BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts construction project management expert witnessesCambridge Massachusetts fenestration expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts eifs expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction claims expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts window expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts defective construction expertCambridge Massachusetts building code 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


    Las Vegas Partner Sarah Odia Named a 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyer Rising Star

    Ownership is Not a Conclusive Factor for Ongoing Operations Additional Insured Coverage

    Liquidated Damages: A Dangerous Afterthought

    French President Vows to Rebuild Fire-Collapsed Notre Dame Roof and Iconic Spire

    Arbitrator May Use Own Discretion in Consolidating Construction Defect Cases

    Los Angeles Recovery Crews Begin to Mobilize as Wildfires Continue to Burn

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (09/12/23) – Airbnb’s Future in New York City, MGM Resorts Suffer Cybersecurity Incident, and Insurance Costs Hitting Commercial Real Estate

    Local Government’s Claims on Developer Bonds Dismissed for Failure to Pursue Administrative Remedies

    Risk-Shifting Tactics for Construction Contracts

    To Require Arbitration or Not To Require Arbitration

    Granting Stay, Federal Court Reviews Construction Defect Coverage in Hawaii

    Enforceability of Contract Provisions Extending Liquidated Damages Beyond Substantial Completion

    Hanover, Germany Apple Store Delayed by Construction Defects

    Montana Federal Court Upholds Application of Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause

    Construction Spending Had Strongest Increase in Four Years

    Expert Excluded After Never Viewing Damaged Property

    “A No-Lose Proposition?”

    The Reptile Theory in Practice

    Why’d You Have To Say That?

    MTA Implements Revised Contractors Debarment Regulations

    What Construction Contractors Should Know About the California Government Claims Act

    2016 California Construction Law Upate

    Google’s Floating Mystery Boxes Solved?

    11th Circuit Affirms Bad Faith Judgement Against Primary Insurer

    Fifth Circuit Reverses Summary Judgment Award to Insurer on Hurricane Damage Claim

    New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Insurers’ Bid to Overturn a $400M Decision

    Evacuations in Santa Barbara County as more Mudslides are Predicted

    COVID-19 Business Interruption Claims Four Years Later: What Have We Learned?

    COVID-19 Damages and Time Recovery: Contract Checklist and Analysis

    More Construction Defects for San Francisco’s Eastern Bay Bridge Expansion

    Congratulations to BWB&O for Ranking in The U.S. News – Best Lawyers ® as “Best Law Firms”!

    Ambiguity in Insurance Policy will be Interpreted in Favor of Insurance Coverage

    The G2G Year in Review: 2020

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Advances to Debris Removal Phase

    Builders FirstSource to Buy ProBuild for $1.63 Billion

    The U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Rules on Greystone

    Understand Agreements in Hold Harmless and Indemnity Provisions

    68 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 5th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    Georgia Legislature Passes Additional Procurement Rules

    A Look at Business and Professions Code Section 7031

    Risk Spotter Searches Internal Data Lakes For Loaded Words

    Janeen Thomas Installed as State Director of WWBA, Receives First Ever President’s Award

    Congratulations to Partner Nicole Whyte on Being Chosen to Receive The 2024 ADL’s Marcus Kaufman Jurisprudence Award

    How Tech Is Transforming the Construction Industry in 2019

    Insolvency of Primary Carrier Does Not Invoke Excess Coverage

    Sometimes you Need to Consider the Coblentz Agreement

    Construction Costs Absorb Two Big Hits This Quarter

    Top Five General Tips for All Construction Contracts

    “Source of Duty,” Tort, and Contract, Oh My!

    Seven Coats Rose Attorneys Named to Texas Rising Stars List
    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

    With an Eye Already in the Sky, Crane Camera Goes Big Data

    February 02, 2017 —
    It started simple enough: a wireless camera mounted on the hook block of a tower crane, allowing the operator in the cab to see the rigger on the ground and the area around the hook. But just a few years later, Netarus’ HoistCam is part of a method to generate point-cloud images of jobsites from the highest perch around. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeff Rubenstone, ENR
    Mr. Rubenstone may be contacted at rubenstonej@enr.com

    California Supreme Court Declares that Exclusionary Rule for Failing to Comply with Expert Witness Disclosures Applies at the Summary Judgment Stage

    March 01, 2017 —
    In Perry v. Bakewell Hawthorne, LLC, 2017 No. S233096, the California Supreme Court held that when a trial court determines an expert opinion is inadmissible because expert disclosure requirements were not met, the opinion must be excluded from consideration at summary judgment if an objection is raised. Plaintiff Mr. Perry sued defendants Bakewell Hawthorne, LLC and JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA, alleging personal injuries after plaintiff fell at a property owned by Bakewell and leased by Chase. Defendant Chase served plaintiff with a demand for the exchange of expert witness information. Plaintiff made no disclosure. Thereafter, the trial date was continued. Defendant Bakewell subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment. In opposition, plaintiff submitted declarations of two experts opining that the stairs on which plaintiff fell were in disrepair and failed to comply with building codes and industry standards. Reprinted courtesy of Bruce Cleeland, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Michael J. Worth, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Cleeland may be contacted at bcleeland@hbblaw.com Mr. Worth may be contacted at mworth@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Lakewood First City in Colorado to Pass Ordinance Limiting State Construction Defect Law

    October 15, 2014 —
    The Denver Post reported that the Lakewood City Council passed an ordinance “designed to soften the effects of Colorado's controversial construction-defects law.” Specifically, the ordinance “gives developers and builders a ‘right to repair’ defects before facing litigation and would require condominium association boards to get consent from a majority of homeowners — rather than just the majority of the board — before filing suit.” Not all residents are in favor of the ordinance. "It protects builders and big business at the expense of homeowners," Chad Otto, former president of the Grant Ranch homeowners association, told the crowd, as quoted by the Denver Post. "Does Lakewood want to be known as the mecca of poorly built condos?" Proponents of the measure, including Lakewood Mayor Bob Murphy, claim that “Colorado's defects law…has forced up insurance premiums on new condo projects to the point where they are no longer feasible to build.” Furthermore, according to the Denver Post, “Condos represented only 4.6 percent of total new home starts in metro Denver in the second quarter of 2014, versus more than 26 percent in 2008, according to Metrostudy.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Supreme Court Finds that When it Comes to Intentional Interference Claims, Public Works Projects are Just Different, Special Even

    April 20, 2017 —
    Earlier, we reported on a California Court of Appeals decision – Roy Allan Slurry Seal, Inc. v. American Asphalt South, Inc. – which held for the first time that a second-place bidder on a public works contract could sue a winning bidder who failed to pay its workers prevailing wages, under the business tort of intentional interference with prospective economic advantage. Fast forward nearly two years, several amicus briefs, and “one doghouse”* later and the California Supreme Court has . . . reversed. The Roy Allan Slurry Seal Case To catch you up, or rather, refresh your recollection . . . Between 2009 and 2012, American Asphalt South, Inc. was awarded 23 public works contracts totaling more than $14.6 million throughout Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino and San Diego counties. Two of the losing bidders on those projects – Roy Allan Slurry Seal, Inc. and Doug Martin Contracting, Inc. – sued American in each of these counties for intentional interference with prospective economic advantage as well as under the Unfair Practices Act (“UPA”) (Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17000 et seq.) and the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) (Bus. & Prof. Code §17200). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Benefits to Insureds Under Property Insurance Policy – Concurrent Cause Doctrine

    December 08, 2016 —
    The Florida Supreme Court in Sebo v. American Home Assurance Co., Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly S582a (Fla. 2016) gave really good news to claimants seeking recovery under a first-party all-risk property insurance policy. The Court held that the concurrent cause doctrine and not the efficient proximate cause doctrine was the proper theory of recovery to apply when multiple perils—an excluded peril and a covered peril-combined to create a property loss. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Katz, Barron, Squitero, Faust, Friedberg, English & Allen, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@katzbarron.com

    Is the Removal and Replacement of Nonconforming Work Economically Wasteful?

    September 19, 2022 —
    There are times a contractor installs the wrong material or system contrary to the plans and specifications. A nonconformity. The owner wants the already-installed material or system to be replaced in conformity with the plans and specifications. However, what was installed is functionally equivalent to what the plans and specifications required and would be cost prohibitive, i.e., economically wasteful. If the contractor elects to remove and replace the nonconforming work, it may seek a change order because it is economically wasteful. Or, the contractor may refuse (typically, not the best approach) in furtherance of taking on the fight based on the economic wastefulness associated with the removal and replacement. A recent case, David Boland, Inc. v. U.S., 2022 WL 3440349 (Fed.Cl. 2022), talks about this exaction situation and the economic waste doctrine. This is an important doctrine for contractors to understand when faced with a similar predicament. Here, a contractor was hired by the government to construct a wastewater collection system that was to be owned and operated by a private company. The contractor’s work was going to be incorporated into a larger sewer system that the private company already operated. The contractor was required to install sewer manholes reinforced with steel in accordance with an ASTM standard. The manholes could be rejected if they did not conform to the ASTM standard. Compliance with this ASTM standard was also required by the private company’s construction protocol for the infrastructure, which was incorporated into the contractor’s contract with the government. The contractor was required to strictly comply with the contract. 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

    Veolia Agrees to $25M Settlement in Flint Water Crisis Case

    February 19, 2024 —
    Engineering firm Veolia North America agreed to a $25-million settlement to resolve a federal class action case related to its work for the city of Flint, Mich., during the city’s lead-in-water crisis, the company and attorneys for the plaintiffs announced Feb. 1. Veolia is the second engineering firm that worked for the city to settle with city residents, and the deal came ahead of a class-action trial scheduled to start later this month. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Consequential Damage Claims for Insurer's Bad Faith Dismissed

    April 22, 2019 —
    Partial dismissal of the insured's complaint seeking consequential damages for the insurer's bad faith was granted by the court. Bryant v. General Cas. Co., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15369 (N.D. N.Y. Jan. 30, 2019). Bryant purchased from General Casualty Company of Wisconsin (GCCW) a commercial property and casualty policy to cover the insured premises. While the building was rented to a tenant who operated a restaurant, it sustained a collapse. GCCW refused to cover the loss. Bryant sued. In addition to the cost of repairing and replacing the damage to the property, Bryant alleged he was out the value of rental revenue from his tenant, which was forced to close the restaurant and relocated as a result of the unrepaired damage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com