BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimony
    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


    Repairs to Water Infrastructure Underway After Hurricane Helene

    Court Grants Motion to Dismiss Negligence Claim Against Flood Insurer

    That Boilerplate Language May Just Land You in Hot Water

    Michigan Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C-" Grade, Improving from "D+" Grade in 2018

    Concurrent Causation Doctrine Applies Where Natural and Man-made Perils Combine to Create Loss

    Insured Cannot Sue to Challenge Binding Appraisal Decision

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

    Federal Court Holds That Other Insurance Analysis Is Unnecessary If Policies Cover Different Risks

    Denver Airport Terminates P3 Contract For Main Terminal Renovation

    Insured's Claim for Replacement Cost Denied

    Is There Direct Physical Loss Under A Property Policy When COVID-19 is Present?

    Oregon Court of Appeals Rules That Negligent Construction (Construction Defect) Claims Are Subject to a Two-Year Statute of Limitations

    Trump Soho May Abandon Condos to Operate Mainly as Hotel

    Nevada Lawmakers Had Private Meetings on Construction Defects

    Commercial Real Estate Brokerages in an Uncertain Russian Market

    Detroit Craftsmen Sift House Rubble in Quest for Treasured Wood

    The Families First Coronavirus Response Act: What Every Employer Should Know

    Hammer & Hand’s Top Ten Predictions for US High Performance Building in 2014

    Louisiana Politicians Struggle on Construction Bills, Hospital Redevelopment

    D.R. Horton Earnings Rise as Sales and Order Volume Increase

    The Future of Construction Tech Is Decision Tech

    Employees Versus Independent Contractors

    Firm Claims Construction Defects in Hawaiian Homes

    New Jersey/New York “Occurrence”

    Rulemaking to Modernize, Expand DOI’s “Type A” Natural Resource Damage Assessment Rules Expected Fall 2023

    AEM Pursuing ISO Standard for Earthmoving Grade-Control Data

    Subcontractors Have a Duty to Clarify Ambiguities in Bid Documents

    Court of Appeals Finds Arbitration Provision Incorporated by Reference Unenforceable

    Top 10 Take-Aways: the ABA Forum's 2024 Mid-Winter Meeting

    Gone Fishing: Tenant’s Insurer Casts A Line Seeking To Subrogate Against The Landlord

    Being the Bearer of Bad News (Sounding the Alarm on Construction Issues Early and Often) (Law Note)

    Recent Developments Involving Cedell v. Farmers Insurance Company of Washington

    Payne & Fears LLP Recognized by Best Lawyers in 2024 “Best Law Firms” Rankings

    Construction Contract Basics: Venue and Choice of Law

    MTA Implements Revised Contractors Debarment Regulations

    Massachusetts Roofer Killed in Nine-story Fall

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Advances to Debris Removal Phase

    Damages in First Trial Establishing Liability of Tortfeasor Binding in Bad Faith Trial Against Insurer

    What You Need to Know About Notices of Completion, Cessation and Non-Responsibility

    Haight Brown & Bonesteel Ranked on the 2017 "Best Law Firms" List by U.S. News - Best Lawyers

    Feds OK $9B Houston Highway Project After Two-Year Pause

    The Road to Hell is Paved with Good Intentions: A.B. 1701’s Requirement that General Contractors Pay Subcontractor Employee Wages Will Do More Harm Than Good

    Florida trigger

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

    Construction Bidding for Success

    Wait, You Want An HOA?! Restricting Implied Common-Interest Communities

    Thank You!

    Benford’s Law: A Seldom Used Weapon in Forensic Accounting

    Insurers Get “Floored” by Court of Appeals Regarding the Presumptive Measure of Damages in Consent Judgments

    U.S. Supreme Court Halts Enforcement of the OSHA Vaccine or Test Mandate
    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

    Contractor Changes Contract After Signed, Then Sues Older Woman for Breaking It

    September 03, 2015 —
    Channel 13 Who TV reported, in Winterset, Iowa, Mary Gregory allegedly signed an estimate for hail damage repair to her home, and was later told by the contractor that it was a contract. When a crew showed up to her home to perform the work, she turned them away. Then, Gregory received a letter from an attorney demanding eight thousand dollars for breach of contract. It turns out that the contractor altered the estimate Gregory signed and submitted it to the insurance company. According to Who TV, the altered estimate “contained work that Gregory says she didn’t authorize and a price tag of $32,134.” Jim Nelle, the contractor, admitted that he added to the contract after it was signed. He claims he was only trying to help her. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Kadeejah Kelly Named to The National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List

    October 17, 2022 —
    New York, N.Y. (October 6, 2022) – New York Associate Kadeejah J. Kelly was recently named to The National Black Lawyers (NBL) “Top 40 Under 40” list. The NBL “Top 40 Under 40” recognizes the most talented black attorneys under the age of 40 who have an outstanding reputation among peers, the judiciary and the public. The honorees on this list are nominated from leading lawyers, current members, and Executive Committee members. Ms. Kelly is a member of the General Liability and Professional Liability Practices. She has extensive experience defending owners, contractors, developers and corporations in high exposure construction cases including New York Labor Law matters, premises liability and construction defect claims. She also has experience defending malpractice claims against attorneys, accountants, architects, engineers, funeral home directors and other miscellaneous professionals. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Recent Developments with California’s Right to Repair Act

    June 11, 2014 —
    In Lexology, Amy Kuo Alexander of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP analyzed recent decisions involving California’s Right to Repair Act, SB 800. According to Alexander, “SB 800, applies to all new residential construction sold after January 1, 2003” and “[i]t establishes a process to resolve certain construction defect claims prior to the filing of any lawsuit by a homeowner of new residential construction.” Alexander’s three main discussion points include “SB 800 is Not the Exclusive Remedy,” “Notice Requirements to Builder Under SB 800,” and “Parties Can Opt Out of SB 800 to Adopt Their Own Prelitigation Procedure So Long as the Terms Are Not Unconscionable.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    April 20, 2011 —

    After reviewing the decision in Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, et al., the Oregon Supreme Court affirmed that a tort claim for property damage arising from construction defects may exist even when the homeowner and the builder are in a contractual relationship.

    When the case was initially filed, the plaintiffs alleged breach of contract and negligence. The defendants moved for summary judgment arguing that one, the claim was barred by the six-year statute of limitations and two, no special relationship (such as one between a doctor and patient) existed. The court agreed with the defendants. However, the Court of Appeals while affirming the trial court’s decision on breach of contract reversed the decision on negligence. The Court of Appeals stated that an administrative or statute rule could establish a standard of care independent from the contract.

    The Oregon Supreme Court gave an example of cases where a tort claim could exist when a contract is present: “If an individual and a contractor enter into a contract to build a house, which provides that the contractor will install only copper pipe, but the contractor installs PVC pipe instead (assuming both kinds of pipe comply with the building code and the use of either would be consistent with the standard of care expected of contractors), that failure would be a breach of contract only. […] If the failure to install the copper pipe caused a reduction in the value of the house, the plaintiff would be able to recover that amount in an action for breach of contract. […] On the other hand, if the contractor installed the PVC pipe in a defective manner and those pipes therefore leaked, causing property damage to the house, the homeowner would have claims in both contract and tort. […] In those circumstances, the obligation to install copper instead of PVC pipe is purely contractual; the manner of installing the pipe, however, implicates both contract and tort because of the foreseeable risk of property damage that can result from improperly installed pipes.”

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    The Living Makes Buildings Better with Computational Design

    November 12, 2019 —
    The AEC industry has a responsibility and mandate when it comes to addressing significant global challenges in the sector and improving operational practice. Professionals such as Lorenzo Villaggi, Senior Research Scientist at The Living, believe that new design technologies hold the key to better-performing built environments. “Although I’m trained as an architect, I’ve always had an interest in how technology can interact with and have an impact on design processes,” says Lorenzo. “I’ve developed a familiarity with advanced computational tools and eventually developed my own.” These computational tools are primarily designed to assist with the generation of design options and improve performance analysis. They range from small systems that help users design faster, all the way to elaborate software that can perform complex, mission-critical tasks. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Payne & Fears LLP Recognized by U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers in 2023 “Best Law Firms” Rankings

    November 28, 2022 —
    Payne & Fears LLP is pleased to announce that the firm has been recognized by U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers 2023 “Best Law Firms” list. Firms included in the 2023 edition of U.S. News – Best Lawyers “Best Law Firms” are recognized for professional excellence with consistently impressive ratings from clients and peers. This includes the top 5% of private practicing lawyers in the United States. Payne & Fears LLP has been ranked in the following practice areas:
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Employment Law – Management
    • Insurance Law
    • Labor Law – Management
    • Litigation – Labor & Employment
    • Litigation – Real Estate
    • Litigation – Intellectual Property
    Additionally, on August 15, 2022, 11 of our attorneys were selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2023. Collectively bringing decades of experience and dedication to their practice, Jeffrey K. Brown, Daniel F. Fears, Daniel M. Livingston, Thomas L. Vincent, Benjamin A. Nix, James L. Payne, Scott S. Thomas, and Kelby Van Patten received this respected achievement. Additionally, Leilani E. Jones, Sarah J. Odia, and Matthew C. Lewis were included in Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch 2023.  Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Payne & Fears LLP

    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

    January 06, 2012 —

    The US District Court of Nevada issued a summary judgment in the case of R&O Construction Company V. Rox Pro International Group, Ltd. on December 19, 2011. The case involved the installation of stone veneer at a Home Depot location (Home Depot was not involved in the case). R&O’s subcontractor, New Creation Masonry, purchased the stone veneer from Arizona Stone. Judge Larry Hicks noted that “the stone veneer failed and R&O was forced to make substantial structural repairs to the Home Depot store.”

    Rox Pro asked the court for a summary judgment, which the court granted only in part. The court looked at two issues in the case, whether the installation instructions constituted a breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and whether there was a breach of an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

    Judge Hicks found that there was a breach of implied warranty of merchantability. The instructions drafted by Real Stone and distributed by Arizona Stone were not sufficient for affixing the supplied stones, according to R&O’s expert, a claim the plaintiffs dispute. “Because there is an issue of material fact concerning the installation guidelines, the court shall deny Arizona Stone’s motion for a summary judgment on this issue.”

    On the other hand, the judge did not find that the instructions had any bearing as to whether R&O bought the stone, since the stone was selected by the shopping center developer. This issue was, in the view of the judge, appropriately dismissed.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Washington High Court Holds Insurers Bound by Representations in Agent’s Certificates of Insurance

    March 16, 2020 —
    In responding to a certified question from the Ninth Circuit in T-Mobile USA Inc. v. Selective Insurance Company of America, the Washington Supreme Court has held that an insurer is bound by representations regarding a party’s additional insured status contained in a certificate of insurance issued by the insurer’s authorized agent, even where the certificate contains language disclaiming any effect on coverage. To hold otherwise, the court noted, would render meaningless representations made on the insurer’s behalf and enable the insurer to mislead parties without consequence. The certified question and ruling stem from T-Mobile USA’s appeal of the district court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of Selective Insurance Company on T-Mobile USA’s breach of contract and declaratory judgment claims. Selective issued the insurance policy at issue to a contractor of T-Mobile Northeast, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of T-Mobile USA. Through endorsement, the policy extended “additional insured” status to T-Mobile NE because the contract between T-Mobile NE and the insured required that T-Mobile NE be added as an additional insured. Additional insured status was not, however, extended to T-Mobile USA, as T-Mobile USA had not entered a written contract with the insured. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Michelle M. Spatz, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Ms. Spatz may be contacted at mspatz@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of