BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts construction project management expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction code expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts roofing and waterproofing expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts building consultant expertCambridge Massachusetts consulting engineersCambridge Massachusetts construction claims expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts reconstruction 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


    MapLab: Why More Americans Are Moving Toward Wildfire

    Federal Energy Regulator Approves Rule to Speed Clean Energy Grid Links

    Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Holds that Nearly All Project Labor Agreements are Illegal

    Be Careful When Walking Off of a Construction Project

    Ambiguity Kills in Construction Contracting

    McCarthy Workers Test Fall-Protection Harnesses Designed to Better Fit Women

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2024 New York – Metro Super Lawyers®

    Disrupt a Broken Industry—The Industrial Construction Sandbox

    Changes To Commercial Item Contracting

    The U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Rules on Greystone

    What is Bad Faith?

    Boys (and Girls) of Summer: New Residential Solar Energy System Disclosures Take Effect January 1, 2019

    Appellate Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Order Compelling Appraisal

    US Court Disputes $1.8B AECOM Damage Award in ‘Remarkable Fraud’ Suit

    How to Defend Stucco Allegations

    Construction Firm Settles Suit Over 2012 Calif. Wildfire

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    Update: New VOSH Maximum Penalties as of July 1

    Updates to the CEQA Guidelines Have Been Finalized

    Condo Developers Buy in Washington despite Construction Defect Litigation

    Second Circuit Brings Clarity To Scope of “Joint Employer” Theory in Discrimination Cases

    Pinterest Nixes Big San Francisco Lease Deal in Covid Scaleback

    Los Angeles Could Be Devastated by the Next Big Earthquake

    How to Protect a Construction-Related Invention

    California Supreme Court Adopts “Vertical Exhaustion” in the Long-Storied Montrose Environmental Coverage Litigation

    Construction Law- Where Pragmatism and Law Collide

    Builder Exposes 7 Myths regarding Millennials and Housing

    Court Grants Partial Summary Judgment on Conversion Claim Against Insurer

    U.S. District Court of Colorado Interprets Insurance Policy’s Faulty Workmanship Exclusion and Exception for Ensuing Damage

    Halliburton to Pay $1.1 Billion to Settle Spill Lawsuits

    Building Amid the COVID Challenge

    Construction Law Alert: A Specialty License May Not Be Required If Work Covered By Another License

    DC Wins Largest-Ever Civil Penalty in US Housing Discrimination Suit

    AB5 Construction Exemption – A Checklist to Avoid Application of AB5’s Three-Part Test

    Despite Feds' Raised Bar, 2.8B Massachusetts Offshore Wind Project Presses On

    Fort Lauderdale Partner Secures Defense Verdict for Engineering Firm in High-Stakes Negligence Case

    Insurer Cannot Abandon Defense Agreement on Underlying Asbestos Claims Against Insured

    HOA Has No Claim to Extend Statute of Limitations in Construction Defect Case

    Texas Approves Law Ensuring Fair and Open Competition

    What Construction Firm Employers Should Do Right Now to Minimize Legal Risk of Discrimination and Harassment Lawsuits

    "Damage to Your Product" Exclusion Bars Coverage

    House Passes Bill to Delay EPA Ozone Rule

    Guarantor’s Liability on Partially Secured Debts – The Impacts of Pay Down Provisions in Serpanok Construction Inc. v. Point Ruston, LLC et al.

    Design-Build Contracting for County Road Projects

    Hundreds of Coronavirus Coverage Cases Await Determination on Consolidation

    Don’t Spoil Me: Oklahoma District Court Rules Against Spoliation Sanctions

    'Major' Mass. Gas Leak Follows Feds Call For Regulation Changes One Year After Deadly Gas Explosions

    Homebuilders Go Green in Response to Homebuyer Demand

    Is Safety Compliance Putting Your Project in Jeopardy? Examining the Essentials of DOE’s Worker Safety and Health Program

    Three Recent Cases Strike Down Liquidated Damages Clauses In Settlement Agreements…A Trend Or An Aberration?
    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

    “Incidental” Versus “Direct” Third Party Beneficiaries Under Insurance Policies in Which a Party is Not an Additional Insured

    April 18, 2023 —
    As they say, when it rains, it pours. Indemnity and insurance are the “Big Two” when it comes to risk avoidance on construction projects. The next case, LaBarbera v. Security National Security Company, 86 Cal.App.5th 1329 (2022), involves both. It’s an interesting case, which I think could have gone either way, involving claims by a higher-tiered party that they were a third party beneficiary under an insurance policy in which they were not named as an additional insured. The LaBarbera Case The Indemnity Provision and Insurance Policy In June 1016, Chris LaBarbera hired Richard Knight doing business as Knight Construction to remodel his house in Carmichael, California. The construction contract included an indemnity provision which provided that Knight would defend and indemnify LaBarbera from all claims arising out the remodeling work except for claims arising from LaBarbera’s sole negligence and willful misconduct. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Ten ACS Lawyers Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    August 30, 2021 —
    ACS is very honored and pleased to announce ten members of our firm were awarded the distinction of top attorneys in Washington. Our blog articles usually cover Construction Legal News, but we feel this is a newsworthy accolade to be shared with friends and clients. To become candidates to receiving the Super Lawyer nomination, lawyers are nominated by a peer or identified by research. After completing this first step in the process, Super Lawyer’s research department analyzes 12 indicators, such as experience, honors/awards, verdicts/settlements, and others. As for the third step, there is a peer evaluation by practice area. Finally, for step four, candidates are grouped into four firm-size categories. In other words, solo and small firm lawyers are compared only with other solo and small firm lawyers, and large firm lawyers are compared with other large firm lawyers. The process is very selective and only 5 percent of the total lawyers in Washington are nominated as Super Lawyers. John P. Ahlers, one of the firm’s founding partners, was recognized as the third Top Lawyer out of all Washington lawyers in the State. Named partner Scott R. Sleight and partner Brett M. Hill were both recognized as one of the 100-Best Lawyers in the State. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cameron Sheldon, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Ms. Sheldon may be contacted at cameron.sheldon@acslawyers.com

    A Termination for Convenience Is Not a Termination for Default

    April 22, 2024 —
    A termination for convenience is NOT a termination for default. They are NOT the same. They should NOT be treated as the same. I am a huge proponent of termination for convenience provisions because sometimes a party needs to be able to exercise a termination for convenience, but the termination is not one that rises to a basis for default. However, exercising a termination for convenience does not mean you get to go back in time and convert the termination for convenience into a termination for default. It does not work like that. Nor should it. An opinion out of the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals – Williams Building Company, Inc. v. Department of State, CBCA 7147, 2024 WL 1099788 (CBCA 2024 – demonstrates a fundamental distinction between a termination for convenience and a termination for default, i.e., that you don’t get to conjure up defaults when you exercise a termination for convenience:
    Because a termination for convenience essentially turns a fixed-price construction contract into a cost-reimbursement contract, allowing the contractor to recover its incurred performance costs, the resolution of this appeal will involve identifying the total costs that [Contractor] incurred in performing this contract before [Government] terminated it for convenience. Since [Government] terminated the contract for convenience rather than for default, it no longer matters whether, in the past,[Contractor] acted intentionally in overstating the amount of its incurred costs or committed a contract breach. Ultimately, as permitted in response to a termination for convenience, [Contractor] will recover those allowable costs that [Contractor]establishes it incurred in performing the contract.
    Williams Building Company, supra.
    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

    New Pedestrian, Utility Bridge Takes Shape on Everett Waterfront

    December 16, 2019 —
    Amidst the constraints of weight limits, a seawall, a waterfront restaurant and high-voltage power poles, crews from ICI Interwest Construction Inc. and heavy mover Oxbo Mega Transport Solutions positioned a $20 million, 282-ft-long pedestrian and utility bridge in place this fall along the Everett, Washington, waterfront. Reprinted courtesy of Tim Newcomb, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Discussion of the Discovery Rule and Tolling Statute of Limitations

    February 26, 2015 —
    Attorney Clay Olson analyzed a recent South Carolina appeals case that “discussed the threshold for ‘notice’ as it pertains to statute(s) of limitations in construction defect cases. At the root of this action was a 2003 forensic report obtained by the HOA which was not acted upon until 2009.” Olson presented the background of the case as well as the case progression. Olson concluded, “It is well settled that an expert’s findings, when presented to a claimant, trigger the statute of limitations as to the specific defective conditions and locale where defects are present. This case is interesting in its treatment of the initial report as a trigger of all defects in not only the main building which was subject of the 2003 report, but additional structures.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Too Late for The Blame Game: Massachusetts Court Holds That the Statute of Repose Barred a Product Manufacturer from Seeking Contribution from a Product Installer

    March 21, 2022 —
    In State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Wangs Alliance Corp., No. 21-cv-10389-AK, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26712, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (District Court) considered whether a product manufacturer was barred by the Commonwealth’s six-year statute of repose for improvements to real property from joining the installer of the product as a third-party defendant. The court denied the defendant’s motion for leave to file a third-party complaint to join the installer, finding that the installer completed its work more than six years prior to the motion being filed. This case reminds us that Massachusetts’ six-year statute of repose for improvement to real property also bars a defendant’s contribution claims against third parties. The Wangs Alliance case involves a subrogation action filed by State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance (Insurer) against Wangs Alliance Corp. (Wangs), a manufacturer of rope lighting. Insurer insured the homeowners, who experienced a fire in their home in 2018. The home was originally built in 2002 by Wellen Construction (Wellen). As part of the original construction, Wellen installed rope lighting manufactured by Wangs in the house. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Replacement of Gym Floor Due to Sloppy Paint Job is Not Resulting Loss

    January 02, 2024 —
    The court granted the insurer's motion for summary judgment finding damage to the gym floor due to a poor paint job was not a resulting loss. Bob Robinson Commercial Flooring, Inc. v. RLI Ins,. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 196105 (D. Ark. Nov. 1, 2023). Bob Robinson Commercial Flooring (BRCF) submitted a bid to the general contractor, Nabholz Construction Corporation, to install a vinyl athletic floor and striping at a middle school. The job also included the painting of a "Wildcat" logo the main gym floor. Therefore, BRCF's job was to install floors with proper painting and striping. Robert Liles and Robert Lines Parking Lot Services was the subcontractor hired to do the painting and striping. BRCF did not supervise or inspect Liles' work while it was ongoing. Nabholz informed BRCF that there were problems with the floor painting, including crooked lines, incorrect markings, misplacement of the three point lines for the basketball surface, drips, smudges, etc. The gym floor was eventually rejected due to the nature of the vinyl flooring, once primer and paint were applied, the paint could not be removed and repainted. BRCF had to hire a new subcontractor to remove the flooring, install new flooring and then paint new lines. The cost for removal and replacement was $134,188.95. 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

    Amazon Hits Pause on $2.5B HQ2 Project in Arlington, Va.

    March 27, 2023 —
    Amazon is tapping the brakes on its $2.5-billion HQ2 second headquarters project in Arlington County, Va., announcing an indefinite delay to the start of the program’s 2.8-million-sq-ft second phase, known as PenPlace. Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of