BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestration
    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


    Bad News for Buyers: U.S. Mortgage Rates Hit Highest Since 2014

    Port Authority Approves Subsidies for 2 World Trade Project

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

    How the Parking Garage Conquered the City

    Recent Developments with California’s Right to Repair Act

    California Contractor Tests the Bounds of Job Order Contracting

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    Homeowner Alleges Pool Construction Is Defective

    In South Carolina, Insurer's Denial of Liability Does Not Waive Attorney-Client Privilege for Bad Faith Claim

    5 Ways Equipment Financing is Empowering Small Construction Businesses

    Balancing Cybersecurity Threats in Smart Cities: Is the Potential Convenience of “Smart” Intersections Worth the Risk?

    Hunton Insurance Partner, Larry Bracken, Elected to the American College of Coverage Counsel

    English v. RKK- There is Even More to the Story

    How Machine Learning Can Help with Urban Development

    Settlement Agreement? It Ain’t Over ‘Til it’s . . . Final, in Writing, Fully Executed, and Admissible

    Handshake Deals Gone Wrong

    Bar Against Forum Selection Clauses in Construction Contracts Extended to Design Professionals

    Tech Focus: Water Tech Getting Smarter

    Alexus Williams Receives Missouri Lawyers Media 2021 Women’s Justice Pro Bono Award

    London's Walkie Talkie Tower Voted Britain's Worst New Building

    U.S. Firm Helps Thais to Pump Water From Cave to Save Boys

    Used French Fry Oil Fuels London Offices as Buildings Go Green

    Customer’s Agreement to Self-Insure and Release for Water Damage Effectively Precludes Liability of Storage Container Company

    Don’t Fall in Trap of Buying the Cheapest Insurance Policy as it May be Bad for Your Business Risks and Needs

    Florida trigger

    Union THUGS Plead Guilty

    Workarounds for Workers' Comp Immunity: How to Obtain Additional Insured Coverage when the Named Insured is Immune from Suit

    Avoiding Construction Defect “Nightmares” in Florida

    Sept. 11 Victims Rejected by U.S. High Court on Lawsuit

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds Asbestos Exclusion in Alleged Failure to Disclose Case

    Insureds' Summary Judgment Motion on Mold Limitation Denied

    Supreme Court of Washington State Upholds SFAA Position on Spearin Doctrine

    The Jersey Shore gets Beach Prisms Designed to Reduce Erosion

    New York Appellate Division: Second Department Contradicts First Department, Denying Insurer's Recoupment of Defense Costs for Uncovered Claims

    Jason Smith and Teddie Arnold Co-Author Updated “United States – Construction” Chapter in 2024 Legal 500: Country Comparative Guides

    New California Construction Laws for 2020

    A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

    Owner’s Obligation Giving Notice to Cure to Contractor and Analyzing Repair Protocol

    Nevada Assembly Passes Construction Defect Bill

    Virtual Jury Trials of Construction Disputes: The Necessary Union of Both Sides of the Brain

    APROPLAN and GenieBelt Merge, Creating “LetsBuild” – the Build Phase End-to-End Digital Platform

    Illinois Court Determines Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims

    Texas Court Construes Breach of Contract Exclusion Narrowly in Duty-to-Defend Case

    Florida Passes Tort Reform Bill

    Waiver of Subrogation Enforced, Denying Insurers Recovery Against Additional Insured in $500 Million Off-Shore Oil Rig Loss

    The Legal Landscape

    2014 WCC Panel: Working Smarter with Technology

    Clean Energy and Conservation Collide in California Coastal Waters

    Colorado Senate Bill 13-052: The “Transit-Oriented Development Claims Act of 2013.”

    Construction Spending Highest Since April 2009
    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

    Confidence Among U.S. Homebuilders Little Changed in January

    January 28, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- Confidence among U.S. homebuilders hovered in January close to a nine-year high, indicating the residential real estate market is poised to expand this year. While the National Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo builder sentiment gauge fell to 57 this month from 58 in December, readings greater than 50 mean more respondents report good market conditions, according to figures issued from the Washington-based group Tuesday. The median forecast in a Bloomberg survey called for 58. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg News

    Safety Guidance for the Prevention of the Coronavirus on Construction Sites

    May 25, 2020 —
    Although construction projects are generally allowed to proceed under most COVID-19 stay at home orders, owners and contractors need to know how to proceed safely on their construction sites. Not only do workers and others on site need to be protected, but implementation of these protocols is also critical to avoid potential liabilities. Last week, the California Department of Industrial Relations – Division of Occupational Safety & Health (CAL/OSHA) released guidance regarding safety and health procedures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 at construction sites. A link to the CAL/OSHA Safety and Health Guidance is provided here. While the guidance states that it is not imposing any new legal obligations, it is imperative for businesses to not only be aware of these safety practices, but to incorporate these practices as appropriate on each construction site to protect its employees as well as subcontractors, suppliers and others who may be present on site. Otherwise, owners and contractors face potential exposure to regulatory action, including potential penalties and other liabilities, if they fail to properly incorporate these guidelines into the Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP) at each construction site. Now is the time to update your current Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP) to include recommended protocols for preventing the spread of the Coronavirus. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Heather Whitehead, Newmeyer Dillion
    Ms. Whitehead may be contacted at heather.whitehead@ndlf.com

    Arizona Court of Appeals Decision in $8.475 Million Construction Defect Class Action Suit

    May 09, 2011 —

    In the case of Leflet v. Fire (Ariz. App., 2011), which involved an $8.475 million settlement in a construction defect class action suit, the question put forth to the Appeals court was “whether an insured and an insurer can join in a Morris agreement that avoids the primary insurer’s obligation to pay policy limits and passes liability in excess of those limits on to other insurers.” The Appeals court provided several reasons for their decision to affirm the validity of the settlement agreement as to the Non-Participatory Insurers (NPIs) and to vacate and remand the attorney fee awards.

    First, the Appeals court stated, “The settlement agreement is not a compliant Morris agreement and provides no basis for claims against the NPIs.” They conclude, “Appellants attempt to avoid the doctrinal underpinnings of Morris by arguing that ‘the cooperation clause did not prohibit Hancock from assigning its rights to anyone, including Appellants.’ This narrow reading of the cooperation clause ignores the fact that Hancock did not merely assign its rights — it assigned its rights after stipulating to an $8.475 million judgment that neither it nor its Direct Insurers could ever be liable to pay. Neither Morris nor any other case defines such conduct as actual ‘cooperation’—rather, Morris simply defines limited circumstances in which an insured is relieved of its duty to cooperate. Because Morris agreements are fraught with risk of abuse, a settlement that mimics Morris in form but does not find support in the legal and economic realities that gave rise to that decision is both unenforceable and offensive to the policy’s cooperation clause.”

    The Appeals court further concluded that “even if the agreement had qualified under Morris, plaintiffs did not provide the required notice to the NPIs.” The court continued, “Because an insurer who defends under a reservation of rights is always aware of the possibility of a Morris agreement, the mere threat of Morris in the course of settlement negotiations does not constitute sufficient notice. Instead, the insurer must be made aware that it may waive its reservation of rights and provide an unqualified defense, or defend solely on coverage and reasonableness grounds against the judgment resulting from the Morris agreement. The NPIs were not given the protections of this choice before the agreement was entered, and therefore can face no liability for the resulting stipulated judgment.”

    Next, the Appeals court declared that “the trial court abused its discretion in awarding attorney’s fees under A.R.S § 12-341.” The Appeals court reasoned, “In this case, the NPIs prevailed in their attack on the settlement. But the litigation did not test the merits of their coverage defenses or the reasonableness of the settlement amount. And Plaintiffs never sued the NPIs, either in their own right or as the assignees of Hancock. Rather, the NPIs intervened to test the conceptual validity of the settlement agreement (to which they were not parties) before such an action could commence. In these circumstances, though it might be appropriate to offset a fee award against some future recovery by the Plaintiff Leflet v. Fire (Ariz. App., 2011) class, the purposes of A.R.S. § 12-341.01 would not be served by an award of fees against them jointly and severally. We therefore conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding fees against Plaintiffs ‘jointly and severally.’”

    The Appeals court made the following conclusion: “we affirm the judgment of the trial court concerning the validity of the settlement agreement as to the NPIs. We vacate and remand the award of attorney’s fees. In our discretion, we decline to award the NPIs the attorney’s fees they have requested on appeal pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-341.01(A).”

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Court of Appeals Discusses Implied Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Public Works Contracting

    August 17, 2017 —
    The implied duty of good faith and fair dealing is implied in every contract, including construction contracts. Generally speaking, this implied duty requires parties cooperate with one another so that they each obtain the full benefit of their contracted bargain. Recently, the Court of Appeals (Division II) in Nova Contracting, Inc. v. City of Olympia discussed this duty’s application to a public works contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lindsay K. Taft, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Ms. Taft may be contacted at ltaft@ac-lawyers.com

    Termination for Convenience Clauses: Maybe More Than Just Convenience

    June 06, 2022 —
    A contractor begins work on a project and everything is going well, until one day the owner informs the contractor that it is being terminated for convenience. Possibly, there is no discussion about alleged defects, reasons for the termination, or any damages the owner might seek against the contractor. In that moment, the contractor may be unaware of any perceived wrongdoing or problems with its work. The industry has typically accepted that, in this scenario, the owner implicitly waives the right to any remedies against the contractor, except those expressly set forth in the contract. Reasonable minds might assume that, if the owner believed it needed to seek further remedies, it would terminate the contractor for cause instead of convenience. And often overlooked during contract negotiations are the benefits of including an express “waiver of remedies” in the termination for convenience section. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert C. Shaia, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar, & Fitzgerald, LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Mr. Shaia may be contacted at rshaia@watttieder.com

    Palm Beach Billionaires’ Fix for Sinking Megamansions: Build Bigger

    June 14, 2021 —
    Thomas Peterffy became one of the world’s richest people by mastering risk on Wall Street. Building his Mediterranean-style mansion seven years ago on a vulnerable stretch of Florida’s Palm Beach Island was a matter of seeing the odds clearly once again. The consequences of climate change will play out over decades, and Peterffy is 76 years old. “I don’t have a care about it at all,” he said over lunch at Mar-a-Lago earlier this year, just down the street from his home. The founder of Interactive Brokers Group has a fortune of more than $21 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. “If something needs to be done to save it,” he added, “it’s not going to be my problem.” The town of Palm Beach is busy adapting to the risks of a warming planet, even if there appear to be fewer worriers among the buyers and speculative builders on the island. Some of the lowest-lying properties in the U.S. are seeing the highest-flying prices. The real estate website Zillow estimates the value of Peterffy’s home at $52 million. This year a new nine-bedroom mansion with toes-in-the-sand views sold to financier Scott Shleifer for a record-breaking price in excess of $122 million. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Prashant Gopal & Amanda L. Gordon, Bloomberg

    Broker for Homeowners Policy Has No Duty to Advise Insureds on Excess Flood Coverage

    November 02, 2017 —
    A broker who assisted the insureds in procuring a homeowners policy had no duty to advise the insureds to secure additional flood coverage. Ring v. Meeker Sharkey Assocs., LLC, 2017 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 3458 (N.J. Super Ct. App. Div. Sept.26, 2017). The insureds owned two beachfront properties that were located in a designated flood zone. They secured homeowners and flood insurance through Meeker's predecessor. Subsequently, Meeker became the insureds' homeowners insurance broker while Willis, N.A. was their flood insurance broker. 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

    David M. McLain named Law Week Colorado’s 2015 Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants

    September 17, 2015 —
    It is my sincere pleasure to announce Law Week Colorado named my friend and partner, Dave McLain, as the 2015 Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants. Law Week Colorado’s summary of David’s accomplishments includes the following recognition:
    David McLain has set himself apart in the heated area of construction defects litigation as a founding member of his firm and as a member of several associations that serve developers. As one of the most connected and most vocal members of this area of law, we certainly know whom to go to when the construction defects issue inevitably bubbles up again.
    I can say with pride and certainty, that there is no one more deserving of such recognition in the legal and construction community than David. I have had the honor of working side by side with David since he began practicing law. Together, fourteen years ago, we founded Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC with a vision of serving the construction industry at the highest level. Our firm’s Mission Statement states that “HHMR exists to embody and exemplify the principles of service and stewardship. In everything we do, we focus on serving our clients selflessly and to the best of our ability.” David lives our values each and every day. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sheri Roswell, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Roswell may be contacted at roswell@hhmrlaw.com