BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope 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


    Toll Brothers Named #1 Home Builder on Fortune Magazine's 2023 World's Most Admired Companies® List

    Withholding Payment or Having Your Payment Withheld Due to Disputes on Other Projects: Know Your Rights to Offset

    ASCE Statement on Devastating Impacts of Hurricane Helene

    An Uncharted Frontier: Nevada First State to Prohibit Defense-Within-Limits Provisions

    An Additional Insured’s Reasonable Expectations may be Different from the Named Insured’s and Must be Considered to Determine whether the Additional Insured is Entitled to Defense from the Insurer of a Commercial Excess & Umbrella Liability Policy

    Construction Recovery Still Soft in New Hampshire

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud

    A Look at Business and Professions Code Section 7031

    4 Steps to Take When a Worker Is Injured on Your Construction Site

    Construction Defects Uncertain Role in Coverage in Pennsylvania

    Millennials Want Houses, Just Like Everybody Else

    Appeal of an Attorney Disqualification Order Results in Partial Automatic Stay of Trial Court Proceedings

    Mass-Timber Furnished Apartments Fare Well in Fire Tests

    What Sustainable Building Materials Will the Construction Industry Rely on in 2020?

    Mobile Home Owners Not a Class in Drainage Lawsuit

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

    Construction Termination Issues Part 6: This is the End (Tips for The Design Professional)

    A New Digital Twin for an Existing Bridge

    Ambiguity in Insurance Policy will be Interpreted in Favor of Insurance Coverage

    How a 10-Story Wood Building Survived More Than 100 Earthquakes

    Awarding Insurer Summary Judgment Before Discovery Completed Reversed

    Paul Tetzloff Elected As Newmeyer & Dillion Managing Partner

    Sweet News for Yum Yum Donuts: Lost Goodwill is Not an All or Nothing Proposition

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

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: Known Loss Doctrine & Interpretation of “Occurrence”

    N.J. Voters Approve $116 Million in School Construction

    How VR and AR Will Help in Remote Expert Assistance

    Know Whether Your Course of Business Operations Are Covered Or Excluded By Your Insurance

    43% of U.S. Homes in High Natural Disaster Risk Areas

    After Fatal House Explosion, Colorado Seeks New Pipeline Regulations

    Steps to Curb Construction Defect Actions for Homebuilders

    New Addition To New Jersey Court Rules Impacts More Than Trial Practice

    Five Facts About Housing That Will Make People In New York City and San Francisco Depressed

    Leonard Fadeeff v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    The Importance of Providing Notice to a Surety

    SIGAR Report Finds +$15 Billion in “Waste, Fraud and Abuse” in Afghanistan

    Confidence Among U.S. Homebuilders Little Changed in January

    Lead Paint: The EPA’s Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule

    Construction Contract Basics: Venue and Choice of Law

    Quick Note: Independent Third-Party Spoliation Of Evidence Claim

    Quick Note: Don’t Forget To Serve The Contractor Final Payment Affidavit

    Pay-if-Paid Clauses, Nasty, but Enforceable

    Perrin Construction Defect Claims & Trial Conference

    Walmart Seeks Silicon Valley Vibe for New Arkansas Headquarters

    No Indemnity After Insured Settles Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability Claims

    Woman Files Suit for Property Damages

    Collapse of Breezeway Attached to Building Covered

    New Home Construction Booming in Texas

    Impaired Property Exclusion Bars Coverage When Loose Bolt Interferes with MRI Unit Operation

    ASCE Statement on Biden Administration Permitting Action Plan
    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

    Governor Signs AB5 Into Law — Reshaping California's Independent Contractor Classification Landscape

    December 02, 2019 —
    Today, Governor Gavin Newsom signed California Assembly Bill 5 (“AB5”), controversial legislation which will have a substantial impact on California employers when it goes into effect on January 1, 2020. AB5 enacts into a statute last year’s California Supreme Court decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal. 5th 903 (2018), and the Court’s three-part standard (the “ABC test”) for determining whether a worker may be classified as an employee or an independent contractor. Under the ABC test established in Dynamex and now under AB5, a worker may be properly considered an independent contractor only if the hiring entity establishes all three of the following: (A) that the worker is free from the control and direction of the hirer in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of such work and in fact; (B) that the worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business; and (C) that the worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed for the hiring entity. Reprinted courtesy of Eric C. Sohlgren, Payne & Fears and Matthew C. Lewis, Payne & Fears Mr. Sohlgren may be contacted at ecs@paynefears.com Mr. Lewis may be contacted at mcl@paynefears.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Graham & Who May Trigger The Need To Protest

    December 23, 2023 —
    On May 30, 2023, the Washington Court of Appeals, Division I, issued a decision that appears to expand a contractor’s obligation with respect to WSDOT notice and claim procedures. In Graham Contracting, Ltd. v. City of Federal Way, No. 83494-1-I, 2023 WL 3721171 (Wash. Ct. App. May 30, 2023) (Unpublished), the Court held that under the 2016 WSDOT Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction (“Standard Specifications”), a Contractor must protest the actions of not only the “Engineer” but also the actions of any person or organization acting on behalf of the Owner. This case arises out of a public construction contract in which Graham Contracting Ltd (“Graham”) built a multi-million dollar roadway improvement for the City of Federal Way along a stretch of Pacific Highway. The appeal was from the trial court’s granting of the City’s motion for summary judgment to dismiss claims by Graham for extra time and money due to delays and impacts to Graham’s construction of the Project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hugo Fraga, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Fraga may be contacted at hugo.fraga@acslawyers.com

    Cold Stress Safety and Protection

    February 27, 2023 —
    The best time to think about cold stress safety isn’t when it’s about to snow – it’s actually when it’s still warm out. “Construction firms and other businesses may start to think about protecting workers against the cold when frigid temperatures and the winter are right around the corner. But we’ve found that oftentimes, that may be too late to start thinking about cold stress prevention,” said Chris O’Hala, director of construction Risk Engineering at The Hartford. “Thinking about cold protection months ahead can prevent serious injuries, illnesses or even death.” O’Hala added that possible solutions for cold-related risks, like planning for temporary heat or building temporary enclosures, “require very specific planning, equipment and materials.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Hartford Staff, The Hartford Insights

    A Court-Side Seat: Guam’s CERCLA Claim Allowed, a “Roundup” Verdict Upheld, and Judicial Process Privilege Lost

    June 14, 2021 —
    This is a brief account of some of the important environmental and administrative law cases recently decided. THE U.S. SUPREME COURT BP PLC, et al. v Mayor and City of Baltimore The issue the court confronted was a procedural matter: Can the defendant energy companies use the federal removal statutes (see 28 USC Section 1442) to remove a state law climate change lawsuit to federal court? Here, a group of energy companies were sued by the mayor and city council of Baltimore in state court, where they alleged that the defendants had concealed the adverse environmental effects of the fossil fuel products they promoted and sold in Baltimore City. Several similar lawsuits have been filed in many state courts, where typically it is alleged that the defendants can be sued on various common law theories. Rather than defend these cases in state court, the defendants have sought to remove these cases to federal court because climate change liability appears to be an issue that should be settled at the federal level. These efforts have been unsuccessful, with most federal trial and appellate courts holding that the reasons cited for removal (oftentimes the federal officer removal statute) have not been persuasive. In this case, both the Maryland federal district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals held they had no jurisdiction to authorize removal, and thus returned the case to the state court. Noting that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled that a removal action could be countenanced under Section 1442, thus creating a circuit split, the Supreme Court held that a straightforward reading of the removal statute empowers the reviewing court to examine all theories for removal that a district court has rejected. Consequently, the Court remanded the case to the Fourth Circuit where it can decide, “in the first instance,” whether there actually exist grounds to remove this case to federal court. 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

    Houston Office Secures Favorable Verdict in Trespass and Nuisance Case Involving Subcontractor’s Accidental Installation of Storm Sewer Pipe on Plaintiff’s Property

    June 12, 2023 —
    Houston, Texas (May 26, 2023) - Houston Partners Joelle Nelson and Matt Begley secured a defense verdict on behalf of a gasoline services company following a four-day trial in the 284th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas. In this case, Lewis Brisbois represented a client who hired a contractor to install a storm sewer line to mitigate flood risks to the client’s property. The contractor, however, deviated from the engineering plans and installed the storm sewer line on a neighboring property owned by the plaintiff. The storm sewer line then remained on the plaintiff’s property for five years while the parties attempted to negotiate potential solutions to the situation. The plaintiff refused multiple reasonable settlement attempts and ultimately sued the client and the contractor for continuous trespass and private nuisance. The contractor’s carrier denied coverage, making the client the target defendant. The matter proceeded to trial. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Seattle’s Audacious Aquarium Throws Builders Swerves, Curves, Twists and Turns

    January 08, 2024 —
    Patrick Nation describes the reinforcing steel for the main tank of the 50,000-sq-ft Seattle Aquarium Ocean Pavilion as a “monster” job for CMC Rebar. In his mind, it was like bending 496 tons of bars “on a golf ball.” In reality, the operation was more like weaving a giant steel basket. Ironworkers had to painstakingly hand-thread the reinforcing steel for the doubly curved and slanted concrete walls of the 350,000-gallon saltwater exhibit—one bar at a time—to create the dense latticework for the 41-ft-tall basket. Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractual Indemnification Limitation on Florida Public Projects

    July 28, 2016 —
    Construction contract indemnification provisions are governed under Florida Statute s. 725.06. This is a very important statute to know if you are drafting indemnification provisions for any type of construction contract. (There is also Florida Statute s. 725.08 that discusses indemnification provisions applicable to design professionals that is also worth knowing.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Florida Court Puts the Claim of Landlord’s Insurer In The No-Fly Zone

    March 06, 2023 —
    In United States Aviation Underwriters v. Turnberry Airport Holdings, LLC, No. 3D22-270, 2023 Fla. App. LEXIS 1207 (U.S. Aviation), the Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District (Appellate Court) considered whether the insurer for a commercial landlord could pursue subrogation against the landlord’s tenant. Based on the terms of the lease between the landlord and the tenant, the Appellate Court held that the landlord’s insurer could not pursue subrogation. In U.S. Aviation, the defendant, Turnberry Airport Holdings, LLC (Turnberry Airport) leased space to an insured aircraft owner. The lease contained the following provision: TENANT agrees that all policies of insurance obtained by it in connection with the Space or as required hereunder shall contain appropriate waiver of subrogation clauses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com