BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer 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


    Preliminary Notices: Common Avoidable But Fatal Mistakes

    Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly Honors Construction Attorney

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

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Tier 1 and Tier 2 “Best Law Firm” by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2025

    Property Owners Sue San Francisco Over Sinking Sidewalks

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: World Class Shopping Experiences

    Colorado Senate Revives Construction Defects Reform Bill

    Harmon Tower Opponents to Try Mediation

    Hurdles with Triggering a Subcontractor Performance Bond

    New York Office Secures Appellate Win in Labor Law 240(1) Fall in Basement Accident Case

    Blockbuster Breakwater: Alternative Construction Method Put to the Test in Tampa Bay

    Why Is California Rebuilding in Fire Country? Because You’re Paying for It

    New Jersey Imposes New Apprenticeship Training Requirements

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    Bidders Shortlisted as Oroville Dam Work Schedule is Set

    Keller Group Fires Two Executives in Suspected Australia Profits Reporting Fraud

    More on the VCPA and Construction

    Contractor Sues Construction Defect Claimants for Defamation

    Not All Work is Covered Under the Federal Miller Act

    City Covered From Lawsuits Filed After Hurricane-Damaged Dwellings Demolished

    Eighth Circuit Affirms Finding of Bad Faith, Award of Costs and Prejudgment Interest

    Union Handbilling: When, Where, and Why it is Legal

    Montana Trial Court Holds That Youths Have Standing to Bring Constitutional Claims Against State Government For Alleged Climate Change-Related Harms

    Incorporation, Indemnity and Statutes of Limitations, Oh My!

    Court Grants Motion to Dismiss Negligence Claim Against Flood Insurer

    Kentucky Supreme Court Creates New “Goldilocks Zone” to Limit Opinions of Biomechanical Experts

    Client Alert: Catch Me If You Can – Giorgio Is No Gingerbread Man

    Colorado’s Abbreviated Legislative Session Offers Builders a Reprieve

    Estoppel Certificate? Estop and Check Your Lease

    One Nation, Under Renovation

    New Home for the Aged Suffers Construction Defects

    ASCE Statement On House Passage Of The Precip Act

    South Carolina Supreme Court Asked Whether Attorney-Client Privilege Waived When Insurer Denies Bad Faith

    Washington Court Denies Subcontractor’s Claim Based on Contractual Change and Notice Provisions

    Umbrella Policy Must Drop Down to Assist with Defense

    Occurrence Found, Business Risk Exclusions Do Not Bar Coverage for Construction Defects

    New York City Construction: Boom Times Again?

    Anti-Fracking Win in N.Y. Court May Deal Blow to Industry

    Don’t Kick the Claim Until the End of the Project: Timely Give Notice and Preserve Your Claims on Construction Projects

    The Importance of Preliminary Notices on Private Works Projects

    Court’s Ruling on SB800 “Surprising to Some”

    EPA Announces Decision to Retain Current Position on RCRA Regulation of Oil and Gas Production Wastes

    Performance Bond Primer: Need to Knows and Need to Dos

    Allegations That COVID-19 Was Physically Present and Altered Property are Sufficient to Sustain COVID-19 Business Interruption Suit

    New York Establishes a Registration Requirement for Contractors and Subcontractors Performing Public Works and Covered Private Projects

    Hunton Andrews Kurth’s Insurance Recovery Practice, Andrea DeField and Cary D. Steklof, Recognized as Legal Elite

    The Drought Is Sinking California

    Hennigh Law Corporation Wins Award Against Viracon, Inc In Defective Gray PIB Case

    Town Concerned Over Sinkhole at Condo Complex

    Flooded Courtroom May be Due to Construction Defect
    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

    HHMR is pleased to announce that David McLain has been selected as a 2020 Super Lawyer

    June 29, 2020 —
    David McLain is a founding member of Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell. Mr. McLain has over 22 years of experience and is well known for his work in the defense of the construction industry, particularly in the area of construction defect litigation. He is a member of the Executive Committee of the CLM Claims College - School of Construction, which is the premier course for insurance, industry, and legal professionals. Law Week Colorado recently named Mr. McLain as the 2019 People’s Choice for Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants. HHMR is highly regarded for its expertise in construction law and the litigation of construction-related claims, including the defense of large and complex construction defect matters. Our attorneys provide exceptional service to individuals, business owners, and Fortune 500 companies. The firm is experienced in providing legal support throughout trials and alternative dispute resolution such as mediations and arbitrations. 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

    Allegations that Carrier Failed to Adequately Investigate Survive Demurrer

    July 30, 2014 —
    The California Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's dismissal of a complaint alleging bad faith for the insurer's failure to adequately investigate the claim. Maslo v. Ameriprise Auto & Home Ins., 2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 564 (Cal. Ct. App. June 27, 2014). The insured was injured in an auto accident caused by an uninsured motorist. The insured sought policy limits of $250,000 from the insurer. In response, the insurer demanded arbitration. The arbitrator awarded $164,120.91. The insured sued, alleging the breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The First Amended Complaint (FAC) alleged the insured was not at fault. The police report found that the uninsured motorist was the sole cause of the accident. The insured provided the police report and medical records to the insurer. When the insured demanded the $250,000 policy limits, the insurer did not respond. 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

    The Great Fallacy: If Builders Would Just Build It Right There Would Be No Construction Defect Litigation

    January 21, 2015 —
    As the 2015 Colorado legislative session gets into full swing, there is a lot of anticipation and discussion regarding this year’s construction defect reform bill. It seems like every time a reporter broaches this issue in an article, there is a quote from a plaintiffs’ attorney stating that if builders would just build homes right, there would be no need for construction defect litigation. This is the sentiment expressed in the site www.BuildOurHomesRight.com. The problem with this argument is that it assumes that the “construction defects” for which associations sue are those only that affect the performance of the homes, or are likely to affect the performance of the homes during the useful life of the component at issue. Unfortunately, this is simply not the case. Over the years, the plaintiffs’ bar has stacked the deck, so to speak, making actionable every technical building code violation, regardless of whether it has any impact, or will ever likely have any impact, on the performance of the homes involved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Injured Subcontractor Employee Asserts Premise Liability Claim Against General Contractor

    March 22, 2021 —
    In an interesting opinion, an injured employee of an electrical subcontractor sued the general contractor of a parking garage project under a premise liability theory after being injured when stepping on an uncovered floor drain at the project site. There is no discussion in the opinion as to workers compensation immunity. Rather, the discussion centers on the injured employee’s premise liability claim as to whether the general contractor “breached its duty to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition by leaving the drain uncovered and failing to warn of the danger of the uncovered drain.” Pratus v. Marzucco’s Construction & Coatings, Inc., 46 Fla.L.Weekly D186a (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the general contractor finding that the drain was open and obvious on the site. The Second District Court of Appeal reversed the summary judgment with a discussion as to premise liability claims, particularly as it pertains to a business invitee, which is what the injured employee of the electrical subcontractor was. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    No Additional Insured Coverage for Subcontractor's Work Outside Policy Period

    August 19, 2015 —
    In a dispute between two insurers, the district court determined that the contractor was not an additional insured under the subcontractor's policy. Navigators Spec. Ins. Co. v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79338 (N. D. Cal. June 17, 2015). McDevitt & McDevitt Construction Corporation was the general contractor for construction of a condominium complex. McDevitt was insured by Navigators Specialty Insurance Company. F&M was a subcontractor for the project for providing structural steel components. F&M's subcontract required it to obtain liability insurance and name McDevitt as an additional insured under a policy that was to be primary. F&M secured a policy with North American Capacity Insurance Company (NAC) which included an endorsement for additional insureds. The endorsement provided that an entity could be an additional insured only with respect to "occurrences resulting from work performed by you during the policy period, or occurrences resulting from the conduct of your business during the policy period." McDevitt and F&M were sued for construct defect claims. Navigators defended McDevitt and NAC defended F&M. Navigators tendered McDevitt's defense to NAC because McDevitt was an additional insured under NAC's policy. NAC disclaimed coverage. 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

    Four Companies Sued in Pool Electrocution Case

    June 26, 2014 —
    Back in April of this year, a seven-year old boy was electrocuted while swimming in his family’s pool in North Miami, Florida, according to CBS Miami. Now, the family is suing four companies in a wrongful death suit. The complaint claims that the victim “was electrocuted due to a faulty pool light and electrical grounding and bonding on the pool’s lighting system.” Pentair Water Pool and Spa, Inc., manufactured and designed the pool light. Florida Pool & Spa Center “provided periodic cleaning, maintenance and inspections of the pool,” while Gary B Electric and Construction Consultant is being sued for “improper bonding and grounding.” Also, Jorge Perez Enterprises Inspection Company is listed in the lawsuit since they conducted the inspection when the family purchased the home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Negligent Construction an Occurrence Says Ninth Circuit

    June 30, 2011 —

    One June 27, the US Court of Appeals has rejected an appeal from Mid-Continent Casualty Company. Mid-Continent had appealed a summary judgment granted to Titan Construction Company.

    Titan Construction had built condominiums for the Williamsburg Condominium Association, which later filed a construction defect lawsuit against Titan and other defendants. Titan settled with the developer, Kennydale, assigning its rights against Mid-Continent to Kennydale. Mid-Continent filed suit, claiming that “it had no obligation to indemnify or defend Titan, Kennydale, or various other defendants.” The district court found in favor of Mid-Continent, granting a summary judgment, concluding that Titan’s insurance covered “occurrences,” and none had taken place.

    On appeal, the court found that the negligent construction of the condominiums constituted an “occurrence” The case was remanded and the district court this time found in favor of Titan, “concluding that Mid-Continent failed to raise a triable issue as to the applicability of the remaining policy exclusions.

    The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has now affirmed that decision and Titan’s summary judgment stands.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Attorneys' Fee Clauses are Engraved Invitations to Sue

    April 19, 2021 —
    As we start another trip around the sun, hopefully you are in the process of updating your form contracts, including purchase and sale agreements and express written warranties. Because the law and litigation landscape continually changes, it is a good practice to periodically update the forms you use in order to give yourself a fighting chance if and when the plaintiffs' attorneys come knocking on your door. As you engage in this process, I hope that you will take a critical look at whether your contracts include a prevailing party attorneys' fees clause and, if so, whether you should leave it in there. In Colorado, parties are entitled to recover attorneys' fees only if provided for by statute or by contract. Historically, plaintiffs' attorneys relied on two statutes, the Colorado Consumer Protection Act and Colorado's Statutory Interest statute, to recover attorneys’ fees in construction defect cases. In 2003, the Colorado legislature capped treble damages and attorneys' fees under the Colorado Consumer Protection Act at $250,000, effectively restricting plaintiffs' attorneys from relying on the CCPA to recoup their attorneys' fees, especially in large cases. In 2008, the Colorado Supreme Court issued its decision in Goodyear v. Holmes, stating that plaintiffs can only claim prejudgment interest under Colorado's Statutory Interest statute, in cases where they have already spent money on repairs, not when they are suing for an estimate of what repairs will cost in the future. Without either the CCPA or the prejudgment interest statute to recover attorneys' fees, plaintiffs' attorneys most often now rely on the prevailing party attorney fee clause in contracts between the owner and builder, or in the declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions in situations where a claim is prosecuted by an HOA. 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