BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut ada design 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


    Awarding Insurer Summary Judgment Before Discovery Completed Reversed

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Obtains Pre-Answer Motion to Dismiss in Favor of Defendant

    Largest Dam Removal Program in US History Reaches Milestone

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2021 Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    Last, but NOT Least: Why You Should Take a Closer Look at Your Next Indemnification Clause

    Insured's Collapse Claim Survives Summary Judgment

    El Paso Increases Surety Bond Requirement on Contractors

    Builder Survey Focuses on Green Practices of Top 200 Builders

    Agree First or it May Cost You Later

    Hunton Insurance Coverage Group Ranked in National Tier 1 by US News & World Report

    Five Construction Payment Issues—and Solutions

    Confidence Among U.S. Homebuilders Little Changed in January

    Dreyer v. Am. Natl. Prop. & Cas. Co. Or: Do Not Enter into Nunn-Agreements for Injuries that Occurred After Expiration of the Subject Insurance Policy

    Difficult Task for Court to Analyze Delay and Disorder on Construction Project

    Construction Up in Northern Ohio

    Shifting the Risk of Delay by Having Float Go Your Way

    Couple Perseveres to Build Green

    A Court-Side Seat: Clean Air, Clean Water, Endangered Species and Deliberative Process Privilege

    California’s Labor Enforcement Task Force Continues to Set Fire to the Underground Economy

    Gordie Howe Bridge Project Team Looks for a Third Period Comeback

    House of the Week: Spanish Dream Home on California's Riviera

    Force Majeure Under the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic

    No Signature? Potentially No Problem for Sureties Enforcing a Bond’s Forum Selection Clause

    Warren Renews Criticism of Private Equity’s Role in Housing

    CGL Insurer’s Duty to Defend Insured During Pre-Suit 558 Process: Maybe?

    Reminder: In Court (as in life) the Worst Thing You Can Do Is Not Show Up

    Construction Venture Sues LAX for Nonpayment

    Ahead of the Storm: Preparing for Dorian

    Construction Defect Coverage Summary 2013: The Business Risks Shift To Insurers

    Federal District Court Issues Preliminary Injunction Against Implementation of the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Final Rule

    New California Employment Laws Affect the Construction Industry for 2019

    Flow-Down Clauses Can Drown Your Project

    Illinois Appellate Court Addresses Professional Services Exclusion in Homeowners Policy

    California Supreme Court Rights the “Occurrence” Ship: Unintended Harm Resulting from Intentional Conduct Triggers Coverage Under Liability Insurance Policy

    Persimmon Offers to Fix Risky Homes as Cladding Crisis Grows

    CGL, Builders Risk Coverage and Exclusions When Construction Defects Cause Property Damage

    An Expert’s Qualifications are Important

    Construction Litigation—Battles on Many Fronts

    State of Texas’ Claims Time Barred by 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act

    Why You May Not Want a Mandatory Mediation Clause in Your Construction Contract

    2017 California Employment Law Update

    Savera Sandhu Joins Newmeyer Dillion As Partner

    BWB&O Partner Jack Briscoe and Associate Anoushe Marandjian Win Summary Judgment Motion on Behalf of Homeowner Client!

    The G2G Year-End Roundup (2022)

    And the Winner Is . . . The Right to Repair Act!

    Developer Pre-Conditions in CC&Rs Limiting Ability of HOA to Make Construction Defect Claims, Found Unenforceable

    Designer of World’s Tallest Building Wants to Turn Skyscrapers Into Batteries

    Federal Energy Regulator Approves Rule to Speed Clean Energy Grid Links

    Haight Brown & Bonesteel Attorneys Named Best Lawyers in America ® 2016

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Tender Is the Fight”
    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

    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

    Solutions To 4 Common Law Firm Diversity Challenges

    April 27, 2020 —
    Minority attorneys continue to depart law firms at a higher rate than those in the majority and continue to be substantially underrepresented at the partner level. With the continued demands of clients and other organizations to improve diversity, law firms need to embrace new and creative solutions. To address the concern, the California Minority Counsel Program, or CMCP, held an interactive workshop in February for members to brainstorm and develop solutions to specific diversity challenges and share them with their peers. This was a rare occasion for attorneys to be able to discuss real issues they are facing in their firms and to develop a potential road map to success as opposed to listening to a panel discussion followed by the usual Q&A session. Payne & Fears LLP is a member of CMCP, so our firm had the opportunity to participate in this workshop. Law firm leaders and HR professionals may want to pay particular attention to the suggestions outlined in this article as their firms strive to diversify. The topics can be uncomfortable, but if not addressed, the problem of underrepresentation will continue to spread. Many of these ideas do not cost much in the way of money, but they do require time and commitment to change. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Alexandra DeFelice, Payne & Fears
    Ms. DeFelice may be contacted at adefelice@paynefears.com

    Defending Against the Res Ipsa Loquitur Doctrine – Liability Considerations

    February 14, 2022 —
    A doctrine of limited applicability, res ipsa loquitur, stands for the proposition that the “things speaks for itself.” This doctrine allows a plaintiff to shift their evidentiary burden of proof to the defendant where a court can infer negligence from the fundamental nature of an accident or injury. We’re noticing a dangerous trend of more plaintiffs seeking to apply this doctrine in liability cases and clients need to know how to defend themselves. When faced with a person claiming that they sustained injuries while on your property, ask yourself: did your business have exclusive control of the instrumentality plaintiff alleges caused their injury? Would the accident have occurred without the negligence of the one in control of the instrumentality? Reprinted courtesy of Rina Clemens, Traub Lieberman Ms. Clemens may be contacted at rclemens@tlsslaw.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Georgia Supreme Court Rules Construction Defects Can Constitute an Occurrence in CGL Policies

    April 05, 2011 —

    Recently, the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed the decision in American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Company v Hathaway Development Company, Inc. stating that because Whisnant’s faulty workmanship caused damage to the surrounding properties, the construction defects constituted “occurrences” under the Commercial General Liability (CGL) policy. Unlike the South Carolina Supreme court ruling in the case of Crossman Communities v Harleysville Mutual, the Georgia Supreme Court stated that an accident can happen intentionally if the effect is not the intended result.

    Interestingly, the only dissenting judge, J. Melton, disagreed with his colleagues on the basis that “although the term ‘accident’ is not specifically defined in the policy, it is axiomatic that an ‘accident’ cannot result from ‘intentional’ behavior.” It is clear that what constitutes an occurrence in CGL policies is still being hotly debated.

    Read the full story...

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

    Want to Use Drones in Your Construction Project? FAA Has Just Made It Easier.

    March 01, 2017 —
    The new Part 107 FAA Rules took effect on Monday, August 29, 2016. Unlike the previous requirements for flying a drone commercially, the new rules are much more simplistic and permissive of a broad amount of commercial drone usage. The following is the basic knowledge you need to legally use a drone on your future projects. To fly a drone commercially, there are now four major requirements:
    • You must be at least sixteen years old;
    • You must register your drone online;
    • You must pass an aviation knowledge test administered at an FAA-approved testing center; and
    • You must pass review by the Transportation Security Administration.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Masaki J. Yamada, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Mr. Yamada may be contacted at myamada@ac-lawyers.com

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

    January 31, 2018 —
    According to a quick Google search the term “holding the bag” comes from the mid eighteenth century and means be left with the onus of what was originally another’s responsibility. Nobody wants to be left holding the bag. But that is the situation our client (subcontractor) found themselves in when upon completion of a public project the general contractor went out of business before paying the remaining amount due and owing to our client. Under Nebraska law, liens are not allowed against public projects. Instead the subcontractor is to make a claim on the payment and performance bond secured by the general contractor at the start of the project. In our case, the general contractor never secured a bond on which to make a claim; consequently, leaving our client holding the bag. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sean Minaham, Lamson, Dugan and Murrary, LLP
    Mr. Minahan may be contacted at sminahan@ldmlaw.com

    Former Mayor Arrested for Violating Stop Work Order

    October 30, 2013 —
    The former mayor of Springfield, Florida has been arrested on charges of insurance fraud. More than a year ago, an investigator for the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation found that an employee of Walker’s construction company was working without workers’ compensation and issued a stop work order. Walker’s employees continued work. The charges were delayed because Walker challenged the stop work order. Once it was determined that the stop work order was issued properly, Walker was charged with a third-degree felony. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Delaware “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6)

    June 10, 2011 —

    In Goodville Mut. Cas. Co. v. Baldo, No. 09-338 (D. Del. June 2, 2011), claimants condominium association and unit owners sued project developer Rehoboth and general contractor Capano seeking damages because of moisture penetration property damage to common elements and individual units resulting from construction defects. Rehoboth and Capano filed a third party complaint against insured property manager Baldo alleging that, if Rehoboth and Capano were liable to claimants, Baldo was also liable because of Baldo’s failure to properly manage, maintain, and repair the property

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

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