BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut contractor 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


    Court of Federal Claims: Upstream Hurricane Harvey Case Will Proceed to Trial

    Construction Workers Face Dangers on the Job

    Appellate Team Secures Victory in North Carolina Governmental Immunity Personal Injury Matter

    TRI Pointe Merges with Weyerhaeuser’s Real Estate Company

    If a Defect Occurs During Construction, Is It an "Occurrence?"

    Washington School District Sues Construction Company Over Water Pipe Damage

    MGM Seeks to Demolish Harmon Towers

    Presidential Executive Order 14008: The Climate Crisis Order

    A Court-Side Seat: May Brings Federal Appellate Courts Rulings and Executive Orders

    Wendel Rosen Attorneys Named as Fellows of the Construction Lawyers Society of America

    No Entitlement to Reimbursement of Pre-Tender Fees

    Ambiguity Kills in Construction Contracting

    The United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, Finds Wrap-Up Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage of Additional Insureds

    You Say Tomato, I Say Tomahto. But When it Comes to the CalOSHA Appeals Board, They Can Say it Any Way They Please

    Construction Defect Reform Dies in Nevada Senate

    N.J. Appellate Court Applies Continuous Trigger Theory in Property Damage Case and Determines “Last Pull” for Coverage

    Five Issues to Consider in Government Contracting (Or Any Contracting!)

    Defense Victory in Breach of Fiduciary Action

    Framework, Tallest Mass Timber Project in the U.S., Is On Hold

    Do Change Orders Need to be in Writing and Other Things That Might Surprise You

    A Proactive Approach to Construction Safety

    AEM Pursuing ISO Standard for Earthmoving Grade-Control Data

    Remote Work Issues to Consider in Light of COVID-19

    Florida Court of Appeals Rejects Insurer’s Attempt to Intervene in Underlying Lawsuit to Submit Special Interrogatories

    Haight’s 2020 San Diego Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Novation Agreements Under Federal Contracts

    Legislatures Shouldn’t Try to Do the Courts’ Job

    Hunton Insurance Head Interviewed Concerning the Benefits and Hidden Dangers of Cyber Insurance

    New Jersey Firm’s Fee Action Tossed for not Filing Substitution of Counsel

    Courthouse Reporter Series: The Travails of Statutory Construction...Defining “Labor” under the Miller Act

    Who is a “Contractor” as Used in “Unlicensed Contractor”?

    Gru Was Wrong About the Money: Court Concludes that Lender Owes Contractor “Contractually, Factually and Practically”

    BHA’s Next MCLE Seminar in San Diego on July 25th

    Third Circuit Affirms Use of Eminent Domain by Natural Gas Pipeline

    Forecast Sunny for Solar Contractors in California

    Commercial Real Estate Brokerages in an Uncertain Russian Market

    Insurer's Attempt to Limit Additional Insured Status Fails

    The Need for Situational Awareness in Construction

    Carroll Brock of Larchmont Homes Dies at Age 88

    Recent Changes in the Law Affecting Construction Defect Litigation

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    Forensic Team Finds Fault with Concrete Slabs in Oroville Dam Failure

    Red Wings Owner, Needing Hockey-Arena Neighborhood, Builds One

    Connecticut Court Clarifies a Limit on Payment Bond Claims for Public Projects

    Data Is Critical for the Future of Construction

    Another Way a Mechanic’s Lien Protects You

    WA Supreme Court Allows Property Owner to Sue Engineering Firm for Lost Profits

    No Coverage Based Upon Your Prior Work Exclusion

    The Simple Reason Millennials Aren't Moving Out Of Their Parents' Homes: They're Crushed By Debt

    Haight Welcomes Elizabeth Lawley
    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

    No Signature? Potentially No Problem for Sureties Enforcing a Bond’s Forum Selection Clause

    March 21, 2022 —
    One of the foundational tenets of contract law is that a party may only be bound by terms they agree to, or in other words, if the party did not sign a contract, that party cannot be bound by the terms thereof. While this principle is generally unwavering, there are certain situations in which a non-signatory to a contract may still be bound by the terms of a contract. In particular, this non-signatory issue may arise when a payment bond claimant makes a bond claim, subsequently files a lawsuit, but the bond contains a forum selection clause different than the venue of the lawsuit and the surety seeks to enforce the bond’s forum selection clause. For example, the claimant may have filed its lawsuit against the surety in federal court, even though the bond provides language specifically mandating that no lawsuit shall be commenced by any claimant other than in a state court where the project is located. Thus, the question then becomes, can the surety enforce the forum selection clause against the claimant when the claimant did not sign the bond and/or never agreed to the terms thereof? The short answer, it depends (yes, that is a very lawyer-like answer). Given recent case law over the past decade, however, the surety has a strong argument in favor of enforcement of the forum selection clause. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian C. Padove, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald, LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Mr. Padove may be contacted at bpadove@watttieder.com

    OSHA Issues New Rules on Injury Record Keeping

    August 19, 2015 —
    On July 28, 2015, OSHA issued proposed rules seeking to clarify an employer’s ongoing obligation to make and maintain accurate records of work-related injuries and illness. The new rules were drafted in response to the U.S. Court of Appeals decision in AKM LLC, d/b/a Volks Constructors v. Secretary of Labor, in which a contractor successfully argued that OSHA’s citation was issued well beyond the six month limitation period. OSHA’s Injury Record Keeping Obligations The Occupational Safety and Health Act requires each employer to make, keep and preserve records of workplace injuries and illnesses. 29 U.S.C. § 658(c). OSHA has promulgated a set of regulations which require employers to record information about work-related injuries and illnesses in three ways. Employers must prepare an incident report and a separate injury log “within seven (7) calendar days of receiving information that a recordable injury or illness has occurred,” 29 C.F.R. § 1904.29(b)(3), and must also prepare a year-end summary report of all recordable injuries during the calendar year, id. § 1904.32(a)(2). An employer “must save” all of these documents for five years from the end of the calendar year those records cover. 29 C.F.R. § 1904.33(a). 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

    Oregon Duty to Defend Triggered by Potential Timing of Damage

    June 28, 2013 —
    The Oregon Supreme Court has concluded that if it is possible that damage could have occurred prior to the completion of the project, then the policies in effect at that time are triggered. John Green of Farella Braun + Martel LLP writes that “we have long argued that, since the duty to defend exists if there is any ‘potential’ of covered liability, there is a potential that damage happened before that project was completed, or at any time after completion, triggering all policies in that time frame.” The Oregon court concluded that if property damage could have happened during construction, the insuerer had a duty to defend and “the insured had no burden to establish any additional facts to support that potential.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Plehat Brings Natural Environments into Design Tools

    May 01, 2019 —
    Natural elements are an essential part of the built environment. However, BIM tools offer almost no support to landscape architecture. Plehat is introducing a new solution that helps architects and decision-makers to understand the dynamics of nature and make smart design choices. Plehat used photogrammetric 3D models of Uunisaari islands, to the south of Helsinki. The experimenters modeled the buildings and the plants on the island and used game engine software to create a virtual reality (VR) experience. They called the app the “Landscape Time Machine”. The technology solution they developed paved the way for new software that the company will launch later this year. In 2018, Plehat, a landscape design startup, received funding from the Finnish national KIRA-digi digitalization project to carry out a test. The experimentation demonstrated how seasonal changes and weather conditions affect plants, and how the environment can be visualized and analyzed virtually. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    So You Want to Arbitrate? Better Make Sure Your Contract Covers All Bases

    August 16, 2021 —
    As a General Contractor, you may prefer to arbitrate any contractual disputes rather than engage in protracted litigation. Many Courts favor arbitration clauses and will enforce them if there is a sufficient reason to do so. However, there are several issues that a General Contractor should consider when including an arbitration clause in its construction agreement with its client. When an arbitration clause is not properly crafted, questions can arise as to who must arbitrate? Who decides whether to arbitrate? Who selects the arbitrator? What will the subject matter of the arbitration be? A look at a recent case in Pennsylvania highlights the need for properly crafted arbitration clauses. A Recent Case Highlights The Importance Of Arbitration Clauses In TEC Construction, LLC v. Greg Rich and Lora Rich filed in the Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, TEC Construction, LLC (“TEC”) and Greg and Lora Rich (the “Riches”), entered into a Construction Agreement with an arbitration clause. Specifically, the parties to the Construction Agreement, TEC and the Riches, agreed to arbitrate any disputes with the American Arbitration Association. Five subcontractors completed the work under the Construction Agreement but none of the subcontractors agreed to arbitrate. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stephanie Nolan Deviney, Fox Rothschild LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Ms. Deviney may be contacted at sdeviney@foxrothschild.com

    Colorado Court of Appeals Defines “Substantial Completion” for Subcontractors’ Work so as to Shorten the Period of Time in Which They Can Be Sued

    October 20, 2016 —
    Over the past few years, there has been a battle raging on in district courts and arbitration hearing rooms throughout Colorado regarding when a subcontractor’s work is to be deemed “substantially complete,” for purposes of triggering Colorado’s six-year statute of repose. C.R.S. § 13-80-104 states, in pertinent part:
    Notwithstanding any statutory provision to the contrary, all actions against any architect, contractor, builder or builder vendor, engineer, or inspector performing or furnishing the design, planning, supervision, inspection, construction, or observation of construction of any improvement to real property shall be brought within the time provided in section 13-80-102 after the claim for relief arises, and not thereafter, but in no case shall such an action be brought more than six years after the substantial completion of the improvement to the real property, except as provided in subsection (2) of this section. * * * (2) In case any such cause of action arises during the fifth or sixth year after substantial completion of the improvement to real property, said action shall be brought within two years after the date upon which said cause of action arises.
    C.R.S. § 13-80-104 (emphasis added). As the battle raged on at the trial court level, subcontractors and design professionals argued that their work should be deemed “substantially complete” when they finished their discrete scope of work within a project. Developers and general contractors, seeking to maintain third-party claims against the subcontractors and design professionals, typically argued either that the subcontractors’ and design professionals’ work should be deemed “substantially complete” upon the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy on the project, or upon the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy for the last building within a project on which the subcontractor or design professional worked. Trial court judges and arbitrators have been split on this issue, with perhaps a slight majority favoring one or the other approaches advocated by developers and general contractors, that the subcontractors’ and design professionals’ work is “substantially complete” upon the issuance of the last certificate of occupancy in a project (the minority view) or upon the issuance of the last certificate of occupancy for the last building within a project on which the subcontractor of design professional worked (the majority view). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Scotiabank Is Cautious on Canada Housing as RBC, BMO Seek Action

    April 12, 2021 —
    Bank of Nova Scotia, Canada’s third-largest lender, waded into the burgeoning debate over whether Justin Trudeau’s government should take immediate steps to cool the nation’s hot housing market, issuing a report that cautioned against rushing to implement new constraints. In a report released Sunday, Scotiabank’s chief economist Jean-Francois Perrault said the recent run-up in home prices nationally over the past year was in large part driven by sluggish supply that failed to keep up with higher demand -- a trend that could reverse itself as new sellers enter the market in coming weeks. If the government does decide to take action, it should target housing speculators, he said. Reprinted courtesy of Shelly Hagan, Bloomberg and Erik Hertzberg, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Massive Redesign Turns Newark Airport Terminal Into a Foodie Theme Park

    March 05, 2015 —
    You wait on what looks like a Soviet bread line. You show your I.D. to a guard. You take off your shoes, empty your pockets, and surrender to a digital scanner. Fortunately, there’s always a bevy of gleaming cocktail bars and foodie outposts welcoming you to the other side. No? Get ready. That’s the plan for United Airlines’ Terminal C at Newark Liberty International Airport—a $120 million redesign that includes 55 dining venues with enough celebrity-chef cameos to rival the glitziest of Las Vegas casinos. Instead of the usual McDonald’s, TCBY, and Sbarro, there will be restaurants serving up far-ranging cuisine, from authentic ramen and tacos to gourmet, Neapolitan-style pizza and Swedish meatballs. Since the terminal must remain in operation, all the structures will be assembled off-site and dropped in next year to keep construction time to a minimum. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Belinda Lanks, Bloomberg