BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts window expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts roofing construction expertCambridge Massachusetts soil failure expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts architect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witnesses fenestrationCambridge Massachusetts contractor expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts eifs 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


    The Jersey Shore gets Beach Prisms Designed to Reduce Erosion

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Brokers' MSJ on Duties Owed In Construction Defect Case

    'Regluing' Oregon State's Showcase for Mass Timber

    Contractual Impartiality Requires an Appraiser to be Unbiased, Disinterested, and Unswayed by Personal Interest

    AI AEC Show: Augmenta Gives Designers Superpowers

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured In Northern California Super Lawyers 2021!

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Lets Broad General Release Stand in SB 800 Case

    Appellate Court Reinforces When the Attorney-Client Relationship Ends for Purposes of “Continuous Representation” Tolling Provision of Legal Malpractice Statute of Limitations

    Texas Supreme Court Cements Exception to “Eight-Corners” Rule Through Two Recent Rulings

    California Governor Signs SB 496 Amending California’s Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Robots on Construction Sites Are Raising Legal Questions

    The Top 10 Changes to the AIA A201: What You Need to Know

    Augmenting BIM Classifications – Interview with Eveliina Vesalainen of Granlund

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: LESLIE KING O'NEAL

    Singapore Unveils Changes to Make Public Housing More Affordable

    Supreme Court Rejects “Wholly Groundless” Exception to Question of Arbitrability

    Insureds' Summary Judgment Motion on Mold Limitation Denied

    A New Study: Unexpected Overtime is Predictable and Controllable

    Brazil's Detained Industry Captain Says No Plea Deals Coming

    Endorsements Do Not Exclude Coverage for Wrongful Death Claim

    After Breaching Its Duty to Defend, Insurer Must Pay Market Rates for Defense Counsel

    Appeals Court Finds Manuscript Additional Insured Endorsements Ambiguous Regarding Completed Operations Coverage for Additional Insured

    Contract Not So Clear in South Carolina Construction Defect Case

    Business Interruption Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    BHA has a Nice Swing: Firm Supports Wounded Warrior Project at WCC Seminar

    Employee Exclusion Bars Coverage for Wrongful Death of Subcontractor's Employee

    General Contractor Gets Fired [Upon] for Subcontractor’s Failure to Hire Apprentices

    Federal Contractors Should Request Debriefings As A Matter Of Course

    Quick Note: Subcontractor Payment Bond = Common Law Payment Bond

    Texas exclusions j(5) and j(6).

    Do You Really Want Mandatory Arbitration in Your Construction Contract?

    Brown Paint Doesn’t Cover Up Construction Defects

    Fifth Circuit Certifies Eight-Corners Duty to Defend Issue to Texas Supreme Court

    Newmeyer Dillion Named 2021 Best Law Firm in Multiple Practice Areas by U.S. News-Best Lawyers

    Wilke Fleury Welcomes New Civil Litigation Attorney

    Architect Norman Foster Tells COP26: Change 'Traditional' City Design to Combat Climate Change

    Insurer's Attempt to Limit Additional Insured Status Fails

    Five-Year Peak for Available Construction Jobs

    Insured's Claim for Cyber Coverage Rejected

    Are “Green” Building Designations and Certifications Truly Necessary?

    Emergency Paid Sick Leave and FMLA Leave Updates in Response to COVID-19

    Be Careful in Contracting and Business

    Real Protection for Real Estate Assets: Court Ruling Reinforces Importance of D&O Insurance

    When is a Contract not a Contract?

    An Overview of the New EPA HVAC Refrigerant Regulations and Its Implications for the Construction Industry

    Occurrence Found, Business Risk Exclusions Do Not Bar Coverage for Construction Defects

    Motion to Strike Insurer's Expert Opinion Granted

    Three lawyers from Haight were recognized in The Best Lawyers in America© 2020 Edition

    Roots of Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam Reach Back a Decade

    An Increase of US Metro Areas’ with Normal Housing & Economic Health
    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

    Settlement Payment May Preclude Finding of Policy Exhaustion: Scottsdale v. National Union

    December 11, 2013 —
    In the last year, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado found that a settlement payment from an excess insurance carrier to another primary insurance carrier precluded a finding of vertical exhaustion sufficient to trigger the primary carrier’s duty to indemnify. See Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, 2012 WL 6004087 (D. Colo. 2012). The Scottsdale case arose out of the construction of a 507-unit apartment complex in Arapahoe County, Colorado in which a number of defects became apparent during construction. As a result, the owner of the project sued the general contractor and/or the construction manager, seeking to recover more than $22 million for various construction deficiencies. Id. at *1. The general contractor was insured under policies issued by several carriers. Scottsdale Insurance Co. (“Scottsdale”) and National Union Fire Ins. Co. (“National Union) provided umbrella coverage, and CNA and American Zurich Ins. Co. (“Zurich”) provided primary insurance under commercial general liability policies. About five years later, the construction defect case settled for $8.5 million dollars. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Heather Anderson
    Heather Anderson can be contacted at anderson@hhmrlaw.com

    With No Evidence of COVID-19 Being Present, DC Trial Court Finds No Claim for Business Interruption

    September 28, 2020 —
    A D.C. Superior Court rejected a business interruption claim due to closures related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Rose's 1, LLC v. Erie Ins. Exchange, Civil Case No 2020 CA 002424 B (Order dated Aug. 8, 2020). The decision is here. Plaintiffs owned a number of restaurants in the District of Coiumbia. Plaintiffs had commercial property coverage in a policy issued by Erie. The policy provided coverage for loss of income sustained due to interruption of business resulting directly from "loss or damage" to the insured property. DC Mayor Bowser issued a series of orders in March 2020 which closed all non-essential businesses, including plaintiffs' restaurants. Plaintiffs filed claims with Erie. When coverage was denied, plaintiffs filed suit. Both sides moved for summary judgment. The dispute centered on whether the closure of the restaurants due to the mayor's orders constituted a "direct physical loss" under the policy. Plaintiffs argued that the loss of use of the restaurants was "direct" because the closures were the direct result of the mayor's orders without intervening action. The court reasoned, however, that the orders were governmental edicts that commanded individuals and businesses to take certain actions. Standing alone and absent intervening actions by individuals and businesses, the orders did not effect any direct changes to the properties. 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

    City Development with Interactive 3D Models

    October 23, 2018 —
    The Finnish city of Hyvinkää has developed a unique internet service for collaborative 3D city planning. It gives real estate owners, investors, developers, designers, authorities, and citizens easy-to-use tools to publish their 3D plans and ideas for the built city environment. Participants can comment on the 3D plans directly in the city model. The 3D app is integrated with Facebook, which enables further conversation. Building the 3D City Model Päivi Tiihonen is the manager of the information services unit of the city’s technical and environmental sector. The city started building a browser-based 3D city model when Tiihonen assumed her position in 2014. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    A Look at Business and Professions Code Section 7031

    July 09, 2014 —
    Garret Murai, on his California Construction Law Blog, stated that California’s Business and Professions Code Section 7031 has often been described as draconian, harsh, and unjust—but still enforceable. The section does two things: first, it “prohibits unlicensed or improperly licensed contractors from suing to recover compensation for construction work requiring a license,” and second, it “permits property owners to sue such contractors for disgorgement of all compensation paid for such work.” According to Murai, the “strict enforcement of Section 7031” is thought to ensure “that contractors meet the minimum qualifications necessary for licensure.” Murai analyzed the case E. J. Franks Construction, Inc. v Sahota, which “carved out a limited exception to Section 7031 for contractors who form business entities and transfer their existing contractor’s license to such entities.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Inverse Condemnation and Roadwork

    October 09, 2023 —
    The following case, issued yesterday by the Georgia Supreme Court, addresses the accrual of the statute of limitations on a claim of inverse condemnation based on nuisance. Wise Bus. Forms, Inc. v. Forsyth Cnty., S22G0874, 2023 WL 6065278 (Ga. Sept. 19, 2023) We granted certiorari in this case to clarify the standards for determining when a claim for inverse condemnation by permanent nuisance accrues for purposes of applying the four-year statute of limitation set forth in OCGA § 9-3-30 (a). [. . .] Permanent nuisance cases vary in relation to when the alleged harm to a plaintiff’s property caused by the nuisance becomes “observable” to the plaintiff. Forrister, 289 Ga. at 333 (2), 711 S.E.2d 641. In some cases, the harm to the plaintiff’s property is immediately observable “upon the creation of the nuisance.” Id. For example, where a landowner or governmental agency “erects a harmful structure such as a bridge or conducts a harmful activity such as opening a sewer that pollutes a stream,” and it is immediately obvious that the structure or activity interferes with the plaintiff’s interests, the plaintiff must file “one cause of action for the recovery of past and future damages caused by [the] permanent nuisance” within four years of the date the structure is completed or the harmful activity is commenced. Id. at 333-336 (2) and (3), 711 S.E.2d 641 (citing Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 899 and 930). Phrased another way, where the “construction and continuance” of the permanent nuisance at issue is “necessarily an injury, the damage is original, and may be at once fully compensated. In such cases[,] the statute of limitations begins to run upon the construction of the nuisance.” City Council of Augusta v. Lombard, 101 Ga. 724, 727, 28 S.E. 994 (1897). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook Jr., Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    ‘Like a War Zone’: Malibu Fire Ravages Multimillion-Dollar Homes

    December 04, 2018 —
    Malibu resident Lance Schultz was jolted awake at 2 a.m. Friday with word that he needed to evacuate. With a roaring fire approaching the coastal community, he gathered his girlfriend, dog and 8-month-old son and headed to nearby Zuma Beach. He returned Sunday to survey the damage. His home was saved after his girlfriend’s 82-year-old father returned to hose down the property he had built years before. But Schultz estimates about one-fifth of the houses in the neighborhood are gone, including a mansion down the block that was on sale for $16 million. Much of the rest of the area is covered in black soot. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Gittelsohn, Anousha Sakoui, & Christopher Palmeri, Bloomberg

    Flag on the Play! Expired Contractor’s License!

    October 02, 2015 —
    It’s football season again. Which means, of course, that in addition to touch downs and field goals, you’ll also see hooting and hollering when the ref throws down a yellow flag signaling that a foul has been committed. In Judicial Council of California v. Jacob Facilities, Inc., Case Nos. A140890, A141393 (August 20, 2015), The California Court of Appeals for the First District threw down its own yellow flag under the dreaded Business and Professions Code section 7031, finding that a contractor was required to disgorge all monies received on a project – to the tune of a whopping $18 million – when its parent company allowed the subsidiary’s contractor’s license to lapse when it rebranded a new company to perform the work of the old company but never formally assigned the contract. I think someone in marketing may be in big trouble. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Yasmeen, Omidi, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Ms. Omidi may be contacted at yomidi@wendel.com

    Index Demonstrates Increase in Builders’ Sentiment

    September 17, 2014 —
    The National Association of Home Builders’ Eye on Housing reported that “[b]uilders’ sentiment jumped four points to 59, the highest level since November 2005, according to the September NAHB/Wells Fargo Housing Market Index.” Furthermore, builders mentioned “renewed interest by potential home buyers and higher traffic in their models and through their phone calls.” Eye on Housing also reported that the “inventory of new home for sale has increased to over 200,000.” While still lower than the 300,000 typical in 1990s and early 2000s, “the steady increase has provided a better selection for consumers.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of