BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture 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


    California Judicial Council Votes to Rescind Prohibitions on Eviction and Foreclosure Proceedings

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    Pennsylvania Finds Policy Triggered When Property Damage Reasonably Apparent

    ISO’s Flood Exclusion Amendments and Hurricane Ian Claims

    Nevada Supreme Court Holds That Insureds Can Use Extrinsic Evidence to Prove Duty to Defend

    Common Law Indemnity Claim Affirmed on Justifiable Beliefs

    Use It or Lose It: California Court of Appeal Addresses Statutes of Limitations for Latent Construction Defects and Damage to Real Property

    New Jersey School Blames Leaks on Construction Defects, May Sue

    DOI Aims to Modernize its “Inefficient and Inflexible” Type A Natural Resource Damages Assessment Regulations

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

    Insured's Failure to Challenge Trial Court's Application of Exclusion Makes Appeal Futile

    Is Arbitration Final and Binding?

    Colorado Homebuyers Must be in Privity of Contract with Developer to Assert Breach of Implied Warranty of Suitability

    Official Tried to Influence Judge against Shortchanged Subcontractor

    Firm Pays $8.4M to Settle Hurricane Restoration Contract Case

    Assessing Defective Design Liability on Federal Design-Build Projects

    New York Court of Appeals Takes Narrow View of Labor Law Provisions in Recent Cases

    Mondaq’s 2023 Construction Comparative Guide

    Are Modern Buildings Silently Killing Us?

    How Drones are Speeding Up Construction

    Japan Quake Triggers Landslides, Knocks Power Plant Offline

    First Suit to Enforce Business-Interruption Coverage Filed

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/23/24) – Construction Backlog Rebounds, Real Estate Sustainability Grows, and Split Incentive Gap Remains Building Decarbonizing Barrier

    New California Construction Law for 2019

    Overruling Henkel, California Supreme Court Validates Assignment of Policies

    Code Changes Pave Way for CLT in Tall Buildings and Spark Flammability Debate

    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    Supreme Court Upholds Prevailing Wage Statute

    To Ease Housing Crunch, Theme Parks Are Becoming Homebuilders

    UK Construction Output Rises Unexpectedly to Strongest Since May

    Iconic Seattle Center Arena Roof the Only Piece to Stay in $900-Million Rebuild

    U.S. Navy Sailors Sue Tokyo Utility Company Over Radiation Poisoning

    Illinois Legislature Enables Pre-Judgment Interest in Personal Injury Cases

    Recommendations for Property Owners After A Hurricane: Submit a Claim

    Changes To Commercial Item Contracting

    Is Construction Defect Litigation a Cause for Lack of Condos in Minneapolis?

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

    Colorado Passes Construction Defect Reform Bill

    Hawaii Supreme Court Says Aloha to Insurers Trying to Recoup Defense Costs From Policyholders

    Safer Schools Rendered Unsafe Due to Construction Defects

    Is Arbitration Always the Answer?

    Bill Taylor Co-Authors Chapter in Pennsylvania Construction Law Book

    Michigan Court of Appeals Remands Construction Defect Case

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/10/24) – New Type of Nuclear Reactor, Big Money Surrounding Sports Stadiums, and Positivity from Fannie Mae’s Monthly Consumer Survey

    DOJ to Prosecute Philadelphia Roofing Company for Worker’s Death

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (06/28/23) – Combating Homelessness, U.S. Public Transportation Costs and the Future of Commercial Real Estate

    CGL Insurer’s Duty to Defend Insured During Pre-Suit 558 Process: Maybe?

    National Lobbying Firm Opens Colorado Office, Strengthening Construction Defect Efforts

    Evergrande’s Condemned Towers on China’s Hawaii Show Threat

    Another Reason to Love Construction Mediation (Read: Why Mediation Works)
    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

    Intellectual Property And Employment Law Best Practices: Are You Covering Your Bases In Protecting Construction-Related Trade Secrets?

    November 15, 2021 —
    There are four main types of intellectual property (IP) – patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade secrets. Many companies have IP rights of all four types. Very different steps are required to protect different types of IP. Your company should work with an experienced IP attorney to develop and continuously update a comprehensive IP protection plan. And for the reasons discussed below, it is important for your company’s IP protection plan to be closely coordinated with employment and contracting practices. Patents are rights that may be granted to protect uniquely-original and usable inventions for a prescribed period of years, the length of which depends on the patent type. To register a patent, an application must be filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), which will decide whether the invention is patentable. A registration gives the owner the ability to prevent others from using or selling the invention without permission. Registered patents may be challenged in court on several grounds, but mounting a successful challenge is a very expensive proposition. A patent registration is thus a highly valued asset and is key to preventing others from using or copying your invention, unless you have a foolproof way to keep your invention secret and out of the hands of competitors. On the other hand, if it is possible to keep the invention secret for enough time to gain a commercial advantage over competitors and the enforceability of the patent is questionable, registering a patent may be a mistake because the invention must be publicly disclosed in excruciating detail, for all competitors to see. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Colin Holley, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar, & Fitzgerald, LLP
    Mr. Holley may be contacted at cholley@watttieder.com

    Why Is It So Hard to Kill This Freeway?

    April 18, 2023 —
    Keith Pete remembers what Claiborne Avenue was like before the interstate. As a child in the early 1960s, the native New Orleanian would come to Claiborne Avenue with his dad to buy chickens from the local grocers. Sometimes, as a treat, father and son would get hamburgers on French rolls and pineapple juice and picnic on the neutral ground — the avenue’s wide, grassy median, which was thick with live oak trees and azaleas. “People used to sit and enjoy the weather,” Pete, 68, recalls. “There was beautiful grass all the way down. It was gorgeous.” At the time, Claiborne Avenue coursed through the heart of New Orleans’ Tremé neighborhood and a major center of Black commerce and culture. “It was safe; it was thriving,” Pete said. “It was mostly wiped out.” In 1966, workers began removing the avenue’s oaks and driving the pilings that would transform 18 blocks of the tree-lined boulevard into a viaduct carrying Interstate 10. While plans for a Robert Moses-designed waterfront freeway through the French Quarter were halted in 1969 after intense resistance from historic preservationists, the state- and city-backed Claiborne Expressway proceeded. The elevated highway and its tangle of off-ramps destroyed some 500 homes and 326 Black-owned businesses. The once-thriving corridor became a dark, noisy netherworld, unsafe for pedestrians and unhealthy for anyone who breathes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Benjamin Schneider, Bloomberg

    Type I Differing Site Conditions Claim is Not Easy to Prove

    May 30, 2018 —
    A differing site condition claim will almost universally result in both a cost and time impact. There will be additional, unanticipated costs incurred. And there will likely be a delay requiring additional time to perform. A Type I differing site condition claim is when the contractor encounters conditions at the site different than those indicated in the contract documents. That seems easy enough to prove, right. Nope. And, I mean nope! If you don’t believe me, consider the recent decision in Meridian Engineering Co. v. U.S., 885 F.3d 1351 (Fed.Cir. 2018). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Insurer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Earth Movement Exclusion Denied

    October 28, 2011 —

    After carefully dissecting the earth movement exclusion, the court denied the insurer’s motion for summary judgment. High Street Lofts Condominium Assoc., Inc. v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109043 (D. Colo. Sept. 26, 2011).

    The City of Boulder performed road repair work near High Street’s property, some of which involved the use of a vibrating compactor to compact and set the roadbed. High Street noticed damage to its building, such as cracks in walls, sloping of floors and separations of porches from the building itself. High Street contacted the City of Boulder, who forwarded the complaint to its contractor, Concrete Express, Inc.

    High Street also filed a claim with its business insurer, American Family, who denied the claim. American Family relied on an opinion letter by High Street’s engineer. The letter indicated that the damage was the result of "soil consolidation/settlement," in response to the construction activities. Based on this letter American Family concluded the claim was excluded under the policy’s earth movement exclusion.

    High Street sued American Family, who moved for summary judgment.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Inspectors Hurry to Make Sure Welds Are Right before Bay Bridge Opening

    August 27, 2013 —
    Each of the 20 welds at the base of the tower of the Bay Bridge took more than four hours to complete, with the lengthy welds forming at one-and-a-half inches per minute. They’ve been finished for two years now, but inspectors are just now checking the welds for defects. Any defects found will have to be removed and repaired. Mazen Wahbeh, an engineer on the project, assumes that less than 5 percent of the total welded area will have to be repaired. According to Wahbeh, the bridge can open before the welds are thoroughly checked and repaired, and so “the contractor is prioritizing the remaining work.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    U.S. Government Bans Use of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements between Nursing Homes and Residents, Effective November 28, 2016

    November 17, 2016 —
    On September 28, 2016, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”), which is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, issued a new rule that bans federal funding to any nursing home that requires its residents to enter mandatory pre-dispute arbitration agreements upon admission. The rule prevents nursing homes from forcing residents to submit any disputes concerning care, payment for services, etc., to mandatory binding arbitration rather than to a court. Mandatory arbitration agreements are frequently used in many types of industries and have been for decades. However, recent eff orts by several consumer advocate groups have sought to curtail the use of mandatory arbitration clauses in industries where the individuals who executed such agreements have little to no bargaining power. According to these groups, nursing home residents are potentially more vulnerable than most to being unwittingly bound by such agreements because of the nature of the admissions process. The new rule is set to take effect on November 28, 2016, and will only apply to agreements entered into after that date. Reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey M. Daitz, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Joseph Vento, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Daitz may be contacted at jdaitz@pecklaw.com Mr. Vento may be contacted at jvento@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “The Jury Is Still Out”

    October 30, 2023 —
    “The Seventh Amendment guarantees the right to a trial by jury for a legal claim in a civil action.” So, isn’t the law, well, the law? Well, perhaps. Some axioms to remember in contracting are that parties are typically able to agree in a contract to anything that is lawful, and that all such lawful agreements essentially become the “law” between the parties. It is on these principles that courts issue jurisprudence which becomes binding on future litigants – for example, concerning waiver of any right to trial by jury. Hence, when a second-tier subcontractor on a federal project sought a jury for a lawsuit it had against a general contractor’s sureties, the sub was successfully rebuffed by the sureties based upon a waiver to trial by jury contained in the relevant subcontract. The court noted various matters to be considered in connection with the generally enforceable jury waiver – including the conspicuousness of the waiver (and, therefore, whether the subcontractor “knowingly” agreed to the waiver), as well as the relative bargaining power of the parties to the agreement (here, the sub was self-proclaimed to be a “leader in the construction contracting field”) – and affirmed the legality of the waiver. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    While Construction Permits Slowly Rise, Construction Starts and Completions in California Are Stagnant

    December 05, 2022 —
    There is an interesting phenomenon happening in the California construction market since the Summer of 2022. There is a steady but slow rise in the construction building permits being issued throughout California. According to the U.S. Census and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s joint announcement (https://www.census.gov/construction/nrc/pdf/newresconst.pdf) of new residential construction statistics for September 2022, privately‐owned housing units authorized by building permits in September were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,564,000. This is 1.4 percent above the revised August rate of 1,542,000. While this is slightly lower than a year ago (3.2 percent below the September 2021 rate of 1,615,000), the trend for obtaining new home permits was reportedly ahead of the projected rates given the market conditions and inflation throughout the country. Interestingly, single‐family authorizations in September were at a rate of 872,000 which was also 3.1 percent below the revised August 2022 figure of 900,000. Authorizations of units in buildings with five units or more were at a rate of 644,000 in September. Overall, while slowly recovering from the record lows during the height of the pandemic, the economic forecast for new home construction in California is positive, but cautious. The flip side of this coin is the construction starts in California, which continue to remain stagnant despite additional building permits being issued. Privately‐owned housing starts in September were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,439,000.  This is 8.1 percent (±14.9 percent) below the revised August estimate of 1,566,000 and is 7.7 percent (±11.5 percent) below the September 2021 rate of 1,559,000.  Single‐family housing starts in September were at a rate of 892,000; this is 4.7 percent (±10.7 percent) below the revised August figure of 936,000. The September rate for units in buildings with five units or more was 530,000. Reprinted courtesy of John Kazanovicz, Kahana Feld and Jason Feld, Kahana Feld Mr. Kazanovicz may be contacted at jkazanovicz@kahanafeld.com Mr. Feld may be contacted at jfeld@kahanafeld.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of