BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete 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


    Year and a Half Old Las Vegas VA Emergency Room Gets Rebuilt

    Illinois Appellate Court Finds Insurer Estopped From Denying Coverage Where Declaratory Judgment Suit Filed Too Late

    AI in Construction: What Does It Mean for Our Contractors?

    Texas Court of Appeals Conditionally Grant Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Anderson

    The Sky is Falling! – Or is it? Impacting Lives through Addressing the Fear of Environmental Liabilities

    Form Contracts are Great, but. . .

    Arizona Is Smart About Water. It Should Stay That Way.

    The OFCCP’s November 2019 Updated Technical Assistance Guide: What Every Federal Construction Contractor Should Know

    Defining Constructive Acceleration

    Is It Time to Revisit Construction Defects in Kentucky?

    If Passed, New Bill AB 2320 Will Mandate Cyber Insurance For State Government Contractors

    Construction Contractor “Mean Tweets” Edition

    Do Not File a Miller Act Payment Bond Lawsuit After the One-Year Statute of Limitations

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Obtains Pre-Answer Motion to Dismiss in Favor of Defendant

    CAUTION: Terms of CCP Section 998 Offers to Compromise Must Be Fully Contained in the Offer Itself

    Happenings in and around the 2016 West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Dynamics of Managing Professional Liability Claims for Design Builders

    Don’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public Project.

    Washington State Updates the Contractor Registration Statute

    Los Angeles Wildfires Rage on, Destroying Structures and Displacing Residents

    Congratulations to all of our 2023 Attorneys Named as Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/06/22

    Gatluak Ramdiet Named to The National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List

    The Secret to an OSHA Inspection

    Do You Really Want Mandatory Arbitration in Your Construction Contract?

    Trump Abandons Plan for Council on Infrastructure

    Indiana Appellate Court Allows Third-Party Spoliation Claim to Proceed

    District Court of Missouri Limits Whining About the Scope of Waiver of Subrogation Clauses in Wine Storage Agreements

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolution Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    Washington State May Allow Common Negligence Claims against Construction Professionals

    Undercover Sting Nabs Eleven Illegal Contractors in California

    Be a Good Neighbor: Techniques to Mitigate the Risk of Claims from Adjacent Landowners

    CA Supreme Court Expands Scope of Lawyers’ Statute of Limitations to Non-Legal Malpractice Claims – Confusion Predicted for Law and Motion Judges

    Just Decided – New Jersey Supreme Court: Insurers Can Look To Extrinsic Evidence To Deny a Defense

    Does Your 998 Offer to Compromise Include Attorneys’ Fees and Costs?

    Homebuilders Leading U.S. Consumer Stocks: EcoPulse

    Florida Property Bill Passes Economic Affairs Committee with Amendments

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Faulty Workmanship Denied

    Ohio Court of Appeals Affirms Judgment in Landis v. Fannin Builders

    High Attendance Predicted for West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Massachusetts Federal Court Holds No Coverage for Mold and Water Damage Claim

    Nine Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    Courts Take Another Swipe at the Implied Warranty of the Plans and Specifications

    Amada Family Limited Partnership v. Pomeroy: Colorado Court of Appeals Expressly Affirms the Continuing Viability of the Common-Law After-Acquired Title Doctrine and Expressly Recognizes Utility Easements by Necessity

    Reasons to Be Skeptical About a Millennial Homebuying Boom in 2016

    Bats, Water, Soil, and Bridges- an Engineer’s dream

    Lumber Liquidators’ Home-Testing Methods Get EPA Scrutiny

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Bars Coverage for Pool Damage

    Yellen Has Scant Power to Relieve U.S. Housing Slowdown

    New Becker & Poliakoff Attorney to Expand Morristown Construction Litigation Practice
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Singer Akon’s Multibillion-Dollar Futuristic City in Africa Gets Final Notice

    September 02, 2024 —
    A single arched concrete block juts out of a field in Senegal where R&B singer Akon first laid the foundation stone for his $6 billion metropolis four years ago. The West African nation granted the artist 136 acres of land on its Atlantic Coast in 2020 to build his Akon City — envisioned as a real-life Wakanda, the fictional country from Marvel Studios’ Black Panther films. Complete with condominiums, amusement parks and a seaside resort in gravity-defying skyscrapers rising above the rural landscape, Akon City would run on solar power and his Akoin cryptocurrency, the American-Senegalese singer said during a flashy presentation in Senegal’s capital, Dakar. Today, goats and cows graze the deserted pasture 60 miles south of Dakar, and authorities are growing increasingly impatient. Reprinted courtesy of Katarina Hoije, Bloomberg and Fred Ojambo, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Should a Subcontractor provide bonds to a GC who is not himself bonded? (Bonding Agent Perspective)

    May 03, 2017 —
    Guest Post Friday is back, and for this week, Construction Law Musings welcomes Steve Moore. Steve has been the Construction & Surety Manager for Towne Insurance Agency-Invincia, in Chesterfield, VA since 2010. Steve’s experience in the Virginia surety bonding marketplace started in 1985 with USF&G. His underwriting travels took him from USF&G to starting National Grange Mutual’s mid-Atlantic bond department over Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, North & South Carolina, to being Reliance Surety’s “Firemark” bond manager in Virginia. Reliance was purchased by Travelers, where Steve continued to grow the surety book of business and build expertise and relationships. Experience with Travelers and Zurich had Steve handling surety bonds for some of Virginia’s largest and best-of-class contractors. Recently, he was contracted by the Commonwealth’s Attorney’s office to serve as a contract surety expert witness on behalf of the state. He is a 1985 graduate of Virginia Tech with double-major B.S. degrees in Finance and Marketing. Today, Steve has business and relationships with Travelers, The Hartford, Westfield, CNA, CBIC, Selective, Liberty Mutual, Ohio Casualty, Cincinnati, and many other companies. Steve’s strong foundation of insurance knowledge and in bonding principles and practices allow him to serve as a great resource for his clients. An old Aesop fable comes to mind when I am asked whether a Sub should bond to an unbonded GC:
    "A woodsman entered the forest and asked the trees to give him a handle made of the best wood. After giving the woodsman a stave of hickory, the forest watched the woodsman fashion an axe onto the handle. In a flash, the woodsman began to chop down the various oaks and maples in the forest. The oak then said to a pine, “It serves us right, since we gave our adversary the very thing that contributes to our doom…"
    When a subcontractor client of mine asks about bonding to an un-bonded general contractor, a number of questions immediately come to mind. Why isn’t the GC bonded? What is the existing relationship between the GC and Sub? How well is the job financed? While wanting to help my subcontractor procure work, and surely enjoying the commissions from writing a bond, I also want to help my sub client manage unforeseen risk. What are the risks to a sub, when posting a bond to an unbonded GC? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    After More than Two Years, USDOT Rejects WSDOT’s Recommendation to Reinstate Non-Minority Women-Owned DBEs into DBE Participation Goals

    February 24, 2020 —
    For the past several years, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight has been closely following news of Washington State Department of Transportation’s (“WSDOT’s”) exclusion of non-minority women-owned Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (“DBEs”)[1] from qualifying toward Condition of Award (“COA”) Goals on federally-funded projects. See ACS’s letter of January 9, 2014 and blog articles of June 2, 2017 and September 21, 2017. In a striking—and long awaited—decision issued just days ago, USDOT rejected WSDOT’s recommendation to unwind the exclusion of non-minority women-owned DBEs from COA Goals, meaning women-owned DBEs in Washington remain excluded from DBE COA participation goals until September 2020. As background, the DBE program is a program created by Congress with the goal of increasing women and minority-owned business participation in federally-funded transportation contracting. To withstand constitutional scrutiny, each state must tailor its program to the specific discrimination found to exist in that state.[2] To that end, every three years, WSDOT must conduct a “Disparity Study,” aimed at statistically measuring the “discrimination” in the marketplace. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ellie Perka, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Ms. Perka may be contacted at ellie.perka@acslawyers.com

    The Independent Tort Doctrine (And Its Importance)

    October 24, 2022 —
    A non-construction raises an important legal principle. Here it is because it applies to construction disputes. It actually applies to many business-type disputes. It is based on what is widely referred to as the independent tort doctrine: Florida law does not allow a party damaged by a breach of contract to recover exactly the same contract damages via a tort claim. “It is a fundamental, long-standing common law principle that a plaintiff may not recover in tort for a contract dispute unless the tort is independent of any breach of contract. A plaintiff bringing both a breach of contract and a tort claim must allege, in addition to the breach of contract, “some other conduct amounting to an independent tort.” Bedoyan v. Samra, 47 Fla.L.Weekly D1955a (Fla. 3d 2022) (internal citations omitted). 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

    Construction Defect Claim over LAX Runways

    October 22, 2013 —
    The city of Los Angeles is claiming that problems with the south runway at Los Angeles International Airport are due to construction defects. The city as filed a lawsuit against four of the firms involved in building the runway, CH2M Hill, R&L Brosamer, HNTB, and Tutor-Saliba Corp. The lawsuit also includes the possibility of naming up to 200 individuals or corporations. The suit alleges that the firms incorrectly installed the concrete, leading to accelerated wear. As a result, renovation of the runway will likely have to be done earlier than anticipated. The runway was opened in 2007 as part of a safety improvement effort. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Rules General Contractors Can Contractually Subordinate Mechanics Lien Rights

    November 26, 2014 —
    In Moorefield Construction, Inc. v. Intervest-Mortgage Investment Co., 230 Cal. App. 4th 146 (4th Dist. 2014), a California appellate court upheld an agreement executed by a general contractor which subordinated its mechanic’s lien to a construction lender’s deed of trust. In 2006, developer DBN Parkside LLC ("DBN") purchased land in San Jacinto, California (the "property") to build a medical complex (the "project"). DBN hired Moorefield Construction, Inc. (“Moorefield”) to act as general contractor and sought funding for the project from Intervest-Mortgage Investment Company (“Intervest”). Prior to the recordation of the construction loan, and unbeknownst to Intervest, Moorefield cleared and grubbed the project site. Pursuant to the construction loan agreement, Intervest required DBN to assign its rights and remedies under the construction contract to Intervest. Under its construction contract, Moorefield agreed to subordinate its lien rights to the construction loan. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys Steven M. Cvitanovic, Jessica M. Lassere Ryland and Colin T. Murphy Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com; Ms. Lassere Ryland may be contacted at jlassere@hbblaw.com; and Mr. Murphy may be contacted at cmurphy@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    How the Cumulative Impact Theory has been Defined

    November 30, 2020 —
    Largely in the federal contract arena, there is a theory referred to as “cumulative impacts” used by a contractor to recover unforeseeable costs associated with a multitude of changes that have an overwhelming ripple effect on its efficiency, particularly efficiency dealing with its original, base contract work. In other words, by dealing with extensive changes, there is an unforeseeable impact imposed on the contractor relative to its unchanged or base contract work. Under this theory, the contractor oftentimes prices its cumulative impact under a total cost approach with an examination on its cost overrun. However, this is not an easy theory to prevail on because there needs to be a focus on the sheer number of changes, causation supporting the impact, and whether there were concurrent impacts or delays that played a role in the ripple effect. See, e.g., Appeals of J.A. Jones Const. Co., ENGBCA No. 6348, 00-2 BCA P 31000 (July 7, 2000) (“However, in the vast majority of cases such claims are routinely denied because there were an insufficient number of changes, contractor-caused concurrent delays, disruptions and inefficiencies and/or a general absence of evidence of causation and impact.”). To best articulate how the cumulative impact theory has been defined, I want to include language directly from courts and board of contract appeals that have dealt with this theory. This way the contractor knows how to best work with their experts with this definition in mind–and, yes, experts will be needed–to persuasively package and establish causation and damages stemming from the multitude of changes. While many of these definitions are worded differently, you will see they have the same focus dealing with the unforeseeable ripple effect of the extensive changes. 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

    Florida’s Statute of Limitations / Repose for Actions Founded on Construction Improvement Modified

    April 25, 2023 —
    On April 13, 2023, Florida’s all-important four-year statute of limitations–Florida Statute s. 95.11(3)(c)–relating to actions founded on construction of an improvement of real property was modified. This is a key statute of limitations for ALL construction practitioners because it also includes the statute of repose for latent construction defects. At the bottom of this posting is the current version fo s. 95.11(3)(c) with the underlined section being recent additions. (They hyperlink above will identify the deletions and additions.) Important things to note:
    • Statute of Repose. The statute of repose has been reduced from 10 years to 7 years. There is now an objective date for when the repose period commences: “within 7 years after the date the authority having jurisdiction issues a temporary certificate of occupancy, a certificate of occupancy, or a certificate of completion, or the date of abandonment of construction if not completed, whichever date is earliest.”
    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