BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction 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


    A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules

    2018 California Construction Law Update

    Subcontractors Must be Careful Providing Bonds when General Contractor Does Not

    Unpaid Subcontractor Walks Off the Job and Wins

    New Change Order Bill Becomes Law: RCW 39.04.360

    Specific Performance: Equitable Remedy to Enforce Affirmative Obligation

    New OSHA Rule Creates Electronic Reporting Requirement

    Construction Defect Dispute Governed by Contract Disputes Act not yet Suited to being a "Suit"

    Three Firm Members Are Top 100 Super Lawyers & Ten Are Recognized As Super Lawyers Or Rising Stars In 2018

    Construction Law- Where Pragmatism and Law Collide

    TARP Funds Demolish Homes in Detroit to Lift Prices: Mortgages

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at a Faster Pace in October

    Sales of Existing Homes in U.S. Fall to Lowest Since 2012

    New Plan Submitted for Explosive Demolition of Old Tappan Zee Bridge

    Prison Contractors Did Not Follow the Law

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

    Understanding Insurance Disputes in Construction Defect Litigation: A Review of Acuity v. Kinsale

    Making the World’s Longest Undersea Railway Tunnel Possible with BIM

    Congress Passes, President Signs Sweeping Energy Measure In Spend Bill

    Sacramento Water Works Recognized as a Historic Civil Engineering Landmark

    Eleventh Circuit Finds Professional Services Exclusion Applies to Construction Management Activities

    Prime Contractor & Surety’s Recovery of Attorney’s Fees in Miller Act Lawsuit

    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    Maryland Legislation Prohibits Condominium Developers from Shortening Statute of Limitations to Defeat Unit Owner Construction Defect Claims

    Construction Defects Claims Can Be Limited by Contract Says Washington Court

    COVID-19 Pandemic Preference Amendments to Bankruptcy Code Benefiting Vendors, Customers, Commercial Landlords and Tenants

    Cyber Security Insurance and Design Professionals

    DC Metro Extension’s Precast Supplier Banned from Federal Contracts

    2018 Super Bowl US. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds Fire Damage Resulted from Single Occurrence

    Triable Issue of Fact Exists as to Insurer’s Obligation to Provide Coverage Under Occurrence Policy

    A Court-Side Seat: Clean Air, Clean Water, Endangered Species and Deliberative Process Privilege

    Ackman Group Pays $91.5 Million for Condo at NYC’s One57

    New World Cup Stadiums Failed at their First Trial

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

    Beware of Statutory Limits on Change Orders

    Pennsylvania “occurrence”

    ASCE Statement on House Passage of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    Avoid the Headache – Submit the Sworn Proof of Loss to Property Insurer

    Standard For Evaluating Delay – Directly from An Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeal’s Opinion

    DC Wins Largest-Ever Civil Penalty in US Housing Discrimination Suit

    There's No Place Like Home

    Common Construction Contract Provisions: No-Damages-for-Delay Clause

    Federal Magistrate Judge Recommends Rescission of Policies

    At Long Last, the Colorado Legislature Gets Serious About Construction Defect Reform – In a Constructive Way

    After Restoring Power in North Carolina, Contractor Faces Many Claims

    Balfour in Talks With Carillion About $5 Billion Merger

    ASCE Statement on Senate Passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024

    Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Owner’s Claims Based on Contractual One-Year Claims Limitations Period

    City Potentially Liable for Cost Overrun on Not-to-Exceed Public Works Contract
    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. Drawing 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

    Suing a Local Government in Land Use Cases – Part 1 – Substantive Due Process

    February 16, 2017 —
    Because of my personal political persuasions (pro-freedom) and success in litigating cases against the government and other media about those cases businesses frequently approach me about bringing claims against local governments and agencies for interfering with their Constitutional rights. Actions by local government agencies that could give rise to a Constitutional violation include: treating a developer’s project differently than a similar project, revoking a previously issued zoning or building permit, disqualifying a contractor from bidding on a government contract, retaliating against a business owner for speaking out against the local agency or one of its members, or unnecessarily delaying the issuance of a permit. The Constitutional rights most typically implicated in these cases are those guaranteed by the 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. However, the 1st Amendment is also frequently implicated. Suing a local government agency for violating your Constitutional rights is not easy. However, the federal statute under which the cases are brought, 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, provides for the award of a successful plaintiff’s attorneys fees. This is true even if the Judge or jury awards a mere $1 is damages. Moreover, sometimes there can be a strategic value in the litigation. This is the first in a series of blog posts exploring claims available to businesses harassed by local government agencies and officials and the challenges inherent in successfully bringing those claims. We will start with a claim for a substantive due process violation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    Beyond Inverse Condemnation in Wildfire Litigation: An Oregon Jury Finds Utility Liable for Negligence, Trespass and Nuisance

    July 10, 2023 —
    On June 10, 2023, a jury in Portland, Oregon found PacifiCorp and Pacific Power (collectively, “PacifiCorp”) liable for negligence, trespass, and nuisance based on a series of four wildfires that occurred during Labor Day weekend in 2020. PacifiCorp prevailed against the plaintiffs on the claim of inverse condemnation. With respect to the tort-based claims, the jury awarded approximately $72 million in compensatory damages to 17 plaintiffs. The jury later found PacifiCorp liable for $18 million in punitive damages, or one quarter of the compensatory damages that the jury awarded to the 17 plaintiffs. The jury’s liability findings apply to a broader class of owners, whose damages will need to be individually proven in a yet-to-be defined second phase of proceedings. Post-verdict motion practice and appeals may affect the jury’s findings. Reprinted courtesy of Marisa Miller, Sheppard Mullin, John Yacovelle, Sheppard Mullin and Kazim Naqvi, Sheppard Mullin Ms. Miller may be contacted at mmiller@sheppardmullin.com Mr. Yacovelle may be contacted at jyacovelle@sheppardmullin.com Mr. Naqvi may be contacted at knaqvi@sheppardmullin.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    When to Withhold Retention Payments on Private or Public Projects

    August 29, 2018 —
    To ensure that construction contractors and subcontractors receive timely progress and retention payments, the California Legislature enacted statutes that impose deadlines and penalties on owners and direct (general) contractors who delay payments. (Cal. Civ. Code, §§ 8800, 8802, 8812, 8814; Pub. Contract Code, §§ 7107, 10262.5; Bus. & Prof. Code, § 7108.5.) However, there is an exception to these deadlines and penalties on both private and public projects. The exception allows an owner or direct contractor to withhold payment1 when there is a good faith dispute between an owner and a direct contractor or between a direct contractor and a subcontractor. (Civ. Code, §§ 8800, subd. (b), 8802, subd. (b), 8812, subd. (c), 8814, subd. (c); Pub. Contract Code, §§ 7107, subds. (c), (e), 10262.5, subd. (a); Bus. & Prof. Code, § 7108.5, subd. (a).) But the term “good faith dispute” has been a source of confusion where direct contractors owe subcontractors retention payments, but want to withhold the payment because of a dispute.2 California appellate courts were split, with one court finding that any type of bona fide dispute justified withholding, and another finding that only disputes related to the payment itself justified withholding. (Compare Martin Brothers Construction, Inc. v. Thompson Pacific Construction, Inc. (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 1401 [any bona fide dispute could justify withholding] with East West Bank v. Rio School Dist. (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 742 [disputes related to the payment itself may justify withholding].) In May 2018, the California Supreme Court clarified that for a direct contractor to withhold a retention payment on a private project, the good faith dispute must somehow relate to the payment itself. (United Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron & Steel Co. (2018) 4 Cal.5th 1082, 1097-1098.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas Karkazis, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Mr. Karkazis may be contacted at nkarkazis@grsm.com

    Everyone's Moving to Seattle, and It's Stressing Out Sushi Lovers

    July 16, 2014 —
    Sooner or later, everyone moves to Seattle, went one saying in the city’s 1990s heyday. The trouble residents face now: What happens after everyone does? Known for hiking and the open spaces of the American West, Seattle is in the midst of another boom that’s made it the fastest-growing among the top 50 U.S. cities. That’s causing angst over density, affordability, crime and other issues more familiar to an East Coast metropolis. At the same time, pay is outpacing the national average and an already rich cultural life is thriving as new restaurants and nightspots open. “It’s a blessing,” Seattle Mayor Ed Murray, a 59-year-old Democrat, said of the growth. “But with it comes some real challenges.” Mr. Robison may be contacted at robison@bloomberg.net; Ms. Vekshin may be contacted at avekshin@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Peter Robison and Alison Vekshin, Bloomberg

    The ‘Sole Option’ Arbitration Provision in Construction Contracts

    July 16, 2014 —
    On his Best Practices Construction Law blog, Matthew Devries discussed how the “at its sole option…has the right to demand arbitration” can “be a good provision if you are the party who has that option.” For instance, Devries cites the case Archer Western Contractors, LLC v Holder Construction Company, where “the Georgia Court of Appeals recently affirmed the trial court’s decision to grant a contractor’s motion to compel arbitration with a ‘sole option’ provision.” Devries stated that “it is important to review carefully the disputes clause in your construction contract to fully understand who has the right to demand arbitration and what rules will apply.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New WOTUS Rule

    November 13, 2023 —
    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers amended the regulation to conform the definition of “waters of the United States” to conform to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency. See the prior blog post about the Supreme Court’s ruling: Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency – Construction and Utility Law | Atlanta | AHC Law Federal Register :: Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States”; Conforming Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook Jr., Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Recovery Still Soft in New Hampshire

    May 10, 2013 —
    The latest building news out of New Hampshire is somewhat mixed. Yes, there has been an increase of seventeen percent in the value of future residential construction on the state. But that’s not enough to offset the general slide in the value of future construction overall. The New Hampshire Business Review reports that the state saw a four percent drop in the cost of planned construction, comparing March 2012 to March 2013. The total value of the drop was shared between the twelve percent drop in nonresidential construction and the fifty-two percent drop in infrastructure building, each of which were more than $4 million less than in the prior year. The rise in residential construction could not make up the loss in other areas. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Pallonji Mistry, Indian Billionaire Caught in Tata Feud, Dies at 93

    August 15, 2022 —
    Pallonji Mistry, the Indian-born billionaire whose engineering empire built luxury hotels, stadiums, palaces and factories across Asia and whose family’s epic showdown with the Tata Group sparked India’s biggest corporate feud, has passed away in Mumbai. He was 93. A company spokesperson confirmed the death of the Indian tycoon after social media posts on the news spread. Mistry and his family control the Shapoorji Pallonji Group, which started more than 150 years ago and today employs more than 50,000 people in over 50 countries, according to its website. Its landmark projects include the Reserve Bank of India and the Oberoi Hotel in Mumbai and the blue-and-gold Al Alam palace for the Sultan of Oman. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bhuma Shrivastava, Bloomberg