BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering 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


    Washington State Updates the Contractor Registration Statute

    With Wildfires at a Peak, “Firetech” Is Joining Smart City Lineups

    In Oregon Construction Defect Claims, “Contract Is (Still) King”

    The Insurance Coverage Debate on Construction Defects Continues

    Water Leak Covered for First Thirteen Days

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

    Congratulations to Nicholas Rodriguez on His Promotion to Partner

    Minnesota Supreme Court Dismisses Vikings Stadium Funding Lawsuit

    Bridges Crumble as Muni Rates at Least Since ’60s Ignored

    Challenging Enforceability of Liquidated Damages (In Federal Construction Context)

    When is Forum Selection in a Construction Contract Enforceable?

    Guidance for Structural Fire Engineering Making Its Debut

    Good and Bad News on Construction Employment

    New York Converting Unlikely Buildings into Condominiums

    Nevada Assembly Sends Construction Defect Bill to Senate

    California Contractor License Bonds to Increase in 2016

    Congratulations 2020 DE, MA, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Research Project Underway to Prepare Water Utilities for Wildfire Events

    Edison Utility Accused of Igniting LA Fire in Lawsuits

    Nobody Knows What Lies Beneath New York City

    Hawaii Court of Appeals Affirms Broker's Liability for Failure to Renew Coverage

    Subcontractors Found Liable to Reimburse Insurer Defense Costs in Equitable Subrogation Action

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “This Is Sufficient for Your Purposes …”

    Contract Void Ab Initio: Key Insights into the KBR vs. Corps of Engineers Affirmative Defense

    Exclusion for Construction of Condominiums Includes Faulty Construction of Retaining Wall

    Foreman in Fatal NYC Trench Collapse Gets Jail Sentence

    U.S. Supreme Court Weighs in on Construction Case

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 2: Coverage for Smoke-Related Damages

    17 Snell & Wilmer Attorneys Ranked In The 2019 Legal Elite Edition Of Nevada Business Magazine

    The Colorado Supreme Court holds that loans made to a construction company are not subject to the Mechanic’s Lien Trust Fund Statute

    Cyber Security Insurance and Design Professionals

    Governor Signs Permit Extension Bill Extending Permit Deadlines to One Year

    L.A.’s Modest Solution to the ‘Missing Middle’ Housing Problem

    San Francisco Half-Built Apartment Complex Destroyed by Fire

    Gillotti v. Stewart (2017) 2017 WL 1488711 Rejects Liberty Mutual, Holding Once Again that the Right to Repair Act is the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    Approaches to Managing Job Site Inventory

    The Contingency Fee Multiplier (For Insurance Coverage Disputes)

    Nevada Judge says Class Analysis Not Needed in Construction Defect Case

    New York Nonprofit Starts Anti-Scaffold Law Video Series

    The Shifting Sands of Alternative Dispute Resolution

    Carroll Brock of Larchmont Homes Dies at Age 88

    Partners Jeremy S. Macklin and Mark F. Wolfe Secure Seventh Circuit Win for Insurer Client in Late Notice Dispute

    On-Site Supersensing and the Future of Construction Automation – Discussion with Aviad Almagor

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/30/24) – Life Science Construction to Increase, Overall Homeownership Is Majority Female, and Senators Urge Fed Chair to Lower Interest Rates

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment to Dispose of Hail Damage Claim Fails

    The G2G Year-End Roundup (2022)

    The Impact of Nuclear Verdicts on Construction Businesses

    San Diego County Considering Updates to Green Building Code

    Washington First State to Require Electric Heat Pumps

    Insurer Must Defend Construction Defect Claims
    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

    Sick Leave, Paid Time Off, and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act

    April 20, 2020 —
    Unemployment claims hit a historic high this past week as 3.3 million Americans filed for unemployment benefits. To give you some context, this is not only the highest number of unemployment claims ever filed, it is five times higher than the previous record of 695,000 unemployment claims in 1982. Restaurants, hotels, airlines and other businesses have begun to layoff or furlough workers. According to a survey conducted by the Associated General Contractors of America this past week, 39% of respondents reported that project owners have halted or cancelled construction projects due to deteriorating economic conditions, 45% reported project delays or disruptions, and 23% reported supply chain disruptions. While the construction industry likely won’t be impacted nearly to the same degree as the retail sector has, some involved in the construction industry may nevertheless be faced with the prospect of having to lay off or furlough workers as “shelter in place” orders are extended. If you’re faced with that situation here are a few things to remember: Paid Sick Leave Under California law, nearly all employers are required to provide paid sick leave to employees who work for 30 or more days in a given year. Paid sick leave can be used by an employee for illnesses, including COVID-19, the diagnosis, care, or treatment of existing health conditions, and preventative care for the employee or employee’s family member. The important thing to remember here is that use of paid sick leave is an employee’s choice. While an employer, concerned that an employee may have contracted COVID-19, may require that an employee not come to the office, the employer cannot force such an employee to use his or her paid sick leave. For more information, the California Labor Commissioner has created a webpage specific to COVID 19. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/18/23) – Zillow’s New Pilot Program, Production Begins at Solar Panel Plant in Georgia, and More Diversity on Contracts for Buffalo Bills Stadium

    November 27, 2023 —
    In our latest roundup, Netflix announces plans to open brick-and-mortar locations, NYU develops a way to examine buildings using drones, robots and AI, distressed U.S. commercial real estate hits a 10-year high, and more! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Insurers in New Jersey Secure a Victory on Water Damage Claims, But How Big a Victory Likely Remains to be Seen

    April 03, 2019 —
    Property insurance policies commonly cover water damage caused by an accidental discharge or leakage of water from an on-site plumbing system and commonly exclude water damage caused by a sewer backup. So it’s not surprising that the cause of water damage is a common battleground between policyholders and insurers. In Salil v. Ohio Security Insurance Co., 2018 WL 6272930 (N.J. App. Div. Dec. 3, 2018), insurers scored a victory when the court held that the release of water and sewage into a restaurant was subject to a $25,000 sublimit for water damage caused by a sewer backup. But claims adjusters and policyholders confronted with water damage claims in New Jersey will no doubt continue to do battle over whether the Salil decision was a decisive victory for insurers or a limited one. In Salil, the insured landlord leased its building to a restaurant operator. After the insured’s tenant reported water and odor at the restaurant, the insured contacted a plumber, who informed the insured that a clog in the restaurant’s toilet caused Category 3 water to flow into the restaurant. The insured allegedly sustained approximately $160,000 in restoration costs and loss of business income. The plumber used a snake to clear the sewer line to remedy the issue. The restoration company confirmed the cause of the loss was a sewer back up. On this basis, the insurer determined that the cause of loss was a sewer backup. The policy excluded coverage for water damage caused by a sewer back-up, but an endorsement restored that coverage, subject to a $25,000 sub-limit for “direct physical loss or damaged caused by water… which backs up into a building or structure through sewers or drains which are directly connected to a sanitary sewer or septic system.” Pursuant to this endorsement, the insurer paid its $25,000 sublimit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kevin Sullivan, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Sullivan may be contacted at ksullivan@tlsslaw.com

    Dallas Condo Project to Expand

    November 20, 2013 —
    Cooper & Stebbins has announced that they are building additional units at Southlake Town Square. One set of additions will expand the Garden District Brownstones, which were built in 2006. There will additionally be a five-story building to be called The Residences. Southlake Town Square is a mixed-use development, combining retail and residences. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Obtaining Temporary Injunction to Enforce Non-Compete Agreement

    June 09, 2016 —
    When a party breaches a non-compete agreement (with a non-solicitation clause), the non-breaching party typically moves for a temporary injunction. The breaching party is the party that signed the non-compete agreement, such as a former employee or consultant that agreed not to solicit its employer’s customer lists or referral sources upon leaving. The non-breaching party or the party moving for the temporary injunction is the party that is looking to protect its trade secret customer lists or referral sources, such as the employer. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Bailout for an Improperly Drafted Indemnification Provision

    February 11, 2019 —
    A recent opinion came out that held that even though an indemnification provision in a subcontract was unenforceable per Florida Statute s. 725.06, the unenforceable portion is merely severed out of the indemnification clause leaving the rest of the clause intact. In essence, an otherwise invalid indemnification clause is bailed out by this ruling (which does not even discuss whether this subcontract had a severability provision that states that if any portion of any provision in the subcontract is invalid, such invalid portion shall be severed and the remaining portion of the provision shall remain in full force and effect). This opinion arose from a construction defect case, CB Contractxors, LLC v. Allens Steel Products, Inc.,43 Fla.L.Weekly D2773a (Fla. 5thDCA 2018), where the general contractor, sued by an association, flowed down damages to subcontractors based on the contractual indemnification provision in the subcontracts. Subcontractors moved to dismiss the contractual indemnification claim because it was not compliant with Florida Statute s. 725.06. The indemnification provision required the subcontractors to indemnify the general contractor even for the general contractors own partial negligence, but failed to specify a monetary limitation on the extent of the indemnification as required by Florida Statute s. 725.06. (The indemnification clause in the subcontract was the standard intermediate form of indemnification that required the subcontractor to indemnify the general contractor for claims regardless of whether the claims were caused in part by the general contractor.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Court Rules Planned Development of Banning Ranch May Proceed

    June 10, 2015 —
    In Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach (filed 5/20/2015, No. G049691), the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, held the Environmental Impact Report prepared by the City of Newport Beach for the partial development of Banning Ranch complied with California environmental protection statutes and local ordinances. Under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), a city desiring to approve or carry out a project that may have significant effect on the environment must prepare an environmental impact report (“EIR”) designed to provide the public with detailed information about the effect which a proposed project will have on the environment. The California Coastal Act of 1976 provides for heightened protection of environmentally sensitive habitat areas (“ESHA”) defined as any “area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments.” In 2006, the City of Newport Beach adopted a General Plan for the physical development of the city. The plan specifically identifies Banning Ranch as having significant value as a wildlife habitat and open space resource for citizens. The general plan includes a primary goal of complete preservation of Banning Ranch as open space. To the extent the primary goal cannot be achieved, the plan identifies a secondary goal allowing limited development of Banning Ranch “to fund preservation of the majority of the property as open space.” The plan also requires the City to coordinate any development with the state and federal agencies. Reprinted courtesy of Kristian B. Moriarty, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Lawrence S. Zucker II, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Moriarty may be contacted at kmoriarty@hbblaw.com; Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    ACEC Statement on Negotiated Bipartisan Debt Limit Compromise

    June 05, 2023 —
    Washington, D.C. – The American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC) released the following statement applauding the negotiated bipartisan compromise to raise the debt limit ahead of the scheduled House vote tonight:
    "The American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC) applauds President Biden and Speaker McCarthy for negotiating a bipartisan compromise to raise the debt limit and avoid a catastrophic default. We are particularly pleased that the bipartisan deal protects the critical funds provided under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and does not include any changes to the Inflation Reduction Act's (IRA) climate and clean energy provisions, which the engineering industry is working hard to deliver successfully. ACEC also strongly supports the provisions in the deal to reform the federal permitting process. These commonsense measures to modernize the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), particularly through the use of digital technologies, will improve interagency collaboration and allow engineering firms to help their clients deliver project benefits more efficiently while ensuring strong environmental protections and opportunities for community and stakeholder engagement."
    The American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC) is the business association of the nation's engineering industry. Founded in 1909, ACEC is a national federation of 51 state and regional organizations representing more than 5,500 engineering firms and 600,000+ engineers, surveyors, architects, and other specialists nationwide. ACEC member firms drive the design of America's infrastructure and the built environment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of