BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witness
    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 Supreme Court Rules that Developers Retain Perpetual Control over Construction Defect Covenants

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Fifteen White and Williams Lawyers

    New Recommendations for Healthy and Safe Housing Conditions

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    Enerpac Plays Critical Role in Industry-changing Discovery for Long Span Bridges at The University of Nebraska-Lincoln

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: Colorado Supreme Court Upholds Declarant Consent Provision to Amend Arbitration Out of Declarations

    An Insurance Policy Isn’t Ambiguous Just Because You Want It to Be

    Insurer Must Pay Portions of Arbitration Award Related to Faulty Workmanship

    EO or Uh-Oh: Biden’s Executive Order Requiring Project Labor Agreements on Federal Construction Projects

    Vermont Supreme Court Finds COVID-19 May Damage Property

    Suffolk Construction Drywall Suits Involve Claim for $3 Million in Court Costs

    Navigating the Hurdles of Florida Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Seattle Independent Contractor Ordinance – Pitfalls for Unwary Construction Professionals

    Eight Things You Need to Know About the AAA’s New Construction Arbitration Rules

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    The Road to Hell is Paved with Good Intentions: A.B. 1701’s Requirement that General Contractors Pay Subcontractor Employee Wages Will Do More Harm Than Good

    Diggerland, UK’s Construction Equipment Theme Park, is coming to the U.S.

    Is Arbitration Final and Binding?

    Online Meetings & Privacy in Today’s WFH Environment

    Federal Court Requires Auto Liability Carrier to Cover Suit Involving Independent Contractor Despite “Employee Exclusion”

    Failing to Adopt a Comprehensive Cyber Plan Can Lead to Disaster

    Lewis Brisbois Ranks Among Top 25 Firms on NLJ’s 2021 Women in Law Scorecard

    Got Licensing Questions? CSLB Licensing Workshop November 17th and December 15th

    The Right to Repair Act Isn’t Out for the Count, Yet. Homebuilders Fight Back

    Reconstructing the Francis Scott Key Bridge Utilizing the Progressive Design-Build Method

    Biden Administration Focus on Environmental Justice Raises Questions for Industry

    Newport Beach Partners Jeremy Johnson, Courtney Serrato, and Associate Joseph Real Prevailed on a Demurrer in a Highly Publicized Shooting Case!

    COVID-19 Damages and Time Recovery: Contract Checklist and Analysis

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

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2019

    Haight’s San Diego Office is Growing with the Addition of New Attorneys

    Force Majeure Under the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic

    The Evolution of Construction Defect Trends at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    "On Second Thought"

    Subcontract Requiring Arbitration Outside of Florida

    Solar Energy Isn’t Always Green

    Blackstone Said to Sell Boston Buildings for $2.1 Billion

    South Carolina School District Investigated by IRS and FBI

    Insurer Prevails on Summary Judgment for Bad Faith Claim

    Arbitration Provisions Are Challenging To Circumvent

    Ten Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    Rattlesnake Bite Triggers Potential Liability for Walmart

    How a 10-Story Wood Building Survived More Than 100 Earthquakes

    Manhattan Bargain: Condos for Less Than $3 Million

    Boston Contractor Faces More OSHA Penalties

    California Bullet Train Clears Federal Environmental Approval

    White and Williams Announces Partner and Counsel Promotions

    Illinois Insureds are Contesting One Carrier's Universal Denial to Covid-19 Losses

    Seattle Crane Strike Heads Into Labor Day Weekend After Some Contractors Sign Agreements

    Indemnity: What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You!
    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

    “It Just Didn’t Add Up!”

    November 05, 2024 —
    Overturning arbitration awards in court is difficult. One of the few bases for a challenge to an award (under the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. 10(a)(4), as well as most state arbitration laws) is where the arbitrator is alleged to have “exceeded [his/her] powers” afforded the arbitrator by whatever rules and agreements are in place for the arbitration. Obviously, this places a burden on the arbitrator to “color within the lines” when serving as arbitrator and issuing rulings in the case. “After extensive discovery and a 10-day hearing, the Tribunal rendered a 142-page” award, whereupon the parties both sought to have the arbitrators correct what the parties agreed was an error in the award – increasing the award by $47,710. One of the parties, however, went further, urging that the arbitrators “erroneously included damages for claims related to production revenue” that occurred before a certain date. According to the court, that party was urging that “the Tribunal erred by factoring into its award damages related to Claims 2 and 3, which the Tribunal never substantially addressed.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Repairs Could Destroy Evidence in Construction Defect Suit

    June 28, 2013 —
    Repair work is underway on the Palladium concert hall in Carmel, Indiana, a suburb of Indianapolis, a contractor for the project says that the repairs will destroy evidence that they need to defect against additional construction defect allegations. Work stopped in 2009 for three months of repairs after problems were found in the steel roof supports. Steel Supply & Engineering Co. has claimed that the column failures are due to errors in the design. They say that if the repair work continues, it “would result in the spoliation of evidence, and will irreparably harm the defendants, and ultimately adversely affect their ability to protect their rights in the action.” They have asked the court to bring repairs to a stop until they are able to inspect the steel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Expansion of Potential Liability of Construction Managers and Consultants

    November 18, 2019 —
    Over the last decade or so, there has been far more judicial willingness to adopt legal theories that result in an increased risk of exposure to construction managers and consultants working on construction projects. This has resulted in a greater likelihood of lawsuits being filed that name construction managers and consultants as defendants and a greater likelihood of those lawsuits surviving efforts to have the lawsuits dismissed prior to trial. The consequence of more claims has led to increased costs for legal expenses, settlements and uncompensated personnel time devoted to the defense of the claims. This expansion of potential liability may be broken into two sets:
    1. claims for pure economic loss not arising from property damage or personal injury by parties not in a contractual relationship with a construction manager or consultant; and
    2. claims for property damage or personal injury by a party not in a contractual relationship with a construction manager or consultant.
    The first set concerns claims by a contractor against a construction manager or consultant that its breach of duties owed to the owner on a project and/or its provision of incomplete or inaccurate information on a project, which it knew, or should have reasonably anticipated, would be relied on by the contractor, resulted in damages to the contractor. Reprinted courtesy of Scott D. Cessar, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Cessar may be contacted at scessar@eckertseamans.com

    ASCE Statement On White House "Accelerating Infrastructure Summit"

    October 17, 2022 —
    WASHINGTON, D.C. –We thank the Administration for convening the Accelerating Infrastructure Summit, which highlighted the possibilities stemming from the bipartisan infrastructure law. Nearly one full year since it was passed into law, this transformative legislation is beginning to kickstart vital infrastructure projects nationwide that will improve the country's economic efficiency and prioritize public health and safety. We know that together, builders, engineers, planners, and those entrusted with infrastructure projects must meet the moment and deliver projects on time, on task, and on budget for communities to make the most of these new resources. This generational investment in infrastructure is much needed - the 2021 Report Card for America's Infrastructure assigned the nation's infrastructure a cumulative grade of "C-" across 17 categories of infrastructure. ASCE is ready to help optimize these investments for communities across the country and make sure all will benefit, whether it is providing contract templates to expedite the process or offering peer support to smaller and rural agencies. ASCE is also focused on education in our industry to better equip civil engineers with the knowledge and expertise to execute alternative project delivery methods with a March 2023 Construction Institute Summit in St. Louis, which will provide a dedicated track to highlight innovations that help reduce the time for construction projects. The bipartisan infrastructure law has provided us the opportunity to transform America and bring our infrastructure into the 21st century, and we will need diverse perspectives, innovative technologies and processes, and a robust workforce to make the most of this once-in-a-generation investment. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 150,000 civil engineers worldwide and is America's oldest national engineering society. ASCE works to raise awareness of the need to maintain and modernize the nation's infrastructure using sustainable and resilient practices, advocates for increasing and optimizing investment in infrastructure, and improve engineering knowledge and competency. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Bid Protests: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (Redeux)

    September 17, 2014 —
    This past week I gave a presentation on a panel entitled “Bid Protests: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” before my local bar association. Thanks to those who attended, my co-presenters and the bar association for sponsoring. Rather than letting my notes gather dust I thought I would share some of the highlights. What is a bid protest? A bid protest is the procedure by which a bidder protests the rejection of its bid or award of a public works contract to another bidder. A bid protest may occur in one of two situations: (1) A public entity rejects the bid of an apparent low bidder and the apparent low bidder protests the rejection; or (2) A public entity awards the contract to the apparent low bidder and another bidder protests the award. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@kmtg.com

    Don’t Put Yourself In The Position Of Defending Against An Accord And Satisfaction Defense

    October 10, 2022 —
    The doctrine of accord and satisfaction lives and breathes in disputes including construction disputes. Unfortunately, a contractor, in the case discussed below, found out the hard way after it cashed checks that were accompanied with a letter that clearly indicated the checks were final payment. Once those payments were cashed, there was no “buyer’s remorse” that would allow it to still pursue disputed amounts. Remember this the next time you accept and cash a payment that says on the check it is full and final payment OR is accompanied by a letter that makes clear the payment is full and final payment. If you cash it, there is no second bite out of the apple, so to speak. If you are not interested in the payment being full and final payment, return the check. If you are not sure, either return the check or inquire and get that response in writing. Don’t put yourself in the position of defending against an accord and satisfaction defense. Even without the doctrine of accord and satisfaction, the contract between the contractor and owner discussed below made clear that contractor’s acceptance of final payment meant that contractor was unconditionally waiving other claims against the owner, further reinforcing that there would be no second bite out of the apple. The morale:
    (1) read the letter that accompanies a check and do NOT cash a check that indicates it is for final payment unless you are prepared to accept that amount; and (2) read your contract to understand any contractual obligation that kicks-in with the acceptance of final payment.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    UPDATE: Trade Secrets Pact Allows Resumed Work on $2.6B Ga. Battery Plant

    April 19, 2021 —
    Construction on a $2.6-billion battery manufacturing plant near Atlanta can continue under an agreement reached April 11 between two rival South Korean auto battery makers—including SK Innovation, which is owner of the half-completed project. Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Jury Awards Aluminum Company 35 Million in Time Element Losses

    September 23, 2019 —
    On July 3, 2019, a Delaware jury determined that fourteen property insurers for Noranda Aluminum Holding Corp., an aluminum producer that filed for bankruptcy and ceased operations three years ago, owe Noranda over $35 million in time element losses that Noranda sustained as a result of two separate catastrophic incidents that occurred at its aluminum facility in 2015 and 2016. In August 2015, an aluminum explosion occurred at Noranda’s facility, resulting in substantial property damage and bodily injuries. Though the insurers paid for Noranda’s property damage claim, the insurers only covered $5.64 million of Noranda’s $22 million time element claim. In January 2016, the same facility sustained significant damage as a result of equipment failure. The insurers again paid for Noranda’s property damage claim arising from the equipment failure but declined to pay any of its $22.8 million time element claim. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews & Kurth and Daniel Hentschel, Hunton Andrews & Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Hentschel may be contacted at dhentschel@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of