BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts architecture expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness structural engineerCambridge Massachusetts construction scheduling expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts consulting engineersCambridge Massachusetts forensic architectCambridge Massachusetts expert witnesses fenestrationCambridge Massachusetts expert witness windows
    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


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

    On-Site Supersensing and the Future of Construction Automation – Discussion with Aviad Almagor

    No Coverage for Contractor's Faulty Workmanship

    California Contractor Tests the Bounds of Job Order Contracting

    Dispute Waged Over Design of San Francisco Subway Job

    San Diego: Compromise Reached in Fee Increases for Affordable Housing

    Claims Against Broker Dismissed

    NTSB Sheds Light on Fatal Baltimore Work Zone Crash

    Assignment of Insured's Policy Ineffective

    The Construction Lawyer as Counselor

    Understanding Indiana’s New Home Construction Warranty Act

    Can Your Employee File a Personal Injury Claim if They’re Injured at Work?

    Parties to an Agreement to Arbitrate May be Compelled to Arbitrate with Non-Parties

    Admissibility of Expert Opinions in Insurance Bad Faith Trials

    Atlantic City Faces Downward Spiral With Revel’s Demise

    Eleventh Circuit’s Noteworthy Discussion on Bad Faith Insurance Claims

    KONE is Shaking Up the Industry with BIM

    No Global MDL for COVID Business Interruption Claims, but Panel Will Consider Separate Consolidated Proceedings for Lloyds, Cincinnati, Hartford, Society

    In Florida, Exculpatory Clauses Do Not Need Express Language Referring to the Exculpated Party's Negligence

    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

    Senior Housing Surplus Seen as Boomers Spur Building Boom

    Tech to Help Contractors Avoid Litigation

    Infrastructure Money Comes With Labor Law Strings Attached

    Hurricane Ian: Florida Expedites Road Work as Damage Comes Into Focus

    Boston Tower Project to Create 450 Jobs

    Balancing Cybersecurity Threats in Smart Cities: Is the Potential Convenience of “Smart” Intersections Worth the Risk?

    Payne & Fears LLP Recognized by U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers in 2023 “Best Law Firms” Rankings

    Assignment of Construction Defect Claims Not Covered

    Cal/OSHA Approves COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards; Executive Order Makes Them Effective Immediately

    Technology and the Environment Lead Construction Trends That Will Continue Through 2019

    Smart Contracts Poised to Impact the Future of Construction

    A Survey of Trends and Perspectives in Construction Defect Decisions

    New Tariffs Could Shorten Construction Expansion Cycle

    Late Notice Bars Insured's Claim for Loss Caused by Hurricane

    Preserving your Rights to Secure Payment on Construction Projects (with Examples)

    Hunton Partner Michael Levine Appointed to Law360’s 2024 Insurance Authority Property Editorial Advisory Board

    Famed NYC Bridge’s Armor Is Focus of Suit Against French Company

    Court of Federal Claims: Upstream Hurricane Harvey Case Will Proceed to Trial

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Just Hanging Around”

    Balfour in Talks With Carillion About $5 Billion Merger

    Use of Dispute Review Boards in the Construction Process

    Trump Tower Is Now One of NYC’s Least-Desirable Luxury Buildings

    English v. RKK- There is Even More to the Story

    Subcontractor Sued for Alleged Defective Work

    Quick Note: Mitigation of Damages in Contract Cases

    ZLien Startup has Discovered a Billion in Payments for Clients

    Construction Defect Claim not Barred by Prior Arbitration

    Contract Change #1- Insurance in the A201 (law note)

    Snooze You Lose? Enforcement of Notice and Timing Provisions

    What Buyers Want in a Green Home—and What They Don’t
    Corporate Profile

    CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Cambridge, Massachusetts Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Cambridge's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at Slower Pace in May

    July 30, 2014 —
    Residential real-estate prices rose in the 12 months ended May at the slowest pace in more than a year as a lull in the U.S. housing market limits appreciation. The S&P/Case-Shiller index of property values in 20 cities increased 9.3 percent from May 2013, the smallest year-to-year advance since February 2013, after rising 10.8 percent in the year ended in April, the group said today in New York. The median projection of 30 economists surveyed by Bloomberg called for a 9.9 percent year-over-year advance. Compared with the prior month, prices dropped for the first time in two years. Higher mortgage rates and strict lending requirements are bridling sales, which will probably prompt sellers to lower their expectations of how much they can get for their properties. Continued job growth and greater balance between supply and demand will be needed to bring some potential homebuyers back into the market. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Victoria Stilwell, Bloomberg
    Ms. Stilwell may be contacted at vstilwell1@bloomberg.net

    Insurer Fails to Establish Prejudice Due to Late Notice

    October 17, 2022 —
    Summary judgment awarded to the insurer was reversed because the insurer presented no evidence of prejudice caused by untimely notice. Perez v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 5435 (Fla. Ct. App. Aug. 10, 2022). The insureds' home suffered water damage due to Hurricane Irma around September 10, 2017. A claim was submitted to Citizens on November 27, 2018. Citizens had an independent adjuster inspect, but then denied the claim due to untimely notice. The insureds sued and Citizens moved for summary judgment. Citizens argued it was prejudiced because it could not confirm the cause of the loss or the property damage attributed to it. The court agreed that the insureds' notice was untimely. The insureds were notified by tenants renting the property that leaks appeared around the time of Hurriane Irma. The policy language, however, placed the burden to rebut the presumption of prejudice caused by late notice on Citizens. Whether the insurer was prejudiced was a question of fact. Citizens failed to demonstrate any prejudice due to the untimely notice. 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

    Breach of a Construction Contract & An Equitable Remedy?

    September 22, 2016 —
    In payment or collection-type lawsuits, the party suing for money sometimes asserts a claim for unjust enrichment or quantum meruit as an alternative equitable remedy to a breach of contract claim. Frankly, sometimes a party will do this as a means to throw everything against the wall hoping something, just something, sticks. However, if there is a contract by and between the parties, equitable claims such as unjust enrichment or quantum meruit will invariably fail. They will fail because a party cannot circumvent a contract simply because their recourse may prove better under an equitable theory. It doesn’t work like that! And, it should not! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Register and Watch Partner John Toohey Present on the CLM Webinar Series!

    October 11, 2021 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara is proud to announce that Partner John Toohey was invited to speak on a panel for the CLM Webinar Series alongside Attorney Rembold Hirschman, and Senior Claims Examiner Brett Reuter. John and his industry peers recently presented on the topic Handling Construction Defect Cases in Arbitration: The Good and the Bad. About the webinar: Unfortunately, many construction projects end in dispute and the parties frequently find themselves in the middle of uncharted territory – arbitration! Subscribe and watch as they explore the pitfalls, debunk the myths, and discuss the benefits of arbitration in construction disputes. About John Toohey: John H. Toohey is a Partner for Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP. Mr. Toohey is an A.V. Preeminent rated attorney with a practice focused on contract negotiation and litigation, complex product liability, and construction. He has successfully represented hundreds of clients in alternative dispute resolution and trial, including multiple cases to jury verdict. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Loss Ensuing from Faulty Workmanship Covered

    April 28, 2014 —
    The court found coverage for damage resulting from faulty workmanship. Drury Co. v. Mo. United Sch. Ins. Counsel, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 319 (Mo. Ct. App. March 25, 2014). The School District entered a contract with general contractor, Penzel Construction Company, Inc., to build an addition to a high school. Under the prime contract, the School District was to purchase property insurance, including builder's risk "all-risk" coverage. The policy was to cover the interests of the owner, the contractor, subcontractors and sub-subcontractors in the project. The School District obtained a policy from Missouri United School Insurance Counsel (MUSIC). Exclusions in the all-risk policy included loss due to faulty workmanship or materials, "unless loss by a peril not otherwise excluded ensues and then MUSIC shall be liable only for such ensuing loss." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Focusing on Design Elements of the 2014 World Cup Stadiums

    June 30, 2014 —
    While Garret Murai on his California Construction Law blog admits that the construction of Brazil’s World Cup stadiums has been problematic (construction worker deaths, delays, and cost overruns), he focused on the design work: “…there’s no denying that the venues are stunning, and for a country known for its beauty as well as beauties (think the Girl From Ipanema), dare I say even sexy.” For instance, Murai described the Estadio do Maracana (constructed in 1950 and renovated in 2013) as looking “a bit like the front of the USS Enterprise.” He goes onto explain how the stadium was originally constructed for the 1950 World Cup, and “famous” attendees include Frank Sinatra and the Pope. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court Orders House to be Demolished or Relocated

    April 26, 2011 —

    Decision Affirmed in Central Arkansas Foundation Homes, LLC v. Rebecca Choate

    The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the decision by the trial court in Central Arkansas Foundation Homes, LLC v. Rebecca Choate. In the trial case, Central Arkansas Foundation Homes (CAFH) sought payment for a home built for Choate, while Choate alleged that the builders committed multiple construction defects including using the wrong foundation materials and positioning the house in the wrong direction.

    After the house was built, CAFH contacted Choate regarding payment, however, Choate alleged that the finished product did not match the contract. “ After CAFH completed construction, it obtained permanent home financing for Choate and tried to contact her to close the transaction. Choate did not respond until October 2005, when she sent CAFH a list of alleged construction defects, including that the house was facing in the wrong direction; that it was not built on a slab; and that the fireplace, garbage disposal, driveway, and storage area were missing. CAFH replied to Choate in writing, telling her that she had until January 6, 2006, to close on the house or CAFH would sell it. The correspondence enclosed worksheets showing that the amount Choate would owe at closing exceeded $94,000, which included interest that had accrued on the as-yet unpaid construction loan.”

    Initially, the court found in favor of CAFH. “On April 18, 2007, Choate’s attorney withdrew from representing her. Soon thereafter, CAFH’s attorney asked the court to set a final hearing on the case. The attorney purportedly sent Choate a letter by regular mail on May 15, 2007, advising her that the case was set for trial on July 9, 2007. Choate, however, did not appear. CAFH did appear, and its general manager, John Oldner, testified to events leading up to the case and the amount of damages claimed. According to Oldner, the interest on the construction loan had accrued to the point that CAFH now sought $104,965.88 from Choate. The court found in favor of CAFH and entered judgment for that amount, plus attorney fees, on July 18, 2007. The court ruled that CAFH could sell the house and either remit any excess to Choate or look to Choate for the deficiency if the sales price did not cover the judgment.”

    However, Choate successfully argued that she did not receive notice of the trial. A new trial was ordered, and the outcome was quite different. “On June 6, 2008, the circuit court entered judgment for Choate, ruling that the house was not in substantial compliance with the parties’ contract and that the contract should be rescinded. The court found that the house suffered from numerous construction defects, that the contract contemplated a slab rather than a concrete-pier foundation, and that CAFH ignored Choate’s complaints that the house was facing the wrong way. The judgment directed CAFH to hold Choate harmless on the construction loan, to deed Choate’s two acres back to her, and to remove the house from Choate’s property.”

    The Court of Appeals “found that Choate would be unjustly enriched by retaining the benefit of the septic systems and utility lines that CAFH installed on her land. The court therefore awarded $5340 to CAFH as a quantum-meruit recovery for the value of that work. CAFH contends that the award is not sufficient, but we see no clear error.” In the end, the Court of Appeals provided this reason for declining to reverse the trial court’s decision: “The court in this case apparently concluded that the house constructed by CAFH was so fundamentally at odds with Choate’s contractual expectations that she was not unjustly enriched and should simply be, as nearly as possible, returned to the status quo ante. Accordingly, the court ordered the house removed from her property and permitted CAFH to either relocate the house or salvage the house’s materials and unused appliances. We decline to reverse the court’s weighing of the equities in this manner.”

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    California Restricts Principles of “General” Personal Jurisdiction

    April 01, 2015 —
    In BNSF Railway Company v. Superior Court (Kralovetz) (Filed 3/27/2015, No. B260798), the California Court of Appeal, Second District, held a Delaware railroad corporation, with its principal place of business in Texas, was not subject to “general” personal jurisdiction in California, despite California housing 8.1% of the corporation’s total workforce, accounting for 6% of the corporation’s revenue, and containing just under 5% of its total track mileage. Plaintiff, Vicki Kralovetz, filed suit in California Superior Court against defendant, BNSF Railway Company (“BNSF”), and others, for wrongful death. Plaintiff contended her husband was exposed to asbestos products manufactured by BNSF in Kansas while working at a dismantling facility owned by BNSF’s predecessor in interest. Plaintiff claimed the exposure caused her husband to contract mesothelioma, which resulted in his death. Reprinted courtesy of Kristian B. Moriarty, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Moriarty may be contacted at mmoriarty@hbblaw.com Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of