BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect 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


    When to Withhold Retention Payments on Private or Public Projects

    Nevada’s Home Building Industry can Breathe Easier: No Action on SB250 Leaves Current Attorney’s Fees Provision Intact

    The California Legislature Passes SB 496 Limiting Design Professional Defense and Indemnity Obligations

    Coronavirus Is Starting to Slow the Solar Energy Revolution

    Four White and Williams Lawyers Recognized as "Lawyer of the Year" by Best Lawyers®

    Montana Trial Court Holds That Youths Have Standing to Bring Constitutional Claims Against State Government For Alleged Climate Change-Related Harms

    Business Risk Exclusions Do Not Preclude Coverage

    Rise in Single-Family Construction Anticipated in Michigan

    Insurers' Communications Through Brokers Not Privileged

    California Supreme Court Holds “Notice-Prejudice” Rule is “Fundamental Public Policy” of California, May Override Choice of Law Provisions in Policies

    Cincinnati Goes Green

    David M. McLain to Speak at the CLM Claims College - School of Construction - Scholarships Available

    Jury Awards Aluminum Company 35 Million in Time Element Losses

    CSLB Begins Processing Applications for New B-2 License

    Is It Time to Digitize Safety?

    San Francisco House that Collapsed Not Built to Plan

    Contractor Liable for Soils Settlement in Construction Defect Suit

    Supreme Court Declines to Address CDC Eviction Moratorium

    Brooklyn’s Industry City to Get $1 Billion Modernization

    Virginia Decision Emphasizes Importance of Naming All Necessary Parties

    Fifth Circuit: Primary Insurer Relieved of Duty to Defend Without Release of Liability of Insured

    Meet D1's Neutrals Series: BILL FRANCZEK

    Surveys: Hundreds of Design Professionals See Big COVID-19 Business Impacts

    Difficulty in Defending Rental Supplier’s Claim Under Credit Application

    Builders Seek to Modify Scaffold Law

    Mass. Gas Leak Follows NTSB Final Report, Call for Reforms

    Duty To Defend PFAS MDL Lawsuits: Texas Federal Court Weighs In

    Wisconsin Court of Appeals Holds Economic Loss Doctrine Applies to Damage to Other Property If It Was a Foreseeable Result of Disappointed Contractual Expectations

    Haight Celebrates 2024 New Partner Promotions!

    Construction Defects in Roof May Close School

    2018 California Construction Law Update

    Colorado’s Need for Condos May Spark Construction Defect Law Reform

    New York vs. Miami: The $50 Million Penthouse Battle From Zaha Hadid

    No Coverage for Counterclaim Arising from Insured's Faulty Workmanship

    It’s Not Just the Millennium Tower That’s Sinking in San Francisco

    6,500 Bridges in Ohio Allegedly Functionally Obsolete or Structurally Deficient

    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

    ICC/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Green Model Code Integrates Existing Standards

    Arguing Cardinal Change is Different than Proving Cardinal Change

    Deadlines. . . They’re Important. Project Owner Risks Losing Claim By Failing to Timely Identify “Doe” Defendant

    Court Finds that Subcontractor Lacks Standing to Appeal Summary Judgment Order Simply Because Subcontractor “Might” Lose at Trial Due to Order

    GRSM Team Wins Summary Judgment in Million-Dollar HOA Dispute

    EEOC Sues Schuff Steel, J.A. Croson in New Racial Harassment Cases

    Product Liability Alert: “Sophisticated User” Defense Not Available by Showing Existence of a “Sophisticated Intermediary”

    Contractor Underpaid Workers, Pocketed the Difference

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    Congratulations to Nicole Whyte, Keith Bremer, John Toohey, and Tyler Offenhauser for Being Recognized as 2022 Super Lawyers!

    Predicting Our Future with Andrew Weinreich

    FAA Plans Final Regulation on Commercial Drone Use by Mid-2016

    Contractor’s Burden When It Comes to Delay
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Top Five Legal Mistakes in Construction

    April 04, 2022 —
    Many contractors repeatedly make the same mistakes in negotiating contracts. Here are the most common mistakes contractors make—and how they can be avoided. 1. Not Being Careful With Force Majeure Clauses To protect themselves from liability in the event of unforeseen circumstances like fires, floods, wars, unusual delays in deliveries, strikes, pandemics or acts of God, contractors should ensure their contracts contain robust force majeure provisions. These provisions state that in the event of any extenuating circumstances outside of its control, the contractor is not liable for any damages that result from a delay to the project completion date and is entitled to a time extension. This clause has been critical in addressing COVID-19-related disruptions and the current material shortages. Contractors should be wary, however, of “no damage-for-delay” language, which often appears in conjunction with these clauses. Reprinted courtesy of Jonathan A. Cass, Nicholas F. Morello and John A. Greenhall, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Cass may be contacted at jcass@cohenseglias.com Mr. Greenhall may be contacted at jgreenhall@cohenseglias.com Mr. Morello may be contacted at nmorello@cohenseglias.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC Recognized Among The Top 50 Construction Law Firms TM of 2024 by Construction Executive

    July 15, 2024 —
    ACS is proud to announce that it has once again been ranked among The Top 50 Construction Law Firms in the Construction Executive 2023 rankings. Since its first publication in 2003, Construction Executive magazine has served as the leading source for news, market developments, and business issues impacting the construction industry, and its articles are designed to help owners and top managers run a more profitable and productive construction business. Construction Executive established the rankings by asking over 600 hundred U.S. construction law firms to complete a survey. Constructive Executive’s data collection includes: 2023 revenues from the firm’s construction practice, the number of attorneys in the firm’s construction practice, percentage of the firm’s total revenues derived from its construction practice, the number of states in which the firm is licensed to practice, the year in which the construction practice was established, and the number of construction industry clients served during the fiscal year 2023. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC

    FEMA Fire Management Assistance Granted for the French Fire

    July 08, 2024 —
    OAKLAND, Calif. – The Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Region 9 Administrator authorized the use of federal funds on July 4 at 11:37 p.m. PDT / 2:37 a.m. EDT to assist the state of California to combat the French Fire burning in Mariposa County. On July 4, the state of California submitted a request for a Fire Management Assistance Grant (FMAG). At the time of the request, the fire threatened approximately 1,019 homes in and around Mariposa, CA, population 1,300. 95% of the threatened homes are primary residences and 5% are secondary residences. The fire started on July 4, 2024 and had burned more than 790 acres of State and private land. The fire was 0% contained. There are five large fires burning uncontrolled within the State. FMAGs provide federal funding for up to 75 percent of eligible firefighting costs. The Disaster Relief Fund provides allowances for FMAGs through FEMA to assist in fighting fires that threaten to become a greater incident. Eligible costs covered by FMAGs can include expenses for field camps, equipment use, materials, supplies and mobilization, and demobilization activities attributed to fighting the fire. For more information on FMAGs, visit https://www.fema.gov/assistance/public/fire-management-assistance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Do We Really Want Courts Deciding if Our Construction Contracts are Fair?

    March 19, 2015 —
    As I posted recently, the Virginia General Assembly has passed, and I can see no reason why the governor won’t sign, a bill that would essentially invalidate preemptive contractual waivers of lien rights as they relate to subcontractors and material suppliers. It does not apply to General Contractors, but it is a step in what many (including those attorneys that represent subcontractors and suppliers) believe is the right direction. Of course, as soon as I posted last week, my friend and colleague Scott Wolfe (@scottwolfejr) commented on that post and then gave his two cents worth at his Zlien blog. The gist of the comments here at Musings and the post over at his blog was essentially that these contractual provisions were inherently unfair and therefore should be abolished because of both a relative disparity in leverage between the Owner or GC and the Subcontractor when it comes to negotiations and the fact that subcontractors often don’t read their contracts or discuss them with a construction attorney prior to signing them. I hear this first of his arguments often when I am reviewing a contract after the fact and a client or potential client acts surprised that a provision will be enforced and the courts of the Commonwealth of Virginia will actually enforce them. As to Scott’s second reason, I have always warned here at Musings that you should read your contracts carefully because they will be the law of your business relationship in the future. The first of his two points is more interesting and in some ways more easily supported. However, where we are speaking of contracts between businesses where both sides are bound by the terms of the contract, it begs the question of whether in seeking to make contracts more “fair” we could add a layer of uncertainty that could cause more problems than it solves. Do we really want courts stepping in after the fact to renegotiate the terms of a deal that was struck months or possibly years before because one judge believes that the deal was too one sided? Do we really need such “Monday morning quarterbacking?” Is one person’s idea of “fair” better than another’s when both parties to the contract had the full ability to read, negotiate and possibly reject the deal long ago? Personally, I think that the answer to these questions is, in all but the most egregious cases or where the legislatures have stepped in adding certainty (whether to the good or bad), “No.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Louisiana Supreme Court Holds Architect Has No Duty to Safeguard Third Parties Against Injury, Regardless of Knowledge of Dangerous Conditions on the Project

    July 31, 2024 —
    In Bonilla v. Verges Rome Architects, 2023-00928 (La. 3/22/24); 382 So.3d 62, the Louisiana Supreme Court held because the terms of the agreement between the architect and the public owner did not give the architect responsibility for the means and methods of construction or for safety on the project, the architect did not have a duty to safeguard third parties against injury, regardless of whether the architect may have had knowledge of dangerous conditions on the project. In Bonilla, the City of New Orleans entered into a contract for the renovation of a building owned by the city. The city also entered into an agreement with Verges Rome Architects (“VRA”) to serve as the project architect. The general contractor on the project subcontracted the demolition work to Meza Services, Inc. (“Meza”). An employee of Meza was injured while attempting to demolish a “vault” on the project. The vault was a ten-foot by ten-foot cinderblock room with a nine-foot-high concrete slab ceiling located on the second floor of the building. The walls of the vault had been partially demolished when one of the employees of Meza was directed by his supervisor to stand on the ceiling of the vault with a jackhammer to continue the demolition. Shortly after beginning the task, the vault structure collapsed and caused the employee to suffer significant injury. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stu Richeson, Phelps
    Mr. Richeson may be contacted at stuart.richeson@phelps.com

    Richest NJ Neighborhood Fights Plan for Low-Cost Homes on Toxic Dump

    May 28, 2024 —
    Josh Bauers has long had his sights set on the town dump in Millburn. Bauers wants to put 75 affordable apartments on the site where piles of Styrofoam and food scraps lie in heaps. But that’s a bridge too far for many residents of New Jersey’s richest ZIP code, Short Hills, where multimillion dollar Tudor and colonial-style mansions are perched atop grassy hillocks less than an hour’s commute from Manhattan. Many in the community, favored by finance types and lawyers, are up in arms over the development’s potential effect on the environment and its highly-rated schools. But the years-long fight to put affordable housing in the town has become about far more than that, and has raised accusations over inequality and race. Millburn Township, whose largest community is Short Hills, may be forced to build on the dump after a state court ruled last month that it will decide where the development will go. The town had agreed to build on the polluted site three years ago, only to backtrack. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nacha Cattan, Bloomberg

    New Spending Measure Has Big Potential Infrastructure Boost

    February 14, 2018 —
    Construction and engineering companies find lots of good news in a newly enacted budget and appropriations package that keeps federal agencies open until late March, provides $89 billion for post-disaster relief and rebuilding and also holds out the prospect of an additional $20 billion in infrastructure funding over the next two years. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com

    Nine Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    July 14, 2016 —
    Ahlers & Cressman PLLC attorneys have again been recognized as “Super Lawyers” and “Rising Stars” (attorneys under 40 years of age, or practicing under 10 years) in Washington for 2016. Six Ahlers & Cressman attorneys were recognized as Super Lawyers: John P. Ahlers, Paul R. Cressman, Jr., Scott R. Sleight, Bruce A. Cohen, Lawrence S. Glosser, and Brett M. Hill. Additionally, three of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized as Rising Stars: Ryan W. Sternoff, James R. Lynch, and Lindsay K. Taft. Super Lawyers selects attorneys using a multiphase selection process, involving peer nominations, evaluations, and third-party research. Each attorney candidate is evaluated on 12 indicators of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only five percent of the total lawyers in Washington State are selected for the honor of Super Lawyer, and no more than 2.5 percent are selected for the honor of Rising Star. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of