BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut engineering consultant
    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


    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Title Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Coverage for Post-Completion Defects

    Georgia Court of Appeals Holds That Policyholder Can “Stack” the Limits of Each Primary Policy After Asbestos Claim

    Ninth Circuit Finds Policy’s Definition of “Policy Period” Fatal to Insurer’s “Related Claims” Argument

    The Clock is Ticking: Construction Delays and Liquidated Damages

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/24/24) – Long-Term Housing Issues in Hawaii, Underperforming REITs, and Growth in a Subset of the Hotel Sector

    Slowing Home Sales Show U.S. Market Lacks Momentum: Economy

    Congratulations to Partner Madeline Arcellana on Her Selection as a Top Rank Attorney in Nevada!

    Hurry Up and Wait! Cal/OSHA Hits Pause on Emergency Temporary Standards for COVID-19 Prevention

    "On Second Thought"

    Miami's Condo Craze Burns Out on Strong Dollar

    Washington State Updates the Contractor Registration Statute

    Insurance Telematics and Usage Based Insurance Products

    As the Term Winds Down, Several Important Regulatory Cases Await the U.S. Supreme Court

    UPDATE - McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court

    Nine Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Recognized as Southern California Super Lawyers

    Kushner Company Files Suit Against Jersey City Over Delays to Planned Towers

    CDJ’s #4 Topic of the Year: KB Home Greater Los Angeles, Inc. v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County

    When an Intentional Act Results in Injury or Damage, it is not an Accident within the Meaning of an Insurance Policy Even When the Insured did not Intend to Cause the Injury or Damage

    Alaska Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C-" Grade

    Wyncrest Commons: Commonly Used Progress Payments in Construction Contracts Do Not Render Them Installment Contracts

    Jean Nouvel’s NYC ‘Vision Machine’ Sued Over Construction Defects

    Constructive Suspension (Suspension Outside of an Express Order)

    Attorneys’ Fees and the American Arbitration Association Rule

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    Construction Defect Lawsuits May Follow Hawaii Condo Boom

    Vertical vs. Horizontal Exhaustion – California Supreme Court Issues Ruling Favorable to Policyholders

    Wichita Condo Association Files Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Trump’s Infrastructure Weak

    URGENT: 'Catching Some Hell': Hurricane Michael Slams Into Florida

    Five-Year Peak for Available Construction Jobs

    Recent Changes in the Law Affecting Construction Defect Litigation

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twenty White and Williams Lawyers

    DE Confirms Robust D&O Protection Despite Company Demise

    Hunton Insurance Practice, Partners Recognized by The Legal 500

    Emerging World Needs $1.5 Trillion for Green Buildings, IFC Says

    Dorian Lashes East Canada, Then Weakens Heading Out to Sea

    FEMA, Congress Eye Pre-Disaster Funding, Projects

    Insured's Failure to Challenge Trial Court's Application of Exclusion Makes Appeal Futile

    Mortgage Bonds Stare Down End of Fed Easing as Gains Persist

    Make Prudent Decisions regarding your Hurricane Irma Property Damage Claims

    Certifying Claim Under Contract Disputes Act

    Drill Rig Accident Kills Engineering Manager, Injures Operator in Philadelphia

    Statute of Limitations and Bad Faith Claims: Factors to Consider

    The Hazards of Carrier-Specific Manuscript Language: Ohio Casualty's Off-Premises Property Damage and Contractors' E&O Endorsements

    Don’t Do this When it Comes to Construction Liens

    How to Challenge a Project Labor Agreement

    One More Thing Moving From California to Texas: Wildfire Risk

    Connecticut Federal District Court Keeps Busy With Collapse Cases

    Risk-Shifting Tactics for Construction Contracts
    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

    Cincinnati Team Secures Summary Judgment for Paving Company in Trip-and-Fall Case

    February 05, 2024 —
    Cincinnati, Ohio (January 25, 2024) - In a recent decision by the Oldham County Circuit Court, Lewis Brisbois Partner Andrew Weber and Associate Jason Paskan obtained summary judgment for a paving company client after successfully arguing that their client did not owe the plaintiff a duty at the time leading up to her trip and fall. Although the court concluded that there was a genuine issue of fact as to whether a parking space wheel stop actually caused her fall, the court noted that whether the wheel stop “constituted an unreasonably dangerous condition necessitating a duty to eliminate them or warn of them is an entirely different matter.” Rebecca Reynolds v. Baptist Healthcare System, Inc., et al., Oldham Circuit Court Case No. 21-CI-00236, *6 (Dec. 21, 2023). The plaintiff in Reynolds drove to the hospital with her sister-in-law for medical testing. Id. at * 2. While both had been to the hospital before, due to COVID and construction in the emergency department, they had to take a different entrance into the hospital. Id. In the plaintiff’s attempt to navigate the parking lot, she allegedly tripped over a black wheel stop that was covered by a shadow. Id. The plaintiff sued the hospital as the landowner and the paving company working in the hospital’s parking lot, among others, under the theory that the failure to stripe the wheel stop, closing off spaces with the black wheel stops, or posting warnings about the condition of the parking lot would have prevented her fall. Id. at *2-3. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 Not Just for Individual Homeowners Anymore?

    March 22, 2017 —
    On March 9, 2017, the Colorado Court of Appeals announced its decision in Broomfield Senior Living Owner, LLC v. R.G. Brinkmann Company, No. 16CA0101, 2017 COA 31 (Colo. App. Mar. 9, 2017). As a matter of first impression, the Court evaluated whether a senior living facility constitutes “residential property” protected by the Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 ("HPA") provision of the Construction Defect Reform Act (CDARA). In 2007, Plaintiff Broomfield entered into a contract with Defendant Brinkmann for construction of a senior assisted and independent living facility. The contract contained warranty provisions related to the quality of construction and cautioned that Plaintiff’s failure to provide Defendant with prompt notice of any defects would result in waiver of any claim for breach. The contract also limited Defendant Brinkmann’s liability by identifying three separate accrual provisions that would determine the time period in which Plaintiff could bring a claim. The project was completed in 2009. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Maggie Stewart, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Stewart may be contacted at stewart@hhmrlaw.com

    Render Unto Caesar: Considerations for Returning Withheld Sums

    January 18, 2021 —
    Withholding sums during a dispute can be an effective and perfectly legitimate means to protect against the harms caused by another party’s breach. However, withholding too much money during a dispute can turn a position of strength into one of weakness. “Why should I fund the other side’s litigation war chest?” and “Isn’t this just a display of weakness?” are common questions raised by contractors when this issue is discussed. Often, the contractor is well within its contractual or legal rights to withhold money from a breaching subcontractor (another topic for another day). But it may not always be in a contractor’s best interest to withhold every single penny available. This article addresses some of the long-term implications for failing to return withheld sums, including the potential to recover attorneys’ fees, possible bad faith, accruing interest, and overall litigation costs. Admittedly, it can be hard to give money back in the middle of a dispute. But sometimes it can positively impact the overall outcome of the case. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William E. Underwood, Jones Walker LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Mr. Underwood may be contacted at wunderwood@joneswalker.com

    Terminating A Subcontractor Or Sub-Tier Contractor—Not So Fast—Read Your Contract!

    May 24, 2018 —
    Every few months I receive a call from a general contractor or subcontractor who has just terminated a subcontractor or sub-tier contractor for non-performance and is “checking in with me to see if there are any liability issues.” After the termination has taken place, if the termination is wrongful, there are serious legal consequences. Calling your lawyer after the fact will not cure missteps in the termination process. Termination for non-performance is a common term in most contract documents. As courts interpret contracts, however, the right to earn revenue from a contract is a substantial interest, and courts generally “abhor” forfeitures (termination) of that right. In other words, the courts will strictly determine whether the terminating party to a contract has complied with the termination process to the letter. A recent example from Connecticut is instructive in this regard. [1] The general contractor on a large hospital project in Connecticut terminated its electrical subcontractor, hired others to finish the electrical subcontractor’s work, and then sued the electrical subcontractor for $26 million. The electrical subcontractor countersued the general contractor for $3.6 million of work that it had completed at the time of the termination which had not been paid for. The subcontractor claimed that due to the many changes that had occurred on the project, it stopped work because the changes altered the contract to the point that it was no longer the same contract. The subcontractor walked off the project and the general contractor then terminated the subcontractor and re-procured the work from other subcontractors. 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

    Hunton Insurance Recovery Lawyers Ranked by Chambers as Top Insurance Practitioners

    May 27, 2019 —
    Hunton Andrews Kurth insurance recovery partner, Lorie Masters, received a top “Band 1” ranking by Chambers and Partners in the Insurance: Policyholder category for the District of Columbia, and a “Band 2” ranking in the Insurance: Dispute Resolution: Policyholder – USA – Nationwide category. Hunton Andrews Kurth insurance recovery associate, Andrea DeField, also was recognized by Chambers in the Associate to Watch: Insurance: Florida category. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth
    Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com

    Largest Dam Removal Program in US History Reaches Milestone

    December 11, 2023 —
    All work associated with removal of the first of four hydroelectric dams slated for demolition on the Klamath River completed in early November, according to the dam owner, Klamath River Renewal Corp. Demolition of the four dams on the Klamath River that flows through parts of Oregon and California is the largest dam removal project in U.S. history. Reprinted courtesy of Mary K. Miller, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Miller Act CLAIMS: Finding Protections and Preserving Your Rights

    November 29, 2021 —
    The Miller Act (the “Act”), which requires the prime contractor to furnish a performance bond and a payment bond to the government, protects “all persons supplying labor and materials carrying out the work provided for in the contract.”[1] Despite its broad language, courts have limited the parties who may actually assert a claim under the Act. This article introduces general background of the Act, identifies subcontractors who may qualify for protections under the Act, and suggests ways to preserve the rights as prime contractors. Brief Background of the Miller Act Under the Miller Act, there are two types of bonds the prime contractor furnishes to the government in a federal construction contract of more than $100,000[2] 1. Performance Bond A performance bond protects the United States and guarantees the completion of the project in accordance with the contract’s terms and conditions.[3] This bond must be with a surety that is satisfactory to the officer awarding the contract and in the amount the officer considers adequate for government protection.[4] If a contractor abandons a project or fails to perform, the bond itself will cover the government’s cost of substitute performance. Thus, the performance bond disincentivizes contractors from abandoning projects and provides the government with reassurance that an abandonment will not create delays or additional expenses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Diana Lyn Curtis McGraw, Fox Rothschild LLP
    Ms. McGraw may be contacted at dmcgraw@foxrothschild.com

    Plaintiffs’ Claims in Barry v. Weyerhaeuser Company are Likely to Proceed after Initial Hurdle

    January 28, 2019 —
    On December 18, 2018, Federal Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak recommended in a written opinion that the Motion of Defendant Weyerhaeuser Company (“Weyerhaeuser”) to Dismiss Amended Complaint Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) be denied. Barry v. Weyerhaeuser Company, 2018WL6589786 (D. Colo. 2018). As such, we believe District Court Judge Christine M. Arguello will accept this recommendation and the lawsuit will proceed. At interest in this lawsuit are TJI joists designed, manufactured, and sold by Weyerhaeuser for residential construction. Headquartered in Seattle, Washington, Weyerhaeuser is one of the world’s largest private owners of timberlands, owning or controlling nearly 12.4 million acres in the United States and managing 14 million acres in Canada. It is a public company that trades on the New York Stock Exchange with revenues of $7.2 billion in 2017.[1] In addition to managing forests, Weyerhaeuser has interests in energy, minerals, and wood products. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Frank Ingham, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. Ingham may be contacted at ingham@hhmrlaw.com