BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractor
    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


    2017 Construction Outlook: Slow, Mature Growth, but No Decline, Expected

    AB 1701 – General Contractor Liability for Subcontractors’ Unpaid Wages

    The Complex Insurance Coverage Reporter – A Year in Review

    Law Firm Settles Two Construction Defect Suits for a Combined $4.7 Million

    Federal Miller Act Payment Bond Claim: Who Gets Paid and Who Does Not? What Are the Deadlines?

    Washington Trial Court Narrows Definition of First Party Claimant, Clarifies Available Causes of Action in Commercial Property Loss Context

    California Complex Civil Litigation Superior Court Panels

    California Supreme Court Holds Insured Entitled to Coverage Under CGL Policy for Negligent Hiring

    Renovation Makes Old Arena Feel Brand New

    California Mediation Confidentiality May Apply to Third Party “Participants” Retained to Provide Analysis

    Building Inspector Refuses to State Why Apartments Condemned

    Negligence Against a Construction Manager Agent

    Judgment Proof: Reducing Litigation Exposure with Litigation Risk Insurance

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

    A Changing Climate for State Policy-Making Regarding Climate Change

    Virginia Families Hope to Sue over Chinese Drywall

    Caterpillar Forecast Tops Estimates as Construction Recovers

    “But I didn’t know what I was signing….”

    Dust Obscures Eleventh Circuit’s Ruling on “Direct Physical Loss”

    July 1, 2015 Statutory Changes Affecting Virginia Contractors and Subcontractors

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

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Who Needs Them”

    Hilti Partners with Canvas, a Construction Robotics Company

    Endorsement to Insurance Policy Controls

    A Court-Side Seat: Appeals and Agency Developments at the Close of 2020

    Home Building Up in Kansas City

    Duty to Defend Requires Payments Under Policy's Supplemental Payments Provision

    Remodels Replace Construction in Redding

    A Court-Side Seat: Clean Air, Clean Water, Endangered Species and Deliberative Process Privilege

    Homebuilders Are Fighting Green Building. Homeowners Will Pay.

    In South Carolina, Insurer's Denial of Liability Does Not Waive Attorney-Client Privilege for Bad Faith Claim

    Mexico Settles With Contractors for Canceled Airport Terminal

    Patti Santelle Honored by Rutgers School of Law with Arthur E. Armitage Sr. Distinguished Alumni Award

    Deadlines. . . They’re Important. Project Owner Risks Losing Claim By Failing to Timely Identify “Doe” Defendant

    Keeping Your Workers Safe When Air Quality Isn't

    Hunton Insurance Lawyer, Adriana Perez, Selected to the National Association of Women Lawyers’ 2023 Rising List

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

    Agrihoods: The Best of Both Worlds

    Denver Airport Terminates P3 Contract For Main Terminal Renovation

    Michael Baker Intl. Settles Federal Pay Bias Allegations

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increased 4.3% in November

    Employee Handbooks—Your First Line of Defense

    Waiver of Subrogation and Lack of Contractual Privity Bars Commercial Tenants’ Claims

    Windows and Lawsuits Fly at W Hotel

    Avoiding Disaster Due to Improper Licensing

    One Shot to Get It Right: Navigating the COVID-19 Vaccine in the Workplace

    Heads I Win, Tails You Lose. Court Finds Indemnity Provision Went Too Far

    #11 CDJ Topic: Cortez Blu Community Association, Inc. v. K. Hovnanian at Cortez Hill, LLC, et al.

    CDC Issues Moratorium on Residential Evictions Through 2020

    Augmented and Mixed Reality in Construction
    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

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/18/23) – Zillow’s New Pilot Program, Production Begins at Solar Panel Plant in Georgia, and More Diversity on Contracts for Buffalo Bills Stadium

    November 27, 2023 —
    In our latest roundup, Netflix announces plans to open brick-and-mortar locations, NYU develops a way to examine buildings using drones, robots and AI, distressed U.S. commercial real estate hits a 10-year high, and more! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “How Bad Is It?”

    September 25, 2023 —
    How bad is it? “Not that bad,” said an Illinois federal court to a surety which was complaining that its subcontract performance bond terms had not been satisfied by the obligees on the bonds (the general contractor and the building owner). In response to $3.6 million demand by the obligees on the performance bond, the surety filed an action in federal court in Illinois seeking to have the court declare that the surety had no further obligation on its performance bond. The surety urged that the obligees had not fulfilled the prerequisite requirements in the bond to make a claim on the bond (which, although the court never identified the bond form, was a bond form that closely resembled the AIA A312-2010 performance bond). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Cape Town Seeks World Cup Stadium Construction Collusion Damages

    March 19, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- The City of Cape Town filed a civil damages claim against builders Aveng Ltd., Wilson Bayly Holmes-Ovcon Ltd. and Stefanutti Stocks Holdings Ltd. for colluding on a tender for a stadium built for the 2010 FIFA Soccer World Cup. The claim for at least 428 million rand ($35 million) will be heard in the North Gauteng High Court, Ian Neilson, Cape Town’s executive deputy mayor, said by phone on Monday. The amount claimed is subject to change, he said. Antitrust authorities fined 15 builders, including the trio facing the Cape Town claim, a total of 1.5 billion rand in June 2013 for rigging contracts for projects including the construction of stadiums for the 2010 World Cup hosted by South Africa. Aveng was fined 307 million rand, WBHO 311 million rand and Stefanutti 307 million rand. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Janice Kew, Bloomberg
    Ms. Kew may be contacted at jkew4@bloomberg.net

    COVID-19 Response: California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board Implements Sweeping New Regulations to Prevent COVID-19 in the Workplace

    December 14, 2020 —
    On November 19, 2020, the California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (OSHSB) proposed sweeping and significant new emergency standards to reduce employee exposure to COVID-19. These standards have been accepted by the Office of Administrative Law and are effective as of November 30, 2020. Accordingly, it is critical that employers familiarize themselves with these new requirements and begin to implement these standards as quickly as possible. The standards include COVID-19 prevention in the workplace, multiple COVID-19 infections and outbreaks in the workplace, “major” COVID-19 outbreaks in the workplace, prevention in employer provided housing, and prevention in employer-provided transportation to and from work. They apply to all California employers and places of employment, except places with one employee who does not have contact with others, employees working from home, or employees in specified health care facilities, services or operations when covered by section 5199. COVID-19 Prevention Program Employers are required to establish, implement, and maintain an “effective” written COVID-19 Prevention Program. Under the Program, an employer is responsible for developing a system for communicating about COVID-19, identifying and evaluating COVID-19 hazards, investigating and responding to COVID-19 cases, correcting COVID-19 hazards, providing training and instructions to employees regarding COVID-19, ensuring all employees are physically distanced, providing face coverings, implementing policies regarding personal protective equipment and recordkeeping, ensuring COVID-19 cases are excluded from the workplace, and prohibiting symptomatic employees from returning to work unless certain requirements are met. Reprinted courtesy of Peter Shapiro, Lewis Brisbois, Drake Mirsch, Lewis Brisbois and Jade McKenzie, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Shapiro may be contacted at Peter.Shapiro@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Mirsch may be contacted at Drake.Mirsch@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. McKenzie may be contacted at Jade.Mckenzie@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    When it Comes to COVID Emergency Regulations, Have a Plan

    December 07, 2020 —
    As I hope readers of this construction corner of the “blogosphere” know, Virginia adopted emergency COVID workplace regulations effective July 27, 2020, and with enforcement beginning at the end of September. Among the various items found in these regulations are general requirements for all employers, including among others, the requirement to self determine the employer’s risk level and disinfecting requirements. The regulations also have some requirements that seem specially directed toward construction industry employers. These include among them engineering controls and various requirements relating to communications with subcontractors. For a good overview of these requirements, see this great post at the Virginia Bar Association’s construction law blog. One item that is not included in the emergency regulations is a statement that following the regulations immunizes an employer from COVID infection-related lawsuits. For this reason, among others, all construction (and other industry) employers should have a COVID plan that meets the requirements of these regulations at whatever “hazard level” that employer meets. These plans should be written and distributed to all employees and include protocols for workplace/job site screening and what to do if there is a need for contact tracing. I also highly recommend that any plan be created with the help of a good Virginia workplace safety consultant well versed in the COVID regulations. 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

    Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Harmon Towers

    June 28, 2013 —
    The Nevada Supreme Court started hearings on Tuesday, June 4 over the fate of Harmon towers. MGM Resorts is hoping to obtain permission from the court to tear down the tower, which they claim could collapse should an earthquake strike Las Vegas. Perini Corp, the builder, wants the building to remain standing in order to support their claim that the building’s flaws are through design and not construction errors. KLAS quoted one of Perini’s lawyers claiming that MGM had pursued a media strategy to prejudice potential jurors against the contractor. “CityCenter hired Cedric and Bunting to place advertisements with the media to win the hearts and minds of the community and to convince the public pretrial that Perini was, quote, ‘scum of the earth.’” If the Supreme Court gives the go-ahead, demolition would begin soon. Still pending, is the $500 lawsuit over the allegations of construction defects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    What Rich Millennials Want in a Luxury Home: 20,000 Square Feet

    February 15, 2018 —
    A new generation of affluent homebuyers powered by a surge in inherited wealth is driving the luxury-home market, demanding larger spaces and fancier finishes, according to a report heralding “the rise of the new aristocracy.” Prospective homebuyers under 50 account for most of those shopping for homes priced at $1 million or more, according to the report. Nearly a quarter of high-net-worth consumers between 25 and 49 said they would look for at least 20,000 square feet when they made their next home purchase; it was just 6 percent for respondents 50 or older. The report is based on a survey of more than 500 consumers with at least $1 million in investable assets, conducted last month on behalf of Luxury Portfolio International, a network of real estate brokerages. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Clark, Bloomberg

    Stormy Seas Ahead: 5th Circuit to Review Whether Maritime Law Applies to Offshore Service Contract

    July 26, 2017 —
    Earlier this year, the 5th Circuit applied the Davis factors to determine the validity of an indemnity clause in a Master Services Contract. In Larry Doiron Inc. et al., v. Specialty Rental Tool & Supply LLP et al., the court affirmed the notion that if a contract provides services on navigable waters aboard a vessel, a maritime contract exists, even if the contract calls for incidental or insubstantial work unrelated to the use of a vessel. With this decision, plaintiffs were granted indemnification for a crane injury and all was well on the open seas. The 5th Circuit made waves, however, on July 7, 2017, when it agreed to rehear the case en banc. In its petition for rehearing, defendant STS argued that: (1) the original opinion conflicted with Supreme Court precedent by applying tort law principles to a contract case; (2) the court misapplied the Davis factors and the decision was contrary to Davis because the historical treatment of specialty well service work has been established as non-maritime; (3) the court needed to address whether a contract is subject to maritime or land-based law in the context of offshore mineral exploration. 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