BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineer
    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


    Construction Needs Collaborative Planning

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2020 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Remodel Leaves Guitarist’s Home Leaky and Moldy

    New Jersey Construction Company Owner and Employees Arrested for Fraud

    How to Prepare for Potential Construction Disputes Resulting From COVID-19

    Shimmick Gets Nod for Second Pilot Pile at Settling Millennium Tower

    Lessons Learned from Implementing Infrastructure BIM in Helsinki

    Advice to Georgia Homeowners with Construction Defects

    Appropriation Bill Cuts Military Construction Spending

    Pinnacle Controls in Verano

    Denver’s Mayor Addresses Housing and Modifying Construction Defect Law

    Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case Cannot Be Overturned While Facts Are Still in Contention in Related Cases

    AGC’s 2024 Construction Outlook. Infrastructure is Bright but Office-Geddon is Not

    The Hidden Price of Outdated Damage Prevention Laws: Part I

    A Court-Side Seat: Recent Legal Developments at Supreme and Federal Appeals Courts

    Claim for Vandalism Loss Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Oregon Bridge Closed to Inspect for Defects

    Do Construction Contracts and Fraud Mix After All?

    Construction Defects in Home a Breach of Contract

    Arbitrator May Use Own Discretion in Consolidating Construction Defect Cases

    New Law Impacting Florida’s Statute of Repose

    Concrete Worker Wins Lawsuit and Settles with Other Defendant

    Preserving Your Construction Claim

    Missouri Asbestos Litigation Reform: New Bill Seeks to Establish Robust Disclosure Obligations

    Labor Intensive

    Best Practices for ESI Collection in Construction Litigation

    Insureds' Experts Insufficient to Survive Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    Subcontractors Found Liable to Reimburse Insurer Defense Costs in Equitable Subrogation Action

    DoD Issues Guidance on Inflation Adjustments for Contractors

    Can a Contractor be Liable to Second Buyers of Homes for Construction Defects?

    Home Builder Doesn’t See Long Impact from Hurricane

    Conspirators Bilked Homeowners in Nevada Construction Defect Claims

    TV Kitchen Remodelers Sued for Shoddy Work

    Is Construction Defect Notice under Florida Repair Statute a Suit?

    Do You Really Want Mandatory Arbitration in Your Construction Contract?

    Commercial Construction Heating Up

    California Fears El Nino's Dark Side Will Bring More Trouble

    No Coverage for Hurricane Sandy Damage

    Traub Lieberman Partners Ryan Jones and Scot Samis Obtain Affirmation of Final Summary Judgment

    Excess Policy Triggered Once Retention Paid, Even if Loss Not Covered By Excess

    Supreme Court Declines to Address CDC Eviction Moratorium

    Concerns Over Unstable Tappan Zee Bridge Push Back Opening of New NY Bridge's Second Span

    Judicial Economy Disfavors Enforcement of Mandatory Forum Selection Clause

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    Keeping Detailed Records: The Best Defense to Constructive Eviction

    Weslaco, Texas Investigating Possible Fraudulent Contractor Invoices

    Sales of U.S. New Homes Decline After Record May Revision

    Revisiting the CMO; Are We Overusing the Mediation Privilege?

    PFAS and the Challenge of Cleaning Up “Forever”

    The Prompt Payment Rollercoaster
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    What is a Subordination Agreement?

    May 06, 2019 —
    Put simply, a subordination agreement is a legal agreement which establishes one debt as ranking behind another debt in the priority for collecting repayment from a debtor. It is an arrangement that alters the lien position. Without a subordination clause, loans take chronological priority which means that a deed of trust recorded first will be considered senior to all deeds of trusts recorded after. As such, the oldest loan becomes the primary loan, with first call on any proceeds from a sale of a property. However, a subordination agreement acknowledges that one party’s claim or interest is inferior to that of another party in the event that the borrowing entity liquidates its assets. Further, shareholders are subordinate to all creditors. The junior debt is referred to as a “subordinated debt”, and the debt which has a higher claim to any assets is the senior debt. Often, the borrower does not have enough funds to pay all debts, and lower priority debts may receive little or no repayment. For example, if a business has $400,000 in senior debt, $100,000 in subordinated debt, and a total asset value of $420,000, upon liquidation of the company, only the senior debtholder will be paid in full. The remaining $20,000 will be distributed among the subordinated debtholders. Subordinated debts are, therefore, riskier and lenders will require a higher interest rate as compensation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Project-Specific Policies and Products-Completed Operations Hazard Extensions

    May 31, 2021 —
    1. Understanding the “Products-Completed Operations Hazard” ISO commercial general liability (“CGL”) policies use the term “products-completed operations hazard” (“PCOH”) to define a category of risk which is treated specially by certain exclusions within the policy and often subject to separate limits of insurance. In construction, we think about PCOH as being about coverage for completed work. Bodily injury and property damage arising out of completed work is a significant construction risk. Most construction contracts include warranty and indemnity obligations for completed work. All states allow lawsuits to be brought alleging bodily injury or property damage because of completed work based on common law. Contract and common law claims are subject to statutes of limitation – laws which define the time in which suits must be brought. Most states provide exceptions to their statutes of limitation for common law claims – the most common example is an extension to file a lawsuit based on a latent defect until the defect is discovered. Most states also have “statutes of repose” – laws that set a date after which suit may no longer be brought, no matter what the circumstances are. A construction contractor, therefore, has potential liability until the statute of repose period has expired. Thus, a contractor looks to ensure that it has coverage for the PCOH for its full statute of repose liability period. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremiah M. Welch, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Mr. Welch may be contacted at JWelch@sdvlaw.com

    The Administrative Procedure Act and the Evolution of Environmental Law

    September 19, 2022 —
    Enacted in 1946, the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) has provided a lasting framework for federal agency rulemaking and adjudication, as well as establishing the power of the federal courts to exercise judicial review over these actions of the federal bureaucracy. The APA is codified at 5 U.S.C. §§ 551–559, and §§ 701-706. There have been very few amendments made to the APA over these years, which indicates that Congress is reasonably satisfied with its administration and implementation. What follows is an overview of how the APA has been used by the courts to resolve disputes involving the federal agencies, with particular attention being paid to the development of environmental law and practice. While there have been very few amendments to the statute, the courts have been free to enlarge upon the sometimes-opaque text of the APA to, in effect, change the law, even in an era when “textual fidelity” to the language of the statute is the prevalent approach. 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

    Important Environmental Insurance Ruling Issued In Protracted Insurance-Coverage Dispute

    May 16, 2018 —
    The latest ruling in the long-running environmental insurance case, Olin Corporation v. Lamorak Ins. Co., was released on April 18, 2018, by Judge Rakoff of the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of New York. Judge Rakoff granted motions for summary judgment filed by Olin Corporation (Olin) and The London Market Insurers, and awarded Olin $55M for its claims against Lamorak Insurance Company (Lamorak). As Judge Rakoff notes, “the overall litigation, having already outlived two federal judges, is now before the unlucky undersigned.” This ruling is in response to the Second Circuit’s most recent decision in Olin Corp. v. OneBeacon Americans Ins. Co. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    When a Request for Equitable Adjustment Should Be Treated as a Claim Under the Contract Disputes Act

    August 29, 2022 —
    In federal contracting, contractors are sometimes torn about submitting a request for equitable adjustment (known as an “REA” under 48 C.F.R. 252.243-7002) or submitting a formal claim under the Contract Disputes Act (41 U.S.C. s. 7103), the latter requiring a final decision by the contracting officer and starts the clock with respect to interest and preserving rights. It is also sometimes not easy for the contracting officer receiving an REA to determine whether the REA is actually a claim under the Contract Disputes Act requiring more immediate action. This recent take by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit hits the nail on the head:
    We recognize that contracting officers will sometimes face the difficult challenge of determining whether a request for equitable adjustment is also a claim. Contractors must choose between submitting a claim—which starts the interest clock but requires the contracting officer to issue a final decision within 60 days—and submitting a mere request for equitable adjustment—which does not start the interest clock but gives the contractor more time to negotiate a settlement and possibly avoid hefty legal fees. The overlap between these two types of documents might create room for gamesmanship. For example, a contractor could submit a document that is a claim—starting the interest clock—but appears to be a mere request for equitable adjustment—causing the contracting officer to not issue a final decision within the 60-day deadline and allowing interest to accrue for months or years. But the government has tools to address this challenge: The contracting officer can communicate to the contractor that she is going to treat the document as a claim and issue a final decision within 60 days. Or the government can explicitly require the contractor to propose settlement terms and attempt to settle disputes before submitting a claim to the contracting officer for a final decision.
    Zafer Construction Company v. U.S., 2022 WL 2793596, *5 (Fed.Cir. 2022).
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    NTSB Outlines Pittsburgh Bridge Structure Specifics, Finding Collapse Cause Will Take Months

    February 21, 2022 —
    Officials in Pennsylvania are moving forward on building a replacement for the Fern Hollow Bridge in Pittsburgh, which collapsed on Jan. 28, selecting a team of HDR Inc. and Swank Construction to design and construct the new structure, and the approval of $25.3 million in federal funds for the project. Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court finds subcontractor responsible for defending claim

    May 18, 2011 —

    In an unpublished decision, the California Fourth Appellate District Court has reversed the judgment of Judge Linda B. Quinn of the Superior Court of San Diego. In the case Inland California, Inc. v. G.A. Abell, Inland, a general contractor had subcontracted with Apache Construction and Precision Electric Company (G.A. Abell).

    Apache alleged that extra demolition and drywall work was needed due to Precision’s electrical work. Inland tendered a defense of Apache’s claims. However, Precision did not provide any defense. Inland withheld payment from Precision.

    At trial, Inland “conceded Precision earned the $98,000 in progress payments Inland withheld.” They were obligated to additionally pay Precision’s costs and attorney fees.

    The Fourth Appellate District court has overturned this and remanded the case back to the lower court. The judges determined that Precision was obligated to defend itself against the claims raised by Apache and therefore vacated the judgment against Inland.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Detroit Craftsmen Sift House Rubble in Quest for Treasured Wood

    March 19, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- Detroit’s 70,000 abandoned homes are proving to be a trove for entrepreneurs who recycle century-old lumber, glass and brick into everything from terrariums to $4,500 guitars. “It’s like a treasure hunt,” said Craig Varterian, executive director of Reclaim Detroit, a nonprofit group that’s stripped and sold materials from almost 70 demolished homes. Floorboards and joists of early 20th century maple, walnut, hickory, fir and even chestnut are prized for their density and fine grain. As Detroit ramps up demolitions of vacant dwellings, Mayor Mike Duggan plans a reclamation center in a city-owned building to keep tons of rubble out of landfills and create jobs and merchandise. Recycling would become a centerpiece of the city’s blight-removal effort, which is struggling to maintain funding. Reprinted courtesy of Chris Christoff, Bloomberg and Alexandra Mondalek, Bloomberg Mr. Christoff may be contacted at cchristoff@bloomberg.net Ms. Mondalek may be contacted at amondalek@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of