BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimony
    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


    Construction Warranties: Have You Seen Me Lately?

    Can an Architect, Hired by an Owner, Be Sued by the General Contractor?

    New York Federal Court Enforces Construction Exclusion, Rejects Reimbursement Claim

    Construction Firm Settles Suit Over 2012 Calif. Wildfire

    The EPA and the Corps of Engineers Propose Another Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States”

    Veterans Day – Thank You for Your Service

    Governor Signs AB5 Into Law — Reshaping California's Independent Contractor Classification Landscape

    Property Owner Entitled to Rely on Zoning Administrator Advice

    CGL Policies and the Professional Liabilities Exclusion

    Insurance Policy Language Really Does Matter

    Keeping Your Workers Safe When Air Quality Isn't

    Leftover Equipment and Materials When a Contractor Is Abruptly Terminated

    California Supreme Court Holds that Requirement of Prejudice for Late Notice Defense is a Fundamental Public Policy of the State for Choice of Law Analysis

    New York Court Holds Radioactive Materials Exclusion Precludes E&O Coverage for Negligent Phase I Report

    Contract Change #8: Direct Communications between Owners and Contractors (law note)

    David M. McLain named Law Week Colorado’s 2015 Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants

    Unbilled Costs Remain in Tutor Perini's Finances

    Contractor Prevailing Against Subcontractor On Common Law Indemnity Claim

    CA Supreme Court: Right to Repair Act (SB 800) is the Exclusive Remedy for Residential Construction Defect Claims – So Now What?

    Time to Reform Construction Defect Law in Nevada

    Meet D1's Neutrals Series: KENNETH FLOREY

    GAO Sustains Unsupported Past Performance Evaluation and Unequal Discussion Bid Protest

    Condo Building Increasing in Washington D.C.

    Another Las Vegas Tower at the Center of Construction Defect Claims

    Home Numbers Remain Small While Homes Get Bigger

    Subcontractor Exception to Your Work Exclusion Paves the Way for Coverage

    A Look at Trending Legislative Changes Impacting Workers' Comp

    Supreme Court of Wisconsin Applies Pro Rata Allocation Based on Policy Limits to Co-Insurance Dispute

    EPA and the Corps of Engineers Repeal the 2015 “Waters of the United States” Rule

    Do Not Pass Go! Duty to Defend in a Professional Services Agreement (law note)

    ASCE Statement on Congress Passage of National Debt Limit Suspension

    Proposed Changes to Federal Lease Accounting Standards

    Strategy for Enforcement of Dispute Resolution Rights

    Municipalities Owe a Duty to Pedestrians Regardless of Whether a Sidewalk Presents an “Open and Obvious” Hazardous Condition. (WA)

    From the Ground Up

    Effective Zoning Reform Isn’t as Simple as It Seems

    Brooklyn Atlantic Yards Yields Dueling Suits on Tower

    Study Finds Mansion Tax Reduced Sales in New York and New Jersey

    Incorporation by Reference in Your Design Services Contract– What Does this Mean, and Are You at Risk? (Law Note)

    Updates to Residential Landlord Tenant Law

    No Occurrence Where Contract Provides for Delays

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Confident about Construction Defect Bill

    As Recovery Continues, Home Improvement Stores Make Sales

    Inspired by Filipino Design, an Apartment Building Looks Homeward

    ‘I’m a Scapegoat,’ Says Former CEO of Dubai Construction Firm

    EEOC Focuses on Eliminating Harassment, Recruitment and Hiring Barriers in the Construction Industry

    Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Insurance Bad Faith Trials

    California Home Sellers Have Duty to Disclose Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Brazil’s Former President Turns Himself In to Police

    Dangerous Condition, Dangerous Precedent: California Supreme Court Expands Scope of Dangerous Condition Liability Involving Third Party Negligent/Criminal Conduct
    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

    CA Supreme Court Rejects Proposed Exceptions to Interim Adverse Judgment Rule Defense to Malicious Prosecution Action

    August 24, 2017 —
    In Parrish v. Latham & Watkins (No. S228277 - August 10, 2017) (“Parrish”), the California Supreme Court examined the “interim adverse judgment rule” in a different context than previous decisions on the subject. The rule provides that if an earlier action succeeds after a hearing on the merits, this success establishes the existence of probable cause and precludes a subsequent malicious prosecution action. In a typical case applying the rule, a plaintiff in the underlying action defeats the defendant’s motion for summary judgment but then loses the case at trial leading to a subsequent malicious prosecution claim. In Parrish, the Court addressed whether the rule applies when the trial court had denied the defendant’s summary judgment motion but concluded after the defense prevailed at a bench trial that the suit had been brought in “bad faith” due to a lack of evidentiary support. Reprinted courtesy of David W. Evans, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Stephen J. Squillario, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Evans may be contacted at devans@hbblaw.com Mr. Squillario may be contacted at ssquillario@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Jason Poore Receives 2018 Joseph H. Foster Young Lawyer Award

    July 21, 2018 —
    Jason Poore, an associate in the General Litigation Group, recently received the 2018 Joseph H. Foster Young Lawyer Award during the Philadelphia Association of Defense Counsel’s annual meeting. The Joseph H. Foster Young Lawyer Award honors “a young lawyer who best exemplifies the qualities of professionalism and dedication as defense counsel in the practice of law and in the promotion of the highest ideals of justice in the community." Jason continues to make significant contributions to the local bar and community. In addition to serving on the Executive Committee of the Philadelphia Bar Association Young Lawyers Division, he is the creator and Chair of the PBA's Youth Courts Committee. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Poore, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Poore may be contacted at poorej@whiteandwilliams.com

    Commerce City Enacts Reform to Increase For-Sale Multifamily Housing

    August 19, 2015 —
    Many cities in Denver’s metropolitan areas are experiencing tremendous growth. For more than a year, Colorado has been reported to be in a building boom. However even with the noticeable expansion, some areas still suffer from a lack of housing options specific to multifamily developments. Sean Ford, Mayor of Commerce City, stated that “[the city] has not approved a new condominium or multi-family project since 2008.”[1] Those of us in the construction industry attribute this shortage, at least in part, to construction defect litigation, which is often drawn-out, complicated, and very costly to builders. Predicting that light rail service will intensify the need for owner-occupied units among Commerce City residents, the city council enacted legislation to address this scarcity. Ordinance No. 2060 which took effect August 1, 2015 provides “reasonable steps to encourage prompt and voluntary correction of construction defects … in order to enhance the health and safety of residents of Commerce City.” The ordinance requires a homeowner who discovers a defect to provide written notice via certified mail or personal delivery to the responsible builder, contractor, engineer, or design professional. The notice may include requests for relevant construction documentation, maintenance recommendations, and warranty information. The builder must acknowledge receipt of notice and provide requested documents within 14 days. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    DIR Public Works Registration System Down, Public Works Contractors Not to be Penalized

    July 15, 2024 —
    In a bit of a major freak-out this past Friday, June 28, 2024, public works contractors with Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) registrations expiring on June 30, 2024 were unable to renew their public works registrations. Those who had submitted checks were not receiving responses, DIR was not accepting online payments, and there was no telephone number or address to contact the DIR about the issue. This, of course, could have been a big deal since Labor Code section 1725.5 prohibits contractors and subcontractors from bidding on, being listed in a bid, or being awarded a public works contract unless registered with the DIR. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Court Sharpens The “Sword” And Strengthens The “Shield” Of Contractors’ License Law

    July 24, 2023 —
    Performing construction work without the necessary license can have significant repercussions on a contractor’s business. California in particular has become known for its imposition of “strict and harsh” penalties for a contractor’s failure to maintain proper licensure. In the realm of public works projects, any contract with an unlicensed contractor is deemed void. See Business & Professions Code Section 7028.15(e). On private projects, California’s Contractors’ License Law prohibits contractors from maintaining any action to recover payment for their work, and more severe, may require a contractor to disgorge all funds paid to it for performing unlicensed work. See Business & Professions Code Section 7031). These methods of deterrence are referred to as the “shield” and “sword” of the Contractors’ State License Law. Loranger v. Jones, 184 Cal. App. 4th 847, 854 (2010). In any discussion surrounding licensure, it is important to review the language of the Business and Professions Code (“Bus. & Prof.”). Section 7031(a) states:
    Except as provided in subdivision (e), no person engaged in the business or acting in the capacity of a contractor, may bring or maintain any action, or recover in law or equity in any action, in any court of this state for compensation for the performance of any act or contract where a license is required by this chapter without alleging that they were a duly licensed contractor at all times during the performance of that act or contract regardless of the merits of the cause of action brought by the person…
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kyle S. Case, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald LLP
    Mr. Case may be contacted at kcase@watttieder.com

    Expired Contract Not Revived Due to Sovereign Immunity and the Ex Contractu Clause

    September 15, 2016 —
    A few months ago, a decision by the Supreme Court of Georgia in Georgia Department of Labor v. RTT Associates, Inc. provided a strict rule for contractors who work with state agencies to determine whether a state agency has waived its sovereign immunity. The issue as framed by the Court was “whether an agency’s waiver of immunity from a breach of contract claim as a result of entering into a written contract remains intact in the event the contract is extended without a written document signed by both parties expressly amending the contract, as required by its terms.” The case involved a contract executed on March 1, 2012, by a contractor, RTT Associates, Inc. (RTT), and the Georgia Department of Labor (DOL), whereby RTT was to develop certain computer software for the DOL by the completion date, June 30, 2012. The contract required that amendments be in writing and fully executed by both parties. Time was of the essence and RTT’s obligation under the contract survived the expiration or termination of the contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook Jr., Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    Separation of Insureds Provision in CGL Policies

    August 31, 2020 —
    CGL policies contain a “Separation of Insureds” provision. This provision oftentimes states:
      Except with respect to the Limits of Insurance, and any rights or duties specifically assigned this Coverage Part to the first Named Insured, this insurance applies:
    1. As if each named insured were the only Named Insured; and
    2. Separately to each insured against whom claim is made or “suit” is brought.
    This provision is designed to “create separate insurable interests in each individual insured under a policy, such that the conduct of one insured will not necessarily exclude coverage for all other insured.” Evanson Ins. Co. v. Design Build Interamerican, Inc., 569 Fed.Appx. 739 (11th Cir. 2014). This provision also allows one insured under the policy (e.g., additional insured) to sue another (e.g., named insured) without violating potential coverage because there are separate insurable interests. This is a valuable provision in CGL policies. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (07/05/23) – A Hospitality Strike in Southern California, Agencies Step in With Lenders and the Social in ESG

    August 14, 2023 —
    In our latest roundup, we see promising developments for climate change action in commercial real estate, how homeowners are reacting to new energy concerns, the fallout of the U.S. debt ceiling fight on global M&A deals, and more!
    • There are new ways the commercial real estate sector can grow its commitment to climate goals and contributions to reducing its carbon footprint. (Mahesh Ramanujam, Forbes)
    • Thousands of hospitality workers in Southern California went on strike to demand higher wages, access to affordable family health care benefits and stronger workplace protections. (Julianne McShane, NBC)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team