BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnesses
    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


    Notes from the Nordic Smart Building Convention

    A Classic Blunder: Practical Advice for Avoiding Two-Front Wars

    Cooperating With Your Insurance Carrier: Is It a Must?

    Near-Zero Carbon Cement Powers Sustainable 3D-Printed Homes

    Contractor Covered for Voluntary Remediation Efforts in Completed Homes

    Estoppel Certificate? Estop and Check Your Lease

    The Condo Conundrum: 10 Reasons Why There's a 'For Sale' Shortage in Seattle

    Mediation Fails In Federal Lawsuit Seeking Damages From Sureties for Alleged Contract Fraud

    2018 Super Bowl US. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis

    Denial of Claim for Concealment or Fraud Reversed by Sixth Circuit

    Designed to Expose: Beware Lender Certificates

    Is the Construction Industry Actually a Technology Hotbed?

    Former NYC Condo Empire Executive Arrested for Larceny, Tax Fraud

    Formaldehyde-Free Products for Homes

    Breath of Fresh Air

    Chinese Millionaire Roils Brokers Over Shrinking Mansion

    Finalists in San Diego’s Moving Parklet Design Competition Announced

    Boston Team Obtains Complete Defense Verdict for Engineering Firm in Professional Liability Matter

    False Implied Certifications in Making Payment Requests: What We Can Learn from Lance Armstrong

    WARN Act Exceptions in Response to COVID-19

    DC District Court Follows Ninth Circuit’s Lead Dismissing NABA’s Border Wall Case

    Alabama Appeals Court Rules Unexpected and Unintended Property Damage is an Occurrence

    Dispute between City and Construction Company Over Unsightly Arches

    Assert a Party’s Noncompliance of Conditions Precedent with Particularity

    PPP Loan Extension Ending Aug. 8

    Orchestrating Bias: Arbitrator’s Undisclosed Membership in Philharmonic Group with Pauly Shore’s Attorney Not Grounds to Reverse Award in Real Estate Dispute

    Direct Contractors In California Should Take Steps Now To Reduce Exposure For Unpaid Wages By Subcontractors

    After Restoring Power in North Carolina, Contractor Faces Many Claims

    SDNY Vacates Arbitration Award for Party-Arbitrator’s Nondisclosures

    New York Court Narrowly Interprets “Expected or Intended Injury” Exclusion in Win for Policyholder

    Nader Eghtesad v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    The Goldilocks Rule: Panel Rejects Proposed Insurer-Specific MDL Proceedings for Four Large Insurers, but Establishes MDL Proceeding for the Smallest

    Be Careful in Contracting and Business

    A New AAA Study Confirms that Arbitration is Faster to Resolution Than Court – And the Difference Can be Assessed Monetarily

    Two Texas Cities Top San Francisco for Property Investors

    Negligence Per Se Claim Based Upon Failure to Pay Benefits Fails

    The Shifting Sands of Alternative Dispute Resolution

    Product Defect Allegations Trigger Duty To Defend in Pennsylvania

    A Lawyer's Perspective on Current Issues Dominating the Construction Industry

    Building and Landscape Standards Enacted in Response to the Governor's Mandatory Water Restrictions Dealing with the Drought and Possible Effects of El Niño

    California Court Holds No Coverage Under Pollution Policy for Structural Improvements

    $17B Agreement Streamlines Disney World Development Plans

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

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    A New Study on Implementing Digital Visual Management

    Connecticut Grapples With Failing Concrete Foundations

    Emergency Paid Sick Leave and FMLA Leave Updates in Response to COVID-19

    FBI Makes Arrest Related to Saipan Casino Construction

    Federal Court Predicts Coverage In Utah for Damage Caused By Faulty Workmanship

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

    Three Attorneys Named Among The Best Lawyers in America 2018

    August 24, 2017 —
    Partners Denis Moriarty and Mark VonderHaar, and Of Counsel William Baumgaertner were selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America 2018. This marks the twelfth consecutive year Mr. Baumgaertner has been listed for his defendants’ and plaintiffs’ work in personal injury and product liability litigation, and the sixth consecutive year Mr. Moriarty has been listed for his work in insurance law. Mr. VonderHaar was listed for the first time for his work in insurance law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    April 05, 2021 —
    A recent case from the Central District of California reminds us that not all insurance policies are alike. Depending on the particular policy, losses from the COVID-19 outbreak could qualify as property damage and therefore could be recoverable under an all-risk insurance policy. COVID-19 has in many cases imposed significant costs on contractors, and in a host of ways. Contractors’ attempts to recover these costs from owners or insurers have at times been frustrated by contractual or policy language written after a lengthy time, during which the risk of a pandemic on the scale of COVID-19 was not as much of a concern as it is now. This has led contractors to explore new, often creative legal theories in their attempts to recover costs flowing from COVID-19. A recent Complaint filed in the Central District of California focuses on all-risk property insurance policies and the potential for contractors who have purchased such policies to classify contamination from COVID-19 as an insurable property loss. In AECOM v. Zurich Insurance Company, Case No. 2:21-cv-00237-JAK-MRW (C.D. Cal), a contractor purchased “all-risk” property insurance from Zurich. This policy covered “economic losses from all risks not expressly excluded.” According to the Complaint, the presence of COVID-19 on its properties “physically alter[ed] air, airspace, and surfaces preventing… (the contractor) from using its properties for their intended purpose and function.” Reprinted courtesy of Neal I. Sklar, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Joshua A. Morehouse, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Sklar may be contacted at nsklar@pecklaw.com Mr. Morehouse may be contacted at jmorehouse@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Final Thoughts on New Pay If Paid Legislation in VA

    August 15, 2022 —
    This past General Assembly session, and after a governor’s amendment and with the convening of a study group, a new statute banning so-called “pay-if-paid” clauses from enforcement was passed. Some of the key features of the legislation are as follows: It does not take effect until January 1, 2023, and, For those construction contracts in which there is at least one general contractor and one subcontractor:
    1. It requires payment within 60 days of receipt of an invoice following the satisfactory performance of the work or within 7 days of receipt of payment by the Owner
    2. It allows for retainage
    3. It allows the higher-tier contractor to withhold money for improper performance
    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

    Update Regarding New York City’s Climate Mobilization Act (CMA) and the Reduction of Carbon Emissions in New York City

    July 05, 2021 —
    In a previous post, we described how the New York City Climate Mobilization Act, 2019 (the CMA, or Local Laws 92, 94, 95, 96, 97, and 147 enacted in 2019) was passed with the goal of reducing New York City’s carbon emissions by 40 percent by 2030 and by 80 percent by 2050 (as against a 2005 baseline as provided for in item 3 of Local Law 97). It is the most ambitious building emissions law to be enacted by any city in the world. The CMA impacts “Covered Buildings” (described below) and, besides contemplating the retrofitting of Covered Buildings to achieve energy efficiency and establishing a monitoring program for Covered Buildings, the CMA contemplates compliance by means of the purchase of carbon offset credits or renewable energy. (Note the new NYC Accelerator program, launched in 2012 by the Mayor’s Office of Sustainability, provides guidance regarding energy-efficient upgrades to properties and emission reductions.) Pursuant to the CMA:
    • Beginning in 2024, Covered Buildings will have to meet the first emission targets, which are calculated by multiplying the gross floor area of each Covered Building by the occupancy classification as set forth in Local Law 97; and
    • In 2025, owners of Covered Buildings will need to establish compliance by submitting a report establishing such compliance (prepared by a certified design professional) to the newly created Office of Building Energy and Emissions Performance.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Caroline A. Harcourt, Pillsbury
    Ms. Harcourt may be contacted at caroline.harcourt@pillsburylaw.com

    Rulemaking to Modernize, Expand DOI’s “Type A” Natural Resource Damage Assessment Rules Expected Fall 2023

    December 23, 2023 —
    The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) anticipates proposing a new rule that would revise its “Type A” Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) regulations under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) in Fall 2023. The proposed rule would modernize DOI’s rarely used simplified Type A procedures for assessing damages for natural resource injuries tailored at sites involving minor releases of hazardous substances, with a smaller scale and scope of natural resource injury occurring in either coastal and marine areas or Great Lakes environments (the “Type A Rule”). (See 88 Fed. Reg. 3373; see 43 C.F.R. Pt. 11 Subpt. D.) The Type A Rule was last updated in 1997. DOI previewed the proposal in January 2023 in its Office of Restoration and Damage Assessment’s (ORDA) Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR). In the ANPR, the ORDA surmised that the Type A Rule was rarely used in part because of its restricted scope, but also because “the model equation for each Type A environment is the functional part of the rule itself—with no provisions to reflect evolving toxicology, ecology, technology, or other scientific understanding without a formal amendment to the Type A Rule each time a parameter is modified.” Calling the existing rule “inefficient and inflexible,” the ORDA stated that its proposal to reformulate the rule “as a procedural structure” would “modernize the Type A process and develop a more flexible and enduring rule than what is provided by the two existing static models” (88 Fed. Reg. 3373). Reprinted courtesy of Amanda G. Halter, Pillsbury, Jillian Marullo, Pillsbury and Ashleigh Myers, Pillsbury Ms. Halter may be contacted at amanda.halter@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Marullo may be contacted at jillian.marullo@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Myers may be contacted at ashleigh.myers@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Oregon Supreme Court Confirms Broad Duty to Defend

    January 13, 2017 —
    The Supreme Court of Oregon issued a decision at the end of last year which perfectly illustrates the lengths to which a court may go to grant a contractor’s claim for defense from its insurer in a construction defect suit. In West Hills Development Co. v. Chartis Claims, Inc.,1 the Court held that a subcontractor’s insurer had a duty to defend a general contractor as an additional insured because the allegations of a homeowner’s association’s complaint could be interpreted to fall within the ambit of coverage provided under the policy—despite the fact that the policy only provided ongoing operations coverage, and despite the fact that the subcontractor was never mentioned in the complaint. The decision is favorable to policyholders but also provides an important lesson: that contractors may avoid additional insured disputes if those contractors have solid contractual insurance requirements for both ongoing and completed operations risks. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Theresa A. Guertin, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Guertin may be contacted at tag@sdvlaw.com

    Avoiding 'E-trouble' in Construction Litigation

    September 10, 2018 —
    During the 2016 presidential election, the FBI subpoenaed Hillary Clinton's emails after she used a private email server during her time as Secretary of State. Separately, the more recent investigation into Donald Trump’s campaign policy adviser, George Papadopoulos, resulted in scrutiny over both his email and social media. As shown the above examples, there are damaging effects of electronically stored information in politics, but how does it impact the construction industry? If not used carefully and properly, emails will serve as “truth serum” in court. Attorneys can simply read an email to know employees’ thoughts or actions, meaning an impulsive email or social media post will most likely come back to haunt the company. Requests for ESI are inevitable in litigation today and the production of inappropriate emails and other ESI open the door for an opposing attorney to argue that a company fosters a culture of uncouth, unprofessional and unfocused project management. Reprinted courtesy of Judah Lifschitz, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Lifschitz may be contacted at lifschitz@slslaw.com

    Eighth Circuit Affirms Judgment for Bad Faith after Insured's Home Destroyed by Fire

    January 21, 2019 —
    The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment that the insurer acted in bad faith when it denied the insured's claim based upon misrepresentations in the application after destruction of his house by fire. Hayes v. Metropolitan Pro. and Cas. Ins. Co., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 31813 (8th Cir. Nov. 9, 2018). Hayes' home was insured by Met under a homeowner's policy. Hayes used the detached garage as part of a home base for his plumbing business. He also rented out the second and third levels of the residence to a tenant and her two children. When Hayes applied for the policy in 2007, Met argues he indicated on the application that the premises were not used to conduct business, and were not used as rental property. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com