BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineer
    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


    Two Firm Members Among the “Best Lawyers in America”

    Viva La France! 2024 Summer Olympics Construction Features Sustainable Design, Including, Simply Not Building at All

    Sanctions Award Against Pro Se Plaintiff Upheld

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    Contractor Entitled to Continued Defense Against Allegations of Faulty Construction

    Why A.I. Isn’t Going to Replace Lawyers Anytime Soon

    ‘Like a War Zone’: Malibu Fire Ravages Multimillion-Dollar Homes

    Assessing Defective Design Liability on Federal Design-Build Projects

    Man Pleads Guilty in Construction Kickback Scheme

    How To Fix Oroville Dam

    Employees Versus Independent Contractors

    Insureds' Not Entitled to Recovery for Partial Collapse

    AB 685 and COVID-19 Workplace Exposure: New California Notice and Reporting Requirements of COVID Exposure Starting January 1, 2021

    Approaches in the Absence of a Differing Site Conditions Clause

    Michigan Court of Appeals Remands Construction Defect Case

    AB5 Construction Exemption – A Checklist to Avoid Application of AB5’s Three-Part Test

    Heat Exposure Safety and Risk Factors

    Impairing Your Insurer’s Subrogation Rights

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Faulty Workmanship Claim

    SkenarioLabs Uses AI for Property Benchmarking

    Denial of Coverage for Bulge in Wall Upheld

    Manhattan Condo Lists for Record $150 Million

    Insurance Client Alert: Denial of Summary Judgment Does Not Automatically Establish Duty to Defend

    Your Contract is a Hodgepodge of Conflicting Proposals

    Manhattan Homebuyers Pay Up as Sales Top Listing Price

    Philadelphia Proposed Best Value Procurement Bill

    Connecticut Court Finds Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Enforceable

    Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co.

    West Coast Casualty’s Quarter Century of Service

    Almost Nothing Is Impossible

    You Can Take This Job and Shove It!

    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    Brown and Caldwell Appoints Stigers as Design Chief Engineer

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increase at Slower Pace

    Government’s Termination of Contractor for Default for Failure-To-Make Progress

    Providence Partner Monica R. Nelson Helps Union Carbide Secure Defense Verdict in 1st Rhode Island Asbestos Trial in Nearly 40 Years

    Indemnity Provision Prevails Over "Other Insurance" Clause

    EEOC Issues Anti-Harassment Guidance To Construction-Industry Employers

    Hard to Believe It, Construction Law Musings is 16

    Sweet News for Yum Yum Donuts: Lost Goodwill is Not an All or Nothing Proposition

    Neighbors Fight to Halt Construction after Asbestos found on Property

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules in Builder’s Implied Warranty of Habitability Case

    Miami Building Boom Spreads Into Downtown’s Tent City

    The Dangers of an Unlicensed Contractor from Every Angle

    The Comcast Project is Not Likely to Be Shut Down Too Long

    Don’t Conspire to Build a Home…Wait…What?

    Project-Specific Policies and Products-Completed Operations Hazard Extensions

    New Jersey School Blames Leaks on Construction Defects, May Sue

    Did the Building Boom Lead to a Boom in Construction Defects?

    Subcontractor’s Claim against City Barred by City’s Compliance with Georgia Payment Bond Statute
    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

    BIM Meets Reality on the Construction Site

    September 25, 2018 —
    BIM models are mostly used by foremen on construction sites. But what if they could be made available for workers at the press of a button? This question was what the Finnish government-funded KIRA pilot project set out to answer. As a by-product, the project also produced augmented reality (AR) solutions for construction sites. The research project was called ”Digitalization of a construction project based on role and location information” (RoPa). It was conducted by construction company Fira and engineering consultancy Sweco. 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

    U.S. Home Sellers Return for Spring as Buyers Get Relief

    February 10, 2014 —
    Suzanne Baker and her siblings bought a foreclosed home in Atlanta two years ago, added a fourth bathroom, then waited for values to rebound before considering a sale. Now, she says, they’re ready to cash in. The family last month listed the four-bedroom house in the affluent Buckhead neighborhood for $710,000. It was purchased as an investment for about $375,000 in late 2011, before bulk buyers snapped up many of the area’s distressed homes, helping to drive up prices in Atlanta by more than 25 percent. “The market is back up,” Baker said. “We think we can make a good amount of profit so we’re going to try.” For two years, a shortage of sellers like the Bakers has propped up prices across the U.S. as shoppers jostled for a dwindling supply of houses. Now, as the market’s busiest season approaches, escalating values are spurring more listings as homeowners regain equity lost in the worst crash since the 1930s. While new-home construction at a third of its 2006 peak will keep inventory tight, the supply increase is poised to damp price gains while higher mortgage rates cut into demand. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Prashant Gopal, Bloomberg
    Mr. Gopal may be contacted at pgopal2@bloomberg.net

    EPA Announces Decision to Retain Current Position on RCRA Regulation of Oil and Gas Production Wastes

    June 03, 2019 —
    After much study, EPA has decided against changing its current RCRA Subtitle D rules affecting the state regulation of oil and gas exploration & production waste. Since 1988, EPA has determined that most such wastes should be regulated as only non-hazardous wastes subject to RCRA Subtitle D, and not the more onerous hazardous waste provisions of RCRA Subtitle C. (See the Regulatory Determination of Oil and Gas and Geothermal Exploration, Development and Production Wastes, 53 FR 25,446 (July 6,1988).) As a result, under the Subtitle D rules, the primary regulators of such waste are state regulatory agencies, which follow the state plan non-hazardous waste guidelines developed by EPA. This regulatory disposition has proven to be fairly controversial, and it was recently challenged in a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia: Environmental Integrity Project, et al. v. McCarthy. To settle this lawsuit, EPA and the plaintiffs entered into a consent decree by which EPA was to make certain determinations about the future of the program after conducting an appropriate study. That study, Management of Exploration, Development and Production Wastes: Factors Informing a Decision on the Need for Regulatory Action, has been completed, and it concludes, after a fairly comprehensive review of these state regulatory programs, that “revisions to the federal regulations for the management of E&P wastes under Subtitle D of RCRA (40 CFR Part 257) are not necessary at this time.” In a statement released on April 23, 2019, EPA accepted these findings and promised that it would continue to work with states and other stakeholders to identify areas for improvement and to address emerging issues to ensure that exploration, development and production wastes “continue to be managed in a manner that is protective of human health and the environment.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Blackstone to Buy Chicago’s Willis Tower for $1.3 Billion

    March 19, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- Blackstone Group LP agreed to buy Chicago’s Willis Tower, the second-tallest building in the U.S., and plans to upgrade the retail and observatory space in a bet on growth in the city. The price was $1.3 billion, a record for a Chicago office building, according to Blackstone executives. The sellers of the 110-story skyscraper, formerly known as Sears Tower, are a group including New York-based investors Joseph Chetrit and Joseph Moinian, and American Landmark Properties Ltd. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hui-yong Yu, Bloomberg
    Ms. Yu may be contacted at hyu@bloomberg.net

    Contractor Not Liable for Flooding House

    October 02, 2013 —
    Knife River Corp was hired by the town of Post Falls, Idaho to do road and sewer construction work. In the process, they interrupted a 6-inch water supply line, sending the water into a wastewater line. From there, the water flooded a home in Post Fall. The city paid more than $7,800 in damages. Post Falls sued Knife River’s insurer for coverage. The city has lost its lawsuit and is responsible for $18,500 in attorneys’ fees. Despite all this, the city administrator says that the city still has a good working relationship with Knife River. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    How to Remove a Mechanics Lien from Your Property

    March 21, 2022 —
    It sometimes happens that a contractor or material supplier records a mechanics lien on your property that becomes expired. Other times, the mechanics lien may be wrong, invalid and unenforceable for some reason, serving no legitimate purpose. The contractor or material supplier may be reasonable and release the mechanics lien once these issues are brought to its attention, but the contractor or material supplier may very well refuse to release the mechanics lien when requested. When this happens, what are your options? In California, there are various ways to bring this type of mechanics lien to a court’s attention in the hopes that the court will cause it to be released. Three of the more common methods are: (1) a petition under California Civil Code (“CCC”) § 8480; (2) a petition under California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) § 765.010; or (3) a Lambert motion. This article will briefly discuss each of these methods. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hannah Kreuser, Porter Law Group
    Ms. Kreuser may be contacted at hkreuser@porterlaw.com

    Indemnity: What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You!

    September 19, 2022 —
    Risk allocation between the parties is a critical component of any construction contract. Indemnity obligations can be some of the important risk-shifting provisions of any design or construction contract. Indemnity provisions typically require one party, the Indemnitor, to agree to “hold harmless,” and/or reimburse another party, the indemnitee, from claims and liability arising out of the party’s work. Considering the financial consequences that an indemnity provision can have on a construction project, it is critical that all parties to a construction contract know the legal implications of the contract indemnity provisions and understand any limitations in enforcing the indemnity provisions depending on the controlling jurisdiction. While most indemnity clauses and obligations are enforceable, many states have enacted anti-indemnity statutes prohibiting or restricting specific indemnification provisions. These anti-indemnity statutes afford protection to contractors and subcontractors not generally in a position to protect themselves from overly extensive indemnity obligations. This article highlights several examples of indemnity provisions typically seen in construction contracts, the measures are taken by a growing number of states to protect parties with less bargaining power in the form of anti-indemnity statutes, and offers practical considerations when negotiating or drafting indemnity provisions.[1] Reprinted courtesy of Caitlin Kicklighter, Emory Law Student (2024 Graduate), (ConsensusDocs) and Bill Shaughnessy, Jones Walker LLP (ConsensusDocs) Mr. Shaughnessy may be contacted at bshaughnessy@joneswalker.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Will They Blow It Up?

    March 28, 2012 —

    The issues concerning the Harmon Towers building in Las Vegas continue to make their way through the courts. As we noted in a previous piece, Cook County building officials stated that the building could be a hazard if Las Vegas were struck by an earthquake. The question of whether the building will continue to stand is just one of the issues in front of a judge.

    MGM Resorts International argued at a March 13 hearing for permission to implode the Harmon hotel building. They claim that more than 1,700 defects have been discovered in the building and that the building is a public safety hazard. Arguing against demolition, Perini Building Company, the general contractor for the hotel, and its subcontractors are claiming that imploding the building would destroy evidence and prejudice juries in the ongoing construction defect claims. They claim that MGM Resorts wishes to abandon the building due to the economic slowdown. Perini Corp, the contractor for the project, claims that the building can be fixed. Perini claims that MGM’s position in the construction trial would be improved if the building is demolished.

    After Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez heard the four days of testimony on the Harmon Towers building and whether it should be demolished, she scheduled more testimony, with two days in April and an entire week in July. Judge Gonzalez will be deciding whether the building will be torn down, imploded, or left in place.

    Read the full story…

    Read the full story…

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