BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts construction defect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness windowsCambridge Massachusetts slope failure expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts roofing construction expertCambridge Massachusetts construction forensic expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness concrete failureCambridge Massachusetts building code compliance 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


    Toward Increased Citizen Engagement in Urban Planning

    Contractors Sued for Slip

    New York Team’s Win Limits Scope of Property Owners’ Duties to Workers for Hazards Inherent in Their Work

    Insurer Must Defend Contractor Against Claims of Faulty Workmanship

    In Construction Your Contract May Not Always Preclude a Negligence Claim

    Statute of Frauds Applies to Sale of Real Property

    CDJ’s #10 Topic of the Year: Transport Insurance Company v. Superior Court (2014) 222 Cal.App.4th 1216.

    Warren Renews Criticism of Private Equity’s Role in Housing

    Court Confirms No Duty to Reimburse for Prophylactic Repairs Prior to Actual Collapse

    Commercial Construction in the Golden State is Looking Pretty Golden

    The Construction Industry Lost Jobs (No Surprise) but it Gained Some Too (Surprise)

    Giant Floating Solar Flowers Offer Hope for Coal-Addicted Korea

    Construction Defects Are Not An Occurrence Under New York, New Jersey Law

    Jury Finds Broker Liable for Policyholder’s Insufficient Business Interruption Limits

    Investigation Continues on Children Drowning at Construction Site

    The Fourth Circuit Applies a Consequential Damages Exclusionary Clause and the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Claims by a Subrogating Insurer Seeking to Recover Over $19 Million in Damages

    Court Rejects Efforts to Limit Scope of Judgment Creditor’s Direct Action Under Insurance Code Section 11580

    ‘Hallelujah,’ House Finally Approves $1T Infrastructure Funding Package

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

    Recovery Crews Swing Into Action as Hurricane Michael Departs

    Rancosky Adopts Terletsky: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Sets Standard for Statutory Bad Faith Claims

    Sacramento’s Commercial Construction Market Heats Up

    Iowa Court Holds Defective Work Performed by Insured's Subcontractor Constitutes an "Occurrence"

    Architects and Engineers Added to Harmon Towers Lawsuit

    The Law of Patent v Latent Defects

    Title II under ADA Applicable to Public Rights-of-Way, Parks and Other Recreation Areas

    An Expert’s Qualifications are Important

    United States Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in EEOC Subpoena Case

    Feds Outline Workforce Rules for $39B in Chip Plant Funding

    Connecticut Reverses Course for Construction Managers on School Projects

    Bad Faith in the First Party Insurance Context

    Construction Up in United States

    Stop by BHA’s Booth at WCC and Support the Susan G. Komen Foundation

    Lawyer Claims HOA Scam Mastermind Bribed Politicians

    Lenders Facing Soaring Costs Shutting Out U.S. Homebuyers

    Creeping Incrementalism in Downstream Insurance: Carriers are Stretching Standard CGL Concepts to Untenable Limits

    Building Inspector Jailed for Taking Bribes

    Pennsylvania Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Hacking Claim Under E&O Policy

    Patent or Latent: An Important Question in Construction Defects

    Red Wings Owner, Needing Hockey-Arena Neighborhood, Builds One

    A Glimpse Into Post-Judgment Collections and Perhaps the Near Future?

    Appraisal Process Analyzed

    Alert: AAA Construction Industry Rules Update

    Gloria Gaynor Sues Contractor over Defective Deck Construction

    Review the Terms and Conditions of Purchase Orders- They Could be Important!

    A Court-Side Seat: A FACA Fight, a Carbon Pledge and Some Venue on the SCOTUS Menu

    Don’t Put All Your Eggs in the Silent-Cyber Basket

    Traub Lieberman Team Obtains Summary Judgment in Favor of Client Under Florida’s Newly Implemented Summary Judgment Standard

    Good Indoor Air Quality Keeps Workers Healthy and Happy

    Pipeline Safety Violations Cause of Explosion that Killed 8
    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

    Last Call: Tokyo Iconic Okura Hotel Meets the Wrecking Ball

    August 26, 2015 —
    Tokyo’s iconic nod to Japanese Modernism, the Hotel Okura, will bid farewell to its last guests next week and face the wrecking ball, despite petitions from around the world to save it. The 1960s-era hotel, which has welcomed international dignitaries and inspired a throng of admirers eager for preservation, will close its doors Aug. 31 to make way for a gleaming new hotel rebuilt in time for the 2020 Olympics, at a cost of about 100 billion yen ($836 million). “What’s odd about the Okura is that it’s a perfect embodiment of ‘60s Modernism, and it represents that very first wave of new development in the region,” Tyler Brule, editor in chief of Monocle magazine, who spearheaded a campaign that included a petition with almost 9,000 signatures, said in an e-mailed response to questions. “For this reason alone, it deserves to be preserved.” Reprinted courtesy of Komaki Ito, Bloomberg and Andreea Papuc, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Coverage for Injury to Insured’s Employee Not Covered

    June 10, 2015 —
    The employee exclusions in the employer's CGL and Umbrella policies barred coverage. Piatt v. Indiana Lumbermen's Mut. Ins. Co., 2015 Mo. LEXIS 32 (Mo. April 28, 2015). Linda Nunley was killed while working for Missouri Hardwood Charcoal, Inc. The kiln's large steel door had been removed and was leaning upright against another kiln when it blew over and crushed Ms. Nunley. Her family filed a wrongful death suit against Junior Flowers, the company's sole owner, director, and executive officer. The complaint alleged that Flowers was negligent in ordering employees to lean the kiln doors upright, even though he knew it was unsafe. The complaint further alleged that Flowers breached a personal duty of care owed to Ms. Nunley and that his actions were "something more" that a breach of the company's duty to provide a safe workplace. Flowers requested a defense under CGL and Umbrella policies issued by Lumbermen's. The policies insured Missouri Hardwood and its executive officers, but excluded liability for a work-related injury to an "employee of the insured." The policies also had a "separation of insureds" provision, stating that the insurance applied "separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought." Lumbermen's denied coverage. 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

    Insured's Motion for Reconsideration on Protecting the Integrity of Referral Sources under Florida Statute s. 542.335

    September 28, 2017 —
    Referral sources are generally important for all businesses. Due to their importance, certain businesses require employees to execute non-solicitation or even non-compete agreements to protect the integrity of their referral sources. Now, whether referral sources for a particular business constitutes a legitimate business interest (very important words) is a question where the context must be examined. Nonetheless, in a case that is certainly important for businesses, the Florida Supreme Court held that referral sources can serve as a legitimate business interest. While this case dealt with home health care companies, the rationale would be the same no matter the business, provided that referral sources are contextually a legitimate business interest for that business. 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

    Home Improvement in U.S. Slowing or Still Intact -- Which Is It?

    May 20, 2015 —
    Two indexes that gauge U.S. home-remodeling activity suggest a slower pace ahead. Wall Street seems to disagree. Future market conditions measured by the National Association of Home Builders’ Remodeling Market Index fell to 55.4 in the three months ended March 31 from a record-high of 59.5 in the fourth quarter, data from the group showed Thursday. Similarly, a leading indicator of remodeling work created by Harvard University projects annual growth in home-improvement spending will slow to 2.9 percent by year end from a projected 6.5 percent in the first quarter. While these measures suggest sluggishness, investors don’t seem to mind. Following a “relatively weak year” for renovations in 2014, “people are warming up to housing again,” said Mike Wood, an analyst in New York at Macquarie Group Ltd. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anna-Louise Jackson, Bloomberg

    Faulty Workmanship may be an Occurrence in Indiana CGL Policies

    April 07, 2011 —

    The question of whether construction defects can be an occurrence in Commercial General Liabilities (CGL) policies continues to find mixed answers. The United States District Court in Indiana denied the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment in the case of General Casualty Insurance v. Compton Construction Co., Inc. and Mary Ann Zubak stating that faulty workmanship can be an occurrence in CGL policies.

    Judge Theresa L. Springmann cited Sheehan Construction Co., et al. v. Continental Casualty Co., et al. for her decision, ”The Indiana Supreme Court reversed summary judgment, which had been granted in favor of the insurer in Sheehan, holding that faulty workmanship can constitute an ‘accident’ under a CGL policy, which means any damage would have been caused by an ‘occurrence’ triggering the insurance policy’s coverage provisions. The Indiana Supreme Court also held that, under identically-worded policy exclusion terms that are at issue in this case, defective subcontractor work could provide the basis for a claim under a CGL policy.”

    As we reported on April 1st, South Carolina’s legislature is currently working on bill S-431 that would change the wording of CGL policies in their state to include construction defects. Ray Farmer, Southwest region vice president of the American Insurance Association spoke out against the bill. “CGL policies were never meant to cover faulty workmanship by the contractor,” he said. “The bill’s supplementary and erroneous liability provisions will only serve to unnecessarily impact construction costs in South Carolina.”

    Read the Opinion and order...
    Read the court’s ruling...
    Read the American Insurance Association statement...

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

    Understanding California’s Pure Comparative Negligence Law

    November 13, 2023 —
    In order for a plaintiff to prove a defendant is negligent, the plaintiff must prove the defendant (1) owed a duty to plaintiff, (2) breached that duty, (3) the breach was the actual and proximate cause of plaintiff’s injury, and (4) the resulting monetary damage. However, for both plaintiffs and defendants it is not an all or nothing game in California. This is because California is a pure Comparative Negligence state. California’s Comparative Negligence law provides that even if a plaintiff is deemed 99% at fault, the plaintiff can still recover 1% in damages from a defendant. Thus, even if a plaintiff is deemed to be more than 50% (or even 99%) at fault for the incident, the plaintiff could still recover some monetary amount, or the defendant will still have to pay plaintiff, depending on how you see it. In most instances, a jury decides what percentage of fault to assign to each party. Just as a plaintiff must prove he/she/its negligence case against a defendant, if the defendant claims plaintiff was partially responsible for the incident, the defendant must prove plaintiff was also negligent and said negligence contributed to plaintiff’s injuries. The total amount of monetary responsibility distributed among all defendants and plaintiffs must equal 100%. As crazy as it may sound, a plaintiff found to be 99.9% at fault, is still entitled to recover 0.01% from a defendant in California. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Yaron Shaham, Kahana Feld
    Mr. Shaham may be contacted at yshaham@kahanafeld.com

    Understanding the Miller Act

    February 26, 2015 —
    John P. Ahlers of Ahlers & Cressman PLLC, explained who is covered by the Miller Act in regards to Federal public works projects on the firm’s blog. Ahlers stated that “[t]he Miller Act requires that all general contractors post payment bonds on contracts in excess of $25,000.00.” In his blog post, Ahlers goes over coverage and the distinction between subcontractor and supplier. Ahlers commented, “While, at first glance, it may seem fairly simple to sort out who is and who is not covered by the Miller Act payment bond, the analysis can at times be factually and legally complex. This is an area that, if faced, the contractor should seek legal advice of an experienced construction lawyer before jumping to conclusions.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Quick Note: Remember to Timely Foreclose Lien Against Lien Transfer Bond

    July 09, 2019 —
    When a construction lien is transferred to a lien transfer bond pursuant to Florida Statute s. 713.24, instead of foreclosing the lien against the real property, you are foreclosing the lien against the lien transfer bond. This is not a bad deal and, oftentimes, is probably ideal. Remember, however, just because a construction lien was transferred to a lien transfer bond (pre-lawsuit) does not mean you get more time to file your lien foreclosure lawsuit. A lawsuit must still be filed within one year (short of that period being specifically shortened under operation of the law). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com