BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts expert witness structural engineerCambridge Massachusetts expert witness windowsCambridge Massachusetts construction project management expert witnessesCambridge Massachusetts multi family design expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts roofing construction expertCambridge Massachusetts stucco expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts contractor 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


    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    11th Circuit Affirms Bad Faith Judgement Against Primary Insurer

    DEP Plan to Deal with Noxious Landfill Fumes Met with Criticism

    Brown and Caldwell Appoints Stigers as Design Chief Engineer

    OSHA Issues COVID-19 Guidance for Construction Industry

    Miami Building Boom Spreads Into Downtown’s Tent City

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

    Haight’s John Arbucci and Kristian Moriarty Selected for Super Lawyers’ 2020 Southern California Rising Stars

    Tennessee Court of Appeals Holds Defendant Has the Burden of Offering Alternative Measure of Damages to Prove that Plaintiff’s Measure of Damages is Unreasonable

    Commercial Development Nearly Quadruples in Jacksonville Area

    Top Talked-About Tech at the 2023 ABC Joint Tech Summit

    Modification: Exceptions to Privette Doctrine Do Not Apply Where There is No Evidence a General Contractor Affirmatively Contributed to the Injuries of an Independent Contractor’s Employee

    Fifth Circuit Holds Insurer Owes Duty to Defend Latent Condition Claim That Caused Fire Damage to Property Years After Construction Work

    Arizona Rooftop Safety: Is it Adequate or Substandard?

    Be Proactive, Not Reactive, To Preserve Force Majeure Rights Regarding The Coronavirus

    Insurance Law Alert: Ambiguous Producer Agreement Makes Agent-Broker Status a Jury Question

    Tacoma Construction Site Uncovers Gravestones

    Recording “Un-Neighborly” Documents

    Haight Brown & Bonesteel Attorneys Named Super Lawyers in 2016

    What You Need to Know About Notices of Completion, Cessation and Non-Responsibility

    Steven Cvitanovic to Present at NASBP Virtual Seminar

    There is No Claims File Privilege in Florida, Despite What Insurers Want You to Think

    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    Jean Nouvel’s NYC ‘Vision Machine’ Sued Over Construction Defects

    Appellate Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    A Few Green Building Notes

    Pennsylvania Modular Home Builder Buys Maine Firm

    Additional Insured Obligations and the Underlying Lawsuit

    Recovering Time and Costs from Hurricane Helene: Force Majeure Solutions for Contractors

    Nader Eghtesad v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    Safety Guidance for the Prevention of the Coronavirus on Construction Sites

    Venue for Suing Public Payment Bond

    Building Growth Raises Safety Concerns

    Hunton Andrews Kurth Insurance Attorney, Latosha M. Ellis, Honored by Business Insurance Magazine

    Walking the Tightrope of SB 35

    Duuers: Better Proposals with Less Work

    Did the Court of Appeals Just Raise the Bar for California Contractors to Self-Report Construction-Related Judgments?

    Top 10 Insurance Cases of 2020

    Turning Back the Clock: DOL Proposes Previous Davis-Bacon Prevailing Wage Definition

    United States Supreme Court Backtracks on Recent Trajectory Away from Assertions of General Jurisdiction in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern

    Savannah Homeowners Win Sizable Judgment in Mold Case against HVAC Contractor

    Florida Governor Bans Foreign Citizens From Buying Land in Florida

    Trends and Issues which Can Affect Workers' Compensation Coverage for Construction Companies

    New Index Tracking Mortgages for New Homes

    Construction Defects and Commercial General Liability in Illinois

    Notes from the Nordic Smart Building Convention

    How AI Can Become a Design Adviser

    In Pricey California, Renters Near Respite From Landlord Gouging

    Good-To-Know Points Regarding (I) Miller Act Payment Bonds And (Ii) Payment Bond Surety Compelling Arbitration

    AB 1701 Has Passed – Developers and General Contractors Are Now Required to Double Pay for Labor Due to Their Subcontractors’ Failure to Pay
    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. Drawing 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

    Montana Federal Court Holds that an Interior Department’s Federal Advisory Committee Was Improperly Reestablished

    December 09, 2019 —
    On August 13, 2019, in a case that may have an impact on the leasing of federal lands for energy development in the future, the U.S. District Court for the Missoula, Montana Division, issued a ruling in the case of Western Organization of Resource Councils v. Bernhardt, which involves the application of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) to the Department of the Interior’s Royalty Policy Committee. This advisory committee, initially established in 1995 to provide advice to the Secretary on issues related to the leasing of federal and Indian lands for energy and mineral resources production, is subject to the provisions of FACA, codified at 5 U.S.C. app. Sections 1-16. The plaintiffs challenged the operations of this advisory committee, which was reestablished for two years beginning in 2017, because it allegedly “acts in secret and works to advance the goals of only one interest: the extractive industries that profit from the development of public gas, oil, and coal.” More specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that this advisory committee violated FACA because: (a) it was not properly established as provided in the implementing GSA rules (which are located at 41 CFR Section 102-3); (b) did not provide public notice of its meetings and publicly disseminate its materials; (c) ensure that its membership was fairly balanced; and (d) failed to exercise independent judgment without inappropriate influences from special interests. 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

    Court Throws Wet Blanket On Prime Contractor's Attorneys' Fees Request In Prompt Payment Case

    September 03, 2015 —
    Prompt payment penalty cases do not come around very often, but when they do, there is bound to be fireworks. In James L. Harris Painting & Decorating, Inc. v. West Bay Builders, Inc., et al. (No. C072169, filed 8/27/15), the California Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District upheld the trial court's discretion to not award prevailing party attorneys' fees to the party who won a prompt payment dispute. California Business and Professions Code §7108.5 and Public Contract Code §§7107 and 10262 are the mechanisms for obtaining prompt payment relief in California. As shown by the outcome, it is possible to win and lose at the same time. West Bay Builders, Inc. (“West Bay”) was the prime contractor on a school construction project for Stockton Unified School District. West Bay entered into a subcontract agreement with James L. Harris Painting & Decorating, Inc. (“Harris”) on the project. During construction there were disagreements between West Bay and Harris regarding the contractual scope of work, and Harris performed work it believed was outside the contract, believing it would be paid for the additional work. After West Bay refused to pay for the additional work, Harris left the project, and West Bay hired another subcontractor to complete the work. Reprinted courtesy of Steven M. Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Abigail E. Lighthart, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com Ms. Lighthart may be contacted at alighthart@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Be Mindful Accepting Payment When Amounts Owed Are In Dispute

    August 29, 2022 —
    After completing work on a project, or even during a project, it is not uncommon for some portion of the contract balance and/or a claim to be in dispute. As a contractor or subcontractor, it is important to be careful what is signed (or not signed) upon receipt of any payment both during and after completion of work on a project. One of the most common documents signed related to a receipt of payment is a lien/claim release document. This can be in the form of a conditional, unconditional, progress and/or final release. The language included in the release document is critically important, especially as it pertains to disputed amounts. As a contractor or subcontractor, if there are known disputes related to amounts owing, whether it be contract balance, disputed change order(s), a delay or inefficiency claim, or any other amounts believed to be owed, it is important to include language in the lien release that expressly carves out the disputed amounts. The same should be done for disputes related to extensions of time. This allows the contractor to accept the payment and release rights for the undisputed work, but continue to reserve its right to pursue the amounts in dispute later. If disputed amounts are not carved out, those amounts may effectively be waived and the subcontractor or contractor may lose all rights to recovery. As a subcontractor in Alaska recently learned, there are potentially other ways a contractor may waive or lose its rights to recover amounts in dispute – without even signing a waiver or release document. In Smallwood Creek, Inc. v. Build Alaska General Contracting, LLC et al., the general contractor sent the subcontractor a check described as “final payment.” The subcontractor believed it was owed more than what the general contractor had sent and refused to accept the check. Months later, the subcontractor deposited the check. The subcontractor reversed course again and attempted to repay the general contractor the amount deposited. The general contractor refused, claiming the subcontractor’s acceptance of payment constituted satisfaction of all amounts owing to the subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas Korst, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Korst may be contacted at nicholas.korst@acslawyers.com

    Suzanne Pollack Elected to Lawyers Club of San Diego 2021 Board of Directors

    May 03, 2021 —
    San Diego Associate Suzanne Pollack was recently elected to the 2021 Lawyers Club of San Diego Board of Directors for a three-year term that will begin on July 1, 2021. Founded in 1972, the mission of Lawyers Club - San Diego’s largest specialty bar association - is to advance the status of women in the law and society. “I am honored to be joining Lawyers Club’s Board of Directors, particularly after this last year, during which we saw the dramatic impact that the pandemic had upon women in the workforce," said Ms. Pollack. "Promoting equality, diversity, and advocacy has never been more important, and I look forward to working with the Board to further these goals.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Suzanne Pollack, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Pollack may be contacted at Suzanne.Pollack@lewisbrisbois.com

    California Supreme Court Endorses City Authority to Adopt Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

    August 04, 2015 —
    The following post was written by my partner Neal Parish on the California Supreme Court’s recent (and surprising) new decision which eases the way for local governments to adopt inclusionary housing ordinances, to the chagrin of residential housing developers. On June 15, 2015, in a decision that came as a surprise to many observers, the California Supreme Court unanimously rejected a challenge to San Jose’s inclusionary housing ordinance which had been filed by the California Building Industry Association (CBIA) and supported by the Pacific Legal Foundation. The Court disagreed with CBIA’s position, which claimed that jurisdictions must first show a nexus between new market-rate residential development and the need for affordable housing before adopting any inclusionary housing requirement. The Court instead held that in adopting an inclusionary housing ordinance the City needs to simply demonstrate a real and substantial relationship between the ordinance and the public interest, and further held that the ordinance did not represent a taking of developers’ property interests. 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

    Client Alert: Naming of Known and Unknown Defendants in Initial Complaints: A Cautionary Tale

    September 24, 2014 —
    On September 12, 2014, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Butler v. National Community Renaissance of California, upheld a district court's dismissal of certain defendants named in amended complaints, affirming the necessity of naming those known and unknown defendants in Plaintiff's original complaint. In April 2009, Plaintiff Zina Butler filed an action in federal district court, naming a single defendant, National Community Renaissance Corporation ("National"), for an alleged warrantless search of Plaintiff's apartment on April 18, 2007. The single page complaint asserted that the apartment manager provided a Section 8 investigator, a City employee and Sherriff deputies keys to Plaintiff's apartment and conducted a search in violation of her Fourth Amendment rights. Shortly after, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint, with the only change being the addition of defendant, the Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles ("HACoLA") in the caption. In May 2009, the court (on its own accord) dismissed the first amended complaint with leave to amend as "it [was] unclear whom Plaintiff intend[ed] to sue." In June 2009, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint, identifying National and HACoLA in the caption as defendants, but separately identifying several other individuals and entities allegedly involved in the incident occurring in April of 2007 in the complaint's statement of facts. The Court, once again, dismissed the second amended complaint with leave to amend for the same reasons it dismissed Plaintiff's first amended complaint. Reprinted courtesy of R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Whitney L. Stefco, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com; Ms. Stefko may be contacted at wstefko@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Consultant’s Corner: Why Should Construction Business Owners Care about Cyber Liability Insurance?

    July 13, 2017 —
    Recently, I wrote an article on the importance of cyber liability insurance for design professionals. The reality, however, is that this is important insurance for all professionals in today’s day and age. A modern, online insurance broker called Embroker was kind enough to submit a guest post on cyber liability insurance. Check it out!!! According to the Cybersecurity Ventures Report, the cost of cybercrime could reach $6 trillion by 2021. That same report predicts that cybercrime will expand into new sectors, such as the construction industry. Assuming your construction business has moved beyond pencil and paper drawings, paper invoices and mailed checks, this prediction is cause for concern. In fact, it’s already come true, as the 2013 Target cyber breach which led to a $39 million court settlement came through a HVAC contractor, a development which underscores the need for Cyber Liability insurance. Considering the numerous issues facing construction business owners — from budget and time constraints to production methods to fire hazards — Cyber Liability insurance may seem like a low priority. But f you expect to stay in business and be profitable, that’s simply not the case. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at Dadelstein@gmail.com

    Undercover Sting Nabs Eleven Illegal Contractors in California

    January 27, 2014 —
    A sting operation conducted in Rancho Murieta, California on January 16th by the Statewide Investigative Fraud Team, with assistance from the state Department of Consumer Affairs Division of Investigation netted “11 people accused of illegal, unlicensed home improvement contracting,” reported the Merced Sun-Star. The news source stated that “the statewide drought” provided “a new angle in approaching conservation-minded property owners, according to the Contractors State License Board.” The accusations included “illegal contracting after seeking bids for exterior painting, fencing and landscaping jobs,” according to the Merced Sun-Star. The eleven individuals received notices to appear in Sacramento Superior Court for arraignment March 27th. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of