BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projects
    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


    First Look at Long List of AEC Firms Receiving PPP Loans

    California Imposes New Disabled Access Obligations on Commercial Property Owners

    New Safety Standards Issued by ASSE and ANSI

    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    Quick Note: Can a Party Disclaim Liability in their Contract to Fraud?

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

    Nine Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch 2021

    How VR and AR Will Help in Remote Expert Assistance

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2022 Southern California Rising Stars List

    New York’s Highest Court Reverses Lower Court Ruling That Imposed Erroneous Timeliness Requirement For Disclaimers of Coverage

    Pennsylvania “occurrence”

    CA Supreme Court Rejects Proposed Exceptions to Interim Adverse Judgment Rule Defense to Malicious Prosecution Action

    Structural Failure of Precast-Concrete Span Sets Back Sydney Metro Job

    Maryland Contractor Documents its Illegal Deal and Pays $2.15 Million to Settle Fraud Claims

    Defects in Texas High School Stadium Angers Residents

    Dozens Missing in LA as High Winds Threaten to Spark More Fires

    Rights Afforded to Employees and Employers During Strikes

    Competitive Bidding Statute: When it Applies and When it Does Not

    Insurer Must Cover Portions of Arbitration Award

    Appeals Court Overruled Insured as Additional Insured on Subcontractor’s Commercial General Liability Policy

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: Trigger and Allocation

    Don’t Forget to Mediate the Small Stuff

    Staten Island Villa Was Home to Nabisco 'Nilla' Wafer Inventor

    The Show Must Go On: Shuttered Venues Operators Grant Provides Lifeline for Live Music and Theater Venues

    A Chicago Skyscraper Cements the Legacy of a Visionary Postmodern Architect

    Foreclosing Junior Lienholders and Recording A Lis Pendens

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Sub-Contractor

    Improvements to AIA Contracts?

    Houston’s High Housing Demand due to Employment Growth

    While Construction Permits Slowly Rise, Construction Starts and Completions in California Are Stagnant

    Ensuring Efficient Arbitration of Construction Disputes Involving Mechanic’s Liens

    Insured's Jury Verdict Reversed After Improper Trial Tactics

    Traub Lieberman Senior Trial Counsel Timothy McNamara Wins Affirmation of Summary Judgment Denial

    Construction Warranties: Have You Seen Me Lately?

    Federal Judge Refuses to Limit Coverage and Moves Forward with Policyholder’s Claims Against Insurer and Broker

    School Board Settles Construction Defect Suit

    Brooklyn Atlantic Yards Yields Dueling Suits on Tower

    General Release of Contractor Upheld Despite Knowledge of Construction Defects

    Texas Court Construes Breach of Contract Exclusion Narrowly in Duty-to-Defend Case

    Court Grants Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment After Insured Fails to Provide Evidence of Systemic Collapse

    No Coverage For Construction Defects Under Alabama Law

    Additional Insured Is Covered Under On-Going Operations Endorsement Despite Subcontractor's Completion of Work

    San Francisco Airport’s Terminal 1 Aims Sky High

    San Diego Developer Strikes Out on “Disguised Taking” Claim

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

    Can a Non-Union Company Be Compelled to Arbitrate?

    A Year-End Review of the Environmental Regulatory Landscape

    Review your Additional Insured Endorsement

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Just Hanging Around”

    Insured's Motion for Reconsideration on Protecting the Integrity of Referral Sources under Florida Statute s. 542.335
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (08/10/22)

    August 29, 2022 —
    The Senate passes the Inflation Reduction Act, construction costs continue to rise across the U.S., commercial real estate advances the adoption of ESG strategies, and more.
    • The recently-passed Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 leaves out the carried interest tax hike, much to the relief of real estate investors worldwide. (Taylor Driscoll, Bisnow)
    • Commercial real estate continues to push forward ESG strategies, given the significant carbon footprints left by most office buildings. (Ted Jackson, CFO)
    • “Space as a Service” tech company Neighbor, which re-purposes under-utilized real estate into storage for tenants, hits its stride in the post-pandemic landscape as the excess of unprofitable space rises. (The Real Deal)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    New York Revises Retainage Requirements for Private Construction Contracts: Overview of the “5% Retainage Law”

    January 22, 2024 —
    On November 17, 2023, the State of New York enacted the “5% Retainage Law.” This legislation effectively limits the amount of retainage that can be held from general contractors and subcontractors to no more than 5%. It applies to many but not all construction contracts. In addition, the new law revises late stage billing requirements, enabling contractors to invoice for retainage at substantial completion. Previously, the parties to a construction contract were free to negotiate any retainage amount, limited only by an unspecified “reasonable amount” that would be released as the parties contractually set forth. Summary The new law amends Sections 756-a and 756-c of the General Business Law (part of Article 35E of the GBL, known as the “Prompt Pay Act”), and applies to private construction contracts “where the aggregate cost of the construction project, including all labor, services, materials and equipment to be furnished, equals or exceeds one hundred fifty thousand dollars.” Reprinted courtesy of Levi W. Barrett, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., Patrick T. Murray, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., Skyler L. Santomartino, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Mark A. Snyder, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Barrett may be contacted at lbarrett@pecklaw.com Mr. Murray may be contacted at pmurray@pecklaw.com Mr. Santomartino may be contacted at ssantomartino@pecklaw.com Mr. Snyder may be contacted at msnyder@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    After Elections, Infrastructure Talk Stirs Again

    December 04, 2018 —
    In the wake of Democrats’ House takeover and Republicans widening their Senate majority in the midterm elections, talk has quickly revived about taking on infrastructure legislation in the new Congress. Construction industry officials welcome the pro-infrastructure rhetoric from congressional leaders and President Trump. But it remains to be seen whether the words will spark a bill that can make it through a divided 116th Congress. Funding the package remains the high hurdle. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, ENR
    Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2021 New York – Metro Super Lawyers®

    October 18, 2021 —
    Traub Lieberman is pleased to announce that six Partners from the Hawthorne, NY Office have been selected to the 2021 New York - Metro Super Lawyers list. 2021 New York – Metro Super Lawyers Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Traub Lieberman

    Coverage Found for Faulty Workmanship Damaging Other Property

    January 06, 2016 —
    The district court found that under Illinois law, the damage caused by the insured's faulty workmanship to portions of building beyond the scope of its own work was covered under a CGL policy. Westfield Ins. Co. v. Nat'l Decorating Serv., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXS 159140 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 25, 2015). 200 North Jefferson, LLC was the owner and developer of a 24- story condominium building. 200 North Jefferson retained as the general contractor McHugh Construction Co. McHugh Construction retained National Decorating Service, Inc. as the subcontractor to perform all painting work on the project. The Condominium Association sued 200 North Jefferson, McHugh Construction, MCZ/Jameson Development Group, LLC, National Decorating for faulty workmanship. The alleged damages included:(1) cracking of the exterior concrete walls, interior walls and ceilings; (2) significant leakage through the exterior concrete walls, balconies, and windows; (3) defects to the common elements of the building; and (4) damage to the interior ceilings, floors, interior painting, drywall and furniture in the units. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    July 28, 2018 —
    I have spoken often regarding the need for a well written construction contract that sets out the “terms of engagement” for your construction project. A written construction contract sets expectations and allows the parties to the contract to determine the “law” of their project. An unwritten “gentleman’s agreement” can lead to confusion, faulty memories, and more money paid to construction counsel than you would like as we lawyers play around in the grey areas. One other area where the written versus unwritten distinction makes a difference is in the calculation of the statute of limitations. In Virginia, a 5 year statute of limitations applies to written contracts while a 3 year statute of limitations applies to unwritten contracts. This distinction came into stark relief in the case of M&C Hauling & Constr. Inc. v. Wilbur Hale in the Fairfax, Virginia Circuit Court. In M&C Hauling, M&C provided hauling services to the defendant through a subcontract with Hauling Unlimited in 2014, the last of which was in July. M&C provided over 2000 hours of hauling and provided time tickets (that were passed to Mr. Hale on Hauling Unlimited letterhead and signed by Mr. Hale or his agent) and an invoice stating the price term of $75.00 per hour. No separate written contract between M&C and Hauling Unlimited or Mr. Hale existed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Insurer's Quote on Coverage for Theft by Hacker Creates Issue of Fact

    December 16, 2019 —
    The appellate court found that the insurer's quote created an issue of fact on whether loss caused by a computer hacker would be covered. Metal Pro Roofing, LLC v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 2019 Ind. App. LEXIS 355 (Ind. Ct. App. Aug. 9, 2019). The insureds, Metal Pro Roofing, LLC and Cornett Restoration, LLC ("LLC's") discovered that their bank accounts had been hacked and over $78,000 stolen. They submitted claims to their insurer, Cincinnati. Coverage was denied, and the LLCs filed suit. Cross-motions for summary judgment were filed, and the court granted summary judgment to Cincinnati. The "Forgery or Alternation" coverage applied to losses resulting directly from the "'forgery' or alteration of checks, drafts, promissory notes, or similar written promises, order or directions to pay a sum of money." "Forgery" was defined as "the signing of the name of another person or organization with the intent to deceive." The LLCs did not cite any evidence that the hacker "signed" anything, let alone that they signed "the name of another person or organization." 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

    Insurers May Not Be Required to Defend Contractors In a Florida §558 Proceeding

    November 06, 2018 —
    In recent holding, the Florida Supreme Court held that an insurer may not have a duty to defend a contractor in a Florida §558 proceeding. Chapter 558 of the Florida Statutes sets forth procedural requirements which must be met before a claimant may file a construction defect action. These requirements include serving a contractor, subcontractor or supplier with written notice of the claim. The contractor, in turn, must serve a written response to the notice of claim in which the contractor provides either an offer to repair the alleged construction defect at no cost to the claimant, resolution of the claim through a monetary payment, a statement disputing the claim, or a statement that any monetary payment will be determined by the recipient’s insurer. The claimant may file suit if the contractor disputes the claim and refuses to remedy the alleged defect or provide monetary compensation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Erik Simpson, Gordon & Rees
    Mr. Simpson may be contacted at esimpson@grsm.com