BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts construction project management expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts forensic architectCambridge Massachusetts stucco expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts hospital construction expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts OSHA expert witness constructionCambridge Massachusetts construction expertsCambridge Massachusetts delay claim 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


    How to Remove a Mechanics Lien from Your Property

    Excess-Escape Other Insurance Provision Unenforceable to Avoid Defense Cost Contribution Despite Placement in Policy’s Coverage Grant

    Warning! Danger Ahead for Public Entities

    Rattlesnake Bite Triggers Potential Liability for Walmart

    There’s an Unusual Thing Happening in the Housing Market

    ETF Bulls Bet Spring Will Thaw the U.S. Housing Market

    CDJ’s #7 Topic of the Year: The Las Vegas Harmon Hotel Year-Long Demolition & Trial Begins

    The Construction Industry's Health Kick

    What is a “Force Majeure” Clause? Do I Need one in my Contract? Three Options For Contractors, Subcontractors and Suppliers to Consider

    2017 Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “That’s Not How I Read It”

    More on the VCPA and Construction

    Ohio Rejects the Majority Trend and Finds No Liability Coverage for a Subcontractor’s Faulty Work

    Relief Bill's Highway Funds Could Help Construction Projects

    Shifting the Risk of Delay by Having Float Go Your Way

    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

    Coverage Denied for Faulty Blasting and Improper Fill

    Appreciate The Risks You Are Assuming In Your Contract

    How BIM Can Serve Building Owners

    Broker Not Liable for Failure to Reveal Insurer's Insolvency After Policy Issued

    Ninth Circuit Finds Policy’s Definition of “Policy Period” Fatal to Insurer’s “Related Claims” Argument

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: Known Loss Doctrine & Interpretation of “Occurrence”

    Traub Lieberman Partner Eric D. Suben and Associate Laura Puhala Win Summary Judgment in Favor of Insurer, Determining it has No Duty to Defend

    Court Extends Insurer Rights to Equitable Contribution

    Gloria Gaynor Sues Contractor over Defective Deck Construction

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    Terminating the Notice of Commencement (with a Notice of Termination)

    William Doerler Recognized by JD Supra 2022 Readers’ Choice Awards

    City of Pawtucket Considering Forensic Investigation of Tower

    Hurricane Damage Not Covered for Home Owner Not Named in Policy

    Research Institute: A Shared Information Platform Reduces Construction Costs Considerably

    Wyncrest Commons: Commonly Used Progress Payments in Construction Contracts Do Not Render Them Installment Contracts

    Traub Lieberman Chair Emeritus Awarded the 2022 Vince Donohue Award by the International Association of Claim Professionals

    What Buyers Want in a Green Home—and What They Don’t

    Contractors’ Right to Sue in Washington Requires Registration

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

    Colorado Senate Voted to Kill One of Three Construction Defect Bills

    Brookfield Wins Disputed Bid to Manage Manhattan Marina

    Housing Advocacy Group Moved to Dissolve New Jersey's Council on Affordable Housing

    The Secret to Success Is Doing Things a Little Bit Differently

    Alleged Defective Water Pump Leads to 900K in Damages

    Fraudster Sells 24-Bedroom ‘King’s Speech’ London Mansion

    MGM Seeks to Demolish Harmon Towers

    Unfair Risk Allocation on Design-Build Projects

    New York Appellate Court Holds Insurers May Suffer Consequences of Delayed Payment of Energy Company Property and Business Interruption Claims

    Understand and Define Key Substantive Contract Provisions

    Where Breach of Contract and Tortious Interference Collide

    Is Arbitration Final and Binding?

    The Death of Retail and Legal Issues

    Verdict In Favor Of Insured Homeowner Reversed For Improper Jury Instructions
    Corporate Profile

    CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Cambridge, Massachusetts 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 Cambridge'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
    Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Noteworthy Construction Defect Cases for 1st Qtr 2014

    April 30, 2014 —
    John A. Husmann and Jocelyn F. Cornbleet of BatesCareyLLP analyzed several noteworthy construction defect cases that have already occurred in 2014, as published in Law360. The cases involved “the ‘occurrence’ requirement, contractual liability exclusion and ‘other insurance’ clauses.” Husmann and Cornbleet summarized Owners Insurance Co. v Jim Carr Homebuilder LLC (Alabama), Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Co. v. Snider (also Alabama), Woodward LLC v. Acceptance Indemnification Insurance Co. (Mississippi), and others. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    4 Ways the PRO Act Would Impact the Construction Industry

    October 24, 2021 —
    The Protecting the Right to Organize Act (the “PRO Act”) is a proposed law that would dramatically rewrite the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). Breathtakingly broad in scope, the PRO Act targets several longstanding features of existing law perceived by unions and labor activists to be unfair to labor and too favorable to employers. The proposed legislation is essentially a grab-bag of grievances that the labor movement has compiled over decades and sought to change through legislation and before the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) without success in the past. While the PRO Act would affect virtually all private sector employers, it would alter the labor dynamic in the construction industry in four major ways: 1. Removing the current prohibitions on secondary, jurisdictional, and other forms of picketing. Current law attempts to balance the rights of employers to operate their businesses without unnecessary interference with the rights of unions to protest concerning wages and working conditions. As part of this balancing act, the NLRA prohibits unions from picketing under certain conditions or with certain aims. These restrictions include the prohibition on “secondary” picketing by unions of neutral employers, which are employers with which the union does not have a direct labor dispute, and “jurisdictional” picketing by unions to force an employer to assign certain work to a specific trade or group of employees. The elimination of these restrictions in the PRO Act would have a significant impact on the construction industry. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Andrew M. MacDonald, Fox Rothschild LLP
    Mr. MacDonald may be contacted at amacdonald@foxrothschild.com

    Where-Forum Art Thou? Is the Chosen Forum Akin to No Forum at All?

    May 30, 2022 —
    Many courts enforce forum selection clauses in contracts between parties. In W. Bay Plaza Condo. Ass’n v. Sika Corp., No. 3D21-1834, 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 1637 (W. Bay Plaza), the Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District (Court of Appeal) answered the question of whether a mandatory forum selection clause in a manufacturer’s warranty was enforceable as to a condominium association, who was a non-signatory. The trial court enforced the forum selection clause – calling for litigation in New Jersey rather than Florida – and the Court of Appeal affirmed the ruling. As stated in W. Bay Plaza, in late 2013 and early 2014, West Bay Plaza Condominium Association (W.B. Plaza Condo. Ass’n) contracted with Built Right Installers International Corporation, R.J. Miranda Consultants, Inc. and UCI Engineering Inc. (collectively, the Construction Defendants) to have repairs done to the exterior of the property. In 2016, Sika Corporation (Sika), a New Jersey corporation, gave a five-year warranty to W.B. Plaza Condo. Ass’n for three sealant products used to repair the garage at the property. In 2019, W.B. Plaza Condo. Ass’n sued the Construction Defendants for breach of contract and professional negligence. Subsequently, W.B. Plaza Condo. Ass’n amended its complaint and filed a claim against Sika, alleging that Sika breached its warranty because its products failed to provide a watertight barrier. Sika filed a motion to dismiss the action, alleging that Florida was an improper venue because its’ warranty contained a mandatory forum selection clause. W.B. Plaza Condo. Ass’n argued that it was not bound by the forum selection clause because it was a non-signatory to the warranty and, even if it was bound by the clause, there were compelling reasons not to enforce it. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    Is Drone Aerial Photography Really Best for Your Construction Projects?

    June 09, 2016 —
    It’s no secret that aerial photographs play an essential role in any construction project. They help with the planning process, assist builders in documenting the progress of a project, provide an opportunity to spot potential issues that would otherwise be missed, capture great marketing images, and more. It used to be the only way to get sky-view pictures for construction purposes was to hire an aerial photography team with a piloted aircraft. However, a new player has entered the scene – the drone. And whether you choose to hire a professional aerial photography team using a fixed-wing airplane, helicopter, or drone, or choose to go the DIY route, all have a place in the world of construction. But, using drones is complicated and ever evolving, so we’d like to touch on a few key points to help you understand drone aerial photography. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sherry and Brett Eklund, Desert View Aerial Photography
    Ms. and Mr. Eklund may be contacted at their website http://dvaerialphoto.com/contact/

    The Year 2010 In Review: Design And Construction Defects Litigation

    February 25, 2011 —

    This article is the first in a series summarizing construction law developments for 2010

    1. Centex Homes v. Financial Pacific Life Insurance Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1995 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

    After settling numerous homeowners’ construction defect claims — and more than ten years after the homes were substantially completed — a home developer brought suit against one of the concrete fabrication subcontractors for the development seeking indemnity for amounts paid to the homeowners, as well as for damages for breach of the subcontractor’s duties to procure specific insurance and to defend the developer against the homeowners’ claims. The subcontractor brought a motion for summary adjudication on the ground the developer’s claims were barred by the ten year statute of repose contained in Code of Civil Procedure Section 337.15.

    The District Court agreed the developer’s claim for indemnity was barred by Section 337.15. And it held that because the damages recoverable for breach of the subcontractor’s duty to purchase insurance are identical to the damages recoverable through the developer’s indemnity claim, the breach of duty to procure insurance claim also was time-barred. The District Court, however, allowed the claim for breach of the duty to defend to proceed. The categories of losses associated with such a claim (attorneys’ fees and other defense costs) are distinct from the damages recoverable through claims governed by Section 337.15 (latent deficiency in the design and construction of the homes and injury to property arising out of the latent deficiencies).

    2. UDC — Universal Development v. CH2M Hill, 181 Cal. App. 4th 10 (6th Dist. Jan. 2010)

    Indemnification clauses in construction agreements often state that one party to the agreement — the “indemnitor” — will defend and indemnify the other party from particular types of claims. Of course, having a contract right to a defense is not the same as actually receiving a defense. Any indemnitor attempting to avoid paying for defense costs can simply deny the tender of defense with the hope that when the underlying claim is resolved the defense obligations will be forgotten. In the past, when parties entitled to a defense — the “indemnitees” — had long memories and pressed to recover defense costs, indemnitors attempted to justify denying the tender by claiming their defense obligations coincided with their indemnity obligations and neither arose until a final determination was made that the underlying claim was one for which indemnity was owed.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Candace Matson, Harold Hamersmith, and Helen Lauderdale, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP. Ms. Matson can be contacted at cmatson@sheppardmullin.com, Mr. Hamersmith can be contacted at hhamersmith@sheppardmullin.com, and Ms. Lauderdale can be contacted at hlauderdale@sheppardmullin.com.

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

    Sales of Existing U.S. Homes Decrease on Fewer Investors

    September 24, 2014 —
    Purchases of previously owned U.S. homes unexpectedly declined in August for the first time in five months as investors retreated from the market. Existing home sales dropped 1.8 percent to a 5.05 million annual pace, from a revised 5.14 million pace in July, the National Association of Realtors reported today in Washington. The median forecast of 72 economists in a Bloomberg survey called for 5.2 million. The share of properties sold to investors was the lowest in almost five years. As wage gains are slow to materialize and credit conditions remain tight, it has been difficult for first-time homebuyers to enter the housing market to make up the decrease in investor activity. Employment growth and easier lending rules could help would-be buyers to feel more secure in taking the plunge into homeownership. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeanna Smialek, Bloomberg
    Ms. Smialek may be contacted at jsmialek1@bloomberg.net

    Homeowner's Mold Claim Denied Due to Spoilation

    April 20, 2016 —
    The trial court's issuance of summary judgment to the insurer for mold and water damage was upheld on appeal. Schwartz v. Encompass Indem. Co., 2016 Mich. App. LEXIS 551 (Mich. Ct. App. March 15, 2016). The contractor was demolishing a portion of the insured's home when he discovered water damage and what appeared to be mold. The contractor believed this damage was due to improper roof installation and leaks around the windows. Further demolition was done to water-damaged portions of the home. The insured filed a claim with Encompass for mold and "over-demolition." When Encompass's adjuster inspected the home, none of the alleged mold-affected material was present because it had been removed from the site by the contractor. The claims were denied. 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

    Low Interest Rates Encourages Homeowners to become Landlords

    June 18, 2014 —
    CNN Money reported that more homeowners are deciding to keep their homes rather than sell, and become landlords instead. "Clients tell us all the time, 'We're never going to sell our home, even after we buy a new one,'" Glenn Kelman, CEO of the brokerage, Redfin, told CNN Money. “The math works in most landlords' favor these days,” according to CNN Money. “Rents have risen by about 20% nationwide since mid-2006, the housing bubble peak, while home prices are still about 21% below what they were at that time.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of