• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield 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

    Asbestos Confirmed After New York City Steam Pipe Blast

    Additional Insured Obligations and the Underlying Lawsuit

    Eleventh Circuit Upholds Coverage for Environmental Damage from Sewage, Concluding It is Not a “Pollutant”

    Arizona Rooftop Safety: Is it Adequate or Substandard?

    Be a Good Neighbor: Techniques to Mitigate the Risk of Claims from Adjacent Landowners

    Lawyer Claims HOA Scam Mastermind Bribed Politicians

    Arizona Court of Appeals Decision in $8.475 Million Construction Defect Class Action Suit

    Don’t Conspire to Build a Home…Wait…What?

    Trump, Infrastructure and the Construction Industry

    How Many New Home Starts are from Teardowns?

    Workers on Big California Bridge Tackle Oil Wells, Seismic Issues

    The Road to Rio 2016: Zika, Super Bacteria, and Construction Delays. Sounds Like Everything is Going as Planned

    Personal Injury Claims – The Basics

    Additional Elements a Plaintiff Must Plead and Prove to Enforce Restrictive Covenant

    Construction Bright Spot in Indianapolis

    Construction Defect Leads to Death of Worker

    Insured's Complaint for Breach of Contract and Bad Faith Adequately Pleads Consequential Damages

    Court Rules on a Long List of Motions in Illinois National Insurance Co v Nordic PCL

    Drafting a Contractual Arbitration Provision

    Drowning of Two Boys Constitutes One Occurrence

    Just a House That Uses 90 Percent Less Energy Than Yours, That's All

    NEW DEFECT WARRANTY LAWS – Now Applicable to Condominiums and HOAs transitioning from Developer to Homeowner Control. Is Your Community Aware of its Rights Under the New Laws?

    Second Circuit Denies Petitions for Review of EPA’s Final Regulations to Establish Requirements for Cooling Water Intake Structures

    Ninth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Construction Defects Under California Law

    The Basics of Subcontractor Defaults – Key Considerations

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2021

    Bert Hummel Appointed to Chief Justice’s Commission on Professionalism

    Burden Supporting Termination for Default

    Hawaii Federal District Court Again Rejects Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    Safety Officials Investigating Death From Fall

    A Landlord’s Guide to California’s New Statewide Rent Control Laws

    Megaproject Savings Opportunities

    The Prompt Payment Act Obligation is Not Triggered When the Owner Holds Less Retention from the General Contractor

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

    Washington State May Allow Common Negligence Claims against Construction Professionals

    Colorado “occurrence”

    Consumer Protection Act Whacks Seattle Roofing Contractor

    West Coast Casualty’s 25th Construction Defect Seminar Has Begun

    Construction on the Rise in Washington Town

    Is Equipment Installed as Part of Building Renovations a “Product” or “Construction”?

    Congress Considers Pandemic Risk Insurance Act to Address COVID-19 Business Interruptions Losses

    Equitable Lien Designed to Prevent Unjust Enrichment

    Toll Brothers Report End of Year Results

    Home Construction Thriving in Lubbock

    Former UN General Assembly President Charged in Bribe Scheme

    DC Circuit Rejects Challenge to EPA’s CERCLA Decision Regarding Hardrock Mining Industry

    Design Immunity Defense Gets Special Treatment on Summary Judgment

    Third Circuit Holds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Despite Insured’s Expectations

    Update: Lawyers Can Be Bound to Confidentiality Provision in Settlement Agreement

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


    Leveraging from more than 5500 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

    Federal Arbitration Act Preempts Pennsylvania Payment Act

    June 15, 2020 —
    I am back. It feels like an entirety since I last posted. But a hellacious trial schedule got me off the blogosphere for some time. Plus, there was nothing to write about. But I am back with a bang thanks to a decision from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania concerning the interplay of a forum selection clause appearing in an arbitration clause in a construction contract and the Pennsylvania Contractor and Subcontractor Payment Act. In Bauguess Electrical Services, Inc. v. Hospitality Builders, Inc., the federal court (Judge Joyner) ruled that the federal arbitration act preempted the Payment Act’s prohibition on forum selection clauses and held that an arbitration must proceed in South Dakota even though the construction project were the work was performed was located in Pennsylvania. The Payment Act applies to all commercial construction projects performed in Pennsylvania. As some you might know, Section 514 of the Payment Act, 73 P.S. 514, prohibits choice of law and forum selection clauses. It states “[m]aking a contract subject to the laws of another state or requiring that any litigation, arbitration or other dispute resolution process on the contract occur in another state, shall be unenforceable.” Therefore, if a construction contract is for a project located in Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania law must apply and all disputes must be adjudicated in Pennsylvania. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at

    Good Signs for Housing Market in 2013

    December 20, 2012 —
    Dan Green, a loan officer at Waterstone Mortgage, is optimistic about the construction market in 2013. He notes that the rise in building permit, housing starts, and housing completions are all good signs. Mortgage rates are still low, making these new homes attractive to buyers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives First Tier Ranking

    January 28, 2015 —
    We try to limit our narcissism here at Wendel Rosen but every once in a while we toot our own horn. Lawyers are, after all, a rather sad, competitive, yet insecure bunch (i.e., we eat this stuff up). We’re proud to announce that Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group has received a first tier ranking in U.S. News & World Reports’ Best Law Firms for 2015. This is the second year the Construction Practice Group has received a first tier ranking. Yay us! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at

    Construction Defect Scam Tied to Organized Crime?

    July 31, 2013 —
    The Las Vegas Review-Journal reports that the initial tip-off came from Scott Canepa, a construction defect attorney who alerted the FBI about Leon Benzer’s activities in taking over homeowner boards. Canepa learned that Nancy Quon was taking part in the scheme and went to the FBI with the information. After FBI officials met with Canepa, they launched an investigation, which they named “Operation GrandMaster.” Although a Benzer associate stated that Benzer claimed not to have ties to organized crime, and according to the Review-Journal, “preferred to think of himself as ‘just a bully,’” the case involves connections to a number of figures with ties to organized crime. Benzer with associated with John V. Spilotro, a lawyer whose uncle was an alleged overseer for Chicago organized crime operating in Las Vegas in the 70s and 80s. Another conspirator, Paul Citelli, reportedly has ties to organized crime in Buffalo. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Disrupt a Broken Industry—The Industrial Construction Sandbox

    November 23, 2020 —
    The existing built environment structure—arguably—is antiquated and must be disrupted to meet the rapidly changing demands of the industry. The built environment struggles with labor shortages, addressing demand, sustainability needs, cost controls, affordability and efficiency gains. Even with the advancement of emerging technology trends, the construction industry still lags behind more technologically advanced verticals. What’s missing? Something is needed beyond incremental change that will truly disrupt the industry, increase the value of other innovations and tackle industry challenges. The answer is industrialized construction technology with offsite manufacturing as the cornerstone. Technology innovation becomes exponentially more valuable when placed in this context. Shadow Ventures, a venture capital firm focused on the built environment, set out to test these theories with verifiable research published this year in a report titled, “Disrupt a Broken Industry—The Industrial Construction Sandbox.” Reprinted courtesy of Brian Sayre, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Partner Lisa M. Rolle and Associate Vito John Marzano Obtain Dismissal of Third-Party Indemnification Claims

    December 22, 2019 —
    On June 1, 2019, Traub Lieberman partner Lisa M. Rolle and associate Vito John Marzano successfully secured dismissal of all third-party claims on behalf of a corporate entity and its principal in a third-party action in the New York State Supreme Court, County of Bronx. The underlying action concerned a trip and fall that occurred on a public sidewalk located in the Bronx. Plaintiff commenced suit against the corporation property owner and its principal. Defendants/third-party plaintiffs commenced the third-party action seeking contractual and common-law indemnification against three third-party defendants, the corporate tenant, another corporate entity that was not a party to the lease and its principal. Traub Lieberman represented the latter two third-party defendants. On behalf of the corporate entity that was not a party to the lease, Traub Lieberman moved for dismissal on the basis that the lease constitutes documentary evidence establishing as a matter of law that the non-tenant corporation cannot be held liable to third-party plaintiffs. On behalf of the principal, Traub Lieberman sought dismissal for failure to state a cause of action because the principal was shielded from liability by virtue of having incorporated his business, and the complaint did not allege a claim for piercing the corporate veil. In opposition, third-party plaintiffs sought to amplify their pleadings by alleging that a de facto merger had occurred between the non-tenant corporation and the tenant corporation. Third-party plaintiffs further argued that the corporate principal executed a guaranty to the lease, thus accepting liability on behalf of the tenant corporation. Reprinted courtesy of Lisa M. Rolle, Traub Lieberman and Vito John Marzano, Traub Lieberman Ms. Rolle may be contacted at Mr. Marzano may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Implementation of CA Building Energy Efficiency Standards Delayed

    February 25, 2014 —
    In his California Construction Law blog, Garret Murai published the recent Industry Bulletin released by the California Contractors State License Board (CSLB) regarding the delayed implementation of the California Building Energy Standards. CSLB has delayed implementation from January 1st, 2014 to July 1, 2014 due to “unanticipated delays in developing complete performance compliance software for 2013 Public Domain Residential and Nonresidential California Building Energy Code Compliance guidelines, necessitating the CEC action to change the effective date of energy related provisions.” The Industry Bulletin summarized changes regarding various codes including 2013 California Energy Code, Part 6; 2013 California Administrative Code, Chapter 10, Part 1; and, 2013 CALGreen, Part 11. According to the bulletin, as reported by the California Construction Law blog, “Contractors are encouraged to contact their local building enforcement agencies for assistance and/or clarification.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Be Careful with Good Faith Payments

    February 24, 2020 —
    Sometimes doing the expedient thing and what looks good at the time can come back to bite you. Just ask 3M Company. In Faneuil, Inc. v. 3M Co., the Virginia Supreme Court considered a customer services subcontract between Faneuil and 3M relating to a toll collection contract 3M entered into with ERC. The subcontract had a “pay if paid” clause in it requiring payment to 3M from ERC before ERC was required to pay Faneuil, a written change order provision and a base monthly payment to Faneuil for the services that could be reduced in the event of less than expected toll collections. Further, the subcontract stated that if either party settled 3rd party claims, that settlement would not bind the other party to the subcontract absent consent or Court order. Faneuil was then alleged to have been required to provide “Special Services” relating to manual identification of license plates and other information necessary for toll billing due to 3M’s alleged failure to provide adequate imaging services. Faneuil requested (without written change order) and 3M promised to pay extra for these services. When 3M was slow to pay for the special services, Faneuil did what you would expect and threatened to stop providing them. Instead of contesting the right to the work, 3m made sporadic “good faith” payments to induce continued Special Services from Faneuil. Eventually 3M’s issues caused ERC to stop payments and thus 3M stopped paying Faneuil. 3M then settled the payment claims with ERC and still failed to pay Faneuil. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at