BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windows
    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


    Colorado homebuilders target low-income buyers with bogus "affordable housing" bill

    Will the AI Frenzy Continue in 2025?

    Subcontractors on Washington Public Projects can now get their Retainage Money Sooner

    Beyond the COI: The Importance of an Owner's or Facilities Manager's Downstream Insurance Review Program

    The Condominium Warranty Against Structural Defects in the District of Columbia

    Design Immunity Defense Gets Special Treatment on Summary Judgment

    Georgia House Bill Addresses Construction Statute of Repose

    Summary Judgment in Favor of General Contractor Under Privette Doctrine Overturned: Lessons Learned

    Is Your Business Insured for the Coronavirus?

    Formal Opinion No. 2020-203: How A Lawyer Is to Handle Access to Client Confidential Information and Anticipation of Potential Security Issues

    The Cross-Party Exclusion: The Hazards of Additional Named Insured Provisions

    Barratt Said to Suspend Staff as Contract Probe Continues

    Maryland Court Affirms Condo Association’s Right to Sue for Construction Defects

    California Subcontractor Gets a Kick in the Rear (or Perhaps the Front) for Prematurely Recorded Mechanics Lien

    Coverage Denied for Ensuing Loss After Foundation Damage

    Guilty Pleas Draw Renewed Interest In Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws

    Illinois Court Addresses Rip-And-Tear Coverage And Existence Of An “Occurrence” In Defective Product Suit

    Housing Prices Up through Most of Country

    Home Building on the Upswing in Bakersfield

    Hawaii Supreme Court Tackles "Other Insurance" Issues

    Colorado Supreme Court Decision Could Tarnish Appraisal Process for Policyholders

    White and Williams Recognized by BTI Consulting Group for Client Service

    Challenging and Defending a California Public Works Stop Payment Notice: Affidavit vs. Counter-Affidavit Process

    Chicago Developer and Trade Group Sue City Over Affordable Housing Requirements

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

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Condominium Construction Defect Resolution in the District of Columbia

    Patti Santelle Honored by Rutgers School of Law with Arthur E. Armitage Sr. Distinguished Alumni Award

    Client Alert: Release of Liability Agreement Extinguishes Duty of Ordinary Care

    Check The Boxes Regarding Contractual Conditions Precedent to Payment

    Georgia Court Reaffirms Construction Defect Decision

    ASCE Statement On White House "Accelerating Infrastructure Summit"

    Supply Chain Delay Recommendations

    Augmented and Mixed Reality in Construction

    ASHRAE Approves Groundbreaking Standard to Reduce the Risk of Disease Transmission in Indoor Spaces

    Largest Dam Removal Program in US History Reaches Milestone

    Consequential Damages Can Be Recovered Against Insurer In Breach Of Contract

    Mitigate Construction Risk Through Use of Contingency

    The Fifth Circuit, Applying Texas Law, Strikes Down Auto Exclusion

    Solar and Wind Just Passed Another Big Turning Point

    California Fears El Nino's Dark Side Will Bring More Trouble

    First-Time Buyers Shut Out of Expanding U.S. Home Supply

    You're Doing Construction in Russia, Now What?

    No Coverage for Building's First Collapse, But Disputed Facts on Second Collapse

    Four Companies Sued in Pool Electrocution Case

    New York Condominium Association Files Construction Defect Suit

    Farewell Capsule Tower, Tokyo’s Oddest Building

    Latosha Ellis Joins The National Black Lawyers Top 40 Under 40

    What is an Alternative Dispute Resolution?

    Alaska Supreme Court Dismisses Claims of Uncooperative Pro Se Litigant in Defect Case
    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

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa Rolle Obtains Summary Judgment in Favor of Defendant

    November 15, 2022 —
    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle obtained summary judgment in favor of defendant SRI Fire Sprinkler, LLC, a family-owned and operated fire sprinkler company which generally provides fire sprinkler installation, inspection, and maintenance services throughout the Northeast and New England. The judgment was determined pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5) on the grounds that Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company’s (Plaintiff) negligent construction claim accrued on the date when work was completed at the premises, not on the date of the incident as alleged in the Plaintiff’s complaint. In the underlying subrogation action, the Plaintiff commenced the action in subrogation of its insured, Bet Am Shalom Synagogue (Bet Am), to recover damages in excess of $173,390.86 which it allegedly paid to Bet Am for water damage cleanup and remodeling after certain sprinkler pipes froze and burst in the recently constructed wing of the Westchester synagogue on January 1, 2019 and January 7, 2019. The Plaintiff alleged that its subrogor, Bet Am, sustained interior water damage on the first floor and basement levels of the premises, including the carpets, drywall, insulation, bathroom, kitchen and appliances, dining room, hallways, closets, basement storage rooms and supplies, and basement classrooms. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lisa M. Rolle, Traub Lieberman
    Ms. Rolle may be contacted at lrolle@tlsslaw.com

    No Damages for Delay May Not Be Enforceable in Virginia

    January 08, 2024 —
    Anyone who reads Construction Law Musings with any regularity (thank you by the way) knows that the contract is king in most instances here in Virginia. Any commercial construction subcontractor in Virginia is likely also very familiar with so-called “no damages for delay” clauses in construction contracts. These clauses essentially state that a subcontractor’s only remedy for a delay caused by any factor beyond its control (including the fault of the general contractor), after proper notice to the general contractor, is an extension of time to complete the work. However, in 2015 the Virginia General Assembly passed a change in the law that precluded the diminishment of any right to claims for demonstrated additional costs prior to payment. This left open the question as to which types of “diminishment” would be barred by the statute. The recent case out of the Eastern District of Virginia federal court, Strata Solar LLC v. Fall Line Construction LLC, added a bit of clarity. 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

    Ninth Circuit Rules Supreme Court’s Two-Part Test of Implied Certification under the False Claims Act Mandatory

    May 13, 2019 —
    For those contractors in the government arena, read on. The False Claims Act (“FCA”) was enacted to deter knowingly fraudulent actions by contractors which resulted in a loss of property to the Government. Intent to defraud with resulting financial hardship was required. Contrary to popular misconception, the statute was not designed to punish all false submissions to the Government simply because those submissions, or claims, are later found to be false. The statute’s inclusion of the requisite element of knowledge is consistent with this notion:
    1. A defendant must submit a claim for payment to the Government;
    2. the claim must be false or fraudulent;
    3. the defendant must have known the claim was fraudulent when it was submitted (also known as scienter); and
    4. the claim must have caused the Government to pay out money.
    See 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a). Despite these explicit elements (in addition to common law elements of fraud), over the last two decades, contractors have seen ever-expanding theories of FCA recovery presented by qui tam plaintiffs and the Government. For example, under the FCA, the false “claim” evolved over time: the claim no longer needs to be an express false claim (i.e. the truthfulness of the claim is a direct condition of payment); the claim can be “implied” misrepresentation or “half-truth”. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Meredith Thielbahr, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Ms. Thielbahr may be contacted at mthielbahr@grsm.com

    The Need for Situational Awareness in Construction

    January 27, 2020 —
    Recent research backs up what we already know from practice: construction work is suboptimal. What happens on a construction site has not kept up with the demands of an increasingly complex work environment. Situational awareness could give on-site employees the necessary means to finally reap the productivity benefits of digitalization. Under the guidance of Professor Olli Seppänen, research teams at the Finnish Aalto University have delved into everyday conditions at a construction site. With the workers’ permission, they used video cameras, sensors, and surveys to locate the bottlenecks in productivity. The researchers also monitored the movement of products and materials on a construction site. The results are eye-opening. According to Aalto’s data, digitalization has not improved the productivity of construction foremen and workers. A typical worker still spends up to 70% of their time on activities that add no value: searching for information, unnecessary movement, and waiting. Construction materials are moved from place to place six times on the site before being consumed. In addition, especially on large construction sites, machinery often goes missing or is displaced. 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

    Deterioration of Bridge Infrastructure Is Increasing Insurance Needs

    December 03, 2024 —
    As the world is taken by storm—literally, with increasing hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires and more—insuring construction projects and infrastructure is becoming more complicated yet more necessary. Sean Pender, senior vice president of construction and development at CAC Specialty, is a leading specialty insurance broker and advisor. As major-storm season for the Northern hemisphere rounds out, he speaks with Construction Executive about the potential risk and insurance implications to the process of ensuring proper repairs, replacements and other forms of maintenance to one of the country’s most pivotal pieces of infrastructure: bridges. What does insurance coverage look like for building bridges in various environments throughout the country? Insurance is essential to protect the entity that owns the bridge during construction. Bridges under construction are at the highest risk of collapse because they are not yet fully stabilized and are exposed to severe weather and natural disasters, which could cause significant damage to the structure or injury to workers and civilians. Therefore, comprehensive liability insurance programs—typically with coverage limits of $50 to $100 million or higher—are crucial, especially with activities on or over waterways. Reprinted courtesy of Grace Calengor, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Are Mechanic’s Liens the Be All End All of Construction Collections?

    August 12, 2024 —
    For those of you familiar with Construction Law Musings, you are aware of my affinity and discussion of those powerful but tricky collection tools: mechanic’s liens. You have heard me tout their ability to secure payment when a contractor or subcontractor has not been paid on a construction project (even in the face of bankruptcy). If you read my construction law blog regularly (though recently not-so-regularly updated), you could get the impression that a mechanic’s lien is an automatic avenue to payment. While mechanic’s liens can be a powerful collection tool, this post is going to discuss some pros and cons of recording, and ultimately suing to enforce, a mechanic’s lien in Virginia. 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

    Subcontractors Have Remedies, Even if “Pay-if-Paid” Provisions are Enforced

    February 19, 2019 —
    In a recent case in Kentucky[1], a sub-tier subcontractor sued the general contractor and owner for failure to pay for extra work. At the trial, the court held the subcontractor was entitled to recover under the theories of implied contracts and unjust enrichment, even though the subcontract contained a “pay-if-paid” clause. All parties appealed. In particular, the general contractor asserted that the pay-if-paid provision in the subcontract precluded recovery by the subcontractor. The issue was petitioned to the Supreme Court of Kentucky. The question to be resolved by the Supreme Court of Kentucky was whether a pay-if-paid provision was enforceable as between a general contractor and subcontractor, and if so, whether the subcontractor could nevertheless pursue the owner directly for payment notwithstanding a lack of privity between the owner and subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at john.ahlers@acslawyers.com

    Viewpoint: Firms Should Begin to Analyze Lessons Learned in 2020

    January 04, 2021 —
    If there’s one phrase that describes 2020, it was not “business as usual.” How AEC firms fared last year depended upon their strategies for navigating an uncertain landscape. While we talk about finding a new normal, company leaders in 2021 will have to think more expansively about what they want that “normal” to look like. Reprinted courtesy of Rich Friedman, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of