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


    Third Circuit Follows Pennsylvania Law - Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship Does Not Arise from an Occurrence

    Business Interruption Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    Update: Where Did That Punch List Term Come From Anyway?

    New Zealand Using Plywood Banned Elsewhere

    Ex-Corps Worker Pleads Guilty to Bribery on Afghan Contract

    California to Build ‘Total Disaster City’ for Training

    HUD Homeownership Push to Heed Lessons From Crisis, Castro Says

    Three Steps to a Safer Jobsite

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss "Redundant Claims" Denied

    The Argument for Solar Power

    Does Your U.S. Company Pull Data From European Citizens? Fall In Line With GDPR by May 2018 or Suffer Substantial Fines

    Res Judicata Bars Insured from Challenging Insurer's Use of Schedule to Deduct Depreciation from the Loss

    Axa Unveils Plans to Transform ‘Stump’ Into London Skyscraper

    Constructive Suspension (Suspension Outside of an Express Order)

    BHA Announces New Orlando Location

    North Miami Beach Rejects as Incomplete 2nd Engineering Inspection Report From Evacuated Condo

    Can Baltimore Get a Great Bridge?

    Wood Wizardry in Oregon: Innovation Raises the Roof for PDX Terminal

    Granting of Lodestar Multiplier in Coverage Case Affirmed

    Appellate Court Endorses Discretionary Test for Vicarious Disqualification of Law Firms Due To New Attorney’s Conflict

    Court of Appeal Opens Pandora’s Box on Definition of “Contractor” for Forum Selection Clauses

    Builder and County Tussle over Unfinished Homes

    Consequential Damages Flowing from Construction Defect Not Covered Under Florida Law

    PATH Station Designed by Architect Known for Beautiful Structures, Defects, and Cost Overruns

    Recent Regulatory Activity

    A Race to the Finish on Oroville Dam Spillway Fix

    The Contract Disputes Act: What Every Federal Government Contractor Should Know

    Fannie-Freddie Elimination Model in Apartments: Mortgages

    Construction Delays: Which Method Should Be Used to Calculate Delay?

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

    Thanks for Four Years of Recognition from JD Supra’s Readers’ Choice Awards

    Reminder: Quantum Meruit and Breach of Construction Contract Don’t Mix

    Daily Construction Reports: Don’t Leave the Job Without Them

    Tests Find Pollution From N.C. Coal Ash Site Hit by Florence Within Acceptable Levels

    Arizona Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Provision Relating to Statutory Authority for Constructing and Operating Sports and Tourism Complexes

    Wisconsin Federal Court Addresses Scope Of Appraisal Provision In Rental Dwelling Policy

    Suppliers of Inherently Dangerous Raw Materials Remain Excluded from the Protections of the Component Parts Doctrine

    Busting Major Alternative-Lending Myths

    Waiving Consequential Damages—What Could Go Wrong?

    Other Colorado Cities Looking to Mirror Lakewood’s Construction Defect Ordinance

    Atlanta Office Wins Defense Verdict For Property Manager On Claims By Vendor, Cross-Claims By Property Owner

    Time to Reform Construction Defect Law in Nevada

    Supreme Court of Kentucky Holds Plaintiff Can Recover for Stigma Damages in Addition to Repair Costs Resulting From Property Damage

    MBS’s $500 Billion Desert Dream Just Keeps Getting Weirder

    BWB&O Senior Associate Kyle Riddles and Associate Alexandria Heins Obtain a Trial Victory in a Multi-Million Dollar Case!

    Ortega Outbids Pros to Build $10 Billion Property Empire

    MTA Implements Revised Contractors Debarment Regulations

    Insurer’s Duty to Indemnify Not Ripe Until Underlying Lawsuit Against Insured Resolved

    Jersey City, New Jersey, to Get 95-Story Condo Tower

    What a Difference a Day Makes: Mississippi’s Discovery 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

    BofA Said to Near Mortgage Deal for Up to $17 Billion

    August 06, 2014 —
    Bank of America Corp. is nearing a $16 billion to $17 billion settlement with the U.S. Justice Department to resolve probes into sales of mortgage-backed bonds in the run-up to the financial crisis, a person familiar with the matter said. Under the proposed terms, the bank would pay about $9 billion in cash and the rest in consumer relief to settle federal and state claims, according to the person, who asked not to be named because the negotiations are private. Details of the proposed accord, such as the relief and a statement of facts, are still being negotiated, the person said. The outlines of the deal were reached last week after a phone call between Attorney General Eric Holder and Bank of America Chief Executive Officer Brian T. Moynihan, the person said. During the July 30 call, Holder said that the government was ready to file a lawsuit in New Jersey if the bank didn’t offer an amount closer to the department’s demand of about $17 billion, according to the person. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Schoenberg, Bloomberg
    Mr. Schoenberg may be contacted at tschoenberg@bloomberg.net

    Spearin Doctrine: Alive, Well and Thriving on its 100th Birthday

    January 15, 2019 —
    On December 9, 2018, United States v. Spearin, [1] a landmark construction law case, will be 100 years old. The Spearin “doctrine”[2] provides that the owner impliedly warrants the information, plans and specifications which an owner provides to a general contractor. The contractor will not be liable to the owner for loss or damage which results from insufficiencies or defects in such information, plans and specifications. Some construction lawyers questioned whether the Spearin doctrine was still viable in Washington after the Washington Court of Appeals decided the recent case of King County v. Vinci Constr. Grand Projets.[3] Some concerned contractor industry groups even considered a “statutory fix” in the wake of the Court of Appeals Vinci decision. It is our opinion that the facts in the Vinci case are distinguishable and the Spearin doctrine is alive and thriving in Washington. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at john.ahlers@acslawyers.com

    EPA Rejects Most of N.Y.’s $511 Million Tappan Zee Loan

    September 17, 2014 —
    A $511 million loan approved by a New York environmental agency to help fund the construction of a new $4 billion Tappan Zee Bridge was rejected almost entirely by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The loan was intended to drive down borrowing costs for the replacement span being built across the Hudson River, with half of it being provided at zero interest. The agency, the Environmental Facilities Corp., approved the borrowing in June, saying it could use the funds from a program that targets clean-water projects. The EPA said today in a letter to state officials that building a new bridge doesn’t fit the intention of the program, which is backed by federal dollars. The agency, citing the U.S. Clean Water Act, said only $29.1 million could be allowed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Freeman Klopott, Bloomberg
    Mr. Klopott may be contacted at fklopott@bloomberg.net

    Corps of Engineers to Prepare EIS for Permit to Construct Power Lines Over Historic James River

    May 01, 2019 —
    On March 1, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia decided National Parks Conservation Assoc. v. Todd T. Simonite, Lieutenant General, et al. The case involves an application to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) for a construction permit to build electric power lines over the “historic James River, from whose waters Captain John Smith explored the New World.” The Corps concluded after reviewing the thousands of comments submitted to it in connection with this application, and after considering the views of several government agencies and conservation groups, that an Environment Impact Statement (EIS) was not required, and that its Environmental Assessment assured the Corps that the project would not result is significant environmental impacts. The Court of Appeals has concluded that, based on this evidence, the Corps’ refusal to prepare an EIS thoroughly discussing all these points was arbitrary and capricious. The Corps has been ordered to prepare the EIS and to take special note of its obligations under the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), the Clean Water Act (CWA) and its obligations under the National Historic Preservation Act. 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

    Buffalo-Area Roof Collapses Threaten Lives, Businesses After Historic Snowfall

    December 05, 2022 —
    After a historical snowfall event in the Buffalo area this past week, residents weren’t just taking to the driveways and sidewalks to clear snow. In the Buffalo suburb of Orchard Park, New York (home to the NFL’s Buffalo Bills), the 80 inches of snow that accumulated was also cleared off local roofs in order to prevent a major danger to homes. Snow as deep and heavy as the recent lake-effect snowstorm can cause roofs to collapse, threatening the lives of people who live inside. An unfortunate scenario befell Buffalo in November 2014, when a 6-foot snow event known as “Snowvember” led to emergency calls for numerous collapsed roofs around the region. One Orchard Park business, Graffiti Grafix & Signs, had its roof collapse in 2014 and had about a third of the roof come down once again this past week, according to The Buffalo News. Orchard Park Police Chief Patrick Fitzgerald noted in an email that three commercial properties in Orchard Park, including Graffiti Grafix & Signs, suffered damage from roof collapse. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of AccuWeather

    Reasonable Expectations – Pennsylvania’s Case by Case Approach to the Sutton Rule

    February 12, 2024 —
    In Mutual Benefit Ins. Co. a/s/o Michael Sacks v. Koser, No. 1340 MDA 2023, 2023 Pa. Super. LEXIS 574, 2023 PA Super 252 (Mutual Benefit), the Superior Court of Pennsylvania discussed whether a landlord’s property insurer could file a subrogation action against tenants that had negligently damaged the landlord’s property. Despite there being more than one clause in the lease holding the tenants liable for the damages, the court held that because there was a provision requiring the landlord, not the tenants, to insure the leased building, the insurer could not subrogate against the tenants. In Pennsylvania, a tenant’s liability for damage to a leased premises in a subrogation action brought by a landlord’s insurer is determined by the reasonable expectation of the parties to the lease agreement. Under this approach, to determine if subrogation is permitted, the court considers the circumstances of the case and examines the terms of the lease agreement. In Mutual Benefit, the tenants leased and resided in a residential home pursuant to a lease agreement. The lease specifically addressed insurance, stating that landlord was responsible for obtaining insurance on the dwelling and the landlord’s personal property, and tenants were encouraged to procure separate insurance for their personal property. The lease also addressed liability for damage to the leased property, stating generally that the tenants were responsible for damage caused by the tenants’ negligence. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Kenney, White and Williams
    Ms. Kenney may be contacted at kenneyme@whiteandwilliams.com

    Improper Classification Under Davis Bacon Can Be Costly

    April 01, 2015 —
    The Department of Labor announced late last year that it had recovered nearly $2 million in back wages and fringe benefits from a subcontractor that provided constructions services at the federally funded Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project in the Nevada desert. This was not a failure to pay Davis Bacon wages, but a failure to properly classify laborers on the project. The DOL determined that the laborers should have been paid as skilled trade steelworkers, not general laborers. As the subcontractor found out, this proved very costly. The subcontractor submitted its bid, classifying its laborers as general laborers and designating their wage at $30.00. The laborers were to assemble billboard sized mirrors on the project. There is some indication that the Department of Energy agreed with the classification, even though the Department of Labor has the final say on classifications. The Department of Labor’s investigation revealed that the laborers routinely performed duties in skilled trades, such as ironworking, electrical work, painting or bridge crane operation. Based on these activities, the Department of Labor concluded that the laborers should have been paid $60.00 per hour plus fringe benefits. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    Congratulations to Haight’s 2021 Super Lawyers San Diego Rising Stars

    May 03, 2021 —
    Haight congratulates partners Michael Parme and Arezoo Jamshidi and associate Catherine Asuncion who were selected to the 2021 San Diego Super Lawyers Rising Stars list. Reprinted courtesy of Catherine M. Asuncion, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP, Arezoo Jamshidi, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Michael C. Parme, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Asuncion may be contacted at casuncion@hbblaw.com Ms. Jamshidi may be contacted at ajamshidi@hbblaw.com Mr. Parme may be contacted at mparme@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of