BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts construction project management expert witnessesCambridge Massachusetts ada design expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts stucco expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts fenestration expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts civil engineer expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction project management expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction forensic expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Massachusetts Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Cambridge Massachusetts

    No state license required for general contracting. Licensure required for plumbing and electrical trades. Companies selling home repair services must be registered with the state.


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Builders Association of Central Massachusetts Inc
    Local # 2280
    51 Pullman Street
    Worcester, MA 01606

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Massachusetts Home Builders Association
    Local # 2200
    700 Congress St Suite 200
    Quincy, MA 02169

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Greater Boston
    Local # 2220
    700 Congress St. Suite 202
    Quincy, MA 02169

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    North East Builders Assn of MA
    Local # 2255
    170 Main St Suite 205
    Tewksbury, MA 01876

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders and Remodelers Association of Western Mass
    Local # 2270
    240 Cadwell Dr
    Springfield, MA 01104

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Bristol-Norfolk Home Builders Association
    Local # 2211
    65 Neponset Ave Ste 3
    Foxboro, MA 02035

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders & Remodelers Association of Cape Cod
    Local # 2230
    9 New Venture Dr #7
    South Dennis, MA 02660

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Cambridge Massachusetts


    “But it’s 2021!” Service of Motion to Vacate Via Email Found Insufficient by the Eleventh Circuit

    Key Economic & Geopolitical Themes To Monitor In 2024

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2023 New York – Metro Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    Preparing the Next Generation of Skilled Construction Workers: AGC Workforce Development Plan

    The Proposed House Green New Deal Resolution

    Insurance Alert: Insurer Delay Extends Time to Repair or Replace Damaged Property

    Court Rules that Damage From Squatter’s Fire is Not Excluded as Vandalism or Malicious Mischief

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You Left Out a Key Ingredient!”

    Seattle Expands Bridge Bioswale Projects

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment Based Upon Vandalism Exclusion

    Ninth Circuit Clears the Way for Review of Oregon District Court’s Rulings in Controversial Climate Change Case

    A Discussion on Home Affordability

    Florida Extends Filing Time for Claims Subject to the Statute of Repose

    Kushners Abandon Property Bid as Pressures Mount Over Conflicts

    Tacoma Construction Site Uncovers Gravestones

    Ex-Turner Exec Gets 46 Months for Bloomberg Construction Bribes

    Supreme Court of New Jersey Reviews Statutes of Limitation and the Discovery Rule in Construction Defect Cases

    10-story Mass Timber 'Rocking' Frame Sails Through Seismic Shake Tests

    Overview of New Mexico Construction Law

    Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- An Alternative

    CSLB Reminds California Public Works Contractors to Renew Their Public Works Registration

    Amazon’s Fatal Warehouse Collapse Is Being Investigated by OSHA

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    Top 10 Insurance Cases of 2020

    Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review Regarding Necessary Parties in Lien Foreclosure Actions

    William Lyon Homes Unites with Polygon Northwest Company

    How SmartThings Wants to Automate Your Home

    State Supreme Court Cases Highlight Importance of Wording in Earth Movement Exclusions

    In Oregon Construction Defect Claims, “Contract Is (Still) King”

    Foreman in Fatal NYC Trench Collapse Gets Jail Sentence

    Communicate with the Field to Nip Issues in the Bud

    Blackstone Said in $1.7 Billion Deal to Buy Apartments

    The Multigenerational Housing Trend

    Not So Universal Design Fails (guest post)

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Indeed, You Just Design ‘Em”

    Your Bad Faith Jury Instruction Against an Insurer is Important

    Deference Given To Procuring Public Agency Regarding Material Deviation

    Claims for Negligence? Duty to Defend Triggered

    Effective October 1, 2019, Florida General Contractors Have a Statutory Right to Recovery of Attorney Fees Against a Defaulted Subcontractor’s Surety

    You Are Not A “Liar” Simply Because You Amend Your Complaint

    Project Team Upgrades Va. General Assembly

    TxDOT: Flatiron/Dragados Faces Default Over Bridge Design Issues

    Caution to GCs! An Exception to Privette Can Leave You Open to Liability

    BWB&O Partners are Recognized as 2022 AV Preeminent Attorneys by Martindale-Hubbell!

    Drastic Rebuild Resurrects Graves' Landmark Portland Building

    Using Lien and Bond Claims to Secure Project Payments

    New Window Insulation Introduced to U.S. Market

    Time To “Construct” New Social Media Policies

    No Additional Insured Coverage Under Umbrella Policy
    Corporate Profile

    CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Cambridge, Massachusetts Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Cambridge'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
    Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Texas Supreme Court Cements Exception to “Eight-Corners” Rule Through Two Recent Rulings

    March 06, 2022 —
    The Texas “eight corners” rule precludes insurers from disclaiming a defense obligation based on facts not alleged in the underlying pleadings. Texas federal and appellate courts have been issuing rulings addressing exceptions to the eight corners rule and recently sought guidance from the Texas Supreme Court on whether Texas law recognizes such exceptions to the “eight corners” rule. The Texas Supreme Court has now spoken on the issue. Monroe Guar. Ins. Co. v. BITCO Gen. Ins. Corp., 65 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 440 (2022). In Monroe, David Jones contracted with 5D Drilling & Pump Services in the summer of 2014 to drill a 3,600-foot commercial irrigation well on his farmland. In 2016, Jones sued 5D for breach of contract and negligence relating to 5D’s drilling operations on Jones’s property. Jones’s pleading was silent as to when the damage flowing from 5D’s alleged acts of misconduct occurred. BITCO and Monroe stipulated that 5D’s drill struck a bore hole during 5D’s drilling operations in or around November 2014. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy S. Macklin, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Macklin may be contacted at jmacklin@tlsslaw.com

    Lost Rental Income not a Construction Defect

    November 27, 2013 —
    A judge in Colorado has ruled that although the homeowner’s policy excluded construction defects from coverage, lost rental income and the cost of deck repair involved in fixing a defective drainage system were. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Balancing Risk and Reward: The Complexities of Stadium Construction Projects

    April 15, 2024 —
    From grand designs to opening day, stadium construction projects present a captivating blend of high-profile opportunities and significant challenges and risks. Navigating this complex landscape is not easy, but when managed properly, the potential rewards, both in terms of reputation and finances, can make it a gamble worth taking. While each stadium project is different, some of the more common risks include:
    1. Securing adequate labor, materials and equipment based on the size of the project;
    2. Logistical concerns regarding the concurrent performance of multiple trade scopes on a single site;
    3. Protection of work in place from weather due to the large footprint of the stadium project;
    4. Cash flow issues caused by protracted change order processing, conflicting and/or onerous payment requirements from project financing entities, and reimbursement of considerable monthly general condition costs; and
    5. Meeting the schedule requirements for the project.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gregory A. Eichorn, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Eichorn may be contacted at geichorn@pecklaw.com

    Title II under ADA Applicable to Public Rights-of-Way, Parks and Other Recreation Areas

    June 29, 2017 —
    Plaintiff Ivana Kirola, who suffers from cerebral palsy, sued the City and County of San Francisco, in a class action contending certain public areas, including rights-of-way, pools, parks and other recreation areas, did not meet the mandate of Title II of the American With Disabilities Act (Kirola v. City and County of San Francisco, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 14-17521, 2017 DJDAR 5982). Title II provides that no qualified individual with a disability “shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” Title II’s implementing regulations mandate that each facility constructed after January 26, 1992 be “readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.” And, for each facility “altered after January 26, 1992,” the altered portion must, “to the maximum extent feasible,” be likewise accessible. The Federal Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board creates nonbinding Americans With Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) to ensure compliance with Title II, and that the Department of Justice (DOJ) adopt its own binding regulations, consistent with the ADAAG standards. Here, the District Court interpreted ADAAG standards as not applying to public rights-of-way, parks, and playground facilities. The District Court concluded that none of Kirola’s experts were reliable in their interpretation of the standards and how the standards applied to the public rights-of-way, etc. Conversely, the District Court concluded that all of the city’s experts were reliable. It thus disregarded and discarded every ADAAG violation identified by Kirola’s experts, accepting only the small number of violations identified by the city’s experts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard E. Morton, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
    Mr. Morton may be contacted at rmorton@hbblaw.com

    Florida Project Could Help Address Runoff, Algae Blooms

    September 17, 2018 —
    Heavy rainfall this spring overwhelmed Everglades infrastructure and required operators to discharge nutrient-laden water from Lake Okeechobee to South Florida’s east and west coasts. The resulting toxic algal blooms are fouling Florida’s coast, killing wildlife, driving away vacationers and local beachgoers and threatening public health. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Thomas F. Armistead, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    In Colorado, Primary Insurers are Necessary Parties in Declaratory Judgment Actions

    December 09, 2011 —

    The United States District Court for the District of Colorado recently ruled that primary insurers are necessary parties, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 19, in a declaratory judgment action being pursued by an excess carrier. See Insurance Co. of State of Pennsylvania v. LNC Communities II, LLC, 2011 WL 5548955 (D. Colo. 2011). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19 is almost identical to Colorado Rule of Civil Procedure 19 and pertains to the joinder of persons needed for “just adjudication.” The Insurance Co. of the State of Pennsylvania (“ICSOP”) sought a declaratory judgment that it did not have a duty to defend or indemnify the defendants (collectively referred to as “Lennar Companies”) with regard to the underlying lawsuit brought by The Falls at Legend Trail Owners Association, Inc. (the “HOA”). Id. at *2. In its lawsuit, the HOA alleged Lennar Companies were liable for construction defects at The Falls at Legend Trail residential development.

    Lennar Companies held two primary insurance policies, one issued by OneBeacon Insurance Company f/k/a General Accident Insurance Company (“General Accident”) and the other issued by American Safety Risk Retention Group, Inc. (“American Safety”). Lennar Companies also carried excess policies issued by ICSOP and Ohio Casualty Insurance Company (“Ohio Casualty”).

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Heather M. Anderson of Higgins, Hopkins, McClain & Roswell, LLP. Ms Anderson can be contacted at anderson@hhmrlaw.com

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

    As the Term Winds Down, Several Important Regulatory Cases Await the U.S. Supreme Court

    September 03, 2019 —
    The Supreme Court will be deciding some very important regulatory law cases in the new few weeks as the term winds down. CERCLA Circled Last week, the Court granted a petition to review a significant CERCLA case, Atlantic Richfield Company v. Christian, et al., decided by the Supreme Court of Montana on state law grounds. This case involves state litigation which could result in a cleanup whose scope is allegedly inconsistent with an ongoing and expensive federal CERCLA cleanup at the Anaconda Smelter site. CERCLA basically provides that no one may challenge an ongoing Superfund cleanup, yet this state common law proceeding seeking a cleanup of the plaintiff’s homes and properties arguably threatens the EPA-approved cleanup remedy. ARCO filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court, which the Court has now granted despite the Solicitor General’s brief which argued that the Court should wait to see the results of the Montana trial. (It is unusual for the Court to reject the advice of the Solicitor General.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Limiting Liability: Three Clauses to Consider in your Next Construction Contract

    June 25, 2019 —
    In your next contract, consider including some (or all!) of the following clauses to limit your liability and maximize your profits. Waiver of Consequential Damages While a proven breach of contract will leave a design professional or contractor exposed to direct or compensatory damages, a waiver of consequential damages will help “stop the bleeding” and protect the design professional or contractor from paying every damage that might flow from the breach. Consequential damages include those damages which indirectly flow from the breach of contract, for example, lost rents, lost profits, lost use, lost opportunity, loss of employee productivity, and damages to reputation. The American Institute of Architects (AIA) has included a mutual waiver of consequential damages in its sample A201 for over 20 years. The AIA provision includes a definition of consequential damages which are waived, including many of the examples cited above. However, the AIA waiver of consequential damages clause carves out an exception for liquidated damages to the owner. Prudent design professionals and contractors will strike this exception so as not to render the clause meaningless. A well-drafted waiver clause will be mutual, will define which damages are consequential versus direct, and will not contain exceptions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tara Lynch - Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Ms. Lynch may be contacted at tlynch@grsm.com