BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultant
    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


    Chinese Lead $92 Billion of U.S. Home Sales to Foreigners

    Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies the Meaning of "Living in the Same Household" for Purposes of Coverage Under a Homeowners Policy

    Modernist Houses Galore! [visual candy for architects]

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Tender Is the Fight”

    Why Is California Rebuilding in Fire Country? Because You’re Paying for It

    City Wonders Who’s to Blame for Defective Wall

    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

    2019 Legislative Session

    Executive Insights 2024: Leaders in Construction Law

    Pile Test Likely for Settling Millennium Tower

    Elon Musk’s Proposed Vegas Strip Transit System Advanced by City Council Vote

    Deck Collapse Raises Questions about Building Defects

    Disputed Facts on Cause of Collapse Results in Denied Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment

    D.R. Horton Earnings Rise as Sales and Order Volume Increase

    Judge Gives Cintra Bid Protest of $9B Md. P3 Project Award New Life

    Cleveland Condo Board Says Construction Defects Caused Leaks

    Over a Hundred Thousand Superstorm Sandy Cases Re-Opened

    Challenging Enforceability of Liquidated Damages (In Federal Construction Context)

    Chicago Makes First Major Update to City's Building Code in 70 Years

    Can We Compel Insurers To Cover Construction Defect in General Liability Policies?

    Traub Lieberman Partner Eric D. Suben Obtains Federal Second Circuit Affirmance of Summary Judgment in Insurer’s Favor

    April Rise in Construction Spending Not That Much

    Contractors Should Be Optimistic that the Best Value Tradeoff Process Will Be Employed by Civilian Agencies

    Association Insurance Company v. Carbondale Glen Lot E-8, LLC: Federal Court Reaffirms That There Is No Duty to Defend or Indemnify A Builder For Defective Construction Work

    Unintended Consequences of New Building Products and Services

    Coverage Rejected Under Owned Property and Alienated Property Exclusions

    Court Holds That One-Year SOL Applies to Disgorgement Claims Under B&P Section 7031

    Multiple Construction Errors Contributed to Mexico Subway Collapse

    Project Labor Agreements Will Now Be Required for Large-Scale Federal Construction Projects

    A Funny Thing Happened to My Ground Lease in Bankruptcy Court

    First Lumber, Now Drywall as Canada-U.S. Trade Tensions Escalate

    Solar and Wind Just Passed Another Big Turning Point

    Environmental and Regulatory Law Update: New Federal and State Rulings

    NY Attorney General to Propose Bill Requiring Climate Adaptation for Utilities

    San Francisco OKs Revamped Settling Millennium Tower Fix

    California Supreme Court McMillin Ruling

    US Secretary of Labor Withdraws Guidance Regarding Independent Contractors

    What to Expect From the New Self-Retracting Devices Standard

    At Least 46 Killed in Taiwanese Apartment Building Inferno

    Consequential Damages Flowing from Construction Defect Not Covered Under Florida Law

    Defend Trade Secret Act of 2016–-Federalizing Trade Secret Law

    Insurer’s Broad Duty to Defend in Oregon, and the Recent Ruling in State of Oregon v. Pacific Indemnity Company

    L.A. Makes $4.5 Billion Bet on Olympics After Boston Backs Out

    Bailout for an Improperly Drafted Indemnification Provision

    Microwave Transmission of Space-Based Solar Power: The Focus of New Attention

    Reporting Requirements for Architects under California Business and Professions Code Section 5588

    Kahana Feld Partner Jeff Miragliotta and Senior Associate Rachael Marvin Obtain Early Dismissal of Commercial Litigation Cases in New York and New Jersey

    Pentagon Has Big Budget for Construction in Colorado

    Car Crashes Through Restaurant Window. Result: Lesson in the History of Additional Insured Coverage

    One Sector Is Building Strength Amid Slow Growth
    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

    Pulte’s Kitchen Innovation Throw Down

    December 10, 2015 —
    Pulte Group’s national purchasing director, Kellee Hansen, created a kitchen competition where six unaffiliated manufacturers competed against each other to build a kitchen vignette based on three consumer segments, reported Builder Online. On October 19th, each team had fifteen minutes to present their vignettes to about 100 people. “In our industry, I think we lack some collaboration, historically,” Hansen told Builder Online. “Listening to our suppliers just makes us better and it makes us better as an industry. I think it raises the level for all our peers as well when we listen to our manufacturers.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Judge Rejects Extrapolation, Harmon Tower to Remain Standing

    November 07, 2012 —
    CityCenter has filed an emergency motion asking the Nevada Supreme Court to intervene in Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez’ order that the building’s defects cannot be extrapolated from those tested. CityCenter’s structural engineering expert “evaluated 397 of the Harmon’s critical structural elements and found all but one defective,” according to the article on Vegas.Inc. Judge Gonzalez would not permit this to be extrapolated to the untested 1,072, as the locations tested were not random. Judge Gonzalez also ruled that if CityCenter does additional testing, they may not appeal her order that ruled the extrapolation inadmissible. CityCenter argued to the Nevada Supreme Court that “the notion that CityCenter should be forced to incur additional millions of dollars in testing costs and sanctions – on the condition that it waive its right to appeal this ruling – just to be permitted to present its own damages evidence, shocks the conscience.” Gonzalez gave the okay to CityCenter to demolish the building, but its demolition would make any further testing impossible. Under Gonzalez’ ruling, the untested structural elements cannot b assumed to be defective. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Appeals Court Remands Fine in Late Completion Case

    November 18, 2011 —

    The California Court of Appeals in Stanislaus County has reversed the decision of the lower court in Greg Opinski Construction Inc. v. City of Oakdale. The earlier court had awarded the city of judgment of $54,000 for late completion, $3,266 for repair of construction defects and interest, and $97,775 in attorneys’ fees. The late completion of the project was due to actions by the City of Oakdale, however, the court rejected Opinski’s argument that the California Supreme Court decision in Kiewit did not allow this, as his contract with the city established a procedure for claiming extensions.

    The appeals court noted that the Kiewit decision has been “criticized as an unwarranted interference in the power of contracting parties to shift the risk of delays caused by one party onto the other party by forcing the second party to give the first notice of any intention to claim an extension of time based on delays caused by first.” They cited Sweet, a professor at Boalt Hall, UC Berkeley’s law school, that Kiewit “gutted” the “provision that conditions the contractor’s right to claim an extension of time for delays beyond his control.”

    Further changes in California law in response to the Kiewit decision lead to the current situation which the court characterized as “if the contractor wished to claim it needed an extension of time because of delays caused by the city, the contractor was required to obtain a written change order by mutual consent or submit a claim in writing requesting a formal decision by the engineer.”

    Opinski also argued that the lower court misinterpreted the contract. The Appeals court replied that “Opinski is mistaken.” He cited parts of the contract regarding the increase of time, but the court rejected these, noting that “an inability to agree is not the same as an express rejection.”

    The court also rejects Opinski’s appeal that “the evidence the project was complete earlier than September 30, 2005, is weightier than the evidence to the contrary,” which they describe as “not a winning appellate argument.” The court points out that the role of an appeals court is not to reweigh the evidence, but to determine “whether the record contains substantial evidence in support of the judgment.”

    The court did side with Opinski on one question of the escrow account. They rejected most of his arguments, repeating the line “Opinski is mistaken” several times. They decided that he was mistaken on the timing of the setoff decision and on whether the city was the prevailing party. However, the appeals court did find that Opinski was not liable for interest on the judgment.

    The appeals court rejected the awarding of prejudgment interest to the city as the funds from which the judgment was drawn was held in an escrow account. The court noted that the city had access to the funds and could “access the funds when it determined that Opinski had breached the contract.” The appeals court noted that the judgment exhausted the escrow balance and remanded the case to the lower court to determine the amount own to Opinski.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    California to Build ‘Total Disaster City’ for Training

    July 30, 2014 —
    California is building a “world-class $56 million training facility in eastern Sacramento County that would pit fire crews against a variety of realistic, pressure-packed simulated disasters,” according to the Sacramento Bee. Construction has begun on the Emergency Response Training Center in Mather Field in Rancho Cordova. “The project is a joint effort between Henke’s fire department, the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and the Sacramento Fire Department,” reported the Sacramento Bee. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Miller Act Statute of Limitations and Equitable Tolling

    July 11, 2022 —
    When it comes to a Miller Act payment bond claim, there is a one-year statute of limitations—“The Miller Act contains a statute of limitations provision that requires actions to ‘be brought no later than one year after the day on which the last of the labor was performed or material was supplied by the person bringing the claim.’” U.S. f/u/b/o Techniquex Specialty Flooring, Inc., v. Philadelphia Indemnity Ins. Co., 2022 WL 169070, *3 (M.D.Penn. 2022) (citing the Miller Act). There is an argument, albeit a difficult one, to support an equitable tolling of the one-year statute of limitations. This would be an argument filed when the one-year statute of limitations expires, but there is reason for missing the statute of limitations caused typically by the overt misleading of the defendant (surety/bond-principal):
    “Equitable tolling functions to stop the statute of limitations from running where the claim’s accrual date has passed.” “Equitable tolling is appropriate in three situations: (1) when the defendant has actively misled the plaintiff respecting the facts which comprise the plaintiff’s cause of action; (2) when the plaintiff in some extraordinary way has been prevented from asserting his rights; and (3) when the plaintiff has timely asserted his rights in the wrong forum.” The first ground for equitable tolling“appears to be the same, in all important respects” to equitable estoppel, which “excuses late filing where such tardiness results from active deception on the part of the defendant” and “what courts describe as ‘equitable tolling’ is encompassed by the latter two parts of our Circuit’s doctrine.” The extraordinary circumstances standard may be met “where the defendant misleads the plaintiff, allowing the statutory period to lapse; or when the plaintiff has no reasonable way of discovering the wrong perpetrated against her …” Tehniquex, supra, at *5 (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

    EPA Issues New PFAS Standard, Provides $1B for Testing, Cleanup of 'Forever Chemicals'

    April 29, 2024 —
    The Biden administration has announced a two-pronged initiative aimed to reduce exposure, through drinking water, to the “forever chemicals”—perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS, which have been linked to cancer and other health problems. Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record and Debra K. Rubin, Engineering News-Record Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com Ms. Rubin may be contacted at rubind@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    After Restoring Power in North Carolina, Contractor Faces Many Claims

    August 10, 2017 —
    Having successfully helped to restore power to two North Carolina barrier islands, PCL Civil Constructors now faces the fallout from a July 27 construction incident that forced a week-long evacuation of 60,000 visitors, putting a potential multimillion-dollar dent in the region’s tourism-dependent economy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Red Tape Is Holding Up a Greener Future

    March 13, 2023 —
    Seven months on, Democrats are still celebrating the Inflation Reduction Act, even though a crucial determinant of its success — permitting reform for energy projects — remains undone. Recent data shows just how imperative it is for them to stop dragging their feet. What’s now called the IRA had little to do with inflation. It was a climate bill, and a big one: It provided $370 billion to improve energy efficiency, reduce emissions and smooth the path to a clean-power economy. It came on top of a 70% surge in private investment since 2017. But the biggest impediment to the US energy transition isn’t financing: It’s building. A decade ago, between 25% and 30% of proposed wind and solar projects moved from the drawing boards to completion. But as new projects and new funding have soared, utilities have been unable to keep up, leading to an immense backlog. A recent report by BloombergNEF found that over just six years, global clean-energy investment has gone from half the level of fossil-fuel investment to near parity, an extraordinary leap that reflects the market’s appetite for clean power. Yet America’s dysfunctional regulation is preventing many needed projects from even breaking ground. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Editors, Bloomberg