BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts architectural engineering expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts building expertCambridge Massachusetts construction safety expertCambridge Massachusetts construction forensic expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness windowsCambridge Massachusetts building code expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witnesses fenestration
    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


    Firm Pays $8.4M to Settle Hurricane Restoration Contract Case

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (3/6/24) – Steep Drop in Commercial Real Estate Investment, Autonomous Robots Being Developed for Construction Projects, and Treasury Department Proposes Regulation for Real Estate Professionals

    Dorian’s Wrath: How Event Cancellation Insurance Helps Businesses Recoup Losses from Severe Weather

    Insurer Waives Objection to Appraiser's Partiality by Waiting Until Appraisal Issued

    Hawaii Bill Preserves Insurance Coverage in Lava Zones

    April Rise in Construction Spending Not That Much

    EEOC Issues Anti-Harassment Guidance To Construction-Industry Employers

    Housing Markets Continue to Improve

    Second Circuit Court Differentiates the Standard for Determining Evident Partiality for a Neutral Arbitrator and a Party-Appointed Arbitrator

    Coverage Doomed for Failing Obtain Insurer's Consent for Settlement

    Arizona Supreme Court Leaves Limits on Construction Defects Unclear

    Continuing Breach Doctrine

    Ninth Circuit Holds Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Applies Beyond All-Risk Policies

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

    A Compilation of Quirky Insurance Claims

    Medical Center Builder Sues Contracting Agent, Citing Costly Delays

    Litigation Roundup: “You Can’t Make Me Pay!”

    Construction Defect Claim Survives Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion Due to Lack of Evidence

    Insured’s Bad Faith Insurance Claim Evaporates Before its Eyes

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

    Notice and Claims Provisions In Contracts Matter…A Lot

    Maine Court Allows $1B Hydropower Transmission Project to Proceed

    Home-Building Climate Warms in U.S. as Weather Funk Lifts

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    Contractor Sentenced to Seven Years for Embezzling $3 Million

    Inverse Condemnation and Roadwork

    Hurricane Damage Not Covered for Home Owner Not Named in Policy

    HOA Has No Claim to Extend Statute of Limitations in Construction Defect Case

    D.C. Decision Finding No “Direct Physical Loss” for COVID-19 Closures Is Not Without Severe Limitations

    Factual Issues Prevent Summary Judgment Determination on Coverage for Additional Insured

    Shea Homes CEO Receives Hearthstone Builder Humanitarian Award

    Tropical Storms Pile Up Back-to-Back-to-Back Out West

    Reasons to Be Skeptical About a Millennial Homebuying Boom in 2016

    Pallonji Mistry, Indian Billionaire Caught in Tata Feud, Dies at 93

    Texas Jury Awards $5.3 Million to Company Defamed by Union: Could it work in Pennsylvania?

    7 Sustainability Ideas for Modular Classrooms in the Education Industry (guest post)

    Insurer Rejecting Construction Defect Claim Must Share in Defense Costs

    Use It or Lose It: California Court of Appeal Addresses Statutes of Limitations for Latent Construction Defects and Damage to Real Property

    Risk Protection: Force Majeure Agreements Take on Renewed Relevance

    New Notary Language For Mechanics Lien Releases and Stop Payment Notice Releases

    Ninth Circuit Holds that 1993 Budget Appropriations Language Does Not Compel the Corps of Engineers to use 1987 Wetlands Guidance Indefinitely

    Julie Firestone & Francois Ecclesiaste Recognized as 2023 MSBA North Star Lawyers

    Insurer's Quote on Coverage for Theft by Hacker Creates Issue of Fact

    Why You Make A Better Wall Than A Window: Why Policyholders Can Rest Assured That Insurers Should Pay Legal Bills for Claims with Potential Coverage

    Risk Management and Contracting after Hurricane Irma: Suggestions to Avoid a Second Disaster

    CDJ’s #3 Topic of the Year: Burch v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 223 Cal.App.4th 1411 (2014)

    25 Years of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar

    Professional Services Exclusion Bars Coverage After Carbon Monoxide Leak

    Options When there is a Construction Lien on Your Property

    SE 2050 Is In Quixotic Pursuit of Eliminating Embodied Carbon in Building Structures
    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

    9th Circuit Plumbs Through the Federal and State False Claims Acts

    January 16, 2024 —
    You may have heard of the False Claims Act and know that it penalizes companies and individuals in contract with the government who present false claims. The federal False Claims Act was signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863 to penalize profiteers during the Civil War who were selling the Union Army moth eaten blankets, boxes of sawdust instead of guns, and sometimes re-selling the Army calvary horses several times over. Since then, many states, including California, as well as municipalities, have enacted their own false claim statutes. As currently written, the federal False Claims Act provides for statutory penalties against any person who:
    1. “[K]nowingly presents, or causes to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval”;
    2. “[K]nowingly makes, uses or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim”;
    3. “[H]as possession, custody, or control of property or money used, or to be used, by the Government an knowingly delivers, or causes to be delivered, less than all of that money or property”;
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Mandatory Arbitration Provision Upheld in Construction Defect Case

    May 18, 2011 —

    The Superior Court of New Jersey reversed the decision in Frumer v. National Home Insurance Company (NHIC) and the Home Buyers Warranty Corporation (HBW), stating that the mandatory arbitration provision within the Frumer’s home warranty policy was binding.

    The Frumers alleged that the construction defects were discovered immediately after moving into their million dollar home. After failing to achieve any results from dealing with the builder, they turned to their home warranty. There was some dispute over claims, and a settlement offer was rejected by the Frumers. The Frumers elected to commence litigation rather than utilize the binding arbitration.

    The NHIC and the HBW filed a motion to compel arbitration, however, the motion judge denied the motion: “…the Warranty leaves open the option for [plaintiffs] to commence litigation, which [plaintiffs have] done in this case. The clause also states that ‘the filing of a claim against this limited Warranty shall constitute the election of remedy and shall bar the Homeowner from all other remedies.’ However, the provision does not state that the filing of a claim elects arbitration as the exclusive remedy, and any ambiguity in the language must be inferred against the drafter.”

    The NHIC and the HBW appealed the decision. The Superior Court reversed the decision: “Where, such as here, the homeowner files a claim against the warranty for workmanship/systems defects, the warranty clearly and unequivocally establishes binding arbitration as the exclusive remedy. There is, however, no election of remedies for a dispute involving a major structural defect claim. The warranty clearly and unequivocally establishes binding arbitration as the exclusive remedy.”

    Charles Curley of Halberstadt Curley in Conshohocken, Pa., the local counsel for National Home and Home Buyers, told the New Jersey Law Journal that “the ruling reaffirms New Jersey’s commitment to enforcing arbitration agreements and requiring people to go to mandatory arbitration when the contracts call for it.”

    “At this point, their hope is that the warranty company will do what it's supposed to do — repair covered defects,” Eric McCullough, the Frumer’s lawyer said to the New Jersey Law Journal.

    Read the full story…

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

    Nevada Assembly Bill Proposes Changes to Construction Defect Litigation

    April 14, 2011 —

    Assemblyman John Oceguera has written a bill that would redefine the term Construction Defect, set statutory limitations, and force the prevailing party to pay for attorney’s fees. Assembly Bill 401 has been referred to the Committee on Judiciary.

    Currently, the law in Nevada states that “a defect in the design, construction, manufacture, repair or landscaping of a new residence, of an alteration of or addition to an existing residence, or of an appurtenance, which is done in violation of law, including in violation of local codes or ordinances, is a constructional defect.” However, AB401 “provides that there is a rebuttable presumption that workmanship which exceeds the standards set forth in the applicable law, including any applicable local codes or ordinances, is not a constructional defect.”

    The Nevada courts may award attorney fees to the prevailing party today. However, AB401 mandates that attorney fees must be awarded, and the exact award is to be determined by the Court. “(1) The court shall award to the prevailing party reasonable attorney’s fees, which must be an element of costs and awarded as costs; and (2) the amount of any attorney’s fees awarded must be determined by and approved by the court.”

    AB401 also sets a three year statutory limit “for an action for damages for certain deficiencies, injury or wrongful death caused by a defect in construction if the defect is a result of willful misconduct or was fraudulently concealed.”

    This Nevada bill is in the early stages of development.

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

    Default, Fraud, and VCPA (Oh My!)

    September 12, 2023 —
    I’ve discussed the Virginia Consumer Protection Act (VCPA) and the interaction between fraud and contract on numerous occasions here at Construction Law Musings. A recent case from the Eastern District of Virginia District Court discusses this interaction (along with that dreaded default) further. In Bhutta v. DRM Construction Corp., the homeowners, the Bhuttas, sued DRM for breach of contract, conversion, fraud, and a violation of the VCPA. These allegations were based upon DRM having taken a $40,000.00 deposit from the Bhuttas and then failing to even begin work. As you may have guessed from the title of this post, DRM did not respond to the Complaint and the Court granted default. The Court then took up the question of whether the Bhuttas had alleged enough on each count for default judgment on those counts. After going through a procedural recitation and finding that DRM was properly served and that the Court had jurisdiction, the Court got to the meat of the matter. The Court held that the Bhuttas properly plead a breach of contract for the obvious reason. The reason was that DRM never performed any work and the Bhuttas were damaged because they both paid the deposit and also had to hire another contractor to complete the work at a higher price. The Court granted default judgment for breach of contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Is Ohio’s Buckeye Lake Dam Safe?

    March 12, 2015 —
    According to Columbus Business First, a report by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that “assessed the structural integrity of the Buckeye Lake Dam [located in Ohio] and found serious problems that present significant risks to the public.” Problems arose, allegedly, from “construction of homes [and] pools and patios that have been built into the earthen embankment.” The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers report stated (according to Columbus Business First) “there was a potential for an eight-foot wave of water, mud and debris that would inundate an area as far as Hebron, more than two miles away.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Florida Appellate Courts Holds Underwriting Manuals are Discoverable in Breach of Contract Case

    February 14, 2022 —
    Recently, Florida’s First District Court of Appeals handed down a victory for policyholders when it affirmed a Circuit Court’s order compelling an insurer to produce its underwriting manual in a breach of contract action. In People’s Trust Insurance Co. v. Foster, No. 1D21-845 (Fla. 1st DCA Jan. 26, 2022), the policyholder, Mr. Foster, filed a breach of contract claim against his insurer, People’s Trust, after People’s Trust failed to pay his insurance claim for damage caused to Mr. Foster’s home due to a leaking water pipe. People’s Trust denied Foster’s claim because “Foster’s pipe damage predated the policy’s inception.” During discovery Foster requested People’s Trusts’ underwriting manual(s) in effect at the time his policy was issued or renewed. People’s Trust objected to the request. In response, Foster filed a motion to compel production of the underwriting manual(s). After a hearing, the Circuit Court granted Foster’s motion and People’s Trust sought a writ of Certiorari from the First District Court of Appeal to quash the order compelling production. Reprinted courtesy of Andrea DeField, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Adriana A. Perez, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. DeField may be contacted at adefield@HuntonAK.com Ms. Perez may be contacted at pereza@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    March 16, 2020 —
    A New York appellate court recently held that renewable bio-diesel fuel manufacturer BioEnergy Development Group LLC may pursue tens of millions of dollars in damages from its insurers under two all-risk insurance policies, including amounts in excess of the policy limits, where the insurers refused to pay claims in a timely manner. BioEnergy purchased two all-risk property policies from Lloyd’s to provide coverage for its manufacturing plant in Memphis, Tennessee. A fire destroyed the Memphis plant in March 2016, eliminating BioEnergy’s production capacity and sole source of revenue. BioEnergy made claims under the policies and sought to rebuild its plant. The insurers acknowledged coverage and eventually made approximately $8 million in interim payments, but the parties disagreed over the value of the total property damage claim, which BioEnergy contended was in excess of $24 million. The disputed claim was submitted to appraisal, which resulted in the insurers agreeing to pay the full business interruption limit of $15.1 million. The insurers filed a declaratory judgment lawsuit, however, seeking to limit BioEnergy’s recovery to the policy limits of $15.1 million. BioEnergy alleged that the insurers failed to make interim payments in a timely manner after the fire and, as a result, the company suffered increased losses because it could not rebuild without the insurance proceeds. BioEnergy sought actual and consequential damages, plus attorneys’ fees, arising from the delayed payments, including payment of its business interruption losses in excess of the policy limits. Reprinted courtesy of Syed S. Ahmad, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Geoffrey B. Fehling, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Ahmad may be contacted at sahmad@HuntonAK.com Mr. Fehling may be contacted at gfehling@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Jersey Shore gets Beach Prisms Designed to Reduce Erosion

    January 22, 2014 —
    Thirty-five beach prisms manufactured by Smith-Midland Corporation have been installed along the Jersey shore in Ocean Gate, New Jersey. According to the Wall Street Journal, “The prisms protect homes, prevent erosion, and reduce impacts from natural disasters like Hurricane Sandy.” They “are made with a built-in parabolic curve that scatters waves away as spray instead of allowing them to crash up onto the vulnerable shoreline.” Ocean Gate’s Mayor Paul J. Kennedy stated, "We've been losing beach year after year with the Nor'easters we get. So we came up with an idea that hopefully will work,” The Wall Street Journal reported. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of