BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witness
    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


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

    How Construction Contracts are Made. Hint: It’s a Bit Like Making Sausage

    Florida Enacts Property Insurance Overhaul for Benefit of Policyholders

    Don MacGregor To Speak at 2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    Bill to Include Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Introduced in New Jersey

    California Subcontractor Gets a Kick in the Rear (or Perhaps the Front) for Prematurely Recorded Mechanics Lien

    Options When there is a Construction Lien on Your Property

    New York Philharmonic Will Open Geffen Hall Two Years Ahead of Schedule

    Gilroy Homeowners Sue over Leaky Homes

    Be Strategic When Suing a Manufacturer Under a Warranty with an Arbitration Provision

    City of Aspen v. Burlingame Ranch II Condominium Owners Association: Clarifying the Application of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act

    Court Addresses HOA Attempt to Restrict Short Term Rentals

    The Leaning Tower of San Francisco

    UK Construction Output Rises Unexpectedly to Strongest Since May

    Design-Assist, an Ambiguous Term Causing Conflict in the Construction Industry[1]

    School District Settles Over Defective Athletic Field

    Did the Court of Appeals Just Raise the Bar for California Contractors to Self-Report Construction-Related Judgments?

    Fixing the Problem – Not the Blame

    Congratulations to BWB&O Partner John Toohey and His Fellow Panel Members on Their Inclusion in West Coast Casualty’s 2022 Program!

    A Court-Side Seat: As SCOTUS Decides Another Regulatory “Takings” Case, a Flurry of Action at EPA

    Enhanced Geothermal Energy Could Be the Next Zero-Carbon Hero

    Georgia Court of Appeals Holds Lay Witness Can Provide Opinion Testimony on the Value of a Property If the Witness Had an Opportunity to Form a Reasoned Opinion

    Risk Transfer: The Souffle of Construction Litigation

    Pennsylvania Finds Policy Triggered When Property Damage Reasonably Apparent

    Hartford Stadium Controversy Still Unresolved

    Arctic Roads and Runways Face the Prospect of Rapid Decline

    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    Does the New Jersey Right-To-Repair Law Omit Too Many Construction Defects?

    South Carolina Supreme Court Requires Transparency by Rejecting an Insurer’s “Cut-and-Paste” Reservation of Rights

    Anchoring Abuse: Evolution & Eradication

    In Contracts, One Word Makes All the Difference

    Mitigating FCRA Risk Through Insurance

    The 2021 Top 50 Construction Law Firms™

    Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review Regarding Necessary Parties in Lien Foreclosure Actions

    Firm Pays $8.4M to Settle Hurricane Restoration Contract Case

    Insurer's Attempt to Limit Additional Insured Status Fails

    Blurred Lines: New York Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Privileged Documents in Connection with Pre-Denial Communications Prepared by Insurer's Coverage Counsel

    Tennessee Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C" Grade

    WSHB Expands into the Southeast

    Hunton Insurance Group Advises Policyholders on Issues That Arise With Wildfire Claims and Coverage – A Seven-Part Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series

    Coverage Exists for Landlord as Additional Insured

    Associated Builders and Contractors Northern California Chapter Announces New President/CEO

    PSA: Pay If Paid Ban Goes into Effect on January 1, 2023

    Floating Cities May Be One Answer to Rising Sea Levels

    General Contractors Can Be Sued by a Subcontractor’s Injured Employee

    Pa. Contractor Pleads No Contest to Prevailing-Wage Charges, Pays Workers $20.7M

    New York Appellate Court Expands Policyholders’ Ability to Plead and Seek Consequential Damages

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (05/11/22)

    Growing Optimism Among Home Builders

    Connecting Construction Project Information: Open Technology Databases Improve Project Communication, Collaboration and Visibility
    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

    Rise in Single-Family Construction Anticipated in Michigan

    December 04, 2013 —
    Things are looking up for Michigan home builders. Rovert Filka, the chief executive officer of the Home Builders Association of Michigan said that “home values are starting to rise as a result of so little production over the last five years.” The group anticipates that about 14,000 new homes will be built in Michigan over the next year. Jason Burton, owner of Price Right Builders, noted that the increase in building has been slow. “Locally we are seeing the climb, but it’s a slow climb,” he said. “We’ve got a long way to go to get back to where we were.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer's In-House Counsel's Involvement in Coverage Decision Opens Door to Discovery

    January 11, 2021 —
    The Mississippi Supreme Court held that the insurer must produce written communications from and make available for deposition the in-house counsel who orchestrated the denial of coverage. Travelers Pro. Cas. Co. of Am. v. 100 Renaissance, LLC, 2020 Miss. LEXIS 409 (Miss. Oct. 29, 2020). An unidentified driver struck a flagpole owned by the insured Renaissance, causing $2,134 in damages. Renaissance filed a claim with Travelers for uninsured-motorist coverage. The Travelers' claims handler, Charlene Duncan, determined there was no coverage because the flagpole was not a covered auto. Before corresponding with the insured, Duncan sought legal advice from Travelers' in-house counsel, Jim Harris. Renaissance sued Travelers for coverage and bad faith. Renaissance then took Duncan's deposition and asked that she explain both the denial letter and the reasons Travelers denied the claim. Duncan repeatedly said she did not know the basis of the denial and that she had consulted with Harris. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    General Contractor’s Excess Insurer Denied Equitable Contribution From Subcontractor’s Excess Insurer

    December 15, 2016 —
    In Advent v. National Union Fire Ins. Co., etc. (No. H041934 filed 12/6/16), a California appeals court refused to order a subcontractor’s excess insurer to contribute to a general contractor’s excess insurer because the general contractor did not qualify as an additional insured of the subcontractor’s insurer, and the policy wording made the subcontractor’s excess insurer second level excess above the general contractor’s own excess insurance. Advent was the general contractor on a housing development and Johnson was a sub-subcontractor providing concrete on perimeter walls. A Johnson employee dispatched to retrieve plywood dumped between some of the buildings somehow fell down an open stairwell inside one of the unfinished buildings and suffered serious injury. He sued Advent and others for negligence, but could not remember how he fell. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Joins the Majority of States in Modifying Its Survival Action Statute To Now Permit Recovery for Pain, Suffering And Disfigurement

    January 03, 2022 —
    On January 1, 2022, California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”)Section 377.30 et seq., as amended by Senate Bill 447, otherwise known as the “survival action” statute1, goes into effect. On that date, all plaintiffs filing new civil cases filed on or after January 1, 2022, and before January 1, 2026, and plaintiffs in any action or proceeding granted trial preference pursuant to CCP Section 36 before January 1, 2022, will be expressly allowed to recover damages for a decedent’s pain, suffering, or disfigurement in a survival action.2 This is a significant change in California law. In that regard, California is now the 46th state to permit this form of recovery. As reported in the Legislative Counsel’s Digest3, Consumer Attorneys of California and Consumer Federation of California, which co-sponsored Senate Bill 447, opined to the Legislature that the prior law provided a “death discount” to defendants which incentivized bad faith delays in resolution, and caused unnecessary congestion of the already overburdened court system. These argued issues will be vetted by the Legislature using the four-year reporting requirement that is also part of the amendment to the statute, requiring plaintiffs who recover this newly permitted category of damages to report the valuation and details of the case to the Judicial Council within 60 days of the judgment or other operative court document being entered in the court’s docket.4 The amendment will be evaluated by the Legislature for amendment or extension on or before January 1, 2026. Reprinted courtesy of Krsto Mijanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel and Elizabeth D. Rhodes, Haight Brown & Bonesteel Mr. Mijanovic may be contacted at kmijanovic@hbblaw.com Ms. Rhodes may be contacted at erhodes@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Illinois Appellate Court Addresses Professional Services Exclusion in Homeowners Policy

    August 03, 2022 —
    In Stonegate Ins. Co. v. Smith, 2022 IL App (1st) 210931, the Insured was performing plumbing work at a multi-story townhouse when a fire ensued causing damage to the second story unit. Although a carpenter by trade, the Insured was performing plumbing work consisting of the replacement of a shower valve as a favor for a friend. To accomplish the task, the Insured utilized a small propane torch to attempt to remove the old water piping to the shower. In doing so, the insulation behind the bathroom wall caught fire and the flame spread upward to the neighboring unit. Stonegate had issued a homeowner’s policy to the Insured during the relevant time period. The homeowner's policy excluded coverage for property damage "[a]rising out of the rendering of or failure to render professional services." Subsequent to tender of the loss, Stonegate initiated a declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration that it owned no duty to defend or indemnity pursuant to the professional services exclusions. In finding in favor of the Insured, the Court began its analysis by noting that the homeowner's policy did not define the term "professional services" such that it was the Court’s task to determine whether the Insured’s work qualified as a "professional service" for purposes of the exclusion. The Court further prefaced its holding by stating that for an exclusionary clause to effectively deny coverage, its applicability must be clear and free from doubt because any doubts as to coverage will be resolved in favor of the insured. Looking to Illinois case precedent, the Court found that the term "professional service" is not limited to services for which the person performing them must be licensed by a governmental authority. Rather, "professional services" encompass any business activity conducted by an insured that (1) involves specialized knowledge, labor, or skill, and (2) is predominantly mental or intellectual as opposed to physical or manual in nature. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James M. Eastham, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Eastham may be contacted at jeastham@tlsslaw.com

    Can an Owner Preemptively Avoid a Mechanics Lien?

    May 25, 2020 —
    Various sections of the California Civil Code, beginning with section 8000, protect the right of contractors, subcontractors and suppliers in the construction industry to obtain payment for work performed and materials supplied to construction projects. Under these statutes, unpaid claimants are entitled to use mechanics liens, stop payment notices and other methods to protect their right to payment. Mechanics liens allow unpaid claimants to sell the property where the work was performed in order to obtain payment. Stop payment notices force the owner or the bank to set money aside to pay unpaid claimants. Article XIV of our California Constitution even elevates the mechanics lien remedy to a “constitutional right”. The system generally works well, and claimants are paid. As someone who practices and teaches construction law, I have noticed a seldom used statutory tool that seems to provide a mechanism for property owners under certain circumstances to prevent subcontractors and suppliers from imposing enforceable mechanics lien on property where work was performed. Under California Civil Code section 8520, it appears that all that an owner of property need do to avoid a mechanics lien on its property is to give a proper notice (per Civil Code section 8100 et seq.) to a person who has a mechanics lien right (a subcontractor or supplier) that the owner is invoking Civil Code section 8520 and that if the claimant is unpaid for work performed or materials supplied to the owner’s property that the claimant must either provide the owner with a stop payment notice or forfeit the right to a mechanics lien on the owner’s property. This would allow an owner to avoid a mechanics lien on its property if the claimant failed to send a stop payment notice to the owner. Providing the “notice” under Civil Code section 8100 appears to be easy. It can be sent by “registered or certified mail or by express mail or by overnight delivery by an express service carrier”. It can even be by “hand delivery”. As far as the notice itself, it would seem that it can be very simple and easily performed under the process described below, which can be implemented within the office of any owner or developer. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Never, Ever, Ever Assume! (Or, How a Stuck Shoe is Like a Construction Project Assumption)

    October 21, 2019 —
    This summer, I had the fortune of taking a trip to Europe. The first place I visited was Amsterdam. A lovely town with a lot of culture and more canals than you can shake a stick at. I was meeting family there, but had hours to kill ahead of time. So, I decided to take the train from the airport into the City Centre, leave my bags at the train station luggage locker, and begin exploring. My plan took its first misstep when I attempted to board the train. Not being in a hurry, I let the other passengers get on first. Sure, I noticed the train conductor blowing his whistle while I stepped onto the train, but figured I was fine since I was already on the steps up. Until, that is, the door began to close, with me in the doorway, suitcase in the train, one foot inside, and one foot mid step up to the cabin. The door closed on my backpack (which was still on my back), but I managed to force it into the train compartment. My shoe, however, was not quite as lucky. Part of my shoe made it inside, and part was outside the door. No worry– just look for the door release mechanism, right? Wrong! There was none. The train started up, with my shoe still halfway in and halfway out of the train. (Luckily my foot itself made it inside all in one piece). The conductor came along to scold me, and told me that he could *probably* rescue my shoe once we got to Central Station. In the meantime, I sat on a nearby jump seat, keeping tabs on my shoe and fuming that this was *not* the way I planned to start my vacation. Long story short– the train conductor was able to salvage my shoe, but not without a lot of commentary on how I should never have boarded the train after the whistle blew. Lesson learned. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions

    May 25, 2020 —
    White and Williams is pleased to announce the election of Vincent Barbera and James Burger to the partnership. The firm has also promoted Victoria Fuller, Phyllis Ingram, William Johnston, Eric Porter, Gus Sara, Jenifer Scarcella, Lian Skaf and Brett Tishler from associate to counsel. The newly elected partners and promoted counsel represent the wide array of practices that White and Williams offers its clients, including education, finance, financial lines, insurance coverage, labor and employment, litigation, real estate, and subrogation. These accomplished lawyers have earned this advancement based on their contributions to the firm and their practices. “We are pleased to elect these two lawyers to the partnership and promote eight exceptional associates to counsel. The group demonstrates the legal talent and breadth of services White and Williams offers clients,” said Patti Santelle, Managing Partner of the firm. “The contributions of these lawyers have enhanced the growth and reputation of our firm and reflect our deep commitment to clients. We look forward to their continued success.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP