BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction 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


    High Court Case Review Frees Jailed Buffalo Billions Contractor CEO

    Fixing That Mistake

    Five Facts About Housing That Will Make People In New York City and San Francisco Depressed

    A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules

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

    Equitable Lien Designed to Prevent Unjust Enrichment

    Topic 606: A Retrospective Review of Revenue from Contracts with Customers

    Heavy Rains Cause Flooding, Mudslides in Japan

    Is an Initial Decision Maker, Project Neutral, or Dispute Resolution Board Right for You?

    Burden of Proof Under All-Risk Property Insurance Policy

    When it Comes to Trials, it’s Like a Box of Chocolates. Sometimes You Get the Icky Cream Filled One

    Port Authority Revises Plans for $10B Midtown NYC Bus Terminal Replacement

    Implications for Industry as Supreme Court Curbs EPA's Authority

    When Do Hard-Nosed Negotiations Become Coercion? Or, When Should You Feel Unlucky?

    Nevada Supreme Court Rejects Class Action Status, Reducing Homes from 1000 to 71

    Subcontractor Not Estopped from Enforcing Lien Not Listed In Bankruptcy Petition

    Design Immunity Does Not Shield Public Entity From Claim That it Failed to Warn of a Dangerous Condition

    2017 Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure

    Even Fraud in the Inducement is Tough in Construction

    Labor Under the Miller Act And Estoppel of Statute of Limitations

    Is it the End of the Lease-Leaseback Shootouts? Maybe.

    Winter COVID-19 Relief Bill: Overview of Key Provisions

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

    Firm Sued for Stopping Construction in Indiana Wants Case Tried in Germany

    Alabama Court Determines No Coverage For Insured's Faulty Workmanship

    Expect the Unexpected (Your Design Contracts in a Post-COVID World)

    Contractor Gets Green Light to Fix Two Fractured Girders at Salesforce Transit Center

    Another Way a Mechanic’s Lien Protects You

    U.K. Broadens Crackdown on Archaic Property Leasehold System

    Liebherr Claims Crane Not Cause of Brazil Stadium Construction Accident

    Construction Spending Had Strongest Increase in Four Years

    Green Energy Can Complicate Real Estate Foreclosures

    More Broad-Based Expansion for Construction Industry Expected in 2015

    No Coverage for Building's First Collapse, But Disputed Facts on Second Collapse

    California Homeowners Can Release Future, Unknown Claims Against Builders

    Vinci Will Build $580M Calgary Project To Avoid Epic Flood Repeat

    Intentionally Set Atlanta Interstate Fire Closes Artery Until June

    San Diego Developer Strikes Out on “Disguised Taking” Claim

    New Pedestrian, Utility Bridge Takes Shape on Everett Waterfront

    A “Supplier to a Supplier” on a California Construction Project Sometimes Does Have a Right to a Mechanics Lien, Stop Payment Notice or Payment Bond Claim

    Construction Contract Clauses That May or May Not Have Your Vote – Part 3

    Mitigation, Restructuring and Bankruptcy: Small Business Tools in the Era of COVID-19

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/10/23) – Wobbling Real Estate, Booming (and Busting) Construction, and Eye-Watering Insurance Premiums

    Construction Law Alert: Unlicensed Contractors On Federal Projects Entitled To Payment Under The Miller Act

    Wyoming Supreme Court Picks a Side After Reviewing the Sutton Rule

    Michigan Lawmakers Pass $4.7B Infrastructure Spending Bill

    DC Wins Largest-Ever Civil Penalty in US Housing Discrimination Suit

    Building Supplier Sued for Late and Defective Building Materials

    Quick Note: Charting Your Contractual Rights With Respect To The Coronavirus
    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

    Incorporation, Indemnity and Statutes of Limitations, Oh My!

    January 19, 2017 —
    We all know that the contract is king in Virginia. We also know that Virginia will allow for a so called “incorporation” clause that will allow for “flow down” of certain prime contract provisions in a way that will make those provisions applicable to subcontractors. We also know that a claim for breach of contract or other contractual claim does not last forever due to certain statutes of limitation found in the Code of Virginia. What happens when all of these elements crash together in one place leading to litigation? Well, a relatively recent case from the Virginia Supreme Court gives at least a partial answer. In Hensel Phelps Construction Company v Thompson Masonry Contractor, Inc, the Virginia Supreme Court considered a claim that arose from construction at Virginia Tech by Hensel Phelps. The construction concluded in 1998 (remember that date). The Prime Contract included language concerning a one year “Guarantee of Work” as well as fairly typical Warranty of Workmanship” language. However the Prime Contract also stated that the one year guaranty term did nothing to affect any other limitations period for any other action pursuant to the Prime Contract (this is important as well because Virginia Tech was not subject to any statute of limitations due to its status as an agency of the Commonwealth of Virginia). Final payment was made to Hensel Phelps and subsequently to the subcontractors in 1999. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    November 18, 2011 —

    Although most are unlikely to change the Boston skyline, there are several large projects on the drawing boards. The site BostInnovation covered ten of them in a recent post. Downtown Boston will be the site of several of these large projects, including three towers to be added to the Christian Science Plaza, a 404-unit residential tower in the Theater District, and perhaps the largest of these projects, a 47-story tower to be built over Copley Plaza, which will tower over the adjacent buildings. None of the planned buildings will challenge the Hancock Tower’s 60 stories.

    Read the full story…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court Finds No Coverage for Workplace “Prank” With Nail Gun

    April 04, 2022 —
    In the recent case of Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Burby, 2022 NY Slip Op 22070, ¶ 1 (Sup. Ct.) Justice Richard M. Platkin of the Supreme Court of Albany County, New York examined a homeowners insurance policy and determined that a duty to defend was triggered in a case seeking recovery for injuries sustained when the insured, Burby allegedly discharged a nail gun in the bathroom of a work facility at which both Burby and the underlying plaintiff worked. Burby pled guilty to assault in the third degree for recklessly causing physical injury. MetLife, Burby’s carrier, disclaimed coverage based on lack of an occurrence, the business activities exclusion and the intentional loss exclusion, which bars coverage for injuries expected or intended by the insured or injuries that are the result of the insured’s intentional and criminal acts or omissions. Justice Platkin initially reviewed the intentional loss exclusion and lack of an occurrence and found that, from a duty to defend perspective, neither provided a dispositive coverage defense. However, the court found that the broadly worded business activities exclusion, which was not the subject of MetLife’s motion and instead was the subject of a cross motion by Burby, applied to bar coverage. In doing so, the court searched the record and granted summary judgment on the issue, despite MetLife not moving for relief under the exclusion. With respect to the expected or intended prong of the intentional loss exclusion, the court found that, even if Burby did intend to pull the trigger of the nail gun, it was not pled in the underlying complaint that the harm that resulted to the plaintiff was expected or intended. As such, the court concluded that MetLife did not prove that there was no possible factual or legal basis upon which it could be found that Burby did not reasonably expect or intend to cause injury to the plaintiff. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com

    Bid Bonds: The First Preventative Measure for Your Project

    September 03, 2019 —
    For this week’s Guest Post Friday, Construction Law Musings welcomes Danielle Rodabaugh. Danielle is a principal for Surety Bonds.com, an agency that issues surety bonds to individuals and businesses across the nation. She writes articles to clarify bonding rules and regulations for those who have a stake in the surety bond industry–from contractors to telemarketers, and every professional in between. In construction we often value performance and payment bonds when considering how to protect the financial investments put into a project. We do so because these bonds provide a legal financial guarantee that the selected contractor will fulfill the contract. However, a third, equally protective kind of construction bond is often overlooked. Before an official contract has been agreed to and successfully executed, bid bonds guarantee that the selected low-bidder will officially enter into the contract at a later date. Bidders must submit a bid bond with their bid. Without doing so, the bidder becomes non-responsive–or an invalid candidate. Sometimes we overlook the benefits provided by this kind of Virginia surety bond, and yet they frequently act as the only legal protection for a project prior to groundbreaking. 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

    A Court-Side Seat: Environmental Developments on the Ninth Circuit

    July 13, 2020 —
    On May 26, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided three significant environmental law cases. Two of these cases involved whether global warming tort cases could be brought in California state courts on, for example, a public nuisance claim, and whether the defendant energy companies had the right to have them removed to the federal courts. County of San Mateo, et al. v. Chevron Corp., et al. and City of Oakland v. BP PLC, et al. While acknowledging the immensity of the legal issues, the Ninth Circuit held that the federal removal statutes did not permit these cases to be removed to the federal courts. For one thing, state court jurisdiction was not preempted by the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, the court affirmed the ruling of Federal Judge Chhabria in the Chevron case, and vacated Judge Alsup’s ruling in the BP case that he had jurisdiction to hear this case pursuant to federal common law, and then to dismiss it. The court also remanded the case to Judge Alsup, and directed him to determine if there was an “alternate basis” for federal court jurisdiction based on the pleadings that an issue of ”navigable waters” was a concern. 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

    Additional Insured Prevails on Summary Judgment For Duty to Defend, Indemnify

    October 02, 2015 —
    On summary judgment, the insured general contractor prevailed not only on the duty to defend, but also the duty to indemnify. Wausau Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Old Republic Gen. Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103954 (S.D. N. Y. Aug. 7, 2015). 170 Broadway entered into a construction management agreement with McGowan Builders Inc. to serve as its construction manager for a hotel being built in Manhattan. Under the agreement, McGowan obtained a general liability policy from Old Republic naming 170 Broadway as an additional insured. 170 Broadway also secured its own policy from Wausau. Adam Burawski, an employee of a security company, came to the 170 Broadway site to meet with McGowan about provided security services for the project. Before the meeting, Burawski tripped and fell, sustaining a serious injury. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Hurricane Ian: Florida Expedites Road Work as Damage Comes Into Focus

    October 10, 2022 —
    Hurricane Ian’s devastation is coming into view days after the storm decimated southwest Florida. Work is underway to rebuild much of the state’s electrical, transportation and other infrastructure, with certain emergency road repairs expedited and restoration of power prioritized after the storm's devastation left millions in the dark and washed out roadways serving as the only access to barrier islands such as Sanibel Island and Pine Island. Reprinted courtesy of Derek Lacey, Engineering News-Record Mr. Lacey may be contacted at laceyd@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A UK Bridge That Is a Lesson on How to Build Infrastructure

    November 15, 2017 —
    This country’s infrastructure—bridges, airports, dams and levees—needs wide-scale repair and renewal. The United Kingdom’s new Queensferry Crossing bridge, connecting Edinburgh to Fife in Scotland, sets a new standard for how to do it. The result speaks for itself: The Queensferry Crossing, a three-tower, 1.7-mile-long cable-stayed bridge, debuted in early September well within budget and a manageable eight-month time delay—a rare occurrence among bridges. According to research at the University of Oxford’s Saïd Business School, nine out of 10 fixed links (bridges and tunnels) suffer an average cost overrun of 34% and a time delay of roughly two years. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cameron J. Bell, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com