BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction 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


    Affordable Housing, Military Contracts and Mars: 3D Printing Construction Potential Builds

    Grenfell Fire Probe Faults Construction Industry Practices

    California Court of Appeal Adopts Horizontal Exhaustion Rule

    Five New Laws to Know Before They Take Effect On Jan. 1, 2022

    New York Court Finds Insurers Cannot Recover Defense Costs Where No Duty to Indemnify

    Court Strikes Expert Opinion That Surety Acted as a “De Facto Contractor”

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

    Practical Advice: Indemnification and Additional Insured Issues Revisited

    How Retro-Commissioning Can Extend the Life of a Building—and the Planet

    Construction Executives Expect Improvements in the Year Ahead

    California Supreme Court Hands Victory to Private Property Owners Over Public Use

    California Court Forces Insurer to Play Ball in COVID-19 Insurance Coverage Suit

    South Carolina Legislature Defines "Occurrence" To Include Property Damage Arising From Faulty Workmanship

    Peckar & Abramson Once Again Recognized Among Construction Executive’s “Top 50 Construction Law Firms™”

    Aecmaster’s Digital Twin: A New Era for Building Design

    1 De Haro: A Case Study on Successful Cross-Laminated Timber Design and Construction in San Francisco

    How Contractors Can Prevent Fraud in Their Workforce

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    How Helsinki Airport Uses BIM to Create the Best Customer Experience

    Construction Defect Risks Shifted to Insurers in 2013

    Public Law Center Honors Snell & Wilmer Partner Sean M. Sherlock As Volunteers For Justice Attorney Of The Year

    Complying With Data Breach Regulations in the Construction Industry

    Insurance Law Alert: California Supreme Court Limits Advertising Injury Coverage for Disparagement

    Heat Exposure Safety and Risk Factors

    Apartment Building Damaged by Cable Installer’s Cherry Picker

    Remembering Joseph H. Foster

    Recent Developments Involving Cedell v. Farmers Insurance Company of Washington

    Amazon HQ2 Puts Concrete on an Embodied Carbon Diet

    Florida Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Homeowners Unaware of Construction Defects and Lack of Permits

    How Will Today’s Pandemic Impact Tomorrow’s Construction Contracts?

    Anti-Concurrent, Anti-Sequential Causation Clause Precludes Coverage

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (06/28/23) – Combating Homelessness, U.S. Public Transportation Costs and the Future of Commercial Real Estate

    Packard Condominiums Settled with Kosene & Kosene Residential

    Gordie Howe Bridge Project Team Looks for a Third Period Comeback

    4 Breakthrough Panama Canal Engineering Innovations

    Trade Contract Revisions to Address COVID-19

    English v. RKK- There is Even More to the Story

    Diggin’ Ain’t Easy: Remember to Give Notice Before You Excavate in California

    Chicago Makes First Major Update to City's Building Code in 70 Years

    Park Avenue Is About to Get Something It Hasn’t Seen in 40 Years

    Restoring the USS Alabama: Surety Lessons From an 80-Year-Old Battleship

    Sacramento’s Commercial Construction Market Heats Up

    Nevada Bill Would Bring Changes to Construction Defects

    Lightstone Committing $2 Billion to Hotel Projects

    Intricacies of Business Interruption Claim Considered

    Entire Fairness or Business Judgment? It’s Anyone’s Guess

    Where-Forum Art Thou? Is the Chosen Forum Akin to No Forum at All?

    U.K. Construction Resumes Growth Amid Resurgent Housing Activity

    Wearable Ways to Work in Extreme Heat

    Guilty Pleas Draw Renewed Interest In Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws
    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

    Construction Firm Settles Suit Over 2012 Calif. Wildfire

    January 15, 2019 —
    SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Officials say a construction company and a logging firm have collectively agreed to pay $9 million for damages resulting from a 2012 wildfire that burned more than 1,600 acres of national forest land in Northern California. The U.S. Attorney's office in Sacramento says Monday that the agreement settles a lawsuit brought by the federal government against Kernen Construction and Bundy & Sons Logging. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Proposed Legislation for Losses from COVID-19 and Limitations on the Retroactive Impairment of Contracts

    July 27, 2020 —
    The COVID-19 pandemic has caused most businesses to temporarily close and, as a result, sustain significant losses. Various states are contemplating the passage of legislation to require carriers to cover claims arising from COVID-19, but case law regarding the constitutionality of such legislation is conflicting. Depending on the facts surrounding retroactive legislation, states may be able to pass an enforceable law leading to coverage. Pennsylvania’s Proposed Legislation for Business Interruption Losses Pennsylvania is one of many states that has proposed legislation to override language in business interruption policies and require coverage from insurance carriers. Pennsylvania House Bill 2372 proposes that any insurance policy that covers loss or property damage, including loss of use and business interruption, must cover the policyholder’s losses from the COVID-19 pandemic.1 It applies to insureds with fewer than 100 employees.2 To enhance its chances to pass constitutional challenges, the House Bill also provides for potential relief and reimbursement through the state’s commissioner.3 Pennsylvania Senate Bill 1127 is broader than House Bill 2372 and most bills proposed in other states and would require indemnification for nearly all insureds.4 The Senate Bill makes important legislative findings and notes that insurance is a regulated industry.5 It essentially provides that an insurance policy insuring against a loss relating to property damage, including business interruption, shall be construed to cover loss or property damage due to COVID-19 or due to a civil authority order resulting from COVID-19.1 The proposed bill redefines “property damage” to include: (1) the presence of a person positively identified as having been infected with COVID-19; (2) the presence of at least one person positively identified as having been infected with COVID-19 in the same municipality where the property is located; or (3) the presence of COVID-19 having otherwise been detected in Pennsylvania. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shaia Araghi, Newmeyer Dillion
    Ms. Araghi may be contacted at shaia.araghi@ndlf.com

    Texas Jury Finds Presence of SARS-CoV-2 Virus Causes “Physical Loss or Damage” to Property, Awards Over $48 Million to Baylor College of Medicine

    September 26, 2022 —
    A Texas jury has found that the presence of SARS-CoV-2 virus on the property of Baylor College of Medicine (BCM) caused “physical loss or damage” and resulting economic loss, triggering coverage under BCM’s commercial property insurance program. The jury awarded BCM over $48 million following a three-day trial; the award consisted of $42.8 million in business interruption, $3.3 million in extra expense, and $2.3 million in damage to research projects. The verdict came after the court denied the insurers’ pre-trial motion for summary judgment, rejecting the insurers’ contention that a virus cannot—as a matter of law—cause physical loss or damage to property. In denying the motion, the court held that whether the presence of the virus causes physical loss or damage presents a question of fact for the jury to resolve; a copy of the order rejecting the insurers’ summary judgment argument can be found here. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Kevin V. Small, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Small may be contacted at ksmall@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Extreme Weather Events Show Why the Construction Supply Chain Needs a Risk-Management Transformation

    July 24, 2023 —
    A perfect storm of recent extreme weather events has exposed the fragility of North America’s construction supply chains amid an increasingly fluctuating, fast-changing risk landscape. Supply chains that were already reeling from resurgent demand for raw materials coming out of the pandemic have been further disrupted by major storms such as recent tornados in Arkansas and Mississippi. Such events can have a ripple effect across many distinct supply lines as exemplified when the 2021 Texas freeze caused railroad closures and knocked out both petrochemical and semiconductor plants, causing shortages that affected construction and many other industries. The wide-ranging reverberations from these events demonstrate how stakeholders across all stages of capital projects increasingly share common vulnerabilities. Crucially, the way in which disruption from extreme weather events has caused project delays and cost overruns shows how time, cost and scope are increasingly interlinked and equally vulnerable to systemic risks. Traditional project-management methods where risks are not collectively managed and mitigated by all stakeholders are becoming increasingly inadequate, as risks to cost, time and scope are often considered in isolation. The domino effect of supply-chain disruption across capital projects similarly shows the inadequacy of project-management models where suppliers are not afforded a key stake in the project (or sometimes even a seat at the planning table). This traditional model cannot adapt to sudden, systemic risks that disrupt multiple suppliers and ripple out across all stakeholders, deliverables and project-management metrics. Reprinted courtesy of Brad Barth, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Texas Storm – Guidance for Contractors

    March 08, 2021 —
    The Texas snow and ice storm of February 2021 will long be remembered. It has affected everyone across the State, and its impacts continue to be felt a week later. This Alert provides the construction industry with guidance and recommendations for navigating commercial risk resulting from the storm. The potential impacts to your projects may be wide reaching. Consequences on a project site can include damage to the site, delays to work from the storm or from government orders, or simply the lack of help from trades who are dealing with serious personal catastrophes. Offsite impacts can cover a much broader scope of issues, including supply production issues or transportation interruptions. So, what can contractors facing such impacts do to avoid losses, mitigate the impacts, and prepare for what’s to come? Reprinted courtesy of Curtis W. Martin, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Paulo Flores, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@pecklaw.com Mr. Flores may be contacted at PFlores@Pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Public Projects in the Pandemic Pandemonium

    September 07, 2020 —
    Despite the ongoing pandemic, states are opening up for business and establishing a new normal. This determination to move forward includes pushing public transportation projects full steam ahead. While this may be good news for certain industries, it may not be for commercial property owners hoping to see a slow down to public projects and avoid a taking of private property. As many grapple with new economic realities, we examine the approaches employed by states in the southeast to manage construction of public projects in this unprecedented time. GEORGIA The Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) is moving forward with all of its previously funded public projects, including the massive I-285 Top-End Project, designated as a “Major Mobility Project” for the Atlanta metro region. Affecting approximately 260 property owners along I-285 and Georgia Highway 400, environmental review of the project continues. GDOT anticipates a contract let date in 2022 and construction start in 2023. Like ocean liners, these projects don’t turn on a dime. Under the 2015 Transportation Funding Act, the budgeted funds cannot be shifted to other needs or projects due to economic shutdown. Once environmental review is complete, GDOT will approve the final design and move toward acquiring right-of-way from affected property owners. Reprinted courtesy of Ashlynn E. Hutton, Michael J. Crook & Christian F. Torgrimson, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    April 06, 2020 —
    Smith Currie provides this update regarding the Families First Coronavirus Response Act as part of its continuing effort to monitor developments concerning the Coronavirus disease (“COVID-19”) and provide guidance as to potential issues that may arise in businesses across the United States. On March 18, 2020, President Trump signed into law the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (the “Act”), which contains provisions requiring certain private employers to provide paid leave to employees who cannot work because of Coronavirus, expanding Family and Medical Leave Act coverage, providing for federal tax credits to affected employers, and providing eligible states the ability to further fund their unemployment trust fund accounts. The Act is effective as of April 2, 2020 and will remain in place through December 31, 2020. Below, we provide a summary of the Act and several of its key components, including the Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act (“EFMLEA”), the Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act, and the Emergency Unemployment Insurance Stabilization and Access Act. Reprinted courtesy of Smith Currie attorneys Donald A. Velez, Karissa L. Fox and Sarah K. Carpenter Mr. Velez may be contacted at davelez@smithcurrie.com Ms. Fox may be contacted at klfox@smithcurrie.com Ms. Carpenter may be contacted at skcarpenter@smithcurrie.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Kushners Abandon Property Bid as Pressures Mount Over Conflicts

    May 10, 2017 —
    A company owned by the family of Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, has abandoned plans to buy a sprawling industrial site in New Jersey from Honeywell International Inc., a major federal contractor, and develop it into a residential community. Kushner Cos. had been the leading bidder for the 95-acre formerly contaminated site known as Bayfront, which is co-owned by Honeywell and Jersey City, city officials said. The company had submitted plans to build as many as 8,100 housing units to be marketed to Orthodox Jewish residents of the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn who are being priced out of that neighborhood. Last fall, the Kushners bid about $150 million, tens of millions higher than competitors, according to people involved in the negotiations. Honeywell heard from others who would only make an offer once the environmental approvals for the cleaned-up site were final. So the bidding is scheduled to reopen later this year and Kushner Cos. had been expected to continue in the process, the people said. But on Tuesday, when Bloomberg News asked about Bayfront, company spokesman James Yolles said the Kushners are no longer pursuing the project. He wouldn’t elaborate or explain. Reprinted courtesy of David Kocieniewski, Bloomberg and Caleb Melby, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of