BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofing
    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


    Fracking Fears Grow as Oklahoma Hit by More Earthquakes Than California

    Everyone’s Working From Home Due to the Coronavirus – Is There Insurance Coverage for a Data Breach?

    Making the Construction Industry a Safer place for Women

    Liquidating Agreements—Bridging the Privity Gap for Subcontractors

    Blue Gold: Critical Water for Critical Energy Materials

    Trade Contract Revisions to Address COVID-19

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (3/20/24) – Construction Backlog Falls, National Association of Realtors Settle Litigation, and Commercial Real Estate Market’s Effect on City Cuts

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

    Development in CBF Green Building Case in Maryland

    Courts Favor Arbitration in Two Recent Construction Dispute Cases

    Fire Damages Unfinished Hospital Tower at NYU Langone Medical Center

    NYPD Investigating Two White Flags on Brooklyn Bridge

    A Vision and Strategy for the Adoption of Open International Standards

    D.C. Decision Finding No “Direct Physical Loss” for COVID-19 Closures Is Not Without Severe Limitations

    Indemnification Against Release/“Disposal” of Hazardous Materials

    Builder Must Respond To Homeowner’s Notice Of Claim Within 14 Days Even If Construction Defect Claim Is Not Alleged With The “Reasonable Detail”

    Haight Attorneys Selected to 2018 Southern California Rising Stars List

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

    Introducing Nomos LLP!

    Research Project Underway to Prepare Water Utilities for Wildfire Events

    San Francisco Bay Bridge Tower Rod Fails Test

    California Court Broadly Interprets Insurance Policy’s “Liability Arising Out of” Language

    Statutory Bad Faith and an Insured’s 60 Day Notice to Cure

    Construction Defects Up Price and Raise Conflict over Water Treatment Expansion

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

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

    Hawaii Federal District Rejects Another Construction Defect Claim

    Attorneys’ Fees and the American Arbitration Association Rule

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

    Pipeline Safety Violations Cause of Explosion that Killed 8

    Low Interest Rates Encourages Homeowners to become Landlords

    New Safety Requirements added for Keystone Pipeline

    Fact of Settlement Communications in Underlying Lawsuits is Not Ground for Anti-SLAPP Motion in Subsequent Bad Faith Lawsuit

    State of Texas’ Claims Time Barred by 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act

    Bidders Shortlisted as Oroville Dam Work Schedule is Set

    A Court-Side Seat: A Poultry Defense, a Houston Highway and a CERCLA Consent Decree that Won’t Budge

    A Court-Side Seat: Recent Legal Developments at Supreme and Federal Appeals Courts

    How BIM Can Serve Building Owners

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    Architect Blamed for Crumbling Public School Playground

    Construction Defect Journal Marks First Anniversary

    Haight Brown & Bonesteel Attorneys Named Best Lawyers in America ® 2016

    Render Unto Caesar: Considerations for Returning Withheld Sums

    Investing in Metaverse Real Estate: Mind the Gap Between Recognized and Realized Potential

    BWBO Celebrating Attorney Award and Two New Partners

    Savera Sandhu Joins Newmeyer Dillion As Partner

    The Nightmare Scenario for Florida’s Coastal Homeowners

    Homeowners Sued for Failing to Disclose Defects

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives First Tier Ranking by U.S. News and World Reports
    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

    Texas Construction Firm Officials Sentenced in Contract-Fraud Case

    August 07, 2018 —
    Two top officials of a Texas construction company—Honest, Experienced, Reliable Contracting Solutions LLC—have been sentenced to federal prison terms for defrauding the State Dept. through a plan to steer more than $1 million in contracts to the company, the Dept. of Justice says. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, ENR
    Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com

    Texas Supreme Court to Review Eight-Corners Duty-to-Defend Rule

    April 05, 2021 —
    The Texas Supreme Court has accepted certified questions from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to clarify Texas’ eight-corners rule for determining the existence of a duty to defend. In Bitco Gen. Ins. Corp. v. Monroe Guar. Ins. Co., No. 19-51012, 2021 WL 955155 (5th Cir. Mar. 12, 2021), certified question accepted (Mar. 19, 2021), the Fifth Circuit asked the Texas Supreme Court to provide guidance on Texas insurance law. In Bitco, the insured was sued for negligently drilling an irrigation well. The insured allegedly got a drilling bit stuck in a bore hole, refused to fix the issue, and eventually abandoned the well. The policy did not cover continuing property damage known to the insured before the policy incepted. The policy period ran from Oct. 6, 2015 to Oct. 6, 2016, and the parties stipulated the drill bit became stuck in November 2014. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jared De Jong, Payne & Fears
    Mr. De Jong may be contacted at jdj@paynefears.com

    Additional Dismissals of COVID Business Interruption, Civil Authority Claims

    December 29, 2020 —
    Among the recent decisions dismissing complaints for business interruption and civil authority coverage due to closures caused by COVID-19 are Pappy's Barber Shops, Inc. v. Farmers Group, Inc., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166808 (S.D. Calif. Sept. 11, 2020) and Sandy Point Dental v. Cincinnati Insurance Co., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171979 (E.D. Ill. Sept. 21, 2020). The difficulty in proving "direct physical loss" was the downfall of both cases. In Pappy's, claims were made for business income losses insured as a result of local and state closure orders. The policy required "direct physical loss of or damage to property at the described premises." Plaintiffs argued that "direct physical loss of" did not require a tangible damage or alteration to property and that the loss of the ability to continue operating their businesses as a result of the government orders met this requirement. The court relied upon a prior decision, 10E, LLC v. Travelers Indem. Co. of Connecticut, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165252 (C.D. Calif. Sept. 2, 2020) [post here], where the court noted that under California law, losses from inability to use property did not amount to "direct physical loss" within the meaning of the policy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    July 30, 2015 —
    The proper classification of workers by construction companies has been on the radar of the Department of Labor for both the US and Virginia governments for quite a while. While most of the misclassification is innocent and not done to create issues, there have been enough instances of purposeful misclassification of certain workers as independent contractors (thus avoiding workers comp and other payroll expenses) that innocent contractors have born the brunt of these issues through increased payroll costs over those that misclassify (in the form of necessarily higher bids, higher overhead, etc.). As an additional deterrent to improper classification of workers, the Virginia Department of Labor and Industry has issued guidelines for what will occur in Virginia Department of Safety and Health (VOSH) cases. 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

    Couple Sues Attorney over Construction Defect Case, Loses

    June 10, 2011 —

    The California Court of Appeals has ruled against a couple who sued their lawyer, after they were unhappy with the results of a construction defect case. Craig and Jeanne Petrik sued Mahaffey and Associates for legal malpractice and breach of contract. Their lawyer, Douglas L. Mahaffey, had settled their case for $400,000. The Petricks claimed Mahaffey did not have the authority make an offer to compromise.

    In the original case, Mahaffey held back the $400,000 awarded in the settlement until he and the Petricks came to terms on how much of that was owed to Mahaffey. The lower court concluded that the Petricks were due $146,323,18. The jury did not agree with the Petrik’s claim that conditions had been met in which Mahaffey would not be charging them costs.

    Judges O’Leary and Ikola wrote the opinion, with the third judge on the panel, Judge Bedworth offering a dissent only on their view of the cost waiver clause.

    Read the court’s opinion

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

    COVID-19 Response: Environmental Compliance Worries in the Time of Coronavirus

    April 20, 2020 —
    Earlier this week, a rumor made the rounds that a forthcoming Presidential Executive Order would impose a nationwide mandate that all employees work remotely. While the rumor proved baseless, it raised questions about manufacturers’ abilities to comply with environmental permit obligations in the event of a COVID-19 precipitated operational shutdown due to federal or state mandates or workforce depletion resulting from widespread illness. Previous emergencies offer some insights on what to expect as companies and their counsel assess environmental business risk. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, several bills were introduced in Congress that would have allowed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to waive or modify requirements, issue emergency permits, or expedite permits as needed to respond to disaster and recovery needs. In the end, no new legislation was enacted, because existing emergency powers under environmental statutes proved sufficient to allow for waiver of regulatory requirements or exercise of enforcement discretion. Key provisions include the following:
    • The Clean Water Act’s (CWA) affirmative defense for “upset” conditions. This provision excuses non-compliance with technology-based permit effluent limitations due to factors outside the permittee’s control. Criteria for establishing the defense include: 1) the upset occurred and the permittee can identify the cause, 2) the permitted facility was at the time being properly operated, 3) the permittee submitted notice of the upset (24 hour notice), and 4) the permittee complied with any remedial measures required under 40 C.F.R. §122.41(d).
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith attorneys Karen Bennett, Jane Luxton, William Walsh and Amanda Tharpe Ms. Bennett may be contacted at Karen.Bennett@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Luxton may be contacted at Jane.Luxton@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. William may be contacted at William.Walsh@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Amanda may be contacted at Amanda.Tharpe@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Rising Construction Disputes Require Improved Legal Finance

    November 15, 2022 —
    Construction disputes are famously high stakes, and the industry is currently experiencing an uptick in the value and number of disputes resulting from contractual obligations and third-party or force majeure incidents. While this is not entirely surprising given COVID-19’s disruption of global markets and supply chains, the numbers are noteworthy. For example, in 2020 alone, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)—the leading institution for construction disputes, partly because its clauses feature in many FIDIC standard form contracts—registered 194 construction arbitrations, and construction disputes now comprise over 20% of the ICC caseload. In addition to the damage to business outcomes that the underlying disputes may present, parties can quickly spend many millions on legal fees and expenses, as well as technical experts and consultants, if and when those disputes progress through the courts or arbitration. According to Norton Rose’s 2020 Global Construction Disputes Report, the average construction dispute value rose sharply from $30.7 million in 2019 to $54.26 million in 2020. Reprinted courtesy of Apoorva Patel, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    San Francisco Bucks U.S. Trend With Homeownership Gains

    September 24, 2014 —
    Homeownership climbed in a small number of U.S. metropolitan areas last year including San Francisco; Nashville, Tennessee; and Austin, Texas, where strong job growth helped them buck the national trend. Of 100 metropolitan areas, 17 had an increase in the “true” ownership rate, which measures the number of owner-occupied households per 100 adult residents, according to an analysis by Trulia Inc. of Census Bureau data. Even in those areas, advances were small. San Francisco had the biggest gain in 2013, rising about 0.6 percentage points from a year earlier, the property-information company said today. The Gary, Indiana, region, made up mostly of suburbs, had a similar increase. The homeownership rate has been falling in much of the U.S. as incomes stagnate and rising prices make housing less affordable and more difficult to finance for entry-level buyers. The regions where the rate is up include strong job markets such as San Francisco and Austin, and areas with stable prices such as Albany, New York, that were spared the brunt of the nationwide foreclosure crisis, Trulia said. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Prashant Gopal, Bloomberg
    Mr. Gopal may be contacted at pgopal2@bloomberg.net