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


    Affordable Global Housing Will Cost $11 Trillion

    Staten Island Villa Was Home to Nabisco 'Nilla' Wafer Inventor

    The Rise of Modular Construction – Impacts for Consideration

    Avoiding Project Planning Disasters: How to Spot Problem Projects

    South Carolina Supreme Court Asked Whether Attorney-Client Privilege Waived When Insurer Denies Bad Faith

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in “The Best Lawyers in America” & “Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch” 2025 Editions

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You Left Out a Key Ingredient!”

    A Win for Policyholders: Court Finds Flood Exclusion Inapplicable to Plumbing Leaks Caused by Hurricane Rainfall

    Just Because You Record a Mechanic’s Lien Doesn’t Mean You Get Notice of Foreclosure

    U.S. Tornadoes, Hail Cost Insurers $1 Billion in June

    Framework, Tallest Mass Timber Project in the U.S., Is On Hold

    Drought Dogs Developers in California's Soaring Housing Market

    Client Alert: Release of Liability Agreement Extinguishes Duty of Ordinary Care

    Atlanta Office Wins Defense Verdict For Property Manager On Claims By Vendor, Cross-Claims By Property Owner

    Contractor May Be Barred Until Construction Lawsuit Settled

    Mortgage Applications in U.S. Jump 11.6% as Refinancing Surges

    New World to Demolish Luxury Hong Kong Towers in Major Setback

    New Jersey Imposes New Apprenticeship Training Requirements

    Federal Government May Go to Different Green Building Standard

    Los Angeles Wildfires Will Cause Significant Insured Losses, Ranking Amongst the Most Destructive in California's History

    Colorado Passes Compromise Bill on Construction Defects

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

    Ortega Outbids Pros to Build $10 Billion Property Empire

    New York State Trial Court Addresses “Trigger of Coverage” for Asbestos Claims and Other Coverage Issues

    Keller Group Fires Two Executives in Suspected Australia Profits Reporting Fraud

    New York High Court: “Issued or Delivered” Includes Policies Insuring Risks in New York

    Ohio “property damage” caused by an “occurrence.”

    Connecticut Supreme Court Again Asked to Determine the Meaning of Collapse

    Unpaid Subcontractor Walks Off the Job and Wins

    Arkansas: Avoiding the "Made Whole" Doctrine Through Dépeçage

    Ambush Elections are Here—Are You Ready?

    What You Need to Know About Home Improvement Contracts

    GSA Releases Updated Standards to Accelerate Federal Buildings Toward Zero Emissions

    Another Municipality Takes Action to Address the Lack of Condominiums Being Built in its Jurisdiction

    Haight Welcomes Robert S. Rucci

    Billion-Dollar Power Lines Finally Inching Ahead to Help US Grids

    Washington State May Allow Common Negligence Claims against Construction Professionals

    Ninth Circuit Construes Known Loss Provision

    How Small Mistakes Can Have Serious Consequences Under California's Contractor Licensing Laws.

    Construction May Begin with Documents, but It Shouldn’t End That Way

    Celebrating Dave McLain’s Recognition in the Best Lawyers in America® 2025

    Big Changes and Trends in the Real Estate Industry

    Homebuilding on the Rise in Nation’s Capitol

    Defining Constructive Acceleration

    Reasons to Be Skeptical About a Millennial Homebuying Boom in 2016

    No Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims under Kentucky Law

    Litigation Privilege Saves the Day for Mechanic’s Liens

    Spearin Doctrine: Alive, Well and Thriving on its 100th Birthday

    The Unwavering Un-waivable Implied Warranty of Workmanship and Habitability in Arizona

    California Trial Court Clarifies Application of SB800 Roofing Standards and Expert’s Opinions
    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

    Changes to the Federal Rules – 2024

    November 18, 2024 —
    Unless Congress moves quickly, several amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Evidence will take effect December 1, 2024. Below is a brief description of the amendments. Rules of Evidence Rule 107 is a new rule. This rule addresses illustrative aids, stating that, if such aid helps the trier of fact to understand the evidence or an argument, a party may use the aid if its utility is not substantially outweighed by the danger of, among other things, unfair prejudice. As noted under the discussion of Rule 1006, below, an illustrative aid - offered only to help the trier of fact understand the evidence - is generally not admissible into evidence. Rule 613 currently states that extrinsic evidence of a witness’s prior inconsistent statement is admissible only if the witness is given an opportunity to explain or deny the statement and the adverse party is given an opportunity to examine the witness about it, or if justice so requires. As amended, the court has the discretion to forego this requirement. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    Pennsylvania: Searching Questions Ahead of Oral Argument in Domtar

    October 08, 2014 —
    If you have been following our coverage of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Domtar Paper Co., you will recall that the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania decided on May 29, 2014 to hear the subrogated insurer’s appeal,1 despite the Superior Court’s holding against the subrogated insurer—based primarily on its own defective case law2 —and its denial of reargument, presumably due to the insurer’s briefing follies.3 The parties in Domtar, as well as numerous amici curiae (friends of the court),4 have submitted their respective briefs over the last few months, and the Supreme Court has scheduled oral argument to take place on October 8, 2014 in Pittsburgh, Pa. The Court has framed the issue as: “Does Section 319 of the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act, 77 P.S. § 671, allow the employer/insurer to step into the shoes of the insured employee to subrogate against the tortfeasor?”5 There are three possible outcomes in Domtar. The first (and easiest) possible outcome for the Supreme Court would be to punt to the Pennsylvania General Assembly for a decision on the issue. Workers’ compensation legislation, perhaps more than any other type of legislation, “creates a highly structured balancing of competing interests.”6 It is basic civics that the legislature has a “superior ability to examine social policy issues and determine legal standards so as to balance competing concerns.”7 Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert Caplan, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Caplan may be contacted at caplanr@whiteandwilliams.com

    The Small Stuff: Small Claims Court and Limited Civil Court Jurisdictional Limits

    June 10, 2024 —
    Sometimes the small stuff matters. And when it comes to legal disputes this can pose a problem for clients as well as their attorneys because litigation and arbitration, the two most frequently utilized venues to resolve legal disputes in the United States, can be and usually are expensive. Data on the cost of civil litigation is sparse. According to a 2013 survey of trial lawyers conducted by the National Center of State Courts, the median cost of litigating a contract dispute – which is the category that most construction disputes would fall under – is $90,575. And this is in 2013 dollars. With inflation, that number rises to nearly $120,000 in 2023, and based upon our experience litigating and arbitrating complex (and even not so complex) construction disputes, it can be many multiples over that. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Coverage Gap Dispute

    October 26, 2017 —
    On Tuesday, October 24, the New Jersey Supreme Court heard arguments in a 17-year-old battle over whether Honeywell International Inc. (Honeywell) will have to help cover the costs of asbestos-related injury suits that were filed against it after insurers began to universally exclude coverage for asbestos-related liabilities. The Court considered the arguments made by two excess insurers, St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co. (St. Paul) and parent Travelers Casualty and Surety Co. (Travelers), that the Court should overturn a state appellate court’s ruling that Honeywell does not have to contribute to these costs. During the course of this case, Honeywell has sought coverage under more than 300 different policies, ultimately settling with all insurers except St. Paul and Travelers, who had issued a total of 10 excess policies to Honeywell’s predecessor, Bendix Corp. (Bendix) between 1968 and 1983. Honeywell has only sought coverage for claims made by individuals who allege that they were first exposed to asbestos prior to 1987. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Austin D. Moody, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Moody may be contacted at adm@sdvlaw.com

    New Jersey Court Upholds Registration Requirement for Joint Ventures Bidding on Public Works Contracts

    December 16, 2023 —
    Introduction In a matter of “first impression,” on November 30, 2023, the Appellate Division affirmed the New Jersey Superior Court decision in Ernest Bock & Sons-Dobco Pennsauken Joint Venture v. Township of Pennsauken and Terminal Construction Corp., finding that the New Jersey Public Works Contractor Registration Act, N.J.S.A. 34:11-56.48 to -56.57 (“PWCRA” or the “Act”), applies to a joint venture formed for the sole purpose of bidding on a public works contract. Therefore, the Court held that the PWCRA requires any joint venture bidding on public works projects in New Jersey to be registered under the Act at the time of bid submission. Accordingly, the Township of Pennsauken acted within its authority and properly rejected the bid submission of the Ernest Bock & Sons-Dobco Joint Venture which was not registered under the Act in the name of the joint venture at the time of its bid submission, despite the individual members of the joint venture being registered. Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas J. Zaita, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Brian Glicos, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Zaita may be contacted at nzaita@pecklaw.com Mr. Glicos may be contacted at bglicos@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Florida Federal Court to Examine Issues of Alleged Arbitrator Conflicts of Interests in Panama Canal Case

    May 24, 2021 —
    The parties in a $238-million dispute over the construction of the third set of locks for the Panama Canal are raising issues concerning alleged conflicts of interest on the part of the International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) arbitrators in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.[2] The case may address rarely litigated issues concerning whether arbitrators who sit on multiple arbitration panels together or who support appointment of each other to lead arbitration panels have disabling conflicts of interest. The case pits Grupo Unidos por el Canal, S.A. (“Grupo”), a consortium of Spanish, Italian, Belgian, and Panamanian construction firms, against Autoridad del Canal de Panama (“ACP”), the Panamanian entity that operates the Panama Canal and that sponsored the multi-billion-dollar, decade-long project to expand the Canal’s capacity by building a new set of locks (the “Project”). The current dispute (the “Panama 1 Arbitration”), which centers on the suitability of the rock coming from the excavations to be used to produce concrete aggregates for the Project, was arbitrated before a three-member ICC Tribunal and resulted in a $238-million award to ACP and against Grupo. The ICC Tribunal reversed a decision of the dispute review board established in the parties’ contract. Reprinted courtesy of Sarah B. Biser, Fox Rothschild LLP and Philip Z. Langer, Fox Rothschild LLP Ms. Biser may be contacted at sbiser@foxrothschild.com Mr. Langer may be contacted at planger@foxrothschild.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Massachusetts Pulls Phased Trigger On Its Statute of Repose

    December 21, 2020 —
    In D’Allesandro v. Lennar Hingham Holdings, LLC, 486 Mass 150, 2020 Mass. LEXIS 721, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts answered a certified question regarding how to apply the Massachusetts statute of repose, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 260, § 2B, in regards to phased construction projects. The court held that, in this context, the completion of each individual “improvement” to its intended use, or the substantial completion of the individual building and the taking of possession for occupancy by the owner or owners, triggers the statute of repose with respect to the common areas and limited common areas of that building. Additionally, the court held that where a particular improvement is integral to, and intended to serve, multiple buildings (or the development as a whole), the statute of repose is triggered when the discrete improvement is substantially complete and open to its intended use. In D’Allesandro, the action arose out of the construction, marketing, sale and management of the Hewitts Landing Condominium (the Condominium) project. Ultimately, 150 units were constructed over 24 phases of construction, enclosed in 28 different buildings. Throughout construction, the project’s architect submitted declarations to the Town of Hingham swearing that the individual units were “substantially complete” and could be occupied for their intended use. The Town of Hingham then issued certificates of occupancy for the unit or building. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kyle Rice, White and Williams
    Mr. Rice may be contacted at ricek@whiteandwilliams.com

    Farewell Capsule Tower, Tokyo’s Oddest Building

    April 25, 2022 —
    Anyone who has seen Tokyo's Nakagin Capsule Tower will remember it. Studded with grey cubes, the striking building carries an obvious architectural message: this is a modular habitat. Built half a century ago during Japan’s dizzying ascent as an economic power, the 140-unit complex has been left behind by the times, overshadowed by taller and sleeker skyscrapers that overlook the city of 14 million. Once demolition officially starts April 12, scaffolding will surround the two towers that make up the building. The capsules will then be plucked off one by one, most likely behind protective sheets of plastic because they contain asbestos. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Reed Stevenson, Bloomberg