BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expert
    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


    Zillow Topping Realogy Shows Web Surge for Housing Market

    California Bid Protests: Responsiveness and Materiality

    Three Construction Workers Injured at Former GM Plant

    Lewis Brisbois Ranks 11th in Law360’s Glass Ceiling Report on Gender Parity in Law Firms

    Fifth Circuit Requires Causal Distinction for Ensuing Loss Exception to Faulty Work Exclusion

    Flood Coverage Denied Based on Failure to Submit Proof of Loss

    Who Is To Blame For Defective — And Still LEED Certified — Courthouse Square?

    Colorado’s Three-Bill Approach to Alleged Construction Defect Issues

    New FAR Rule Mandates the Use of PLAs on Large Construction Projects

    Expert's Opinions On Causation Leads Way To Summary Judgment For Insurer

    Another Case Highlighting the Difference Between CGL Policies and Performance Bonds

    Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claim Against Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Antidiscrimination Clause Required in Public Works and Goods and Services Contracts­ –Effective January 1, 2024

    Just Because I May Be An “Expert” Does Not Mean I Am Giving Expert Testimony

    That Boilerplate Language May Just Land You in Hot Water

    Trade Contract Revisions to Address COVID-19

    The Great Skyscraper Comeback Skips North America

    NLRB Hits Unions with One-Two Punch the Week Before Labor Day

    Judge Tells DOL to Cork its Pistol as New Overtime Rule is Blocked

    Home Building Mergers and Acquisitions 2014 Predictions

    Retroactive Application of a Construction Subcontract Containing a Merger Clause? Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal Answers in the Affirmative

    Employees in Construction Industry Entitled to Compensation for Time Spent Complying with Employer-Mandated Security Protocols

    Recent Environmental Cases: Something in the Water, in the Air and in the Woods

    Tallest U.S. Skyscraper Dream Kept Alive by Irish Builder

    Insurer's Refusal to Consider Supplemental Claim Found Improper

    Microsoft Urges the Construction Industry to Deliver Lifecycle Value

    Home Buyers Lose as U.S. Bond Rally Skips Mortgage Rates

    Boston Catwalk Collapse Injures Three Workers

    Colorado Senate Bill 13-052: The “Transit-Oriented Development Claims Act of 2013.”

    We've Surveyed Video Conferencing Models to See Who Fits the CCPA Bill: Here's What We Found

    Construction News Roundup

    The "Dark Overlord" Strikes The Practice Of Law: What Law Firms Can Do To Protect Themselves

    Ten ACS Lawyers Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    Be Proactive, Not Reactive, To Preserve Force Majeure Rights Regarding The Coronavirus

    Eleventh Circuit Finds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Claims

    Illinois Supreme Court Rules Labor Costs Not Depreciated to Determine Actual Cash Value

    Colorado Senate Voted to Kill One of Three Construction Defect Bills

    Godfather Charged with Insurance Fraud

    The Court-Side Seat: FERC Reviews, Panda Power Plaints and Sovereign Immunity

    Neighbors Fight to Halt Construction after Asbestos found on Property

    Colorado Springs may be Next Colorado City to Add Construction Defects Ordinance

    Montrose III: Appeals Court Rejects “Elective Vertical Stacking,” but Declines to Find “Universal Horizontal Exhaustion” Absent Proof of Policy Wordings

    The Fourth Circuit Applies a Consequential Damages Exclusionary Clause and the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Claims by a Subrogating Insurer Seeking to Recover Over $19 Million in Damages

    Some Work Cannot be Included in a Miller Act Claim

    Vinci Will Build $580M Calgary Project To Avoid Epic Flood Repeat

    Tenth Circuit Reverses District Court's Ruling that Contractor Entitled to a Defense

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    Nevada Budget Remains at Impasse over Construction Defect Law

    Mitigating the Consequences of Labor Unrest on Construction Projects

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers List
    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

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/06/22

    April 11, 2022 —
    A growing proptech startup aims to pre-emptively identify needed home repairs, 3D-printed homes could become a workable solution to the housing shortage, and more.
    • Concerns about a housing-market crash are growing as the Fed begins to hike interest rates, leaving industry experts to speculate on what’s next for the U.S. housing bubble. (William Edwards, Insider)
    • Real-estate sales in Manhattan topped $7 billion in the first quarter of 2022, with the average price of apartments jumping 19% over the previous year. (Robert Frank, CNBC)
    • Proptech startup DwellWell claims to have produced the first “check engine light” that can pre-emptively diagnose needed home repairs. (T.P. Yeatts, The Real Deal)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    WARN Act Exceptions in Response to COVID-19

    April 13, 2020 —
    California’s WARN Act requires employers of certain covered establishments to provide 60 days written notice of any mass layoff, relocation, or termination. This notice is required to be given to employees and the Employment Development Department. An employer’s failure to comply with this requirement can result in being held liable for back-pay and value of the cost of any benefits to which the affected employee(s) may have been entitled for up to a maximum of 60 days. Due to the COVID-19 crisis and emergency circumstances in which many employers now find themselves, the Governor of California has issued Executive Order N-31-20, which temporarily suspends the 60-days advance notice requirement and the provisions that impose liability and penalties on an employer for the duration of the COVID-19 emergency. Reprinted courtesy of Yvette Davis, Haight Brown & Bonesteel and Kyle R. DiNicola, Haight Brown & Bonesteel Ms. Davis may be contacted at ydavis@hbblaw.com Mr. DiNicola may be contacted at kdinicola@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    School District Settles Over Defective Athletic Field

    December 11, 2013 —
    The Hillsboro, Oregon School District has settled a lawsuit with Mahlum Architects of Portland, one of the four companies sued by the school district over problems with a soccer field. The total lawsuit was for $1.7 million. The architects have settled for $25,000. The manufacturer of Astro Turf also settled with the school for an as-yet undisclosed amount. What the school describes as the “primary defendants” have yet to settle. The school had to close the soccer field when drainage problems lead to large holes in the playing field. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    After Sixty Years, Subcontractors are Back in the Driver’s Seat in Bidding on California Construction Projects

    September 22, 2016 —
    For almost the last sixty years, the standard for bidding on California construction projects has been governed by the landmark case of Drennan v. Star Paving (1958) 51 Cal.2d 409; which generally states that the contractor bidding to perform work for a project owner is entitled to rely on the bids of subcontractors in formulating its own bid to do the work. Under the equitable legal doctrine of “promissory estoppel”, which serves as the foundation of the Drennan case, even though there was no actual “contract” between the contractor and subcontractor at the time of bid, the contractor was entitled to enforce the subcontractor’s bid in reliance on this doctrine. For bidding purposes, promissory estoppel serves as an equitable substitute for an actual contract. The courts have, since that time, allowed promissory estoppel to act as a substitute for the contract in public bidding because, in equity, when a contractor “reasonably” relies on a subcontractor’s bid in formulating its own bid, it would be unjust to allow the subcontractor to withdraw a bid on which the contractor had relied in submitting its own successful bid. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Providing Notice of Claims Under Your Construction Contract

    April 02, 2014 —
    Craig Martin on his blog Construction Contractor Advisor explained the importance of knowing when to provide notice under your construction contract: “Time and time again, courts rule that contractors must follow notice requirements in order to submit a claim for additional time or compensation.” Martin cited the case JEM Contracting v. Morrison-Maierle, where the contractor provided verbal notice of a claim to the engineer, but failed to submit in writing until eighteen days later, which was past the notice requirement as stated in the contract. The judge denied the contractor’s claim and sided with the engineer and county. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Teaming Agreement is Still a Contract (or, Be Careful with Agreements to Agree)

    November 18, 2019 —
    I have discussed teaming agreements in this past here at Construction Law Musings. These agreements are most typically where one of two entities meets a contracting requirement but may not have the capacity to fulfill a contract on its own so brings in another entity to assist. However, these agreements are contracts and are treated as such here in Virginia with all of the law of contracts behind them. One illustrative case occurred here in Virginia and was decided by the Virginia Supreme Court. That case is CGI Fed. Inc. v. FCi Fed. Inc. While this is not strictly a “construction” case, it helps lay out some of the pitfalls of teaming agreements in general. In this case, the parties entered into a fairly typical small business (FCI) Big Business (CGI) teaming arrangement for the processing of visas for the State Department. The parties negotiated the workshare percentage (read payment percentage) should FCI get the work and the teaming agreement set out a framework for the negotiation of a subcontract between FCI, the proposed general contractor, and CGI, the proposed subcontractor. After a while working together, FCI submitted a proposal to the State Department and as part of the negotiations of this proposal, the work percentage for CGI was lowered in exchange for some management positions for CGI relative to the work by amendment to the original teaming agreement. However, one day later FCI submitted a proposal to the State Department that not only didn’t include the management positions, but further lowered CGI’s workshare. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    4 Ways the PRO Act Would Impact the Construction Industry

    October 24, 2021 —
    The Protecting the Right to Organize Act (the “PRO Act”) is a proposed law that would dramatically rewrite the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). Breathtakingly broad in scope, the PRO Act targets several longstanding features of existing law perceived by unions and labor activists to be unfair to labor and too favorable to employers. The proposed legislation is essentially a grab-bag of grievances that the labor movement has compiled over decades and sought to change through legislation and before the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) without success in the past. While the PRO Act would affect virtually all private sector employers, it would alter the labor dynamic in the construction industry in four major ways: 1. Removing the current prohibitions on secondary, jurisdictional, and other forms of picketing. Current law attempts to balance the rights of employers to operate their businesses without unnecessary interference with the rights of unions to protest concerning wages and working conditions. As part of this balancing act, the NLRA prohibits unions from picketing under certain conditions or with certain aims. These restrictions include the prohibition on “secondary” picketing by unions of neutral employers, which are employers with which the union does not have a direct labor dispute, and “jurisdictional” picketing by unions to force an employer to assign certain work to a specific trade or group of employees. The elimination of these restrictions in the PRO Act would have a significant impact on the construction industry. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Andrew M. MacDonald, Fox Rothschild LLP
    Mr. MacDonald may be contacted at amacdonald@foxrothschild.com

    Motion to Dismiss Insurer's Counterclaim for Construction Defects Is Granted

    June 29, 2017 —
    The court granted the insured's motion to dismiss the insurer's counterclaim arising out of construction defects. Centrex Homes v. Zurich Specialties London Limited, et al., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77212 (D. Nev. May 19, 2017). Centrex, the general contractor, was sued by homeowners in a residential development known as Liberty Hill Estates. The suit alleged that defective work had been performed by Centrex's subcontractors, one of which was Valley Concrete Company, Inc. The insurer had issued a policy to Valley and Centrex was an additional insured. The insurer agreed to defend, but only paid a portion of the defense fees and costs because the policy only covered Centrex as to liability arising from Valley's work. The insurer refused to pay defense costs incurred prior to March 28, 2012 the date of notice of claims arising from Valley's work. Centrex then filed suit against the insurer alleging breach of contract and bad faith. The insurer filed a counterclaim seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend. The insurer claimed that Centrex failed to cooperate by unilaterally switching counsel without prior notification to the insurer. This deprived the insurer of the right to control the defense and discharged the insurer's obligations under the policy. Centrex moved to dismiss the counterclaim. 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