BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness 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


    Seattle Expands Bridge Bioswale Projects

    Preliminary Notices: Common Avoidable But Fatal Mistakes

    Stop by BHA’s Booth at WCC and Support the Susan G. Komen Foundation

    Brown and Caldwell Team with AECOM for Landmark Pure Water Southern California Program

    Important New Reporting Requirement for Some Construction Defect Settlements

    Subcontractors Have a Duty to Clarify Ambiguities in Bid Documents

    Apartment Boom in Denver a Shortcut Around Condo Construction Defect Suits?

    Balancing Risk and Reward: The Complexities of Stadium Construction Projects

    Gilbert’s Plan for Downtown Detroit Has No Room for Jail

    Evaluating Construction Trends From 2023 and Forecasting For 2024

    Delaware Supreme Court Allows Shareholders Access to Corporation’s Attorney-Client Privileged Documents

    Insureds Survive Motion to Dismiss Civil Authority Claim

    The Difference Between Routine Document Destruction and Spoliation

    New Tariffs Could Shorten Construction Expansion Cycle

    We've Surveyed Video Conferencing Models to See Who Fits the CCPA Bill: Here's What We Found

    Caveat Emptor (“Buyer Beware!”) Exceptions

    2023’s Bank Failures: What Contractors, Material Suppliers and Equipment Lessors Can Do to Protect Themselves

    Texas Supreme Court Defines ‘Plaintiff’ in 3rd-Party Claims Against Design Professionals

    Chicago Cubs Agree to Make Wrigley Field ADA Improvements to Settle Feds' Lawsuit

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa M. Rolle and Vito John Marzano Secure Dismissal of Indemnification and Breach of Contract Claims Asserted against Subcontractor

    School Board Settles Construction Defect Suit

    Editorial: Qatar Is Champion of Safety Hypocrisy in Migrant Worker Deaths

    How Machine Learning Can Help with Urban Development

    Contractor Given a Wake-Up Call for Using a "Sham" RMO/RME

    Uniwest Rides Again (or, Are Architects Subject to Va. Code Section 11-4.1?)

    Colorado Passes Construction Defect Reform Bill

    Prime Contractor & Surety’s Recovery of Attorney’s Fees in Miller Act Lawsuit

    Manufacturer of Asbestos-Free Product May Still Be Liable for Asbestos Related Injuries

    Can a Non-Union Company Be Compelled to Arbitrate?

    Three Attorneys Named Among The Best Lawyers in America 2018

    Dealing with Hazardous Substances on the Construction Site

    General Liability Alert: ADA Requirements Pertaining to Wall Space Adjacent to Interior Doors Clarified

    Use Your Instincts when Negotiating a Construction Contract

    Construction Defect Journal Seeks Article Submissions Regarding SB800 and Other Builders Right to Repair Laws

    First-Party Statutory Bad Faith – 60 Days to Cure Means 60 Days to Cure

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “How Bad Is It?”

    Insurer Must Cover Portions of Arbitration Award

    The Reptile Theory in Practice

    Compliance with Contractual and Jurisdictional Pre-Suit Requirements is Essential to Maximizing Recovery

    The Coronavirus, Zoom Meetings and Now a CCPA Class Action

    What California’s COVID-19 Reopening Means for the Construction Industry

    Alaska Supreme Court Finds Insurer Owes No Independent Duty to Injured Party

    Seattle Council May Take a New Look at Micro-Housing

    Construction Defect Dispute Governed by Contract Disputes Act not yet Suited to being a "Suit"

    Contractor Covered for Voluntary Remediation Efforts in Completed Homes

    The ‘Sole Option’ Arbitration Provision in Construction Contracts

    Owners and Contractors are Liable for Injuries Caused by their Independent Contractors under the “Peculiar Risk Doctrine”

    Consequential Damage Claims for Insurer's Bad Faith Dismissed

    California Expands on Scope of Coverage for Soft Cost Claims

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud
    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

    A Court-Side Seat: Clean Air, Clean Water, Citizen Suits and the Summer of 2022

    November 01, 2022 —
    This is a selection of significant environmental and regulatory law cases decided by the federal courts after the Supreme Court’s 2021 Term concluded. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit National Association of Broadcasters v. Federal Communications Commission On July 12, 2022, the DC Circuit held that an order of the FCC requiring radio broadcasters to follow a prescribed five-step process to verify the identity of program sponsors was not authorized by the Communications Act. According to the court, the FCC “decreed a duty that the statute does not require, and that the statute does not empower the FCC to impose.” Here, the agency failed to identify the statutory authority it needed to authorize the issuance of such an order. While certainly not as significant as the Supreme Court’s ruling in West Virginia v. EPA, decided only a few days before this decision was released, it is a strong reminder that the courts want to know if a challenged rule is authorized by law. Humane Society of the U.S., et al., v. U.S. Department of Agriculture On July 22, 2022, the court decided a case involving the steps the Administrative Procedure Act and the Federal Register Act require to be taken before a final agency rule is legally promulgated. Customarily, when there has been a change in Presidential administrations, the incoming administration “quietly” withdraws rules awaiting Federal Register publication without much ceremony. The majority of this panel agreed that public notice should have been provided to the regulated community to comment on the new administration’s action to pull back a new rule which had been made available for public inspection before Federal Register publication that would have strengthened the protections afforded “show horses,” as now required by law. The court noted that “it seems clear that filing with the Federal Register constituted promulgation of a regulation even though publication may not occur until a later date.” Circuit Judge Rao filed a strong dissent. “By cutting off agency discretion at public inspection, the majority imposes judicial burden on agency procedures that conflicts with circuit precedent, the statutory framework and a longstanding regulation permitting withdrawals prior to publication.” There could be a further review of this unique ruling. 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

    Keeping Up With Fast-moving FAA Drone Regulations

    February 28, 2018 —
    One of the biggest changes in recent years relating to commercial drone regulations has been FAA rule Part 107. Prior to 107, drone pilots were required to hold a current, manned aircraft pilot certificate, and had to pass a written, practical and oral exam to earn that credential. After 107 came into effect, a drone pilot was only required to pass a written exam to earn this commercial drone license. The majority of people working at construction companies who take the Part 107 exam don’t have any type of aviation background, so it’s recommended that they give themselves at least two hours of study a day over two weeks to prepare for the exam. This commitment allows enough time for the student to both master any prepared test materials as well as do any additional research when necessary. The Part 107 certification is good for 24 months. While the FAA hasn’t posted anything about a recertification process yet, it will need to do so soon because everyone who took the exam when it was available in September 2016 will need to be recertified by August 2018. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dick Zhang, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved.
    Mr. Zhang may be contacted at contact@identifiedtech.com

    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

    November 07, 2012 —
    A parking garage under construction at the Doral campus of Miami Dade College collapsed on October 9. Experts state that the collapse may have been due to errors in the construction process, either in the fabrication of the pre-cast components or in their assembly. The Bradenton Herald quotes Mark Santos, a structural engineer, who “would look at erection procedures – that’s probably the one question to ask first.” During the failure, floors separated from the south wall of the structure. The contractor responsible for the garage, Ajax Building Corp, said there was “no indication of any potential cause.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nine Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Recognized as Southern California Super Lawyers

    February 11, 2019 —
    Prominent business and real estate law firm Newmeyer & Dillion LLP is pleased to announce that nine of its Newport Beach attorneys have been selected to the 2019 Southern California Super Lawyers list. Each year, no more than 5 percent of lawyers are selected to receive this honor. Attorneys named to the Southern California Super Lawyers list include: Michael Cucchissi Jeff Dennis Greg Dillion Joseph Ferrentino Charles Krolikowski John O'Hara Jane Samson Michael Studenka Paul Tetzloff Super Lawyers is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high-degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The patented selection process includes independent research, peer nominations and peer evaluations. About Newmeyer & Dillion For almost 35 years, Newmeyer & Dillion has delivered creative and outstanding legal solutions and trial results for a wide array of clients. With over 70 attorneys practicing in all aspects of business, employment, real estate, privacy & data security and insurance law, Newmeyer & Dillion delivers legal services tailored to meet each client's needs. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, with offices in Walnut Creek, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, Newmeyer & Dillion attorneys are recognized by The Best Lawyers in America©, and Super Lawyers as top tier and some of the best lawyers in California, and have been given Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review's AV Preeminent® highest rating. For additional information, call 949.854.7000 or visit www.ndlf.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    To Sea or Not to Sea: Fifth Circuit Applies Maritime Law to Offshore Service Contract, Spares Indemnity Provision from Louisiana Oilfield Indemnity Act

    March 29, 2017 —
    Faced with the issue of whether maritime or state law should be applied to determine the validity of an indemnity clause in a Master Services Contract (MSC), the Fifth Circuit affirmed that where there is no historical treatment of the contract in question (1), it would consider six factors established in Davis (2). In Doiron, the Apache Corporation and STS (3) entered a broad-form blanket MSC, under which STS agreed to perform flow-back services, a process designed to dislodge solid objects from inside a well, on Apache’s well located off shore of Louisiana. The MSC also contained an indemnification provision, which required STS to defend and indemnify Apache and its company groups against all claims of property injury or bodily injury. During the flow-back operation, Larry Doiron Inc. (LDI), one of the Apache Company groups, supplied a crane barge for use by STS employees. Subsequently, the crane knocked over an STS employee, causing him to suffer severe injuries. LDI then made a formal demand to STS for defense and indemnification. STS rejected the demand and argued that the Louisiana Oilfield Indemnity Act applied to the MSC instead of maritime law. Pursuant to the Act, indemnity clauses in agreements pertaining to wells for oil, gas or water are void as against public policy. But, under maritime law, the enforcement of such provisions is not barred. Therefore, if the MSC was construed under the Act, STS had no duty to defend or indemnify LDI. Reprinted courtesy of Richard W. Brown, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Afua S. Akoto, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Brown may be contacted at rwb@sdvlaw.com Ms. Akoto may be contacted at asa@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ben L. Aderholt Joins Coats Rose Construction Litigation Group

    February 25, 2014 —
    According to a press release on PR Newswire, “Ben Aderholt has joined Coats Rose law firm's Houston office as Of Counsel.” Aderholt was a “past President of the Houston Bar Association, past Chair of the Mayor's Council and a Director of the State Bar of Texas.” Furthermore, he “has taught commercial law at the University of Houston” and “continues to be active on the Editorial Board of the Construction Law Journal.” Coats Rose has offices in Houston, Clear Lake, Dallas, Austin, San Antonio, and New Orleans. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Damages or Injury “Likely to Occur” or “Imminent” May No Longer Trigger Insurance Coverage

    January 05, 2017 —
    Washington Courts allow an insurer to determine its duty to defend an insured against a lawsuit based only on the face of the complaint and the limitations of the insurance policy. This is otherwise known as the “eight corners” rule (four corners of the complaint plus the four corners of the policy). In other words, the insurance company is not permitted to rely on facts extrinsic to the complaint in order to deny its duty to defend an insured. See Truck Ins. Exch. v. VanPort Homes, Inc., 147 Wn.2d 751, 763 (2002). The laws in Washington provide greater protection to the insured over the insurer when it comes to the insurer’s duty to defend. The duty to defend a claim is triggered if a claim could “conceivably” be covered under the policy. See Woo v. Fireman’s Insurance, 161 Wn.2d 43 (2007). If there is any ambiguity in a policy with regard to coverage, the ambiguity is interpreted in favor of the insured. As a result, contractors in Washington regularly tender claims or potential claims to their insurers even when damage has not occurred but will occur in the imminent future. Especially in the context of construction defect cases, a contractor will tender such a claim to its insurer to trigger the broad duty of the insurer to provide a defense. We also regularly recommend this to our contractor clients. For example, if a building owner serves a contractor with a claim that the construction and installation of a window system will imminently cause leaks and corrosion, we would recommend that the contractor tender the claim to its commercial general liability insurer. Washington courts have found a duty to defend when there are allegations in the complaint that covered damages will occur in the imminent future. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Masaki J. Yamada, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Mr. Yamada may be contacted at myamada@ac-lawyers.com

    Key Legal Considerations for Modular Construction Contracts

    April 19, 2021 —
    Modular construction is literally on the rise. It is rapidly displacing traditional stick-built construction for new commercial, industrial and residential buildings. Over the past decade, an increasing number of health care, education facilities and apartment buildings have been built using modular construction. As the need for housing, and especially affordable housing, has grown as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, modular construction is becoming increasingly popular. Recently, the Canadian government, through the Canadian Mortgage Housing Corporation, launched a “Rapid Housing Initiative,” a $1 billion program utilizing only modular construction to rapidly construct affordable housing for its citizens. Similarly, the city of Toronto (which last year approved a plan to build 250 modular homes in response to homelessness) plans to build 1,000 modular homes by 2030. The pandemic also has resulted in an urgent demand for modules for medical facilities and schools. Modular construction allows contractors to build “leaner” and “greener” buildings while increasing quality control and improving site safety and potentially saving valuable time and money. Reprinted courtesy of Frederick E. Hedberg, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Hedberg may be contacted at fhedberg@rc.com