BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnesses
    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


    Colorado Supreme Court to Hear Colorado Pool Systems, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance Company, et al.

    Edward Beitz and William Taylor Recognized by US News – Best Lawyers as a "Lawyer of the Year"

    Beam Fracture on Closed Mississippi River Bridge Is at Least Two Years Old

    Kentucky Supreme Court Creates New “Goldilocks Zone” to Limit Opinions of Biomechanical Experts

    Colombia's $15 Billion Road Plan Bounces Back From Bribe Scandal

    Quick Note: Subcontractor Payment Bond = Common Law Payment Bond

    Good News on Prices for Some Construction Materials

    Coverage For Advertising Injury Barred by Prior Publication Exclusion

    Tax Increase Pumps $52 Billion Into California Construction

    New Mexico Holds One-Sided Dispute Resolution Provisions Are Unenforceable

    Too Late for The Blame Game: Massachusetts Court Holds That the Statute of Repose Barred a Product Manufacturer from Seeking Contribution from a Product Installer

    Cause Still Unclear in March Retaining Wall Collapse on $900M NJ Interchange

    Colorado Finally Corrects Thirty-Year Old Flaw in Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    Equities Favor Subrogating Insurer Over Subcontractor That Performed Defective Work

    The Importance of the Recent Amendment to Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence

    Illinois Court Addresses Rip-And-Tear Coverage And Existence Of An “Occurrence” In Defective Product Suit

    Fatal Boston Garage Demolition Leaves Long Road to Recovery

    SFAA Commends U.S. House for Passage of Historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill

    Everyone Wins When a Foreclosure Sale Generates Excess Proceeds

    Former NJ Army Base $2B Makeover is 'Buzzsaw' of Activity

    Hunton Insurance Lawyer, Jae Lynn Huckaba, Awarded Miami-Dade Bar Association Young Lawyer Section’s Rookie of the Year Award

    Gibbs Giden is Pleased to Announce Four New Partners and Two New Associates

    Why Financial Advisers Still Hate Reverse Mortgages

    Flexible Seattle Off-Ramp Would Retain Shape in Quake

    Two Years, Too Late: Time-Barred Hurricane Loss is Timely Reminder to Insureds

    Hunton Insurance Practice Again Scores “Tier 1” National Ranking in US News Best Law Firm Rankings

    #1 CDJ Topic: McMillin Albany LLC v Superior Court of California

    Preventing Costly Litigation Through Your Construction Contract

    Coverage for Construction Defects Barred By Exclusion j (5)

    Home-Building Climate Warms in U.S. as Weather Funk Lifts

    Tiny Houses Big With U.S. Owners Seeking Economic Freedom

    A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules

    California Court Invokes Equity to Stretch Anti-Subrogation Rule Principles

    With Vice President's Tie-Breaker, US Senate Approves Far-Reaching Climate Bill

    Few Homes Available to Reno Buyers, Plenty of Commercial Properties

    Eight Things You Need to Know About the AAA’s New Construction Arbitration Rules

    Newmeyer Dillion Named One of "The Best Places To Work In Orange County" by Orange County Business Journal

    Subrogation Waiver Unconscionable in Residential Fuel Delivery Contract

    Google, Environmentalists and University Push Methane-Leak Detection

    Kansas Man Caught for Construction Scam in Virginia

    Housing Affordability Down

    Miami's Condo Craze Burns Out on Strong Dollar

    The Status of OSHA’s Impending Heat Stress Standard

    Were Condos a Bad Idea?

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Two Recent Cases Address Copyright Protection for Architectural Works

    Failing to Pay Prevailing Wages May Have Just Cost You More Than You Thought

    Forum Selection Provisions Are Not to Be Overlooked…Even On Federal Projects

    Environmental Justice Update: The Justice40 Initiative

    New Jersey Law Firm Announces $4 Million Settlement from Construction Site Accident

    N.J. Voters Approve $116 Million in School Construction
    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

    Couple Sues for Construction Defects in Manufactured Home

    July 31, 2013 —
    A West Virginia couple has sued the manufacturer of their home for construction defects and damage. Darrell and Teri Pearson claim that the home they purchased from Giles Industries was defective. They further claim that Kitchen’s Construction failed to set the home up properly and that the firm did not repair damaged sections of home. The suit also names the firm that sold the home and others. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Times Square Alteration Opened Up a Can of Worms

    January 26, 2017 —
    Compared with some of its Manhattan neighbors, a high-rise on the corner of Seventh Avenue and West 47th Street looks standard. Like many buildings in Times Square, the 41-story retail-entertainment-hotel development, nearly topped out, has a tower springing from a boxy base that will sport a flashy billboard. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record
    Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com

    Drone Operation in a Construction Zone

    August 17, 2020 —
    The potential uses of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) in the construction industry continue to expand as new technologies enter the market and construction companies realize UAS can perform unique tasks at tremendous cost savings. The full technological capabilities of UAS are, however, limited by law for public safety reasons. UAS share airspace with traditional passenger, military and cargo aircraft, and are potential hazards for humans below. The risk of potential catastrophic collisions has led to a careful approach to the adoption of this technology. All U.S. airspace is exclusively regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and therefore, most drone regulation originates from this agency. Many states and localities have also enacted additional limits on UAS operations, and many of these nonfederal regulations are presently on unsure footing after a federal court ruling in Singer v. Newton invalidated a local regulation that conflicted with FAA regulations. What is clear is that all commercial UAS operations must comply with FAA regulations. Any drone operation conducted by any private company, even through use of an employee’s personal drone, would constitute commercial operation subject to regulation. Reprinted courtesy of Mark R. Berry, Peckar & Abramson and Freddy X. Muñoz, Peckar & Abramson Mr. Berry may be contacted at mberry@pecklaw.com Mr. Muñoz may be contacted at fmunoz@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Case Remanded for Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    November 06, 2013 —
    The Florida Court of Appeals remanded the case after the insured was awarded an $8 million dollar judgment against its property insurer for hurricane and other damage to a home. Am. Home Assur. Co. v. Sebo, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 14799 (Fla. Ct. App. Sept. 18, 2013). Sebo purchased his home in April 2005, when it was four years old. It was insured under a manuscript policy issued by AHAC for $8 million. The all-risk policy covered rain, but excluded damage caused by faulty, inadequate or defective planning. After Sebo bought the home, water leaks were noticed. Sebo believed that the house suffered from major design and construction defects. In October 2005, Hurricane Wilma struck and further damaged the home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Just Hanging Around”

    August 14, 2023 —
    A subcontractor asserting a payment bond claim for “standby” time for its equipment on the Cline Avenue bridge project (over Indiana Harbor and Ship Canal in East Chicago, Indiana) received pushback from the payment bond surety. In fact, the duration of the standby time occurred after the surety’s principal, the general contractor, had been placed in default and terminated on the general contract. According to the surety: “After termination of the contract… it is impossible for labor, materials, and equipment to have been furnished for use in performing the terminated contract.” The surety filed a motion for summary judgment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Biden Administration Issues Buy America Guidance for Federal Infrastructure Funds

    April 25, 2022 —
    As you know, late this past year Congress passed and President Biden signed the largest infrastructure bill since President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “New Deal” in 1933. The infrastructure bill provides $1.2 trillion in spending on the nations’ infrastructure over the next five years. On Monday, the Biden Administration issued Initial Implementation Guidance requiring that, beginning May 14, 2022, materials paid for with infrastructure bill funds be made in America. The Guidance, which implements the “Buy America” provisions of the infrastructure bill requires that: 1. All iron and steel used in a project be produced in the United States; Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Arkansas: Avoiding the "Made Whole" Doctrine Through Dépeçage

    April 09, 2014 —
    In Arkansas, a workers’ compensation carrier’s subrogated recovery is subject to a determination of whether the injured worker—or, as the case may be, the worker’s surviving beneficiaries—has been “made whole” by the worker’s recovery against the third party tortfeasor. See, e.g., Yancey v. B & B Supply, 213 S.W.3d 657, 659 (Ark. App. 2005) (“An insured’s right to be made whole takes precedence over an insurer’s right to subrogation, and an insured must be fully compensated before the insurer's right to subrogation arises.”) [1] More often than not, a “made whole” determination will completely eradicate the carrier’s lien. But under the right circumstances, a workers’ compensation carrier may be able to avoid the harsh outcome of “made whole” by intervening in a pending third party action and subsequently filing a motion for dépeçage—i.e., the conflict of laws principle requiring the court to conduct a separate choice of law analysis for discrete issues in a given case. A motion for dépeçage, in this sense, would demand that the court conduct a choice of law analysis to determine what state’s workers’ compensation subrogation law will apply on reimbursing a carrier’s lien. We recently exploited this often underutilized tactic—to avoid Arkansas’ made whole doctrine—in a case involving a fatal plane crash in Louisiana. In that case, the deceased worker and his beneficiaries were residents of Louisiana; the accident took place in Louisiana; the worker was officially employed in Louisiana; and the workers’ compensation insurance policy was governed by, and benefits were paid under, Louisiana law. The only “contact” with Arkansas [2], meanwhile, was that Arkansas was the defendant’s domicile. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert M. Caplan, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Caplan may be contacted at caplanr@whiteandwilliams.com

    Proposition 65: OEHHA to Consider Adding and Delisting Certain Chemicals of Concern

    September 03, 2015 —
    The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”), which is responsible for determining the chemicals that are included on its list of chemicals known to be carcinogenic or to cause reproductive harm, thereby requiring businesses to comply with the rules accorded under California’s Proposition 65, has announced the beginning of a 45-day public comment period on five chemicals: