BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architect
    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


    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2023 Illinois Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    Massachusetts Court Holds Statute of Repose Bars Certain Asbestos-Related Construction Claims

    Revolutionizing Buildings with Hybrid Energy Systems and Demand Response

    Using the Prevention Doctrine

    Important Insurance Alert for Out-of-State Contractors Assisting in Florida Recovery Efforts!

    Insured's Remand of Bad Faith Action Granted

    The Miller Act: More Complex than You Think

    Appellate Division Confirms Summary Judgment in Favor of Property Owners in Action Alleging Labor Law Violations

    The Murky Waters Between "Good Faith" and "Bad Faith"

    The Shifting Sands of Alternative Dispute Resolution

    Eleventh Circuit Rules That Insurer Must Defend Contractor Despite “Your Work” Exclusion, Where Damage Timing Unclear

    Don’t Miss the 2015 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    Congress to be Discussing Housing

    Late Progress Payments on Local Public Works Projects Are Not a Statutory Breach of Contract

    COVID-19 Vaccine Considerations for Employers in the Construction Industry

    The New Industrial Revolution: Rebuilding America and the World

    Crumbling Roadways Add Costs to Economy, White House Says

    This Is the Most Remote and Magical Hotel on Earth

    Natural Hydrogen May Seem New in Town, but It’s Been Here All Along

    Slavin Doctrine and Defense from Patent Defects

    Amos Rex – A Museum for the Digital Age

    Bank Sues over Defective Windows

    Condo Owners Suing Bank for Failing to Disclose Defects

    The Contingency Fee Multiplier (For Insurance Coverage Disputes)

    Nicholas A. Thede Joins Ball Janik LLP

    Contractor Allegedly Stole Construction Materials

    Update: Where Did That Punch List Term Come From Anyway?

    Courthouse Reporter Series: The Travails of Statutory Construction...Defining “Labor” under the Miller Act

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “How Bad Is It?”

    Construction Termination Issues Part 5: What if You are the One that Wants to Quit?

    “But I didn’t know what I was signing….”

    Payment Bond Claim Notice Requires More than Mailing

    Insurance Telematics and Usage Based Insurance Products

    More Clear, But Not Yet Crystal: Virginia Amends its Prompt Payment Law and Legislation Banning “Pay-If-Paid Clauses in Construction Contracts Effective July 1, 2023

    Claims Made Insurance Policies

    Duty to Defend Broadly Applies to Entire Action; Insured Need Not Apportion Defense Costs, Says Maryland Appeals Court

    Port Authority Reaches Deal on Silverstein 3 World Trade

    CGL Insurer’s Duty To Defend Broader Than Duty To Indemnify And Based On Allegations In Underlying Complaint

    Florida Courts Say that Developers Are Responsible for Flooding

    Palo Alto Proposes Time Limits on Building Permits

    #11 CDJ Topic: Cortez Blu Community Association, Inc. v. K. Hovnanian at Cortez Hill, LLC, et al.

    Excess Carrier Successfully Appeals Primary Insurer’s Summary Judgment Award

    South African Building Industry in Line for More State Support

    Home Prices on the Rise

    National Engineering and Public Works Roadshow Highlights Low Battery Seawall Restoration Project in Charleston

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

    Solar and Wind Just Passed Another Big Turning Point

    Travelers v. Larimer County and the Concept of Covered Cause of Loss

    Two Things to Consider Before Making Warranty Repairs

    California Courts Call a “Time Out” During COVID-19 –New Emergency Court Rules on Civil Litigation
    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. Drawing 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

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit

    November 07, 2012 —
    The Franklin County, Pennsylvania Public Opinion reports that an area school is coming to an end with its construction lawsuit. The school district was sued by its contractors for a combined $1.4 million, which the school district withheld when the project was not completed on schedule. Lobar Inc. claimed that the district additionally owed interest and should pay attorney fees. The school claimed that only $1.15 million was due under the contract. Under the settlement, they will be paying $1.136 million. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Reaffirming the Importance of Appeal Deadlines Under the Contract Disputes Act

    January 26, 2017 —
    A recent United States Court of Federal Claims (“COFC”) decision emphasizes the importance of deadlines for appealing a contracting officer’s (“CO”) decision under the Contract Disputes Act (“CDA”). On July 22, 2016, the COFC granted the consolidation of two naval contract dispute appeals totaling nearly $12.4 million in response to Nova Group/Tutor-Saliba’s (“NTS”) motion to resolve two Requests for Equitable Adjustment (“REA”) in the same forum. See Nova Group/Tutor-Saliba v. United States, No. 15-885C, 2016 WL 4009886, at *5 (Fed. Cl. July 22, 2016). NTS’s motion before the COFC sought to transfer an appeal of a REA before the COFC to the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (“ASBCA”), where another appeal of a REA arising under the same contract was presently on appeal. The COFC rejected NTS’s appeal to transfer the REA to the ASBCA because NTS did not appeal the REA within the 90-day limit under the CDA. Instead, the COFC allowed NTS to transfer the REA before the ASBCA to the COFC because timeliness was not an issue. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Chadd Reynolds, Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Reynolds may be contacted at reynolds@ahclaw.com

    The First UK Hospital Being Built Using AI Technology

    February 01, 2023 —
    University Hospitals Dorset (UHD) has announced that the new Royal Bournemouth Hospital is the first hospital facility in the UK to be built using groundbreaking AI technology, which increases efficiency and decreases costs. The technology, Buildots, automatically analyses data captured at the site via helmet-mounted 360-degree cameras. The platform then generates true-to-life progress reports supported by visuals, providing managers and stakeholders with accurate, objective data and in-depth analysis, leading to improved efficiency. Evidence-Based Real-Time Analysis The Royal Bournemouth Hospital’s new BEACH building (Births, Emergency And Critical Care, Children’s Health) will include a new purpose-built maternity unit, purpose-built children’s unit, enhanced emergency department, and critical care unit. 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

    “But it’s 2021!” Service of Motion to Vacate Via Email Found Insufficient by the Eleventh Circuit

    June 21, 2021 —
    While we are all getting used to the “new normal” of working remotely and relying on emails for almost all communications, a recent decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit provides arbitration practitioners with a stark reminder – the “notice” requirements of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) will be strictly enforced and providing notice of a motion to vacate via email may not qualify as proper service. In O'Neal Constructors, LLC v. DRT Am., LLC, 991 F.3d 1376 (11th Cir. 2021), O’Neal Constructors, LLC (O’Neal) and DRT America (DRT) entered into a contract containing an arbitration provision. Following a dispute, the parties went to arbitration and, on January 7, 2019, the panel issued an award requiring DRT to pay O’Neal a total of $1,415,193. The amount awarded to O’Neal consisted of two parts: $765,102 for the underlying contract dispute and $650,090 for reimbursement of O’Neal’s attorneys’ fees. While DRT paid O’Neal the first portion of the award, DRT refused to pay the portion that related to O’Neal’s attorneys’ fees. On April 4, 2019, as a result of DRT’s refusal to pay O’Neal’s attorneys’ fees, O’Neal filed a motion to confirm the award in Georgia state court (which was subsequently removed to the Northern District of Georgia). The next day, in a separate action, DRT filed a motion to vacate the attorneys’ fees portion of the award and, that same night, DRT’s counsel emailed O’Neal’s counsel a “courtesy copy” of DRT’s memorandum in support of the motion to vacate. A few weeks later, on April 30, 2019 (i.e., more than three months after the award was issued), DRT served O’Neal (via U.S. Marshall) with a copy of the motion to vacate. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Justin Fortescue, White and Williams
    Mr. Fortescue may be contacted at fortescuej@whiteandwilliams.com

    Crime Policy Insurance Quotes Falsely Represented the Scope of its Coverage

    July 13, 2020 —
    An Indiana businessman found out the hard way how far his insurance company was willing to go to avoid paying a claim after it misrepresented the coverage of a crime policy it sold to him. The quote for the policy indicated that it included coverage for losses resulting from computer hacking. Despite this representation, when the policyholder’s bank accounts were hacked, the insurer denied coverage on the ground that there was no provision for hacking coverage in the policy. Fortunately, the Indiana Court of Appeals recognized the insured’s right to argue before a jury that the insurer’s quotes falsely represented the scope of its coverage. In Metal Pro Roofing, LLC v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., Richard Cornett, principal of Metal Pro Roofing, LLC and Cornett Restoration, LLC (the “LLCs”), purchased a Cincinnati Insurance Company CinciPlus Crime XC+ Policy (the “Policy”). At the time Mr. Cornett purchased this coverage, and during all subsequent renewals, Cincinnati issued insurance quotes that stated:
    Cincinnati can insure your money and securities while at your premises, inside your bank and even off site in the custody of a courier. While you’ve taken precautions to protect your money and securities, you run the risk of loss from employees, robbers, burglars, computer hackers and even physical perils such as fire.
    Give yourself peace of mind with Cincinnati’s crime coverage to insure the money and securities you worked so hard to earn.
    Crime Expanded Coverage (XC®)Plus Endorsement $125.00.
    (Emphasis added.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian J Clifford, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Mr. Clifford may be contacted at bjc@sdvlaw.com

    GRSM Named Among 2025 “Best Law Firms” by Best Lawyers

    December 23, 2024 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani has been recognized in the 2025 "Best Law Firms" survey published by Best Lawyers. To be eligible for a 2025 ranking, a law firm must have at least one lawyer recognized in the 2025 edition of the Best Lawyers in America in a "Best Law Firms" practice area and geographic jurisdiction. GRSM announced earlier this year that 166 lawyers were recognized in the 2025 edition of Best Lawyers in America®, while 74 lawyers were named to the 2025 edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch. Explore the full list of GRSM recognized attorneys. No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. For details about Best Law Firms' methodology, please click here. The firm received National "Tier 1" rankings in the following areas:
    • Admiralty and Maritime Law
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Construction Law
    • Insurance Law
    • Litigation – Construction
    • Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    Gene Witkin Celebrates First Anniversary as Member of Ross Hart’s Mediation Team

    May 23, 2022 —
    LOS ANGELES, California, May 18, 2022 – With a near perfect record of resolving cases, Gene is particularly passionate about helping parties get closure and minimize the significant costs of civil discovery and trial. He attributes the high success rate to empathy for all sides from his diverse prior experience representing both plaintiffs and defendants in civil litigation, as well as his extensive past experience as insurance coverage counsel for both insureds and insurers. In recent months, two cases in particular were at an impasse due to insurance issues. The parties were able to bridge the gap and resolve the disputes, with mediator help on subtle coverage issues in one case (working through technical policy provisions together) and a creative settlement structure in the other (involving allocation of payments under the insurance policy). Gene also credits the successful resolutions in part to pre-mediation calls with the parties to better define the obstacles to resolution. Gene, along with Ross Hart and several AMCC neutrals were thrilled to see many of their colleagues and construction defect stakeholders earlier this month at the West Coast Casualty seminar, which certainly heralded a successful return to in person events. For more information or to schedule a mediation, please contact case administrator Stephanie Felton at admin@amccenter.com. About AMCC For more than 30 years the principals of AMCC have been serving the construction, real estate and insurance industries as a full service ADR firm. In addition to administering multiple terms of the CSLB contract for the state, AMCC is the recognized leader in California for administering insurance appraisals under Insurance Code 2071, as well as numerous other related ADR services such as partnering and dispute review boards. For more information please visit www.amccenter.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    U.S. District Court of Colorado Interprets Insurance Policy’s Faulty Workmanship Exclusion and Exception for Ensuing Damage

    August 15, 2022 —
    Recently, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado interpreted a faulty workmanship exclusion in a property insurance policy in The Lodge at Mountain Village Owner Association v. Eighteen Certain Underwriters of Lloyd’s of London, 22 U.S Dist. Ct LEXIS 48883*, decided on March 18, 2022. The Court held that the faulty workmanship exclusion at issue extended to preclude coverage for later ensuing damage that arose from the faulty workmanship, even though the damage was weather related, because faulty workmanship was the primary cause of the ensuing damage. The claims in The Lodge at Mountain Village arose from maintenance work performed on log siding at three multi-unit condominium buildings in Telluride. The maintenance work to the log siding included staining, finishing, and chinking repairs to joints between the logs. About a year after completion of the work, The Lodge at Mountain Village Owners Association (“The Lodge”) notified the maintenance contractor that logs were extremely weathered and that its work was defective. The Lodge retained an expert who prepared a report stating that the log finish and underlying wood was deteriorating because of the contractor’s work and that some areas were not properly protected from exposure to snow, rain, and brine from ice-melting salt. The Lodge pursued and settled its claims against the contractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Carin Ramirez, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Ramirez may be contacted at ramirez@hhmrlaw.com