implode the building has been rejected. Should demolition proceed, the building will be dismantled floor by floor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Homebuilding Continues to Recover in San Antonio Area

    December 04, 2013 —
    There was a slowing in the third quarter, but home builders expect that 2013 will see more than 9,000 home starts in the San Antonio area. And even though the third quarter was slow, it was still about 3% above the same quarter in 2012. And the new homes are more expensive. Jack Inselmann, a senior vice president at MetroStudy noted that “in 2011, 40 percent of housing activity was under $175,000. And here we are two years later and 31 percent is under $175,000.” He worries that people looking for homes will go to the resale market, instead of buying a new home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of