BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut reconstruction 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


    New Mexico Holds One-Sided Dispute Resolution Provisions Are Unenforceable

    Updated 3/13/20: Coronavirus is Here: What Does That Mean for Your Project and Your Business?

    The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities From Scratch

    Couple Sues Attorney over Construction Defect Case, Loses

    When Every Drop Matters, Cities Turn to Watertech

    Remediation Work Caused by Installation of Defective Tiles Not Covered

    Unpaid Subcontractor Walks Off the Job and Wins

    5 Questions about New York's Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act

    Contractors’ Right to Sue in Washington Requires Registration

    Bright-Line Changes: Prompt Payment Act Trends

    Appeals Court Affirms Civil Engineer Owes No Duty of Care to General Contractor

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Subcontractor Has No Duty to Defend Under Indemnity Provision

    Supreme Court of Oregon Affirms Decision in Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, et al.

    Exception to Watercraft Exclusion Does Not Apply

    Bertha – The Tunnel is Finished, but Her Legacy Continues

    You're Doing Construction in Russia, Now What?

    Proposed Law Protecting Tenants Amended: AB 828 Updated

    Fraud, the VCPA and Construction Contracts

    ASCE Statement on Biden Administration Permitting Action Plan

    Rich NYC Suburbs Fight Housing Plan They Say Will ‘Destroy’ Them

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Tightens Requirements for Co-Worker Affidavits in Asbestos Cases

    Maryland Legislation Prohibits Condominium Developers from Shortening Statute of Limitations to Defeat Unit Owner Construction Defect Claims

    Shoring of Problem Girders at Salesforce Transit Center Taking Longer than Expected

    Be Wary of Construction Defects when Joining a Community Association

    Pine River’s Two Harbors Now Targets Non-Prime Mortgages

    Legislative Update – The CSLB’s Study Under SB465

    Commercial Development Nearly Quadruples in Jacksonville Area

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    California Court of Appeal Provides Clarity On What Triggers Supplemental Analysis Under California Environmental Quality Act

    Kahana & Feld P.C. Enhances Client Offerings, Expands Litigation Firm Leadership

    “Source of Duty,” Tort, and Contract, Oh My!

    3M PFAS Water Settlement Could Reach $12.5B

    Jason Feld Awarded Volunteer of the Year by Claims & Litigation Management Alliance

    Join: Computer Science Meets Construction

    Certificates Of Merit For NC Lawsuits Against Engineers And Architects? (Still No)(Law Note)

    Engineer Probing Champlain Towers Debacle Eyes Possibility of Three Successive Collapses

    Short on Labor, Israeli Builders Seek to Vaccinate Palestinians

    SFAA Commends Congress for Maintaining Current Bonding Protection Levels in National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)

    Grenfell Fire Probe Faults Construction Industry Practices

    Differing Site Conditions Produce Differing Challenges

    The Right to Repair Act Means What it Says and Says What it Means

    One Stat About Bathrooms Explains Why You Can’t Find a House

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Business Interruption Claim Denied

    Homeowners May Not Need to Pay Lien on Defective Log Cabin

    New York Court Finds Insurers Cannot Recover Defense Costs Where No Duty to Indemnify

    ASCE Statement On White House "Accelerating Infrastructure Summit"

    Illusory Insurance Coverage: Real or Unreal?

    Suppliers of Inherently Dangerous Raw Materials Remain Excluded from the Protections of the Component Parts Doctrine

    Hurricane Ian: Florida Expedites Road Work as Damage Comes Into Focus

    NTSB Cites Design Errors in Fatal Bridge Collapse
    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. Drawing 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

    Nancy Conrad to Serve as President of the Pennsylvania Bar Association

    May 28, 2024 —
    White and Williams is honored to announce that Nancy Conrad, Managing Partner of the Lehigh Valley office and Chair of the Higher Education Practice Group, will serve as President of the Pennsylvania Bar Association (PBA) for the 2024-2025 term. She will be the seventh woman to serve as President, the second president to hail from Lehigh Valley, the third partner from White and Williams and our firm’s first woman Partner to serve in this role. Conrad recently completed her term as President of the Lehigh County Bar Association (2023-2024). Tim Davis, Managing Partner stated, “We are proud of Nancy as she begins her term as President of the Pennsylvania Bar Association. Her commitment to ensuring excellence in the profession, her focus on the community and on being an inclusive thought-leader have all laid the foundation for her to take on this important position." During her career and involvement with the PBA, Conrad served on a number of committees and sections. She started with the Women in the Profession Committee (WIP), then expanded to the Federal Practice Committee, the Labor & Employment Section, the Civil Litigation Section and others. In each of these committees and sections, she served in leadership roles leading to her appointment as Woman Governor and Chair of the DEI Team. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    North Carolina Learns More Lessons From Latest Storm

    October 16, 2018 —
    There’s no big wall planned to protect North Carolina’s coast from storm surge. There’s no massive tunnel system proposed to keep floodwaters away from populated areas. There are no grant-funded resilience competitions to help the state plan to manage water more effectively. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pam Radtke Russell, ENR
    Ms. Russell may be contacted at Russellp@bnpmedia.com

    Defects in Texas High School Stadium Angers Residents

    March 07, 2014 —
    According to WFAA News, many residents of Allen, Texas were upset when their tax dollars were spent on a new high school football stadium, and they are angry now that alleged construction defects may cause the stadium to close, and perhaps not even reopen again this fall. There “is a disproportionately large amount of our tax dollars that goes just to Allen ISD," Rachel Palmer, an Allen resident, told WFAA News. However, Ben Pogue, president of Pogue Construction, the stadium’s general contractor called the situation “a road bump.” WPAA News also interviewed Dr. Simon Chao of the Department of Civil Engineering at the University of Texas at Arlington: "Cracking is fairly common in concrete," Chao stated. "The problem is the damage water may cause by getting in the cracks.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Rio de Janeiro's Bursting Real-Estate Bubble

    September 17, 2015 —
    At opposite ends of downtown Rio de Janeiro, projects tied to Donald Trump and Eike Batista-- one a billionaire-turned-politician, the other Brazil’s most famous ex-billionaire -- have come to represent the city’s real estate bust. The 23-story Serrador building, a granite-and-glass art deco tower near Rio’s Santos Dumont airport, has sat empty since Batista’s failed empire of commodities companies abandoned it last year. Four miles away, in the city’s gritty port district, an ambitious office project that Trump lent his name to is still nothing more than a weed-filled lot about a year after construction was slated to begin. Reprinted courtesy of Juan Pablo Spinetto, Bloomberg and Peter Millard, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Design Immunity of Public Entities: Sometimes Designs, Like Recipes, are Best Left Alone

    October 21, 2015 —
    April 23, 1985 will live in infamy. The Coca Cola Company, responding to diminishing sales as its “sweeter” rival Pepsi-Cola gained market share, announced that it was changing its “secret” recipe and introducing a new kind of Coke, referred to by the public simply as, “new Coke.” The reaction was unexpected. People around the world began hoarding “old Coke.” Protest groups, such as the Society for the Preservation of the Real Thing and Old Cola Drinkers of America, sprang up around the county. Angry letters addressed to “Chief Dodo” were sent to Coca-Cola’s chief executive officer. And even Fidel Castro, a longtime Coca-Cola drinker, joined the backlash calling “new Coke” a “sign of American capital decadence.” By July it was over. Coca-Cola announced that it would once again produce “old Coke,” and in a sign (I’m sure Fidel Castro would say) of American arrogance, announced that “old Coke” would be produced under the name “Coca-Cola Classic” alongside “new Coke” which would continue to be called “Coca-Cola” suggesting that “new Coke” would be the Coke of today as well as the future. By 1992, however, “new Coke” whose sales dwindled to 3% of market share was demoted to “Coke II” and by 2002 was discontinued entirely. The moral of the story: Change the recipe at your own risk. Castro v. City of Thousand Oaks In the next case, Castro v. City of Thousand Oaks, Case No. B258649, California Court of Appeals for the Second District (August 31, 2015), the corollary might well be change the recipe design at your own risk. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Rescission of Policy for Misrepresentation in Application Reversed

    August 17, 2017 —
    The California Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's issuance of summary judgment to the insurer, finding that the insured did not make misrepresentations when applying for a policy to cover rental property. Duarte v. Pacific Spec. Ins. Co., 13 Cal. App. 5th 45 (2017). Duarte rented his house to Jennifer Pleasants. Duarte gave her a 45-day notice to quit in February 2012, but she did not leave. Two months later, Duarte applied for landlord-tenant coverage with Pacific. The application was submitted electronically and Pacific issued a policy to Durate the same day. In June 2012, Pleasants filed a lawsuit against Duarte, alleging ten causes of action arising from habitability defects which began in 2009. The suit claimed Pleasants had notified Duarte about the defects, she had suffered emotional distress and physical injury, and over paid rent, and had out-of-pocket expenses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    D.C. Decision Finding No “Direct Physical Loss” for COVID-19 Closures Is Not Without Severe Limitations

    August 24, 2020 —
    On August 6, 2020, in Rose’s 1 LLC, et al. v. Erie Insurance Exchange, Civ. Case No. 2020 CA 002424 B, a District of Columbia trial court found in favor of an insurer on cross motions for summary judgment on the issue of whether COVID-19 closure orders constitute a “direct physical loss” under a commercial property policy. At its core, the decision ignores key arguments raised in the summary judgment briefing and is narrowly premised on certain dictionary definitions of the terms, “direct,” “physical,” and “loss.” Relying almost entirely on those definitions – each supplied by the insureds in their opening brief – the court set the stage for its ultimate conclusion by finding “direct” to mean “without intervening persons, conditions, or agencies; immediate”; and “physical” to mean “of or pertaining to matter ….” The court then apparently accepted the policy’s circular definition of “loss” as meaning “direct and accidental loss of or damage to covered property.” Importantly, however, despite recognizing the fundamental rule of insurance policy construction that the court “must interpret the contract ‘as a whole, giving reasonable, lawful, and effective meaning to all its terms, and ascertaining the meaning in light of all the circumstances surrounding the parties at the time the contract was made,’” the court apparently ignored the insureds’ argument that the term “property damage” is specifically defined in the policy to include “loss of use” without any specific reference to physical or tangible damage. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Michael L. Huggins, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Huggins may be contacted at mhuggins@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Delays in Filing Lead to Dismissal in Moisture Intrusion Lawsuit

    September 09, 2011 —

    The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals has upheld a summary judgment in the case of Franklin v. Mitchell. Walter Mitchell, doing business as Southern Classic Construction built a new home for the Franklins. The Franklins moved into the home in October 2001. In April 2006 they discovered sagging floors in both the bathroom and kitchen. They contacted Mitchell who suggested the flooring might be defective. The Franklins spent eight months attempting to contact the flooring manufacturer.

    In March 2007, the Franklins had the home inspected. The sagging was determined to be due to a loss of strength in the decking because of condensation from the air conditioning system. Air returns were not properly sealed and drawing moisture into the structure. There was mold on the decking and floor joints.

    When Mitchell was contacted by the Franklins, he told them his one-year warranty had expired but had the HVAC subcontractor, Southern Mechanical Heating & Air (owned by Mitchell’s father, Jim Mitchell), look at the situation. SMHA replaced and braced subfloors. Later, they entered the crawl space to tape ducts, seal the air return, and insulate the air vent housing. The Franklins were not satisfied with the repairs, as not all the ducts were taped, nor were the air vent housings insulated.

    Franklin complained to Walter Mitchell who again cited his one-year warranty. Jim Mitchell said he would not report complaints to his insurer, stating that the repairs were unnecessary, that the work had been done correctly in the first place, and it was only done at the request of Walter Mitchell.

    In February 2009, the Franklins sued Walker Mitchell. Mitchell denied the claims, citing in part the statute of limitations. Mitchell also filed complaints against three subcontractors, including his father’s firm. Mitchell received a summary judgment as the case started after Alabama’s six-year statute of limitations.

    The appeals court rejected the Franklin’s argument that the claim of damage did not start until they were aware it was due to a construction defect. The court noted that as Walter Mitchell was licensed as a “residential home builder, the statute the Franklins cite did not apply, as it concerns architects, engineers, and licensed general contactors.”

    Nor did they feel that Mitchells’ claim that his warranty had expired were sufficient to override the statute of limitations, quoting an earlier case, “Vague assurances do not amount to an affirmative inducement to delay filing suit.” Their claim of subsequent negligent repairs was rejected because Mitchell did not direct the specific actions taken by his father’s firm.

    Read the court’s decision…

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