BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating 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


    Architect Plans to 3D-Print a Two-Story House

    Federal District Court Addresses Material Misrepresentation in First Party Property Damage Claim

    The Ever-Growing Thicket Of California Civil Code Section 2782

    The Registered Agent Advantage

    Appeals Court Overruled Insured as Additional Insured on Subcontractor’s Commercial General Liability Policy

    Statute of Frauds Applies to Sale of Real Property

    Home Prices Beat Estimates With 0.8% Gain in November

    Appeals Court Explains Punitive Damages Awards For Extreme Reprehensibility Or Unusually Small, Hard-To-Detect Or Hard-To-Measure Compensatory Damages

    CGL Policies and the Professional Liabilities Exclusion

    Duty to Defend Broadly Applies to Entire Action; Insured Need Not Apportion Defense Costs, Says Maryland Appeals Court

    New Jersey Judge Declared Arbitrator had no Duty to Disclose Past Contact with Lawyer

    2024 Construction Law Update

    More Construction Defects for San Francisco’s Eastern Bay Bridge Expansion

    Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

    No Damage for Delay? No Problem: Exceptions to the Enforceability of No Damage for Delay Clauses

    Is Safety Compliance Putting Your Project in Jeopardy? Examining the Essentials of DOE’s Worker Safety and Health Program

    Pennsylvania Court Finds that Two Possible Causes Can Prove a Product Malfunction Theory of Liability

    New Addition To New Jersey Court Rules Impacts More Than Trial Practice

    Colorado Finally Corrects Thirty-Year Old Flaw in Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    Production of Pre-Denial Claim File Compelled

    Be Mindful Accepting Payment When Amounts Owed Are In Dispute

    Late Notice Bars Insured's Claim for Loss Caused by Hurricane

    A Glimpse Into Post-Judgment Collections and Perhaps the Near Future?

    Arizona Supreme Court Clarifies Area Variance Standard; Property Owners May Obtain an Area Variance When Special Circumstances Existed at Purchase

    Insurance and Reconstruction: A Guide for Property Owners Facing Wildfire Aftermath and Other Disasters

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Bars Coverage for Pool Damage

    Federal Court Rejects Insurer's Argument that Wisconsin Has Adopted the Manifestation Trigger for Property Policy

    Texas Supreme Court to Rehear Menchaca Bad Faith Case

    Pennsylvania Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Hacking Claim Under E&O Policy

    Insurer's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings for Construction Defect Claim Rejected

    Hunton Andrews Kurth’s Insurance Recovery Practice, Partners Larry Bracken and Mike Levine Receive Band 1 Honors from Chambers USA in Georgia

    SFAA Commends Congress for Maintaining Current Bonding Protection Levels in National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)

    Los Angeles Construction Sites May Be on Fault Lines

    At Least 23 Dead as Tornadoes, Severe Storms Ravage South

    California Mediation Confidentiality May Apply to Third Party “Participants” Retained to Provide Analysis

    Preserving Lien Rights on Private Projects in Washington: Three Common Mistakes to Avoid

    U.S. Stocks Fall as Small Shares Tumble Amid Home Sales

    Delays and Suspension of the Work Under Fixed Price Government Contract

    New California Employment Laws Affect the Construction Industry for 2019

    The Rise of Modular Construction – Impacts for Consideration

    Colorado Adopts Twombly-Iqbal “Plausibility” Standard

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

    New OSHA Fall Rules to Start Early in Minnesota

    Consequential Damage Claims for Insurer's Bad Faith Dismissed

    How Will Artificial Intelligence Impact Construction Litigation?

    Because I Haven’t Mentioned Mediation Lately. . .

    Language California Construction Direct Contractors Must Add to Subcontracts Beginning on January 1, 2022, Per Senate Bill 727

    The Complex Insurance Coverage Reporter – A Year in Review

    Work without Permits may lead to Problems Later

    DC Circuit Upholds EPA’s Latest RCRA Recycling Rule
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    California Senator Proposes Bill to Require Contractors to Report Construction Defect Cases

    January 04, 2018 —
    According to Renne Schiavone’s of Patch.com in her article “Sen. Hill Wants Contractors to Report Construction Defect Cases”, Senator Jerry Hill of San Mateo County proposed a bill on December 21st, 2017 requiring construction defect settlements to be reported by contractors to the licensing board. This proposal comes after the tragic incident that took place back on June 16, 2015 during which a balcony on the fifth floor of a Berkeley apartment complex collapsed. This resulted in the death of six students and serious injuries for an additional seven individuals. An investigation revealed that three years prior to the balcony collapse, Segue Construction, who built the apartment complex, had paid $26.5 million in construction defect lawsuit settlements. Since the law doesn’t require these settlements to be reported by contractors, the Contractors State License Board (CSLB) wasn’t aware of the case. "Working together we can take even stronger steps to protect the public by ensuring that this critically important data is accessible to the Contractors State License Board," said Senator Hill. Senate Bill 465 will aim to protect consumers with more regulation and transparency. Senator Hill is also working on Senate Bill 721 which would require periodic condo and apartment building inspections of exterior elevated walking surfaces, stairwells, and balconies. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Irvine Partner Cinnamon J. Carr and Associate Brittney H. Aquino Prevail on Summary Judgment

    June 17, 2024 —
    Congratulations to Irvine Partner Cinnamon J. Carr and Associate Brittney H. Aquino for Prevailing on a Motion for Summary Judgment! Irvine Partner Cinnamon J. Carr and Associate Brittney H. Aquino prevail on summary judgment in a slip and fall case venued in Riverside County! Plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging negligence against Kahana Feld’s client, a grocery store with over 50 stores throughout Southern California. Prior to Plaintiff’s fall, security cameras captured footage of a third-party customer picking up a case of water bottles near the entrance of the store. The customer tilted the case and water streamed to the floor. The customer then returned the leaky case to the pallet, picked up another case of water, and walked away. Approximately a minute and 10 seconds later, Plaintiff walked through the area, slipping on the spilled water. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Linda Carter, Kahana Feld
    Ms. Carter may be contacted at lcarter@kahanafeld.com

    Changes to Judicial Selection in Mexico Create a New Case for Contractual ADR Provisions

    November 25, 2024 —
    The Mexican Congress recently discussed and approved a Constitutional Amendment called the “Judiciary Amendment” which was ironically published in the Official Gazette on September 15, 2024, the day before Mexican Independence Day. With this Judiciary Amendment, the Mexican Congress determined that Federal Judges, Federal Magisters and the Ministers of the Supreme Court will now be elected through direct and popular election. Before the Judiciary Amendment, Federal Judges and Magisters used to have a judicial career; many of them started as law clerks and were promoted step by step until becoming Judge or Magister. Ministers of the Supreme Court were appointed by the Senate through an election of three candidates designated by the President. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Juan Pablo Sandoval, COMAD, S.C.
    Mr. Sandoval may be contacted at jpsandoval@comad.com.mx

    Recent Bribery and Anti-Corruption Enforcement Trends in Global Construction Industry

    August 26, 2019 —
    Bribery and corruption have long plagued the construction industry, particularly in the developing world and emerging markets. Large contracts often trickle down through layers of subcontractors, presenting opportunities for corruption at each level. The risk is enhanced in certain foreign jurisdictions, where large corporations may be wholly or partially state-owned enterprises and public officials may expect payment in exchange for state-issued licenses or government contracts. Recent enforcement trends indicate that both the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) are increasingly targeting the construction industry for anti-bribery and corruption actions under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). Several former DOJ officials also recently commented that the construction industry has become a focus of anti-corruption enforcement efforts. The FCPA is a formidable tool for regulators, making it unlawful to influence a foreign government official with any type of payment or personal reward. While certain safe harbors apply — including de minimis payments made to expedite routine governmental action or the payment being lawful in the foreign jurisdiction — these exceptions are construed narrowly and can be difficult to apply in practice. Reprinted courtesy of Ralph A. Finizio, Pepper Hamilton LLP and Anthony Finizio, Pepper Hamilton LLP Mr. Finizio may be contacted at finizior@pepperlaw.com Mr. Finizio may be contacted at finizioa@pepperlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    ZLien Startup has Discovered a Billion in Payments for Clients

    March 19, 2014 —
    The New Orleans startup company zlien “tracks liens for contractors through an online service” and has “secured more than $1 billion in payments for clients on 33,000 construction projects” according to its founder Scott Wolfe, as reported by The Times-Picayune. When Wolfe practiced law, he noticed “an absence of any centralized service to help firms comply with lien procedures.” Wolfe “saw construction companies hiring small operators, in what he called ‘a very manual, service business,’ to track liens in different states, running the process inconsistently or failing to collect on some liens at all.” Wolfe has entered zlien into “New Orleans Entrepreneur Week on March 28 for the Coulter IDEAPitch, a business competition in front of what The Idea Village organizers describe as an invitation-only audience of ‘world-class investors’ focused on ventures with high growth prospects.” Wolfe told The Times-Picayune that “not getting paid is a central problem in construction. That is something that really strains the construction industry." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    OSHA Reinforces COVID Guidelines for the Workplace

    March 08, 2021 —
    On January 29, 2021, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) updated its existing guidelines concerning coronavirus protection measures for the workplace. Focusing on the implementation of workplace protection programs, OSHA’s updated advisory guidance seeks to reinforce the benefits of implementing workplace policies along with the critical role employees have in combatting workplace spread. These guidelines are “intended to inform employers and workers in most workplace settings outside of healthcare to help them identify risks of being exposed to and/or contracting COVID-19 at work and to help them determine appropriate control measures to implement.” OSHA maintains that the implementation of a strong coronavirus protection program is the most effective way to combat virus spread in the workplace. OSHA has identified 16 categories or elements that an effective coronavirus protection program should address, which include appointing a workplace coordinator and conducting a workplace specific hazard assessment. This assessment should begin by identifying risks in the workplace and developing control measures to mitigate them. The guidance stresses that workers are often the most valuable source of information relating to conditions that contribute to the risk of spread. Reprinted courtesy of Joseph P. Paranac Jr., White and Williams LLP and Robert M. Pettigrew, White and Williams LLP Mr. Paranac may be contacted at paranacj@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Pettigrew may be contacted at pettigrewr@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court Provides Guidance on ‘Pay-When-Paid’ Provisions in Construction Subcontracts

    July 13, 2020 —
    On April 17, the California Court of Appeal decided Crosno Construction, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty & Surety Company of America,1 effectively narrowing the scope of enforceable “pay-when-paid” provisions in construction subcontracts to the extent the subcontractor seeks recovery against a general contractor’s payment bond surety. Although the Crosno case involved a public works project, the rationale and holding should apply with equal force to private works projects. Basing the bulk of its decision on the Wm. R. Clarke Corp. v. Safeco Insurance Co.2 case, the court found that an open-ended “pay-when-paid” provision in a subcontract is not enforceable against a subcontractor that seeks to recover on a public works payment bond claim. This article discusses the Crosno decision and the implications for contractors on both sides of the contract moving forward. Brief Case Summary In Crosno, general contractor Clark Bros., Inc. contracted with the North Edwards Water District (the District) to build an arsenic removal water treatment plant. Clark hired steel storage tank subcontractor Crosno Construction, Inc. to build and coat two steel reservoir tanks. Clark and Crosno’s subcontract included a “pay-when-paid” provision, which stated that Clark would pay Crosno within a “reasonable time” of receiving payments from the owner, but “in no event less than the time Contractor and Subcontractor require to pursue to conclusion their legal remedies against Owner or other responsible party to obtain payment.” After Crosno completed its work, a dispute arose between Clark and the District, and the District withheld payment from Clark (including the monies earmarked for Clark’s subcontractors). Clark sued the District for payment, and Crosno filed its own action against Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America, the surety on Clark’s statutory public works payment bond, for recovery of the unpaid subcontract balance. Travelers rejected Crosno’s bond claim as premature, invoking the “pay-when-paid” subcontract language and pointing to Clark’s pending payment action against the District. The issue on appeal was whether the “pay-when-paid” provision in the subcontract blocked Crosno from recovering under the payment bond from Travelers while Clark’s lawsuit against the District was still pending. Reprinted courtesy of Ted R. Gropman, Pepper Hamilton LLP and Cindy J. Lee, Pepper Hamilton LLP Mr. Gropman may be contacted at ted.gropman@troutman.com Ms. Lee may be contacted at cindy.lee@troutman.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    EPA Announces Decision to Retain Current Position on RCRA Regulation of Oil and Gas Production Wastes

    June 03, 2019 —
    After much study, EPA has decided against changing its current RCRA Subtitle D rules affecting the state regulation of oil and gas exploration & production waste. Since 1988, EPA has determined that most such wastes should be regulated as only non-hazardous wastes subject to RCRA Subtitle D, and not the more onerous hazardous waste provisions of RCRA Subtitle C. (See the Regulatory Determination of Oil and Gas and Geothermal Exploration, Development and Production Wastes, 53 FR 25,446 (July 6,1988).) As a result, under the Subtitle D rules, the primary regulators of such waste are state regulatory agencies, which follow the state plan non-hazardous waste guidelines developed by EPA. This regulatory disposition has proven to be fairly controversial, and it was recently challenged in a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia: Environmental Integrity Project, et al. v. McCarthy. To settle this lawsuit, EPA and the plaintiffs entered into a consent decree by which EPA was to make certain determinations about the future of the program after conducting an appropriate study. That study, Management of Exploration, Development and Production Wastes: Factors Informing a Decision on the Need for Regulatory Action, has been completed, and it concludes, after a fairly comprehensive review of these state regulatory programs, that “revisions to the federal regulations for the management of E&P wastes under Subtitle D of RCRA (40 CFR Part 257) are not necessary at this time.” In a statement released on April 23, 2019, EPA accepted these findings and promised that it would continue to work with states and other stakeholders to identify areas for improvement and to address emerging issues to ensure that exploration, development and production wastes “continue to be managed in a manner that is protective of human health and the environment.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com