BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut multi family design 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


    Failure to Timely File Suit in Federal Court for Flood Loss is Fatal

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

    Record Keeping—the Devil’s in the Details

    Home Repair Firms Sued for Fraud

    Tennessee Looks to Define Improvements to Real Property

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    The Credibility of Your Expert (Including Your Delay Expert) Matters in Construction Disputes

    Too Costly to Be Fair: Texas Appellate Court Finds the Arbitration Clause in a Residential Construction Contract Unenforceable

    2017 California Employment Law Update

    No Coverage for Alleged Misrepresentation Claim

    Top 10 Take-Aways from the 2024 Annual Forum Meeting in New Orleans

    Where There's Smoke...California's New Emergency Wildfire Smoke Protection Regulation And What Employers Are Required To Do

    California Posts Nation’s Largest Gain in Construction Jobs

    Texas Supreme Court Rules That Subsequent Purchaser of Home Is Bound by Original Homeowner’s Arbitration Agreement With Builder

    Defective Stairways can be considered a Patent Construction Defect in California

    Insurer Prevails on Summary Judgment for Bad Faith Claim

    The Black Woman Architect Who Hopes to Change the Face of Design in America

    Federal Court Enforces “Limits” and “Most We Will Pay” Clauses in Additional Insured Endorsement

    Economic Damages Cannot be Based On Speculation

    Alabama Limits Duty to Defend for Construction Defects

    LAX Runway Lawsuit a Year Too Late?

    Order for Appraisal Affirmed After Insureds Comply with Post-Loss Obligations

    Court of Appeals Issues Decision Regarding Second-Tier Subcontractors and Pre-Lien Notice

    County Officials Refute Resident’s Statement that Defect Repairs Improper

    Pine Island Bridge in Place as Florida Pushes Barrier Island Access in Ian's Wake

    Washington State Enacts Law Restricting Non-Compete Agreements

    NY State Appellate Court Holds That Pollution Exclusions Bar Duty to Defend Under Liability Policies for Claims Alleging Exposure to PFAS

    French President Vows to Rebuild Fire-Collapsed Notre Dame Roof and Iconic Spire

    ADA Lawsuits Spur Renovation Work in Fresno Area

    How Long does a Florida Condo Association Have to File a Construction Defect Claim?

    Contractors Should Be Optimistic that the Best Value Tradeoff Process Will Be Employed by Civilian Agencies

    Amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 – Expert Testimony

    This Company Wants to Cut Emissions to Zero in the Dirty Cement Business

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation: A Redux

    No Duty to Defend Additional Insured for Construction Defects

    Housing Starts Fall as U.S. Single-Family Projects Decline

    Are You a Construction Lienor?

    And the Cyber-Beat Goes On. Yet Another Cyber Regulatory Focus for Insurers

    Trump, Infrastructure and the Construction Industry

    Get Construction Defects in Writing

    Revisiting OSHA’s Controlling Employer Policy

    Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Vexed by Low Demand for Mortgages

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

    Homebuilders Offer Hope for U.K. Economy

    Indiana Court Enforces Contract Provisions rather than Construction Drawing Markings

    The Relevance and Reasonableness of Destructive Testing

    Towards Paperless Construction: PaperLight

    Washington State Updates the Contractor Registration Statute

    Finding of No Coverage Overturned Due to Lack of Actual Policy

    Mexico Settles With Contractors for Canceled Airport Terminal
    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. Drawing 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

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: World Class Shopping Experiences

    May 03, 2018 —
    If you don’t want to venture far from the Disneyland Resort, consider heading to the Outlets at Orange. Formerly known as the Block of Orange, this open air shopping center features outlet stores such as Neiman Marcus Last Call, Nordstrom Rack, and Sax Fifth Avenue’s Off Fifth, as well as an AMC movie theater, restaurants, Lucky Strike Bowling Alley, and Dave and Buster’s. For another local option, head to the Brea Mall, where you can find department stores such as Macy’s and Nordstrom’s and a host of other stores like Apple, Guess, and Tommy Bahama. For a more exclusive shopping experience, travel to south Orange County's Fashion Island of Newport Beach. Their department stores include Bloomingdale’s, Macy’s, Neiman Marcus’s, and Nordstroms, and the shopping center also contains many boutique shops and eateries. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    ConsensusDOCS Updates its Forms

    October 21, 2015 —
    As reported recently in ENR Magazine, among other publications, the ConsensusDOCS folks have updated their contract forms. Why is this news? First of all, it’s only been around three and a half years since these documents were officially released and this release is about 18 months sooner than anticipated (the original revision cycle was to be 5 years). Why the revision? According to my friend and counsel to ConsensusDOCS, Brian Perlberg, one major rationale is that “the economics of the construction industry today looks nothing like it did [in 2007.” Among the changes are several terminology changes (“constructor” instead of “contractor” for instance), the addition of mandatory green building design as a basic service (these forms already have a Green Building Addendum) if included in the Owner’s plan and the ability to provide for prevailing party attorney fees (before both sides of a dispute bore their own fees). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Manhattan Bargain: Condos for Less Than $3 Million

    February 05, 2015 —
    When Related Cos. began selling condominiums at one of its former rental buildings last month, 50 people showed up in the first two days for an only-in-Manhattan bargain: almost all the homes cost less than $3 million. Carnegie Park, a 1980s-era rental property, was renovated as a condo building where one-bedroom apartments with 690 square feet (64 square meters) start at $765,000. The average price for all units is about $1,300 per square foot -- roughly 30 percent less than the average for a newly built Manhattan condo sold in the fourth quarter, according to appraiser Miller Samuel Inc. Reprinted courtesy of Oshrat Carmiel, Bloomberg LLP and Heather Perlberg, Bloomberg LLP Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Jersey Courts Speed Up Sandy Litigation

    September 03, 2014 —
    In order to deal with the thousand plus property damage cases related to Hurricane Sandy the “U.S. District Chief Judge Jerome Simandle of the District of New Jersey, who sits in Camden, N.J., issued a standing order dated Aug. 13 that, in effect, cuts in half the amount of time that arbitrators and mediators will have to hear disputes over coverage and issue rulings,” the New Jersey Law Journal reported. “John O’Brien, chief deputy of operations for New Jersey’s federal courts, said that, as of Wednesday, 1,240 Sandy-related lawsuits had been filed in New Jersey and that 1,051 of those cases are still pending,” according to the New Jersey Law Journal. “Sixty of those pending cases have been referred to mediation and another six have been sent to arbitration panels, according to O’Brien.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Pulled from the Swamp: EPA Wetland Determination Now Judicially Reviewable

    September 15, 2016 —
    Landowners and developers bogged in an EPA wetland determination were recently thrown a life line when the United States Supreme Court determined The Army Corps of Engineer’s (Corps) “jurisdictional determinations” (JD) regarding wetland designations are reviewable by the court. United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co. Inc. Under the Clean Water Act (CWA) landowners and developers who do not have the proper permits can face severe criminal and civil penalties for releasing any pollutant into “the waters of the United States.” Anybody stuck wading through the permitting process will tell you it is difficult, time consuming, expensive, and may eventually prohibit the intended use of the property. Furthermore, there is yet to be a consensus on the definition or scope of the term “waters of the US”. Consequently, a landowners or developers may never be certain whether a permit is necessary before conducting any activity that may discharge a pollutant into a “water of the United States”. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sean Minahan, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Minahan may be contacted at sminahan@ldmlaw.com

    An Interesting Look at Mechanic’s Lien Priority and Necessary Parties

    May 13, 2019 —
    As regular readers of Construction Law Musings are well aware, I like to discuss mechanic’s liens. Whether it is their picky nature, the way court’s treat them or the soon to take effect changes in the form, mechanic’s liens are a topic near and dear to my heart as a construction attorney. This past month the Fairfax Circuit Court took on the intersection of mechanic’s lien priority under Virginia Code section 43-21 (the lien priority statute) and what constitute necessary parties that must be named in any enforcement suit. In Marines Plumbing, LLC v. Durbin, et al., the Court discussed an all too typical scenario. Marines Plumbing performed repair work on the defendants’ property and the defendants did not pay for the work. Marines Plumbing recorded a memorandum of lien and subsequently sued to enforce that lien. In filing its suit, Marines Plumbing failed to name the trustees and lender on a deed of trust securing the loan on the property. Needless to say, the Defendants moved to dismiss the action for failure to name necessary parties (lender and trustees). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Federal Contractors Should Request Debriefings As A Matter Of Course

    May 30, 2018 —
    Federal Contractors—especially those engaging in FAR Part 15 direct contract negotiations—should make it a routine practice to timely request debriefings after the Contracting Agency excludes the bidder from the competitive range (“pre-award debriefing”) or after the Agency issues the award (“post-award debriefing”). Debriefings allow the Contractor to understand the evaluation process used by the Contracting Agency and to receive an assessment of how it fared in that evaluation. This is not a one-sided presentation as Contracting Agencies are required to answer the contractor’s relevant questions about the decision-making process. Properly run debriefings can be used to better tailor future bids and negotiations, as further marketing to the Contracting Agency for future awards, and, occasionally, to unearth grounds for a potential protest if any part of the evaluation process is out of sync with the FARs. In the event the contractor learns of a basis for protest at the debriefing, the deadline to file a protest begins running from the date of the debriefing—whether it was required or not. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott MacDonald, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. MacDonald may be contacted at scott.macdonald@acslawyers.com

    EPA Will Soon Issue the Latest Revision to the Risk Management Program (RMP) Chemical Release Rules

    February 10, 2020 —
    On November 21, 2019, EPA released a pre-publication copy of its Reconsideration of the revised Risk Management Program (RMP) Rules. In an accompanying statement, the agency noted that it has taken steps to “modify and improve” the existing rule to remove burdensome, costly and unnecessary requirements while maintaining appropriate protection (against accidental chemical releases) and ensuring responders have access to all of the necessary safety information. This action was taken in response to EPA’s January 13, 2017 revisions that significantly expanded the chemical release prevention provisions the existing RMP rules in the wake of the disastrous chemical plant explosion in West, Texas. The Reconsideration will take effect upon its publication in the Federal Register. Background As recounted by the D. C. Circuit in its August 2018 decision in the case of Air Alliance Houston, et al. v. EPA, in 1990, the Congress amended the Clean Air Act to force the regulation of hazardous air pollutants (see 42 USC Section 7412). An initial list of these hazardous air pollutants was also published, at Section 7412 (b). Section 112(r) (codified at 42 USC Section 7412 (r)), authorized EPA to develop a regulatory program to prevent or minimize the consequences of a release of a listed chemical from a covered stationary source. EPA was directed to propose and promulgate release prevention, detection, and correction requirements applicable to stationary sources (such as plants) that store or manage these regulated substances in amounts determined to be above regulated threshold quantities. EPA promulgated these rules in 1996 (see 61 FR 31668). The rules, located at 40 CFR Part 68, contain several separate subparts devoted to hazard assessments, prevention programs, emergency response, accidental release prevention, the development and registration of a Risk Management Plan, and making certain information regarding the release publicly available. EPA notes that over 12.000 RMP plans have been filed with the agency. In January 2017, in response to the catastrophe in West, EPA issued substantial amendments to these rules, covering accident prevention (expanding post-accident investigations, more rigorous safety audits, and enhanced safety training), revised emergency response requirements, and enhanced public information disclosure requirements. (See 82 FR 4594 (January 13, 2017).) However, the new administration at EPA, following the submission of several petitions for reconsideration of these revised rules, issued a “Delay Rule” on June 14, 2017, which would have extended the effective date of the January 2107 rules until February 19, 2019. On August 17, 2018, the Delay Rule was rejected and vacated by the D.C. Circuit in the aforementioned Air Alliance case (see 906 F. 3d 1049 (DC Circuit 2018)), which had the effect of making the hotly contested January 2017 RMP revisions immediately effective. 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