BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut fenestration 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


    COVID-19 Information and Resources

    Colorado Finally Corrects Thirty-Year Old Flaw in Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    Developer Sues TVA After It Halts Nuke Site Sale

    California Supreme Court Holds that Prevailing Wages are Not Required for Mobilization Work, for Now

    New Jersey School Blames Leaks on Construction Defects, May Sue

    California Contractor Spills Coffee on Himself by Failing to Stay Mechanics Lien Action While Pursuing Arbitration

    Reaffirming the Importance of Appeal Deadlines Under the Contract Disputes Act

    1 De Haro: A Case Study on Successful Cross-Laminated Timber Design and Construction in San Francisco

    The Increasing Trend of Caps in Construction Contracts and Negotiating Them

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

    Colorado Supreme Court Weighs in on Timeliness of Claims Against Subcontractors in Construction Defect Actions

    When Coronavirus Cases Spike at Construction Jobsites

    Punchlist: The News We Didn’t Quite Get To – May 2016

    Untangling Unique Legal Issues in Modern Modular Construction

    Expert's Opinions On Causation Leads Way To Summary Judgment For Insurer

    New Index Tracking Mortgages for New Homes

    Public Adjuster Cannot Serve As Disinterested Appraiser

    The Future Has Arrived: New Technologies in Construction

    Planes, Trains and Prevailing Wages. Ok, No Planes, But Trains and Prevailing Wages Yes

    10 Safety Tips for General Contractors

    California Mediation Confidentiality May Apply to Third Party “Participants” Retained to Provide Analysis

    Florida’s Statute of Limitations / Repose for Actions Founded on Construction Improvement Modified

    Contractor Haunted by “Demonized” Flooring

    Homeowner Loses Suit against Architect and Contractor of Resold Home

    More In-Depth Details on the Davis-Bacon Act Overhaul

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “That’s Not How I Read It”

    Insurer Need Not Pay for Rejected Defense When No Reservation of Rights Issued

    Construction Activity on the Upswing

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Jason Moberly Caruso As Its Newest Partner

    A Court-Side Seat: Appeals and Agency Developments at the Close of 2020

    What’s in a Name? Trademarks and Construction

    Affordable Housing should not be Filled with Defects

    SCOTUS to Weigh Landowners' Damage Claim Against Texas DOT

    UPDATE: Texas Federal Court Permanently Enjoins U.S. Department of Labor “Persuader Rule” Requiring Law Firms and Other Consultants to Disclose Work Performed for Employers on Union Organization Efforts

    Nevada Court Adopts Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    HP Unveils Cheaper, 3-D Printing System to Spur Sales

    Texas Construction Firm Officials Sentenced in Contract-Fraud Case

    Court Finds That Limitation on Conditional Use Permit Results in Covered Property Damage Due to Loss of Use

    Now Available: Seyfarth’s 50 State Lien Law Notice Requirements Guide (2023-2024 Edition)

    Negligence Against a Construction Manager Agent

    The Need for Situational Awareness in Construction

    U.S. Supreme Court Allows Climate Change Lawsuits to Proceed in State Court

    In a Win for Property Owners California Court Expands and Clarifies Privette Doctrine

    Proposed Changes to Federal Lease Accounting Standards

    Solutions To 4 Common Law Firm Diversity Challenges

    Appeals Court Rules that Vertical and Not Horizontal Exhaustion Applies to Primary and First-Layer Excess Insurance

    Policing Those Subcontractors: It Might Take Extra Effort To Be An Additional Insured

    Infrastructure Money Comes With Labor Law Strings Attached
    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

    A New Way to Design in 3D – Interview with Pouria Kay of Grib

    August 24, 2017 —
    In this podcast interview with Pouria Kay, CEO and Co-founder at Grib, we talk about the startup’s new, intuitive 3D design tool. Grib® is a cloud–based software that turns a mobile device into a universal controller. With Grib, both young and professional designers can sketch complex objects without first having to learn cumbersome 3D software. You work intuitively in actual 3D space and interact with your environment using augmented reality. All you need is pen, paper, and your mobile device. You can share models with friends, order a print, or export them if needed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at info@aepartners.fi

    Arizona Supreme Court Clarifies Area Variance Standard; Property Owners May Obtain an Area Variance When Special Circumstances Existed at Purchase

    October 19, 2017 —
    In Pawn 1st v. City of Phoenix, the Arizona Supreme Court rejected a Court of Appeals rule that would have unduly restrained alienation of property in Arizona. The Court of Appeals found that the City of Phoenix Board of Adjustment acted beyond its authority when it granted an area variance to a pawn shop where the special circumstances causing a need for the variance existed before the pawn shop purchased the property. Under Arizona law, boards of adjustment cannot grant an area variance where the special circumstances requiring the variance are self-imposed. The Court of Appeals adopted a rule that knowledge of special circumstances at the time of purchase made the special circumstances self-imposed, foreclosing the purchaser’s ability to obtain a variance. This rule would have severely restricted property purchasers’ ability to obtain area variances in Arizona and by extension likely strained property transactions. The underlying case involved a pawn shop that was proposed in southeast Phoenix. After the property purchaser obtained approval for a required use permit (for a pawn shop) and a variance (for a 500 foot residential setback) from the City of Phoenix Board of Adjustment, a competing pawn shop filed a special action arguing that the variance was a use variance, not an area variance, beyond the board of adjustment’s authority. Reprinted courtesy of Snell & Wilmer attorneys Nick Wood, Adam Lang, Noel Griemsmann and Brianna Long Mr. Wood may be contacted at nwood@swlaw.com Mr. Lang may be contacted at alang@swlaw.com Mr. Noel may be contacted at ngriemsmann@swlaw.com Ms. Brianna may be contacted at bllong@swlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    First-Party Statutory Bad Faith – 60 Days to Cure Means 60 Days to Cure

    October 19, 2020 —
    In a first party bad-faith lawsuit, such as a bad faith claim against an insured’s property insurer, there are three requirements that must be met before the bad faith lawsuit is filed: “‘(1) determination of the insurer’s liability for coverage; (2) determination of the extent of the insured’s damages; and (3) the required notice must be filed under section 624.155(3)(a).’” Fortune v. First Protective Ins. Co., 45 Fla. L. Weekly D2092a (Fla. 2d DCA 2020) (citation omitted). The third requirement is for the insured to file a Civil Remedy Notice (known as a “CRN”) as a condition precedent to filing a statutory bad faith lawsuit giving the insurer 60 days’ notice of the bad faith violation and to cure the violation, i.e., pay the claim if the violation is payment. A very common bad faith payment violation is the assertion that the insurer did NOT attempt “in good faith to settle claims when, under the circumstances, it could and should have done so, had it acted fairly and honestly towards its insured and with due regard for his or her interests.” Fla. Stat. s. 624.155(1)(b)(1). 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

    Why Biden’s Infrastructure Plan Is a Green Jobs Plan

    April 26, 2021 —
    “Once you put capital money to work, jobs are created.” These are not the words of President Joe Biden, announcing his administration’s infrastructure plan in Pittsburgh on Wednesday. Nor were they the words of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, standing on a train platform to announce expanded service, or of any of the administration’s economists charged with touting the virtues of the $2.25 trillion spending plan. It was Michael Morris, then-CEO of Ohio utility American Electric Power, who uttered them on an investor call a decade ago. AEP was fighting an Environmental Protection Agency proposal to reduce mercury and other pollutants from power plants, citing the expense of creating jobs to install new scrubbers on smokestacks or build cleaner plants. Morris, taking his fiduciary responsibility to the utility’s investors seriously, argued these new roles would come at a cost to AEP and were, thus, bad. What he did not question, and correctly so, was whether more investments would indeed create more jobs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gernot Wagner, Bloomberg

    Client Alert: Service Via Tag Jurisdiction Insufficient to Subject Corporation to General Personal Jurisdiction

    August 27, 2014 —
    In Martinez v. Aero Caribbean (No. 3:11-cv-03194-WHA, filed 8/21/2014), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held service of process on a corporation's officer, within the forum state, does not establish general personal jurisdiction over the corporation unless the corporation's contacts with the forum render it essentially at home in the state. Decedent, Lorenzo Corazon Mendoza, was traveling by airplane when the plane crashed, killing everyone aboard. Defendant Avions De Transport Régional (ATR) manufactured the airplane that crashed. Plaintiffs Lorenzo Martinez, Eliezer Martinez, Eliu Mendoza and Gloria Montes (Plaintiffs) filed suit against ATR as heirs of decedent. ATR is a business entity organized under French law with its principal place of business in France. It is not licensed to do business in California, and it has no office or other physical presence there. It has purchased parts from California suppliers, sent representatives to California to promote its business, and advertised in trade publications available in California. It has also sold airplanes to a California corporation. Empire Airlines flies from Santa Barbara to Ontario using ATR planes on a regular basis; however, Empire Airlines purchased the ATR planes secondhand from third parties, and never directly from ATR. At the time of the crash, ATR North America (a wholly owned subsidiary of ATR) had its headquarters in Virginia, and has since relocated to Florida. Reprinted courtesy of R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Kristian B. Moriarty, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com; Mr. Moriarty may be contacted at kmoriarty@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    4 Ways to Mitigate Construction Disputes

    March 20, 2023 —
    Resolving construction disputes in litigation (court or arbitration) can be expensive and may drag on for years. Most disputes could have been avoided, or at least mitigated, had the parties (both owners and contractors) identified contract risks during negotiations and been more proactive in communicating the risks during execution of the work. This article highlights four practical risk management approaches that help all parties focus on their mutual interest in close coordination and clear communication at the beginning of the project as well as throughout performance:
    • Identifying and allocating risks;
    • Accurate scheduling;
    • Clear project documentation and communication; and
    • Real-time dispute resolution.
    The intent of these techniques is not to shift legal obligations or risks. Rather, the intent is to keep project personnel and project management for all the participants focused on communicating and working together, including responsibly confronting real problems to avoid or mitigate their impact. Allocating risks, scheduling, project documentation and communication, and real-time dispute resolution are independently relevant on a bilateral basis between the owner, designer, and the various contractors. These approaches and their diligent execution by the parties during construction contribute far more to a successful project than anything lawyers and claims consultants can contribute in after-the-fact legal proceedings. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bill Shaughnessy, Jones Walker LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Mr. Shaughnessy may be contacted at bshaughnessy@joneswalker.com

    Biden’s Buy American Policy & What it Means for Contractors

    February 22, 2021 —
    January 25, 2021, President Biden signed an Executive Order (EO) “Ensuring the Future is Made in All America by All of America’s Workers”, which seeks to bolster U.S. manufacturing through the federal procurement process. Note that, just six day earlier, on January 18, the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Counsel issued a final rule implementing former President Trump’s July 2019 EO, titled “Maximizing Use of American-Made Goods, Products, and Materials” (EO No. 13881) on the then-current Buy American standards. For context, Trump’s proposed revisions – adopted and implemented by the FAR Council earlier this year – imposed three (3) significant changes worth noting: (1) increasing the percentage of domestic content (other than iron or steel) from 50% to 55% that an end product must contain in order to qualify as a “domestic end product”; (2) implementing an even higher increase in the domestic content requirement for iron and steel products to at least 95% U.S. “predominately” iron or steel product; and (3) increasing the price evaluation preference for domestic offerors from 6% to 20% (for other than small business) and 30% (for small businesses). The FAR’s rule became effective January 21, 2021, and applies to solicitations issued on or after February 22, 2021, and resulting contracts let. Biden’s EO rescinds Trump’s EO No. 13881 “to the extent inconsistent with [Biden’s] EO.” However, when dissected, it is clear Biden’s Buy American plan does little to modify thresholds inconsistent with the Trump Administration; rather, the White House’s latest EO implements changes in the form of BA administration. Nonetheless, Biden’s EO does expressly note that it supersedes and replaces Trump’s EO on the same issues. Reprinted courtesy of Meredith Thielbahr, Gordon & Rees and Nicole Lentini, Gordon & Rees Ms. Thielbahr may be contacted at mthielbahr@grsm.com Ms. Lentini may be contacted at nlentini@grsm.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Personal Thoughts on Construction Mediation

    September 20, 2021 —
    Construction Mediation WorksAs I left a mediation last week at 8:30 at night, I realized something that I knew all along. Mediation works. Why does mediation work? For several reasons that I can think of. The first, and likely most important is that lawyers are expensive. In most construction cases, we charge by the hour and those hours build up, especially close to a trial date. A mediated settlement can avoid this sharp uptick in attorney fees that always occurs in the last month before trial. Therefore the earlier the better. The second is the flexibility to make a business decision. Commercial contractors and subcontractors are in a business, and they should be making business decisions. While one such decision can be to go to litigation; litigation is not always the best solution from a financial, or stress perspective. Construction professionals, with the assistance of construction attorneys, can come up with a creative way to deal with a problem and solve it. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com