BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect 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


    Bad Faith in the First Party Insurance Context

    Just Because You Allege There Was an Oral Contract Doesn’t Mean You’re Off the Hook for Attorneys’ Fees if you Lose

    Asbestos Confirmed After New York City Steam Pipe Blast

    Landlords, Brace Yourselves: New Law Now Limits Your Rental Increases & Terminations

    EPA Threatens Cut in California's Federal Highway Funds

    Common Law Indemnity Claim Affirmed on Justifiable Beliefs

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight Rated as One of the Top 50 in a Survey of Construction Law Firms in the United States

    Illinois Court of Appeals Addresses What It Means to “Reside” in Property for Purposes of Coverage

    New Jersey Court Adopts Continuous Trigger for Construction Defect Claims

    The Need to Be Specific and Precise in Drafting Settling Agreements

    Malerie Anderson Named to D Magazine’s 2023 Best Lawyers Under 40

    OPINION: Stop Requiring Exhibit Lists!

    Hunton Insurance Lawyer, Jae Lynn Huckaba, Awarded Miami-Dade Bar Association Young Lawyer Section’s Rookie of the Year Award

    Buy American Under President Trump: What to Know and Where We’re Heading

    A Win for Policyholders: California Court of Appeals Applies Vertical Exhaustion for Continuous Injury Claims

    Stay-At-Home Orders and Work Restrictions with 50 State Matrix

    Massachusetts District Court Holds Contractors Are Not Additional Insureds on Developer’s Builder’s Risk Policy

    More Details Emerge in Fatal Charlotte, NC, Scaffold Collapse

    The Families First Coronavirus Response Act: What Every Employer Should Know

    Court of Appeals Finds Additional Insured Coverage Despite “Care, Custody or Control” Exclusion

    Green Construction Trends Contractors Can Expect in 2019

    Florida Lawmakers Fail to Reach Agreement on Condominium Safety Bill

    Performance Bond Primer: Need to Knows and Need to Dos

    Chinese Lead $92 Billion of U.S. Home Sales to Foreigners

    Let’s Give ‘Em Sutton to Talk About: Tennessee Court Enforces Sutton Doctrine

    Is it time for a summer tune-up?

    Wisconsin Court Enforces Breach of Contract Exclusion in E&O Policy

    Bad Welds Doom Art Installation at Central Park

    Sellers of South Florida Mansion Failed to Disclose Construction Defects

    Texas Supreme Court Cements Exception to “Eight-Corners” Rule Through Two Recent Rulings

    PAGA Right of Action Not Applicable to Construction Workers Under Collective Bargaining Agreement

    Utah Digs Deep and Finds “Design Defect” Includes Pre-Construction Geotechnical Reports

    Norristown, PA to Stop Paying Repair Costs for Defect-Ridden Condo

    Additional Insurance Coverage Determined for General Contractor

    Surveys: Hundreds of Design Professionals See Big COVID-19 Business Impacts

    California Appeals Court Remands Fine in Late Completion Case

    PFAS: From Happy Mistake to Ubiquity to Toxic Liability (But is there coverage?)

    Intentionally Set Atlanta Interstate Fire Closes Artery Until June

    California Court Holds No Coverage Under Pollution Policy for Structural Improvements

    Ensuring Arbitration in Construction Defect Claims

    7 Areas where Technology is Shifting the Construction Business

    One Insurer's Settlement with Insured Does Not Bar Contribution Claim by Other Insurers

    Does a No-Damage-for-Delay Clause Also Preclude Acceleration Damages?

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

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

    2024 Update to CEB’s Mechanics Liens Now Available

    11th Circuit Affirms Bad Faith Judgement Against Primary Insurer

    Payne & Fears LLP Recognized by U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers in 2023 “Best Law Firms” Rankings

    To Require Arbitration or Not To Require Arbitration

    Cause Still Unclear in March Retaining Wall Collapse on $900M NJ Interchange
    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

    Pile Test Likely for Settling Millennium Tower

    October 04, 2021 —
    A pilot pile program to prove the efficacy of a less-disruptive method for the paused foundation fix at the ailing Millennium Tower in San Francisco could begin the week of Oct. 4. Accelerated settling and tilt—caused by a pile upgrade intended to correct settlement of the 645-ft-tall residential condominium—ceased after Aug. 20, when the engineer-of-record halted the $100-million fix. Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    David M. McLain, Esq. to Speak at the 2014 CLM Claims College

    August 13, 2014 —
    David McLain will be a speaker at the School of Construction. The Claims College will be held from September 7-10 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Mr. McLain is a founding member of Higgins, Hopkins,McLain & Roswell, LLC, a firm which specializes in construction law and construction litigation throughout Colorado. Mr. McLain received his undergraduate degree from Colorado State University, graduating cum laude, and his law degree from the University of Denver, College of Law. Mr. McLain completed the Claims and Litigation Management Alliance Litigation Management Institute, earning the designation from that organization as a Certified Litigation Management Professional. He has a general civil litigation practice with an emphasis on the defense of complex construction lawsuits on behalf of developers and general contractors. As a result of the experience gained by defending some of Colorado’s largest residential construction defect lawsuits, developers, general contractors, and subcontractors seek out Mr. McLain to consult on risk avoidance and risk management strategies. Currently among his clients are several of the state’s largest home builders, regional and custom builders, and numerous insurance carriers. Mr. McLain is an AV® Preeminent™ Peer Review Rated attorney by Martindale-Hubbell and is a regular speaker at local, regional, and national seminars regarding construction defect litigation in Colorado. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Client Alert: Court of Appeal Applies Common Interest Privilege Doctrine to HOA Litigation Meetings

    March 19, 2014 —
    In Seahaus La Jolla Owners Assoc. v. Superior Court (No. D064567, March 12, 2014), the California Court of Appeal held a homeowners association’s (“HOA”) litigation meetings related to the HOA’s construction defect lawsuit were subject to protection under the attorney-client privilege. Specifically, the court concluded the common interest doctrine applied to the subject litigation meetings, thereby barring the defendants in the HOA’s lawsuit from seeking discovery related to the content and disclosures made during those meetings. The plaintiff HOA initiated a construction defect lawsuit against a residential developer and builder, seeking damages for construction defects related to common areas. The defendants took the depositions of individual homeowners and inquired regarding the communications and disclosures made at informational litigation update meetings. The meetings were conducted by the HOA’s counsel with groups of homeowners, some of whom had filed their own, separate lawsuits against the same defendants. Motions to compel were filed after attorney-client privilege objections were asserted by counsel for the HOA. After the court-appointed discovery referee opined that the common interest doctrine applied and that the communications presented at the meetings were subject to the attorney-client privilege, the trial court rejected this recommendation and overruled the HOA’s privilege objections. The HOA filed a petition for a writ of mandate. The defendants argued the privilege had been waived based on the presence of persons who were not the clients of the HOA’s attorney, that the subject communications were not “confidential communications” and that the individual homeowners and the HOA did not share common interests at the time. After setting forth a comprehensive discussion of the statutory principles underlying the attorney-client privilege and the bases for waiver, as provided in California Evidence Code §§ 912 and 952, and summarizing applicable decisional law, the court specifically analyzed the question of whether the common interest doctrine applied in the context of the disputed HOA litigation meetings. The common interest doctrine protects confidential communications made by counsel to third parties if the third parties are present to further the interest of the client or are those to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for the transmission of the information or the accomplishment of the purpose for which the lawyer was consulted. Reprinted courtesy of David W. Evans, Steven M. Cvitanovic, and Michael C. Parme of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Evans may be contacted at devans@hbblaw.com, Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com, and Mr. Parme may be contacted at mparme@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Parol Evidence can be Used to Defeat Fraudulent Lien

    March 27, 2019 —
    Parol or extrinsic evidence can be used to defeat an argument that a lien is a fraudulent lien. And, just because a lien amount exceeds the total contract amount does not presumptively mean the lien is willfully exaggerated or recorded in bad faith. Finally, a ruling invalidating a construction lien can create the irreparable harm required to support a petition for writ of certiorari. All of these issues are important when dealing with and defending against a fraudulent lien and are explained in a recent case involving a dispute between an electrical subcontractor and its supplier. In Farrey’s Wholesale Hardware Co., Inc. v. Coltin Electrical Services, LLC, 44 Fla.L.Weekly D130a (Fla. 2d DCA 2019), there were various revisions to the supplier’s initial purchase order, both from a qualitative and quantitative perspective, and a ninth-revised purchaser order was issued and accepted. The electrical subcontractor claimed that deliveries were late, unassembled, and did not include the required marking (likely the UL marking), to pass building inspections. As a result, the subcontractor withheld money from the supplier and the supplier recorded a lien in the amount of $853,773.16 and filed a foreclosure lawsuit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    President Obama Vetoes Keystone Pipeline Bill

    February 26, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama issued his third veto Tuesday to reject legislation that would allow construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, escalating a battle over the project with Republicans in Congress. Notice of the long-expected veto was released without fanfare via a message to the Senate just hours after the bill formally arrived at the White House. The Senate has agreed to hold a vote on overriding the veto no later than March 3. Obama has repeatedly said a State Department review of the TransCanada Corp. project -- which would carry crude oil produced in Alberta, Canada, south through the U.S. -- should proceed before a decision is made on whether to allow construction of the $8 billion pipeline. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Angela Greiling Keane, Bloomberg

    MTA Implements Revised Contractors Debarment Regulations

    July 06, 2020 —
    On June 3, 2020, the Metropolitan Transit Authority (“MTA”) published and implemented revised regulations pertaining to the debarment of contractors. The revised regulations address many of the deep concerns raised by the contracting community. Under relevant administrative procedure, the MTA publication of the revised regulations starts a 45 day notice period before the regulations can be adopted as final. The prior regulations essentially required that debarment occur upon a purely formulaic calculation establishing that a contractor: 1) was more than 10% late, or 2) had submitted invalid claims that exceeded the adjusted contract price by a measure of 10%. The revised regulations represent improvements over the prior regulations. Critically, the revised regulations address the primary concern raised by the contracting community, that being the mandate of purely formulaic debarment. Instead, the revised regulations establish a process that includes greater flexibility and discretion before debarment may ensue. Reprinted courtesy of Peckar & Abramson, P.C. attorneys Steven M. Charney, Gregory H. Chertoff and Paul Monte Mr. Charney may be contacted at scharney@pecklaw.com Mr. Chertoff may be contacted at gchertoff@pecklaw.com Mr. Monte may be contacted at pmonte@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Three White and Williams Lawyers Named Top Lawyers by Delaware Today

    December 07, 2020 —
    White and Williams is pleased to announce that John Balaguer, Managing Partner of the Wilmington office, Partner Stephen Milewski and Counsel Dana Spring Monzo have been chosen by their peers as Delaware Today's 2020 "Top Lawyers." The annual list recognizes John, Steve and Dana in the practice area of Medical Malpractice for the Defense. John has over 30 years of experience defending complex tort cases and is recognized as one of the leading trial lawyers in the State of Delaware. Steve has over 15 years of experience as a trial lawyer specializing in healthcare law, particularly defending hospitals, doctors and healthcare providers in medical negligence cases. Dana's practice is focused on complex civil litigation, primarily medical malpractice. For more than a decade she has represented the interests of physicians, hospitals and healthcare providers in Delaware. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    More Hensel Phelps Ripples in the Statute of Limitations Pond?

    February 03, 2020 —
    As is always the case when I attend the Virginia State Bar’s annual construction law seminar, I come away from it with a few posts on recent cases and their implications. The first of these is not a construction case, but has implications relating to the state project related statute of limitations and indemnification issues for construction contracts brought out in stark relief in the now infamous Hensel Phelps case. In Radiance Capital Receivables Fourteen, LLC v. Foster the Court considered a waiver of the statute of limitations found in a loan contract. The operative facts are that the waiver was found in a Continuing Guaranty contract and that the default happened more than 5 years prior to the date that Radiance filed suit to enforce its rights. When the defendants filed a plea in bar stating that the statute of limitations had run and therefore the claim was barred, Radiance of course argued that the defendants had waived their right to bring such a defense. The defendants responded that the waiver was invalid in that it violated the terms of Va. Code 8.01-232 that states among other things:
    an unwritten promise not to plead the statute shall be void, and a written promise not to plead such statute shall be valid when (i) it is made to avoid or defer litigation pending settlement of any case, (ii) it is not made contemporaneously with any other contract, and (iii) it is made for an additional term not longer than the applicable limitations period.
    The Circuit Court and ultimately the Supreme Court agreed with the defendants. In doing so, the Virginia Supreme Court rejected arguments of estoppel and an argument that a “waiver” is not a “promise not to plead.” 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