BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield 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


    Nancy Conrad Recognized in Lehigh Valley Business 2024 Power in Law List

    French Government Fines National Architects' Group $1.6M Over Fee-Fixing

    Hunton Insurance Recovery Lawyers Ranked by Chambers as Top Insurance Practitioners

    Architect Sues School District

    San Francisco International Airport Reaches New Heights in Sustainable Project Delivery

    Subcontractor Exception to Your Work Exclusion Paves the Way for Coverage

    Forethought Is Key to Overcoming Construction Calamities

    Florida Court of Appeals Holds Underlying Tort Case Must Resolve Before Third-Party Spoliation Action Can Be Litigated

    Facing Manslaughter Charges In Worker's 2021 Trench Collapse Death, Colorado Contractor Who Willfully Ignored Federal Law Surrenders To Police

    Sometimes you Need to Consider the Coblentz Agreement

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    Broker Not Negligent When Insured Rejects Additional Coverage

    Now Available: Seyfarth’s 50 State Lien Law Notice Requirements Guide (2023-2024 Edition)

    Hybrid Contracts for The Sale of Goods and Services and the Predominant Factor Test

    Design Firm Settles over Construction Defect Claim

    Default, Fraud, and VCPA (Oh My!)

    Spotting Problem Projects

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds Asbestos Exclusion in Alleged Failure to Disclose Case

    FEMA Offers Recovery Tips for California Wildfire Survivors

    Save a Legal Fee: Prevent Costly Lawsuits With Claim Limitation Clauses

    Changes to Pennsylvania Mechanic’s Lien Code

    California Case That Reads Like Russian Novel Results in Less Than Satisfying Result for Both Project Owner and Contractors

    New Pedestrian, Utility Bridge Takes Shape on Everett Waterfront

    Denver Court Rules that Condo Owners Must Follow Arbitration Agreement

    SEC Approves New Securitization Risk Retention Rule with Broad Exception for Qualified Residential Mortgages

    Consultant Says It's Time to Overhaul Construction Defect Laws in Nevada

    Wage Theft Investigations and Citations in the Construction Industry

    Unwrapped Pipes Lead to Flooding and Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Ex-Engineered Products Firm Executive Convicted of Bid Rigging

    Randy Maniloff Recognized by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® as a "Lawyer of the Year"

    For Whom Additional Insured Coverage Applies in New York

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa Rolle and Christopher Acosta Win Summary Judgment in Favor of Property Owner

    Developers Celebrate Arizona’s Opportunity Zones

    In Colorado, Repair Vendors Can Bring First-Party Bad Faith Actions For Amounts Owed From an Insurer

    Safety Versus a False Sense of Security: Challenges to the Use of Construction Cranes

    Court Rejects Efforts to Limit Scope of Judgment Creditor’s Direct Action Under Insurance Code Section 11580

    New-Home Sales in U.S. Unexpectedly Fall to Four-Month Low

    John Paulson’s $1 Billion Caribbean Empire Faces Betrayal

    Killer Subcontract Provisions

    New York’s Second Department Holds That Carrier Must Pay Judgment Obtained by Plaintiff as Carrier Did Not Meet Burden to Prove Willful Non-Cooperation

    Kahana Feld Named to the Orange County Register 2024 Top Workplaces List

    Deadlines Count for Construction Defects in Florida

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa Rolle Wins Summary Judgment on Behalf of Contract Utility Company in Personal Injury Action

    Builders Can’t Rely on SB800

    ACS Obtains Overwhelming Jury Trial Victory for General Contractor Client

    Federal Arbitration Act Preempts Pennsylvania Payment Act

    The Evolution of Construction Defect Trends at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Florida Federal Court Reinforces Principle That Precise Policy Language Is Required Before An Insurer Can Deny Coverage Based On An Exclusion

    Sales of Existing U.S. Homes Unexpectedly Fell in January

    Construction Bright Spot in Indianapolis
    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

    Don MacGregor To Speak at 2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    January 01, 2011 —

    “Challenges for Experts in Construction Defect Claims and Litigation” will be held Thursday May 13, 2011 between 1:30 and 3:00 PM at this year’s West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar. Among the various topics covered will be of Right to Repair/Opportunity to Repair statutes, improper testing methodologies, new challenges where a case involves a Wrap Policy, OCIPS, CCIPS, and other owner controlled insurance programs, as well as the need for realistic testing protocols for the party the expert is retained to represent.

    During the presentation Mr. MacGregor will be working in connection with a group of construction and design experts each of which have extensive experience with construction defect and claims related litigation. This particular session is expected to attract a standing-room only crowd, drawing in excess of 1700 attendees.

    The West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar is the largest seminar of its type. This year’s event is scheduled for will take place on May 12 and 13, 2011, at The Disneyland Hotel and Resort. For more information regarding the years event please visit http://www.westcoastcasualty.com/dyncat.cfm?catid=3322

    http://www.westcoastcasualty.com/dyncat.cfm?catid=3322 Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Demonstrating A Fraudulent Inducement Claim Or Defense

    May 18, 2020 —
    In a recent case, Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court’s denial of a motion for a temporary injunction sought by an employer due to an independent contractor’s violation of a non-compete and non-solicitation provision in an employment / independent contractor agreement (“employment agreement”). You can find more on this case and the enforcement of the non-compete and non-solicitation clause here. A worthy discussion in this case centers on the independent contractor’s fraudulent inducement defense. Specifically, the independent contractor, as a defense to the injunction, claimed that he was fraudulently induced into entering into the employment agreement because the employer promised he would make a certain amount of money and he would work predominantly in one geographic location. The employment agreement contained NO such representations. Instead, the employment agreement contained a fee and services schedule and the independent contractor would be compensated based on that schedule. It stated nothing as to the independent contractor only having to work, or predominantly working, in one geographic location, or that the independent contractor would be guaranteed “X” amount of money working in that location. Why is this important? 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

    NYC’s Next Hot Neighborhoods Targeted With Property Funds

    August 20, 2014 —
    New York’s real estate world is filled with tales of ordinary people who bought property decades ago and saw values skyrocket to the millions. Seth Weissman is seeking investors to get in early on the next hot neighborhoods. The veteran of Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) and hedge fund Perry Capital LLC started CityShares, which enables participants to reap rewards from increasing apartment demand in gentrifying areas. Investors who pledge at least $100,000 to one of the program’s neighborhood-focused funds become partial owners of a group of buildings and share in the rental income. The first pool is more than halfway toward its target of $5 million, which will be used to buy properties in Brooklyn’s Bedford-Stuyvesant. Harlem in upper Manhattan is next, with a goal of as much as $20 million. Additional funds are planned for Bushwick, Crown Heights and Sunset Park, all in Brooklyn. Renters are pushing into those more-distant areas after getting squeezed out of the borough’s waterfront communities, where leasing costs rival Manhattan’s. CityShares is the first program of its kind and offers a way to invest in burgeoning markets that are poised to grow as New York’s workforce expands, Weissman said. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jonathan LaMantia, Bloomberg
    Mr. Lamantia may be contacted at jlamantia1@bloomberg.net

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (3/20/24) – Construction Backlog Falls, National Association of Realtors Settle Litigation, and Commercial Real Estate Market’s Effect on City Cuts

    April 15, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, bad loans outweigh loss reserves at top six U.S. banks, the FCC announces a proposed rule aimed at “bulk billing,” office-to-multifamily conversion projects grow in major metro cities, and more!
    • The National Association of Realtors has agreed to settle litigation that accused them of artificially inflating real estate commissions – a major decision that could reshape the housing market for buyers, sellers and agents. (Rachel Siegel, The Washington Post)
    • An NYU professor considers the positives and negatives of cities cutting services or raising other kinds of taxes to offset the continued faltering of the commercial real estate market. (Alan Rappeport, The New York Times)
    • Construction backlog fell in February for every size of contractor except for those with under $30 million in annual revenue, while, over the past year, the largest contractors – those with greater than $50 million in revenue – have experienced the greatest decline in backlog. (Sebastian Obando, Construction Dive).
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Federal Lawsuit Accuses MOX Contractors of Fraud

    March 04, 2019 —
    A subcontractor employee working on the now-canceled MOX project in South Carolina used football tickets, automobile tires, barbecue grills and other gifts to persuade employees of CB&I AREVA MOX Services and other vendors to help approve thousands of fraudulent invoices cumulatively valued at more than $6.4 million, according to a Dept. of Justice lawsuit filed Feb. 14 that names both companies as defendants. The controversial project at the Savannah River Site in Aiken, S.C., originally scheduled for completion in 2016, was canceled in January after cost and schedule estimates increased significantly. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott Judy, ENR
    Mr. Judy may be contacted at judys@enr.com

    Teaching An Old Dog New Tricks: The Spearin Doctrine and Design-Build Projects

    October 30, 2018 —
    The United States District Court for the Southern District of California has now held that the Spearin doctrine applies to design-build subcontractors where the subcontractor is expected to design a portion of their work. The case is United States for the use and benefit of Bonita Pipeline, Inc., et al. v. Balfour Beatty Construction, LLC, et al. (“Bonita Pipeline”) (Case No. 3:16-cv-00983-H-AGS). In Bonita Pipeline, a subcontractor sued the general contractor and its sureties alleging breach of contract, breach of implied warranty, declaratory relief, and recovery under the Miller Act. The subcontractor then filed a motion for partial summary judgment against the general contractor on its declaratory relief cause of action, seeking a finding that the general contractor could not shift legal responsibility for its defective plans and specifications to the subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Castro, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Mr. Castro may be contacted at jcastro@grsm.com

    District Court denies Carpenters Union Motion to Dismiss RICO case- What it Means

    March 16, 2017 —
    In a case that has been widely discussed on this blog, a United States federal district court Judge denied the Philadelphia Carpenters’ Union’s motion to dismiss a federal RICO case filed against it by the Pennsylvania Convention Center. Judge Nitza I. Quiñones Alejandro issued the ruling on the Union’s motion. Unfortunately, Judge Quinoses Alejandro did not issue an opinion to go along with her order. This is a bit unusual. Federal Judges routinely issue opinions (if only in footnote form) even on motion dealing with procedural issues. like discovery disputes. The lack of an opinion prevents us from knowing the Judge’s rationale for denying the motion. Therefore, the order lack precedental value for subsequent cases. However, I do not believe the order is any less significant. Potential plaintiffs now know that a federal RICO case against a union can survive a motion to dismiss. Moreover, the attorneys for the Convention Center have provided potential plaintiffs a road map for doing so. As I have stated before, the fact pattern in the Convention case is hardly unique and the tactics the Carpenters used in that case are de ri·gueur. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    August 04, 2011 —

    On July 28, the Washington Court of Appeals ruled in Clasen Fruit & Cold Storage v. Frederick & Michael Construction Co., Inc. that more than six years had passed since a contractor had concluded work and so granted a summary dismissal of the suit.

    Frederick & Michael Construction Co., Inc. (F&M) was contracted to construct several buildings for Clasen Fruit and Cold Storage. These were completed in March, 1999. The buildings suffered wind damage to the roofs in 2001, 2003, 2005, and 2006. In the first two incidents, F&M repaired the roofs with Clasen paying for repairs.

    In 2005, Clasen hired Continuous Gutter to make repairs. The final incident was the collapse of the roof of one building. This was attributed to “excessive moisture in the roof’s vapor barriers.” At this point, Clasen demanded that F&M pay for repair and replacement costs. In 2008, Clasen sued F&M for damages for breach of contract and negligent design and construction of the roof.

    The decision then covered the meanings, in Washington law, of “termination of services” and “substantial completion.” The panel concluded that construction was “substantially completed in 1997” and “relevant services” by 2001. “But Clasen did not sue until 2008, some seven years after termination of any roof related services.”

    Read the court’s decision…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of