BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildings
    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


    Insured Survives Motion for Summary Judgment in Collapse Case

    With VA Mechanic’s Liens Sometimes “Substantial Compliance” is Enough (but don’t count on it) [UPDATE]

    COVID-19 Impacts on Subcontractor Default Insurance and Ripple Effects

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

    Claim for Consequential Damages Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to the 2016 Southern California Super Lawyers Lists

    Some Insurers Dismissed, Others Are Not in Claims for Faulty Workmanship

    Lessons Learned from Implementing Infrastructure BIM in Helsinki

    Mass-Timber Furnished Apartments Fare Well in Fire Tests

    AB 3018: Amendments to the Skilled and Trained Workforce Requirements on California Public Projects

    Court finds subcontractor responsible for defending claim

    The Greenest U.S. Cities & States

    Big Policyholder Win in Michigan

    Insured's Expert Qualified, Judgment for Coverage Affirmed

    Design & Construction Case Expands Florida’s Slavin Doctrine

    Motion to Dismiss Insurer's Counterclaim for Construction Defects Is Granted

    Connecticut District Court to Review Proposed Class Action in Defective Concrete Suit

    Thank You for 17 Years of Legal Elite in Construction Law

    Vinny Testaverde Alleges $5 Million Mansion Riddled with Defects

    ICC/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Green Model Code Integrates Existing Standards

    Insurer's Attempt to Strike Experts in Collapse Case Fails

    The G2G Mid-Year Roundup (2022)

    Shutdowns? What A Covid-19-Safe Construction Site Looks Like

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    Subcontractor’s Claim against City Barred by City’s Compliance with Georgia Payment Bond Statute

    Don’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public Project.

    Construction Litigation—Battles on Many Fronts

    California Governor Signs SB 496 Amending California’s Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Floating Cities May Be One Answer to Rising Sea Levels

    What If There Is a Design Error?

    No Trial Credit in NJ Appellate Decision for Non-Settling Successive Tortfeasors – Must Demonstrate Proof of Initial Tortfeasor Negligence and Proximate Cause

    Pipeline Safety Violations Cause of Explosion that Killed 8

    Owners Should Serve Request for Sworn Statement of Account on Lienor

    Diggin’ Ain’t Easy: Remember to Give Notice Before You Excavate in California

    Oregon Bridge Closed to Inspect for Defects

    Pre-Judgment Interest Not Awarded Under Flood Policy

    Trump Sues Casinos to Get Conditions Fixed or Name Off

    Is Your Contract “Mission Essential?” Recovering Costs for Performing During a Force Majeure Event Under Federal Regulations

    Named Insured’s Liability Found Irrelevant to Additional Insured’s Coverage Under a Landlords and Lessors Additional Insured Endorsement

    Contractual Assumption of Liability Does Not Bar Coverage

    Rattlesnake Bite Triggers Potential Liability for Walmart

    2021 Executive Insights: Leaders in Construction Law

    School District Client Advisory: Civility is not an Option, It is a Duty

    Georgia Federal Court Says Fact Questions Exist As To Whether Nitrogen Is An “Irritant” or “Contaminant” As Used in Pollution Exclusion

    Orchestrating Bias: Arbitrator’s Undisclosed Membership in Philharmonic Group with Pauly Shore’s Attorney Not Grounds to Reverse Award in Real Estate Dispute

    Biden Unveils $2.3 Trillion American Jobs Plan

    Hirers Must Affirmatively Exercise Retained Control to be Liable Under Hooker Exception to Privette Doctrine

    Material Prices Climb…And Climb…Are You Considering A Material Escalation Provision?

    OSHA COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing ETS Unveiled

    Another Colorado Construction Defect Reform Bill Dies
    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

    Beginning of the 2020 Colorado Legislative Session: Here We Go Again

    February 10, 2020 —
    The 2020 Colorado legislative session started on Wednesday, January 8th. It seems like there will be plenty of issues this year to which home builders will want to pay close attention. On January 13th, Senators Fenberg, Foote, and Jackson sponsored SB 20-093, known as the “Consumer and Employee Dispute Resolution Fairness Act.”
      For certain consumer and employment arbitrations, the act:
    • Prohibits the waiver of standards for and challenges for evident partiality prior to a claim being filed and requires any waiver of such provisions after the claim is filed to be in writing;
    • Provides that the right of a party to challenge an arbitrator based on evident partiality is waived if not raised within a reasonable time of learning of the information leading to the challenge but that such right is not waived if caused by the opposing party;
    • Establishes ethical standards for arbitrators; and
    • Requires specified public disclosures by arbitration services providers but includes protections for certain confidential information.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    “You’re Out of Here!” -- CERCLA (Superfund) Federal Preemption of State Environmental Claims in State Courts

    October 20, 2016 —
    The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C § 9601 et seq. (“CERCLA”), commonly referred to as “Superfund,” is a federal statute that provides funding and cost-recovery to address our nation’s worst hazardous-waste sites. While CERCLA generally vests United States District Courts with exclusive original jurisdiction over all related controversies, section 113(h) of the Act delays such jurisdiction while the United States Environmental Protection Agency supervises or undertakes environmental response action plans. What impact does this delayed federal jurisdiction have on state law claims brought in state courts? Short answer: “You’re out of here!” Litigants are precluded from bringing claims in state court that “challenge” environmental response actions under CERCLA during the pendency of those actions. Reprinted courtesy of Joshua J. Anderson, Newmeyer & Dillion LLP and John E. Van Vlear, Newmeyer & Dillion LLP Mr. Anderson may be contacted at joshua.anderson@ndlf.com Mr. Van Vlear may be contacted at john.vanvlear@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Someone Who Hires an Independent Contractor May Still Be Liable, But Not in This Case

    April 18, 2023 —
    In Allstate Veh. & Prop. Ins. Co. v. Glitz Constr. Corp., 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1180, 2023 NY Slip Op 01171, the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department (Appellate Court), considered whether a contractor could be found liable for its subcontractor’s alleged negligence in causing injury to a homeowner’s property. The homeowner’s insurer, as subrogee of the homeowner, sought to recover damages from the contractor despite an allegation that the subcontractor – an independent contractor – caused the injury to the homeowner’s property. Finding that there was no evidence that any of the exceptions to the non-liability rule related to hiring independent contractors applied, the Appellate Court affirmed the lower court’s decision granting judgment in favor of the contractor. In this case, the homeowner hired the contractor (defendant) to convert her garage area into a bedroom and an office. The defendant later hired a subcontractor to perform the electrical rough-in work. At trial, the homeowner’s insurer (plaintiff) presented evidence that the subcontractor, who damaged an existing wire with a drill bit, caused an electrical failure that resulted in a fire. The defendant argued that it could not be held liable for the subcontractor’s alleged negligence because the subcontractor was an independent contractor and, on appeal, the Appellate Court agreed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Katherine Dempsey, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Dempsey may be contacted at dempseyk@whiteandwilliams.com

    New Home Sales Slip, but Still Strong

    December 30, 2013 —
    Economists say that prospective home buyers have adjusted to the increase in mortgage rates, according to AZCentral.com. And while there was a 2.1 percent drop in new home sales in November, estimates for the preceding months were revised upwards, beating estimates. October new home sales were at the highest they had been since the beginning of the recession. The Federal Reserve plans to taper off of economic stimulus, which should send interest rates even higher. This may have prompted some home buyers to get in the market sooner, rather than later, according to Sara Watt House, and economist with Wells Fargo. “It’s not really derailing people’s purchase plans,” said Ms. House. With reduction in inventory has come an increase in prices, which also could slow down sales of new homes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Starting July 1, 2020 General Contractors are “Employers” for All Workers on Their Jobsite

    June 08, 2020 —
    I have discussed the impactful legislation to the Virginia construction industry in prior posts here at Construction Law Musings. One of those statutes that will take effect on July 1, 2020 will fundamentally change the relationships between general contractors and their subcontractors and suppliers. Senate Bill 838 does the following on construction projects with a value of $500,000 or greater that are not single family residential construction projects:
    • Makes the general contractor, and all tiers of subcontractors on a particular project contractually liable to pay their subcontractors’ (at any tier) employees wages.
    • Requires that the payments are equal or exceed those required by other statutes.
    • Deems contractors to be the employers of their subcontractors’ employees for purposes of Va. Code Section 40.1-29 that imposes criminal and civil penalties for failure to pay wages when due, and
    • Grants employees a private right of action for any violations, including the right to a class or joint action, award of liquidated damages, reasonable attorney fees and possible treble damages for “knowing” violations by the contractor.
    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

    Trends and Issues which Can Affect Workers' Compensation Coverage for Construction Companies

    December 26, 2022 —
    Recent trends in workers’ compensation coverage suggest that the number of claims are likely to continue to increase, specifically for high-risk industries, like the construction industry. This article explores multiple trends and issues which are likely to impact workers’ compensation insurance for construction companies. Several of these trends and issues reflect demographic, labor, and technological shifts, which have important implications for contractors and construction companies. 1. Technological Innovation and Worker Safety New wearable technologies and other data-collecting products such as helmets which warn of employee fatigue and sensors which help with ergonomic corrections have emerged in the markets to support safety measures in the construction industry. Although devices such as these tools can help business owners to demonstrate the implementation of safety programs to their insurance carriers, they can also distract the workers who are wearing them or go through a product malfunction, which could lead to injuries in the workplace and could also result in higher workers’ compensation premiums. While these new technological devices are intended to support worker safety on construction sites, it is also important for business owners to evaluate the potential risks of new technologies on a project site. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.

    Florida Supreme Court Adopts Federal Summary Judgment Standard, Substantially Conforming Florida’s Rule 1.510 to Federal Rule 56

    June 07, 2021 —
    Effective May 1, 2021, the Florida courts will transition to a new summary judgment standard meant to “align Florida’s summary judgment standard with that of the federal courts and of the supermajority of states that have already adopted the federal summary judgment standard.” In re Amends. to Fla. Rule of Civ. Pro. 1.510, 309 So. 3d 192, 192 (Fla. 2020). Consistent with this amendment, Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510 has been amended to adopt the federal summary judgment rule, with exceptions for timing-related issues. The Florida Supreme Court’s most recent opinion on rule 1.510 and the text of new rule 1.510 can be found here. As background, on December 31, 2020, the Florida Supreme Court adopted the federal summary judgment standard by amending Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510(c) to include the following sentence: “The summary judgment standard provided for in this rule shall be construed and applied in accordance with the federal summary judgment standard articulated in Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1976); and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (1986) [(the ‘Celotex trilogy’)].” In re Amends. to Fla. Rule of Civ. Pro. 1.510, 309 So. 3d at 196. The court’s amendment was slated to take effect on May 1, 2021, subject to a public comment period. The court also sought guidance from the Florida Bar’s Civil Procedure Rules Committee. After careful consideration of numerous responses, the court ultimately chose to adopt the substance of the text from federal rule 56. Along with its amendments, the court provides substantial guidance as to how the Florida courts and practitioners should interpret the new rule. A summary of the court’s thorough discussion follows. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    A Court-Side Seat: Flint Failures, Missed Deadlines, Toad Work and a Game of Chicken

    October 05, 2020 —
    The last few weeks have yielded a number of interesting developments in the Federal courts. FEDERAL COURTS OF APPEAL In re Flint Water Cases Several local and State of Michigan officials, including the former governor, requested dismissal from the civil litigation seeking damages for the massive failure of Flint, Michigan’s public drinking water system. On August 5, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit agreed that the plaintiffs, residents of Flint, have successfully pled a case that the conduct of the defendants so “shocked the conscience” that a claim for a violation of their substantive due process rights was appropriately alleged. The defendants, including the former governor, argued that they were entitled to a qualified immunity defense. The court rejected this argument on the basis of the earlier decisions made by the court in this matter. Judge Sutton concurred because he was bound by this precedent, but remarked that the evidence for the governor’s culpability was very thin; he was not intimately connected to the extraordinary error in judgment. The majority was very upset with this concurrence as indicted by their own opinion. 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