BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts window expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts civil engineering expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts architectural engineering expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction expert testimonyCambridge Massachusetts construction expertsCambridge Massachusetts architect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts consulting architect 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


    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Wrap Music to an Insurer’s Ears?”

    Hurricane Milton Barrels Toward Florida With 180 MPH Winds

    Court Dismisses Coverage Action In Lieu of Pending State Case

    Governmental Immunity Waived for Independent Contractor - Lopez v. City of Grand Junction

    Tishman Construction Admits Cheating Trade Center Clients

    Feds, County Seek Delay in Houston $7B Road Widening Over Community Impact

    Insurer Awarded Summary Judgment on Collapse Claim

    New York Developer’s Alleged Court Judgment Woes

    Bad Faith Claim for Investigation Fails

    Hunton Insurance Coverage Group Ranked in National Tier 1 by US News & World Report

    Why Insurers and Their Attorneys Need to Pay Close Attention to Their Discovery Burden in Washington

    Lucky No. 7: Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Issues Pro-Policyholder Decision Regarding Additional Insured Coverage for Upstream Parties

    SCOTUS to Weigh Landowners' Damage Claim Against Texas DOT

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

    The California Legislature Passes SB 496 Limiting Design Professional Defense and Indemnity Obligations

    Top 10 Take-Aways from the 2024 Annual Forum Meeting in New Orleans

    Contractor Beware: Design-Build Firms Must Review Washington’s Licensing Requirements

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2024 “Atlanta 500” List

    Environmental Justice: A Legislative and Regulatory Update

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to Best Lawyers in America© Orange County and as Attorneys of the Year 2018

    Contractors: Revisit your Force Majeure Provisions to Account for Hurricanes

    Client Alert: Design Immunity Affirmative Defense Not Available to Public Entities Absent Evidence of Pre-Accident Discretionary Approval of the Plan or Design

    Retainage: What Contractors Need to Know and Helpful Strategies

    California Court of Appeals Says, “We Like Eich(leay)!”

    Differing Site Conditions Produce Differing Challenges

    Tiny Houses Big With U.S. Owners Seeking Economic Freedom

    New York’s Highest Court Weighs in on N.Y. Labor Law

    #2 CDJ Topic: Valley Crest Landscape v. Mission Pools

    BHA Has a Nice Swing

    Sochi Construction Unlikely to be Completed by End of Olympic Games

    Timely Legal Trends and Developments for Construction

    Freddie Mac Eases Mortgage Rules to Limit Putbacks

    Ten Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to the Best Lawyers in America© 2019

    Supreme Court’s New York Harbor Case Isn’t a ‘Sopranos’ Episode

    Summarizing Changes to NEPA in the Fiscal Responsibility Act (P.L. 118-5)

    Massive Wildfire Near Boulder, Colo., Destroys Nearly 1,000 Homes and Businesses

    Modern Tools Are Key to Future-Proofing the Construction Industry

    A Discussion on Home Affordability

    User Interface With a Building – Interview with Esa Halmetoja of Senate Properties

    Vermont Supreme Court Reverses, Finding No Coverage for Collapse

    Is Your Construction Business Feeling the Effects of the Final DBA Rule?

    Green Home Predictions That Are Best Poised to Come True in 2014 and Beyond (guest post)

    Haight Welcomes Robert S. Rucci

    California Team Secures Appellate Victory on Behalf of Celebrity Comedian Kathy Griffin in Dispute with Bel Air Neighbor

    Leaning San Francisco Tower Seen Sinking From Space

    Developer Sues TVA After It Halts Nuke Site Sale

    Georgia Update: Automatic Renewals in Consumer Service Contracts

    Collapse Claim Dismissed

    Toll Brothers to Acquire Shapell for $1.6 Billion

    Florida’s Fourth District Appeals Court Clarifies What Actions Satisfy Florida’s Construction Defect Statute of Repose
    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

    Prison Time and Restitution for Construction Fraud

    February 14, 2013 —
    Federal prosecutors have obtained prison sentences and fines for the two leaders of a construction kickback scheme. Others are awaiting sentencing. The Chicago Sun-Times reports that John Paderta the former president of Krahl Construction has been sentenced to five years in prison and must pay $10 million in restitution. His executive vice president, Doug Harner will be spending five years in prison and has been ordered to pay $9.6 million in restitution. Paderta and Harner overbilled two clients on renovation projects, giving kickbacks to employees at the client companies. Two employees of these client companies have pled guilty. A further five employees of the three companies have admitted that they were involved in the fraud. They are yet to be sentenced. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Future Looks Bright for Construction in 2015

    January 21, 2015 —
    Associated Builders and Contractors’ Construction Executive has painted a rosy outlook for the upcoming year. ABC’s Chief Economist predicts a 7.4 percent increase in total nonresidential spending for 2015. This is great news for a construction industry that has climbing out of the recession through fits and starts over the last several months. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    February 18, 2020 —
    Recently, I was talking with my friend Matt Hundley about a recent case he had in the Charlottesville, VA Circuit Court. It was a relatively straightforward (or so he and I would have thought) breach of contract matter involving a fixed price contract between his (and an associate of his Laura Hooe) client James River Stucco and the Montecello Overlook Owners’ Association. I believe that you will see the reason for the title of the post once you hear the facts and read the opinion. In James River Stucco, Inc. v. Monticello Overlook Owners’ Ass’n, the Court considered Janes River Stucco’s Motion for Summary Judgment countering two arguments made by the Association. The first Association argument was that the word “employ” in the contract meant that James River Stucco was required to use its own forces (as opposed to subcontractors) to perform the work. The second argument was that James River overcharged for the work. This second argument was made without any allegation of fraud or that the work was not 100% performed. Needless to say, the Court rejected both arguments. The Court rejected the first argument stating:
    In its plain meaning, “employ” means to hire, use, utilize, or make arrangements for. A plain reading of the contractual provisions cited–“shall employ” and references to “employees”–and relied on by Defendant does not require that the persons performing the labor, arranged by Plaintiff, be actual employees of the company or on the company’s payroll. It did not matter how the plaintiff accomplished the work so long as it was done correctly. The purpose of those provisions was to allocate to Plaintiff responsibility for supplying a sufficient workforce to get the work done, not to impose HR duties or require the company to use only “in house” workers. So I find that use of contracted work does not constitute a breach of the contract or these contractual provisions.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Court Holds That Parent Corporation Lacks Standing to Sue Subsidiary’s Insurers for Declaratory Relief

    May 12, 2016 —
    In D. Cummins Corp. v. U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty (no. A142985, filed 3/30/16), a California Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of a declaratory relief action filed by the parent holding company of an insured corporation seeking coverage for asbestos claims. Cummings Corp. installed asbestos containing products in California. It had been insured by USF&G between 1969 and 1992. Cummings Holding, LLC was the parent and majority shareholder of Cummings Corp., which had no assets. The holding company claimed to be “the sole entity responsible for managing the affairs of Cummins Corp., including making decisions as to litigation strategy, resolution and settlement,” and sued USF&G seeking a declaratory judgment that the insurer was obligated to defend and/or indemnify Cummins Corp., “in full, including, without limitation, payment of the cost of investigation, defense, settlement and judgment . . . , for past, present and future Asbestos Suits.” The insurer demurred on the ground that the holding company had insufficient interest in its insurance policies and, consequently, lacked standing to sue for declaratory relief. Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    7 Ways Technology is Changing Construction (guest post)

    July 28, 2018 —
    Today, we have a guest post by Eric Weisbrot, Chief Marketing Officer of JW Surety Bonds. With years of experience in the surety industry under several different roles within the company, he is also a contributing author to the surety bond blog. Welcome, Eric! It is difficult to argue that technology is having minimal impact on society as a whole. Not only are digital enhancements making waves on the consumer side of the line, but businesses are feeling the effects as much if not more in recent years. The construction industry is no exception to this technological shift, but the influence the change is having on licensed construction contractors and long-standing businesses is far-reaching. Here are several ways technology is disrupting construction on a day to day basis. #1. Autonomous Equipment. One of the most notable changes in construction is the addition of autonomous equipment on job sites. Several technology-focused companies are currently testing and perfecting construction machines that require no human interaction to operate. The hope behind this shift is to reduce the impact of the labor shortage in the industry while improving efficiency and productivity on each job. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett, PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    Why Are Developers Still Pouring Billions Into Waterlogged Miami?

    November 30, 2016 —
    On Sunday, an ebullient procession of artists, performers, and city residents filled Collins Avenue between Miami Beach’s 32nd and 36th streets to inaugurate the Faena Forum, a 43,000--square-foot, $150 million, performing- and visual-arts space that’s the cultural centerpiece of the Faena District, a $1 billion development comprising luxury hotels, restaurants, and real estate. The complex is the brainchild of Alan Faena, an Argentinian fashion designer-cum-developer known for his all-white outfits, and Len Blavatnik, a Ukrainian born, New York-based billionaire whose net worth is estimated by Bloomberg Billionaires to be $18.6 billion. The parade/carnival/performance was was titled “Side by Tide,” which might be an overly optimistic assessment of Miami Beach's sea level. With "king tides" flooding parking garages and a University of Miami study reporting that Miami Beach has seen a 200 percent increase in flooding in the last decade, the tide isn’t on anyone’s side. It’s already beneath the city, seeping upward, often as not, through the ground’s porous limestone and into buildings’ backlogged storm drains. Aside from ruining the undercarriages of residents’ Porsches, this ground-up flooding has a second, perhaps more deleterious effect on the long-term feasibility of Miami Beach: Normal defenses against a rising ocean—such as sea walls or dykes—are useless. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James Tarmy, Bloomberg
    Mr. Tarmy may be followed on Twitter @jstarmy

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

    March 06, 2022 —
    In this final post in the Blog’s Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series, we discuss the court’s ruling on the known loss doctrine and its interpretation of “occurrence” in National Indemnity Co. v. State, 499 P.3d 516 (Mont. 2021). Personal injury claims against the State of Montana arose out of its alleged failure to warn Libby residents about the danger of asbestos exposure despite the State’s regulatory inspections of the Libby Mine as early as the 1950s and through the 1970s. Among other defenses, the insurer contended that there was no coverage for these claims because the asbestos claims arising out of the Libby Mine were a “known loss.” A “known loss” defense, as the court explained, is “not based upon a provision of the Policy, but a common law principle which courts have imposed upon liability policies” that “requires that losses arise without the insureds’ knowledge.” Reprinted courtesy of Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Patrick M. McDermott, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Rachel E. Hudgins, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Mr. McDermott may be contacted at pmcdermott@HuntonAK.com Ms. Hudgins may be contacted at rhudgins@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Alleged Negligent Misrepresentation on Condition of Home is Not an Occurrence Causing Property Damage

    December 17, 2024 —
    The court found that even if the insured's negligent misrepresentations constituted an accident, the disclosures did not cause physical damage to the property. Wood v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180624 (D. S.C. Sept. 12, 2024). The insured, Clinton Wood, purchased a townhome in January 2014. After the purchase, Wood experienced leaks and significant water intrusion, as did other townhome owners in the same development. Wood and the other owners retained an engineer to evaluate the cause of the water damage. The engineer determined that the water intrusion was caused by defects in the design and construction of the residence. The engineer told Wood that the proposed repairs would not adequately address and resolve the water intrusion and leaks, and that the problems would continue even if repairs were made. 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