BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractor
    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


    PCL Sues Big Bank for $30M in Claimed NJ Mall Unpaid Work

    A Networked World of Buildings

    “Wait! Do You Have All Your Ducks in a Row?” Filing of a Certificate of Merit in Conjunction With a Complaint

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Wrap Music to an Insurer’s Ears?”

    Construction Defects and Commercial General Liability in Illinois

    EEOC Suit Alleges Site Managers Bullied Black Workers on NY Project

    Challenging and Defending a California Public Works Stop Payment Notice: Affidavit vs. Counter-Affidavit Process

    White and Williams Recognized by BTI Consulting Group for Client Service

    Hawaii Federal District Court Remands Coverage Dispute

    California Supreme Court Finds Negligent Supervision Claim Alleges An Occurrence

    Terminating the Notice of Commencement (with a Notice of Termination)

    Vermont Supreme Court Finds COVID-19 May Damage Property

    Contractor’s Coverage For Additional Insured Established by Unilateral Contract

    Professional Liability and Attorney-Client Privilege Bulletin: Intra-Law Firm Communications

    Whose Lease Is It Anyway: Physical Occupancy Not Required in Landlord-Tenant Dispute

    Construction in Indian Country – What You Need To Know About Sovereign Immunity

    The Cheap and Easy Climate Fix That Can Cool the Planet Fast

    A Court-Side Seat: As SCOTUS Decides Another Regulatory “Takings” Case, a Flurry of Action at EPA

    New California "Construction" Legislation

    Official Tried to Influence Judge against Shortchanged Subcontractor

    California Indemnity and Defense Construction Law Changes for 2013

    Texas Federal Court Finds Total Pollution Exclusion Does Not Foreclose a Duty to Defend Waterway Degradation Lawsuit

    Avoiding Construction Defect “Nightmares” in Florida

    Insureds' Summary Judgment Motion on Mold Limitation Denied

    Contractor Given a Wake-Up Call for Using a "Sham" RMO/RME

    Progress, Property, and Privacy: Discussing Human-Led Infrastructure with Jeff Schumacher

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

    Subcontractor’s Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    Record-Setting Construction in Fargo

    Why Is California Rebuilding in Fire Country? Because You’re Paying for It

    Montana Theater Threatened by Closure due to Building Safety

    Duty to Defend Sorted Between Two Insurers Based Upon Lease and Policies

    Not Our Territory: 11th Circuit Dismisses Hurricane Damage Appraisal Order for Lack of Jurisdiction

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

    May Heat Wave Deaths Prompt New Cooling Rules in Chicago

    The “Right to Repair” Construction Defects in the Rocky Mountain and Plains Region

    PSA: Performing Construction Work in Virginia Requires a Contractor’s License

    Nevada Judge says Class Analysis Not Needed in Construction Defect Case

    Quick Note: Expert Testimony – Back to the Frye Test in Florida

    Insurers' Communications Through Brokers Not Privileged

    Homebuilder Confidence Takes a Beating

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Recognized in “The Best Lawyers in America” & “Best Lawyers: One’s to Watch” 2024 Editions

    Crypto and NFTs Could Help People Become Real Estate Tycoons

    An Increase of US Metro Areas’ with Normal Housing & Economic Health

    New Law Raises Standard for Defense Experts as to Medical Causation

    Legislative Update – The CSLB’s Study Under SB465

    Victoria Kajo Named One of KNOW Women's 100 Women to KNOW in America for 2024

    San Francisco OKs Revamped Settling Millennium Tower Fix

    Leonard Fadeeff v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    Hyundai to Pay 47M to Settle Construction Equipment's Alleged Clean Air Violations
    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

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

    March 01, 2017 —
    The new Part 107 FAA Rules took effect on Monday, August 29, 2016. Unlike the previous requirements for flying a drone commercially, the new rules are much more simplistic and permissive of a broad amount of commercial drone usage. The following is the basic knowledge you need to legally use a drone on your future projects. To fly a drone commercially, there are now four major requirements:
    • You must be at least sixteen years old;
    • You must register your drone online;
    • You must pass an aviation knowledge test administered at an FAA-approved testing center; and
    • You must pass review by the Transportation Security Administration.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Masaki J. Yamada, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Mr. Yamada may be contacted at myamada@ac-lawyers.com

    Drone Operation in a Construction Zone

    August 17, 2020 —
    The potential uses of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) in the construction industry continue to expand as new technologies enter the market and construction companies realize UAS can perform unique tasks at tremendous cost savings. The full technological capabilities of UAS are, however, limited by law for public safety reasons. UAS share airspace with traditional passenger, military and cargo aircraft, and are potential hazards for humans below. The risk of potential catastrophic collisions has led to a careful approach to the adoption of this technology. All U.S. airspace is exclusively regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and therefore, most drone regulation originates from this agency. Many states and localities have also enacted additional limits on UAS operations, and many of these nonfederal regulations are presently on unsure footing after a federal court ruling in Singer v. Newton invalidated a local regulation that conflicted with FAA regulations. What is clear is that all commercial UAS operations must comply with FAA regulations. Any drone operation conducted by any private company, even through use of an employee’s personal drone, would constitute commercial operation subject to regulation. Reprinted courtesy of Mark R. Berry, Peckar & Abramson and Freddy X. Muñoz, Peckar & Abramson Mr. Berry may be contacted at mberry@pecklaw.com Mr. Muñoz may be contacted at fmunoz@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Five-Year Statute of Limitations on Performance-Type Surety Bonds

    December 01, 2017 —
    The statute of limitations on a claim against a performance-type bond is 5 years from the breach of the bond, i.e., the bond-principal’s default (based on the same statute of limitations that governs written contracts / obligations). See Fla. Stat. s. 95.11(2)(b). This 5-year statute of limitations is NOT extended and does NOT commence when the surety denies the claim. It commences upon the default of the bond-principal, which would be the act constituting the breach of the bond. This does not mean that the statute of limitations starts when a latent defect is discovered. This is not the case. In dealing with a completed project, the five-year statute of limitations would run when the obligee (beneficiary of the bond) accepted the work. See Federal Insurance Co. v. Southwest Florida Retirement Center, Inc., 707 So.2d 1119, 1121-22 (Fla. 1998). This 5-year statute of limitations on performance-type surety bonds has recently been explained by the Second District in Lexicon Ins. Co. v. City of Cape Coral, Florida, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D2521a (Fla. 2d DCA 2017), a case where a developer planned on developing a single-family subdivision. 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

    Prompt Payment More Likely on Residential Construction Jobs Than Commercial or Public Jobs

    May 02, 2022 —
    NEW ORLEANS, May 02, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- In construction, no line of work guarantees prompt and in-full payments, but contractors working on residential jobs say their rate of prompt payment is significantly better than commercial or public jobs, according to the 2022 Levelset Cash Flow and Payment Report. However, the report revealed that residential construction jobs require increased communication to improve the chance of prompt payment when compared to commercial or public jobs. Contractors working on residential projects are more than twice as likely as those working on public projects to report getting paid within 30 days, with residential construction contractors saying they are paid in 30 days or less 48% of the time and public construction contractors saying that only happens 21% of the time. Significantly slow payments of 60 days or more are three times more likely on public construction projects than on residential construction projects, according to the survey participants. Residential contractors say it happens rarely, just 6% of the time, while public project contractors say it happens nearly one out of five times (18%). For more information about the report and a detailed summary of findings, please visit: www.levelset.com/survey About Levelset Levelset's mission is to empower contractors to always get what they earn. Levelset's products help millions in the construction industry each year to make payment paperwork and compliance easier, get cash faster, monitor the risk on jobs and contractors, and better understand payment processes and rules. The results are faster payments, access to capital, and fewer surprises. Founded in 2012, Levelset is based in New Orleans, Louisiana, with offices in Austin, Texas, and Cairo, Egypt, and is owned and operated by Procore Technologies, Inc. For more information, visit www.levelset.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    School’s Lawsuit over Defective Field Construction Delayed

    October 08, 2013 —
    The lawsuit from an Oregon school district over the faulty installation of an artificial playing field has been postponed. The chief financial officer of the Hillsboro School District noted that there is no new date set. Drainage problems caused depressions in the soccer field, leading to damage of the artificial turf. The district subsequently repaired the playing field. Two defendants, Mahlum Architects and American Sport Product Group, have already settled with the school district. The two final defendants are Robinson Construction and Geocon Northwest Inc. Robinson Construction built the field. None of the parties have released information about the settlements. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Congratulations to Partner Vik Nagpal on his Nomination for West Coast Casualty’s Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence!

    March 27, 2023 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is honored to share that Downtown San Diego and Encinitas Managing Partner Vik Nagpal is nominated for West Coast Casualty’s Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence! Every year, West Coast Casualty recognizes an individual who is committed, trustworthy, and has contributed to the betterment of the construction defect community. The award is named after the late Judge Jerrold S. Oliver who is considered a “founding father” in the alternate resolution process in construction claims and litigation. Each year, members of the construction community are asked to nominate individuals who invoke the same spirit as Judge Oliver. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You May Want an Intervention …”

    June 10, 2024 —
    You may want an intervention … but you are not getting one! So said a federal court in New Orleans to a masonry supplier seeking to intervene in in an upstream subcontractor’s lawsuit against a payment bond surety for allegedly unpaid subcontract sums. It all seems so obvious: the masonry supplier indicates it is unpaid, and the subcontractor to which it supplied materials is saying the same thing and pursuing monies from the general contractor’s surety. Eventually, if the subcontractor prevails against the surety, monies ought to flow to the supplier – a set of facts lending itself to an intervention. The federal district court disagreed, however. Referring to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2) and prior United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals case law the topic, the court opined that the masonry supplier lacked an interest in the subcontractor’s potential recovery that was “related to the property or transaction that forms the basis of the controversy…an interest that is ‘direct, substantial, [and] legally protectable.’" Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Architect Sues School District

    November 20, 2013 —
    SFL+A Architects is suing the Marlboro County, South Carolina School District over $690,000 that the architect claims is owed to it by the school district. The firm did design work for the Blenheim Elementary Middle School, which opened in January. The architectural firm contends that the school district refused to pay for anything outside of basic services and failed to pay the full amount on those either. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of