BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut expert witness windows
    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 Temporarily Requires Employers to Provide Sick Leave While Awaiting COVID-19 Testing

    Shifting Fees and Costs in Nevada Construction Defect Cases

    Building a Case: Document Management for Construction Litigation

    New Jersey Appeals Court Ruled Suits Stand Despite HOA Bypassing Bylaw

    Construction Defect Not a RICO Case, Says Court

    5 Ways Equipment Financing is Empowering Small Construction Businesses

    68 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 5th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    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

    A Glimpse Into Post-Judgment Collections and Perhaps the Near Future?

    Los Angeles Warehousing Mecca Halts Expansion Just as Needs Soar

    Insurer Has No Obligation to Cover Arbitration Award in Construction Defect Case

    Economy in U.S. Picked Up on Consumer Spending, Construction

    New OSHA Regulations on Confined Spaces in Construction

    It Has Started: Supply-Chain, Warehouse and Retail Workers of Essential Businesses Are Filing Suit

    Negligence Per Se Claim Based Upon Failure to Pay Benefits Fails

    The End of Eroding Limits Policies in Nevada is Just the Beginning

    Excess Policy Triggered Once Retention Paid, Even if Loss Not Covered By Excess

    DC Circuit Issues Two Important Clean Air Act and Administrative Law Decisions

    Caltrans Reviewing Airspace Program in Aftermath of I-10 Fire

    Connecticut Grapples With Failing Concrete Foundations

    Project-Specific Commercial General Liability Insurance

    Missouri Asbestos Litigation Reform: New Bill Seeks to Establish Robust Disclosure Obligations

    Eighth Circuit Affirms Finding of Bad Faith, Award of Costs and Prejudgment Interest

    Settlement Conference May Not Be the End in Construction Defect Case

    Jury Instruction That Fails to Utilize Concurrent Cause for Property Loss is Erroneous

    De-escalating The Impact of Price Escalation

    Deadly Fire in Older Hawaii High-Rise Causes Sprinkler Law Discussion

    Guidance for Construction Leaders: How Is the Americans With Disabilities Act Applied During the Pandemic?

    Five Steps Employers Should Take In the Second Year Of the COVID-19 Pandemic

    You're Doing Construction in Russia, Now What?

    Wine without Cheese? (Why a construction contract needs an order of precedence clause)(Law Note)

    Payne & Fears LLP Recognized by Best Lawyers in 2024 “Best Law Firms” Rankings

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions, Four Attorneys Promoted to Partner and One Attorney Promoted to Counsel

    Insurer Rejects Claim on Dolphin Towers

    Arbitration: For Whom the Statute of Limitations Does Not Toll in Pennsylvania

    The Biggest Trials Coming to Courts Around the World in 2021

    New York Public Library’s “Most Comprehensive Renovation” In Its History

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

    Governor Ducey Vetoes Water and Development Bills

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/17/23) – A Flop in Flipping, Plastic Microbes and Psychological Hard Hats

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “It’s One, Two… Eight Strikes: You’re Out!”

    OSHA Advisory Committee, Assemble!

    Legal Disputes Soar as Poor Information Management Impacts the AEC Industry

    Update Your California Release Provisions to Include Amended Section 1542 Language

    Client Alert: Absence of a Court Reporter at a Civil Motion Hearing May Preclude Appellate Review

    Colorado Rejects Bill to Shorten Statute of Repose

    New NEPA Rule Restores Added Infrastructure Project Scrutiny

    Part I: Key Provisions of School Facility Construction & Design Contracts

    Additional Insured Obligations and the Underlying Lawsuit

    Insurer Beware: Failure to Defend Ends with Hefty Verdict
    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

    Pennsylvania Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Hacking Claim Under E&O Policy

    July 25, 2022 —
    On June 9, 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held, on summary judgment, that an insured was not entitled to coverage under a Professional Errors and Omissions (E&O) policy for loss allegedly resulting from a hacking incident. See Construction Fin. Admin. Servs., Inc. v. Federal Ins. Co., No. 19-0020, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103042 (E.D. Pa. June 9, 2022). Applying North Carolina and Pennsylvania law, the court reasoned that: (1) coverage was barred by the policy’s unauthorized computer access, or “breach,” exclusions; and (2) the insured violated a condition in the policy that required the insurer’s consent to settlements and the violation prejudiced the insurer. The insured, Construction Financial Administration Services, Inc. (CFAS), was a third-party fund administrator for construction contractors. In April 2018, the CFAS received email requests from what it believed to be one of its clients, SWF Constructors (SWF), to disburse $1.3 million from an SWF account to a foreign company. CFAS authorized the payments, despite not having received a copy of any executed agreement between SWF and the foreign company. After the funds were disbursed, SWF advised that it had not authorized or requested the payments to the foreign company. In response, CFAS placed approximately $1.2 million of recovered and borrowed funds into the SWF disbursement account. SWF then sent a letter advising CFAS that the requests from the foreign company did not include documentation required under the contract between SWF and CFAS. It was later determined that the emails had been initiated by a fraudster who had gained unauthorized access to the sender’s email account. Reprinted courtesy of Celestine Montague, White and Williams LLP and Paul A. Briganti, White and Williams LLP Ms. Montague may be contacted at montaguec@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Briganti may be contacted at brigantip@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Amada Family Limited Partnership v. Pomeroy: Colorado Court of Appeals Expressly Affirms the Continuing Viability of the Common-Law After-Acquired Title Doctrine and Expressly Recognizes Utility Easements by Necessity

    June 28, 2021 —
    On May 27, 2021, a division of the Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Amada Family Limited Partnership v. Pomeroy, 2021 COA 73. In that case, the court decided two significant issues that apparently had never been expressly ruled on by a Colorado appellate court before: (1) that Colorado’s common-law after-acquired title doctrine was not abrogated by adoption of the after-acquired interest statute; and (2) that utility easements may be implied by necessity. As is often the case in matters involving access and implied property rights, the facts and history underlying Amada are complicated, but the case’s two most significant rulings are not. Instead, the basic legal principles established (or confirmed) in Amada appear to be broadly applicable, and real property practitioners should take note of these significant developments (or clarifications) in the law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    Two Injured in Walkway Collapse of Detroit Apartment Complex

    May 30, 2018 —
    ABC WXYZ Local News reported that a balcony collapsed at the Anthoes Garden Apartments in Detroit, Michigan. Two people were witnessed falling from the upper walkway through the second and third floors, landing on the cement, sidewalk below. Neighbors pulled the thirty-something woman out of the debris, but the sixty-something man remained trapped under cement chunks and told the rescuers that he could not breathe. The neighbors used car jacks to raise the cement blocks to relieve pressure while waiting for help to arrive. Firefighters rescued residents from the apartments. The fire marshall condemned the building. However, according to ABC News, "people who live in apartments nearby are afraid to leave because of the walkway's instability." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Liability Coverage For Construction Claims May Turn On Narrow Factual Distinctions

    March 25, 2024 —
    In a recent trial court decision, a Montana federal court reminds us how fragile insurance coverage can be for construction-related insurance claims. Specifically, this case illustrates how seemingly small factual nuances can make or break coverage. The case turned on the application of policy provisions familiar to all who deal with these kinds of cases. (See Nautilus Ins. Co. v. Farrens, No. CV 22-193-M-DWM, 2024 WL 885109 (D. Mont. Mar. 1, 2024)) First, the court rebuffed the insurer’s argument that damage resulting from defective workmanship (in this case, the flawed design and installation of an elaborate floating-floor pool system) is not “caused by an occurrence.” The court correctly applied the test followed by most states: if either act causing injury is unintentional or the resulting injury is unexpected or unintended, the “occurrence” requirement is met. Fortunately, the court distinguished sloppy language from earlier Montana federal court decisions suggesting otherwise. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott S. Thomas, Payne & Fears
    Mr. Thomas may be contacted at sst@paynefears.com

    What I Learned at My First NAWIC National Conference

    September 25, 2023 —
    On August 9-12, 2023, I attend my first National Association of Women in Construction (“NAWIC”) National Conference in beautiful Portland, Oregon. What is NAWIC, you ask? NAWIC originated as Women in Construction of Fort Worth, Texas and was founded in 1953 by sixteen women in the construction industry. Knowing that back then women only represented a fraction of the construction industry, the founders organized to create a support network for women to work in a male dominated field. The organization has grown by leaps and bounds and now consists of 115 chapters throughout the United States. NAWIC’s core purpose is to “Strengthen and amplify the success of women in the construction industry.” I joined this organization in December of 2022 at the suggestion of my law partner Jason Feld. Before Jason’s suggestion I had never heard of NAWIC. I joined the Orange County chapter and attended my first meeting in December and did not look back. In NAWIC I found a group of women kindred spirits in whom a found a commonality of interests, experiences, and goals. This is an organization that provides support, encouragement, education, and advocacy for women in all aspects of the construction industry. It also provides an outlet to share ideas, network and build relationships. I am happy to report that on September 12, 2023, I will be installed as one of the directors of the Orange County Chapter. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ivette Kincaid, Kahana Feld
    Ms. Kincaid may be contacted at ikincaid@kahanafeld.com

    Building Codes Evolve With High Wind Events

    November 14, 2018 —
    Designs for wind loads have been in building codes for a long time. Prior to the creation of the International Building Code, the three primary legacy codes had wind load provisions but they mostly dealt with wind loads on the building frame and had little load information about the building components or the exterior cladding. Since Hurricane Andrew in 1992, building codes include more wind design information that comes from disaster investigations and wind engineering research conducted primarily at the university level. In 2000, the legacy building codes were replaced with the International Building Code (IBC). Residential buildings must comply with the International Residential Code (IRC). Both of these building code documents reference the engineering load standard, ASCE 7 Minimum Design Loads and Other Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures. This load standard has also been in existence for a long time; it now is revised every six years and the building codes revised every three years (IBC and IRC) reference ASCE 7 so the provisions in ASCE 7 become part of the building code requirements. Reprinted courtesy of William L. Coulbourne, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    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

    Paycheck Protection Flexibility Act Of 2020: What You Need to Know

    July 20, 2020 —
    On June 5, 2020, President Trump signed into legislation the bipartisan bill titled the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act of 2020 (PPPFA). The PPPFA modifies the Paycheck Protection Program, which was first introduced under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act). The modifications provide borrowers more control over the use of funds and make it easier to obtain forgiveness. The following is a summary of the key changes. 1. Extended Maturity Date From 2 Years to 5 Years Under the CARES Act, the minimum maturity date for loan amounts after the forgiveness period was not defined. The Small Business Administration (SBA) then released an Interim Final Rule clarifying that the minimum maturity date was two years. The PPPFA has extended the term to five years: “The covered loan shall have a minimum maturity of 5 years and a maximum maturity of 10 years from the date on which the borrower applies for loan forgiveness under that section.” 2. Extension of Covered Period From Eight Weeks to a Maximum of 24 Weeks Under the CARES Act, the covered period of the loan (i.e., the time period in which you may spend the loan funds) was February 15, 2020 to June 30, 2020, an eight-week period. The PPPFA extended the covered period to 24 weeks from the origination date of the loan, or December 31, 2020, whichever is earlier. Reprinted courtesy of Amy R. Patton, Payne & Fears and Rana Ayazi, Payne & Fears Ms. Patton may be contacted at arp@paynefears.com Ms. Ayazi may be contacted at ra@paynefears.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of