BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield 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


    Federal Regulatory Recap: A Summary of Recent Rulemaking Actions Taken or Proposed Affecting the Energy Industry

    Recycling Our Cities, One Building at a Time

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap – Arbitration Motion Practice

    4 Breakthrough Panama Canal Engineering Innovations

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

    CAUTION: Terms of CCP Section 998 Offers to Compromise Must Be Fully Contained in the Offer Itself

    Ongoing Operations Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You May Want an Intervention …”

    Oregon Court of Appeals Rules That Negligent Construction (Construction Defect) Claims Are Subject to a Two-Year Statute of Limitations

    Fifth Circuit -- Damage to Property Beyond Insured’s Product/Work Not Precluded By ‘Your Product/Your Work Exclusion’

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- The Claim

    Skanska Found Negligent for Damages From Breakaway Barges

    #4 CDJ Topic: Vita Planning and Landscape Architecture, Inc. v. HKS Architects, Inc.

    U.S. Housing Starts Top Forecast on Single-Family Homes

    Judgment for Insurer Reversed Due to Failure to Establish Depreciation

    Adobe Opens New Office Tower and Pledges No Companywide Layoffs in 2023

    Business Risk Exclusions Do Not Preclude Coverage

    No Coverage for Collapse of Building

    No Coverage for Alleged Misrepresentation Claim

    COVID-19 Response: Essential Business Operations: a High-Stakes Question Under Proliferating “Stay at Home” Orders

    The California Legislature Passes SB 496 Limiting Design Professional Defense and Indemnity Obligations

    No Bad Faith in Insurer's Denial of Collapse Claim

    An Increase of US Metro Areas’ with Normal Housing & Economic Health

    Bank of America’s Countrywide Ordered to Pay $1.3 Billion

    Competent, Substantial Evidence Carries Day in Bench Trial

    The Project “Completion” Paradox in California

    Delaware River Interstate Bridge Shut to Assess Truss Fracture

    BWB&O Senior Associate Kyle Riddles and Associate Alexandria Heins Obtain a Trial Victory in a Multi-Million Dollar Case!

    In South Carolina, Insurer's Denial of Liability Does Not Waive Attorney-Client Privilege for Bad Faith Claim

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (6/4/24) – New CRE Litmus Tests, Tech Integration in Real Estate and a Jump in Investor Home Purchases

    Amid the Chaos, Trump Signs Executive Order Streamlining Environmental Permitting and Disbands Infrastructure Council

    Minnesota Senate Office Building Called Unconstitutional

    140 Days Until The California Consumer Privacy Act Becomes Law - Why Aren't More Businesses Complying?

    Key Amendments to Insurance Claims-Handling Regulations in Puerto Rico

    Federal Court Asks South Dakota Supreme Court to Decide Whether Injunction Costs Are “Damages,” Adopts Restatement’s Position on Providing “Inadequate” Defense

    Deference Given To Procuring Public Agency Regarding Material Deviation

    Home Prices Rose in Fewer U.S. Markets in Fourth Quarter

    Nonparty Discovery in California Arbitration: How to Get What You Want

    Construction Law Advisory: Mechanical Contractor Scores Victory in Prevailing Wage Dispute

    Mediation Fails In Federal Lawsuit Seeking Damages From Sureties for Alleged Contract Fraud

    Georgia Amends Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Will the Hidden Cracks in the Bay Bridge Cause Problems During an Earthquake?

    Fifth Circuit Holds Insurer Owes Duty to Defend Latent Condition Claim That Caused Fire Damage to Property Years After Construction Work

    Hail Damage Requires Replacement of Even Undamaged Siding

    ASCE Statement on House Failure to Pass the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    Project Delivery Methods: A Bird’s-Eye View

    Tokyo Building Flaws May Open Pandora's Box for Asahi Kasei

    Insurer Must Pay for Matching Siding of Insured's Buildings

    Report Highlights Trends in Construction Tech, Digitization, and AI

    A Duty to Design and Maintain Reasonably Safe Roadways Extends to All Persons. (WA)
    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

    Licensing Mistakes That Can Continue to Haunt You

    November 28, 2022 —
    Today there are nearly 290,000 contractors licensed in California. This number continues to grow as California law requires businesses or individuals who alter any road or structure to be licensed contractors if the total cost of the project is $500 or more (including labor and materials). Complaints about improper and defective work performed by contractors are constantly filed with the California Contractors State License Board (“CSLB”) and any violations by those contractors could result in a license suspension. A contractor whose license is suspended by the CSLB or otherwise becomes unlicensed jeopardizes a contractor’s livelihood, compromises current insurance policies, and curtails an ability to obtain future insurance coverage. Moreover, being unlicensed could force a contractor to disgorge all money received on a project per California Business & Professions Code § 7031. What can contractors do to stay vigilant and avoid these scary outcomes? Stay tuned for a few suggestions. 1. Stay Qualified Contractors must make sure the correct person and/or entity is holding the contractor’s license. Contractors can obtain licenses as a sole owner, partnership, corporation, joint venture, or limited liability company. For any form of the business entity, one individual must act as qualifier to meet the CLSB license requirements. This qualifying individual must have the knowledge, experience, and skills to manage the daily activities of a construction business (including field supervision) or be represented by someone else with at least four years of experience within the past ten years as an unsupervised journeyperson, foreperson, supervising employee, or contractor in the trade being applied for. Reprinted courtesy of Alexa Stephenson, Kahana Feld and Rick Seely, Kahana Feld Ms. Stephenson may be contacted at astephenson@kahanafeld.com Mr. Seely may be contacted at rseely@kahanafeld.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Harmon Towers Case to Last into 2014

    December 20, 2012 —
    Don’t expect a fast resolution to the Harmon Tower case in Las Vegas. The latest schedule sets trial for the construction defect claims in January 2014. Previously, these claims were going to be heard during the trial set to start in June 2013. Now the June trial will be over payment issues only. Don’t expect the building to come down soon either. While CityCenter claims the building could come down in an earthquake, Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez had determined that as the structural testing was not random; its results cannot be extrapolated through the entire structure. As a result, CityCenter has elected to do more testing, holding off on demolishing the building. They are appealing Gonzalez’s order to the Nevada Supreme Court. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Should I Stay or Should I Go? The Supreme Court Says “Stay”

    June 10, 2024 —
    In the construction industry, arbitration is a frequently agreed-upon and utilized dispute resolution method. The Federal Arbitration Act (the “FAA”), 9 U.S.C. 1, et seq., provides the underpinning and framework for how courts should handle litigation in connection with arbitration agreements. Where a party asserts that a claim brought in court should be subject to arbitration, Section 3 of the FAA provides that the action should be stayed. However, some courts have entertained a party’s request to dismiss a suit where the claim is subject to an arbitration agreement, creating a circuit split in the federal appeals courts. In Smith v. Spizzirri, 2024 WL 2193872, issued on May 16, 2024, the Supreme Court held that, absent some other defect (such as the lack of personal or subject matter jurisdiction), Section 3 of the FAA requires a court which finds a claim is subject to an arbitration must stay the lawsuit during the arbitration proceedings rather than dismissing the action.[1] In so doing, the Court addressed a question that for years it left unanswered. While most Circuits held, prior to Smith, that Section 3 requires a court to stay the litigation pending an arbitral award; the First, Fifth, Eighth, and Ninth Circuits each held that a court could dismiss an action in lieu of staying. In Smith, both parties acknowledged the underlying claims were arbitrable, but when the district court compelled arbitration, the court dismissed the action rather than staying the court proceedings. The Ninth Circuit (relying on its prior precedent) affirmed, with two judges noting that the Ninth Circuit’s approach was incorrect. The Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brendan J. Witry, Laurie & Brennan LLP
    Mr. Witry may be contacted at bwitry@lauriebrennan.com

    Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review Regarding Necessary Parties in Lien Foreclosure Actions

    August 17, 2017 —
    For several years, the requirements for which parties must be named in a lien foreclosure action when a release of lien bond is in place have been cloudy. RCW 60.04 et seq., the “mechanics’ lien” or “construction lien” statute, provides protection for a party or person who provides labor, materials, or equipment to a construction project. That person or party, if not paid, can file a lien against the construction project property to secure recovery. As the lien impacts the property by “clouding title” and could potentially result in foreclosure of the property, the statute sets forth strict requirements with respect to timing, notice, and parties. For example, the lien must be recorded within 90 days of the person or party’s last day of work or materials or equipment supplied, and the lien claimant must then give a copy of the claim of lien to the owner or reputed owner within 14 days of the lien recording. RCW 60.04.081. The statute also allows a property owner or other party to “free” the property from the lien prior to the claim being resolved by issuing a release of lien bond. While the claim is still in dispute, the lien then attaches to the bond and not the property. The same rules about foreclosure, however, still apply but not without some confusion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lindsay K. Taft, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Ms. Taft may be contacted at ltaft@ac-lawyers.com

    New California Construction Law for 2019

    January 02, 2019 —
    The California Legislature introduced over 2637 bills in the second half of the 2017-2018 session. This article summarizes some of the more important bills affecting contractors in their roles as contractors, effective January 1, 2019, unless otherwise noted. Not addressed here are many other bills that will affect contractors in their roles as businesses, taxpayers, and employers. Each of the summaries is brief, focusing on what is most important to contractors. Because not all aspects of these bills are discussed, each summary’s title is a live link to the full text of the referenced bills for those wanting to explore the details of the new laws. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel F. McLennon, Smith Currie
    Mr. McLennon may be contacted at dfmclennon@smithcurrie.com

    Beyond Inverse Condemnation in Wildfire Litigation: An Oregon Jury Finds Utility Liable for Negligence, Trespass and Nuisance

    July 10, 2023 —
    On June 10, 2023, a jury in Portland, Oregon found PacifiCorp and Pacific Power (collectively, “PacifiCorp”) liable for negligence, trespass, and nuisance based on a series of four wildfires that occurred during Labor Day weekend in 2020. PacifiCorp prevailed against the plaintiffs on the claim of inverse condemnation. With respect to the tort-based claims, the jury awarded approximately $72 million in compensatory damages to 17 plaintiffs. The jury later found PacifiCorp liable for $18 million in punitive damages, or one quarter of the compensatory damages that the jury awarded to the 17 plaintiffs. The jury’s liability findings apply to a broader class of owners, whose damages will need to be individually proven in a yet-to-be defined second phase of proceedings. Post-verdict motion practice and appeals may affect the jury’s findings. Reprinted courtesy of Marisa Miller, Sheppard Mullin, John Yacovelle, Sheppard Mullin and Kazim Naqvi, Sheppard Mullin Ms. Miller may be contacted at mmiller@sheppardmullin.com Mr. Yacovelle may be contacted at jyacovelle@sheppardmullin.com Mr. Naqvi may be contacted at knaqvi@sheppardmullin.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2024 “Atlanta 500” List

    February 26, 2024 —
    Atlanta, Ga. (February 9, 2024) – Atlanta Partner Candis R. Jones has been named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2024 “Atlanta 500” list of the most powerful law professionals in Atlanta. This is the fourth year in a row she has received this recognition. To compile this list, the publication reviewed nominations from the public and consulted experts across various sectors. The magazine’s editors and writers considered not only the status of the nominees within their respective organizations, but also whether the nominees were visionaries who led programs for their communities and created opportunities for employees. According to Atlanta Magazine, this list is “an anthology of the power that resides in Atlanta.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Candis Jones, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Jones may be contacted at Candis.Jones@lewisbrisbois.com

    No Coverage for Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship

    November 28, 2022 —
    Finding faulty workmanship that did not cause property damage beyond the subcontractor's work, the court found there was no coverage under the CGL policy. Middlesex Ins. Co. v. Dixie Mech., Inc., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175190 (N. D. Ga. Sept. 27, 2022).  The case involved a construction project on Elba Island, Georgia. IHI E&C International Corporation (IHI) filed suit against Robinson Mechanical Contractors ("Robinson") for faulty construction work, including a pipe rack and process module installation. The pipe racks allegedly contained defective welds. Robinson filed a third-party complaint against Patriot Modular, Inc. (Patriot), Robinson's subcontractor, for faulty work for IHI. Finally, Patriot filed a fourth-party complaint against Dixie Mechanical, Inc. (Dixie), alleging it subcontracted with Dixie to perform fabrication, welding, testing, and inspection of pipes under Patriot's subcontract with Robinson. Patriot contended that to the extent it was found liable to Robinson for any defective work, delays or breaches of contract for Dixie's work, Patriot was entitled to recover such amounts from Dixie. In this case, Dixie's insurer, Middlesex Insurance Company, sought a declaration that it had no duty to defend or to indemnify Dixie. Middlesex contended that the claims of faulty workmanship in the underlying complaints constituted neither an "occurrence" nor "property damage." 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