BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts contractor expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts structural concrete expertCambridge Massachusetts expert witness windowsCambridge Massachusetts engineering expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts eifs expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts fenestration expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witnesses fenestration
    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


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

    Hundreds of Coronavirus Coverage Cases Await Determination on Consolidation

    Ethical Limits on Preparing a Witness for Deposition or Trial

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

    New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ Bill

    EPA Fines Ivory Homes for Storm Water Pollution

    Manhattan to Get Tall, Skinny Tower

    London Office Builders Aren’t Scared of Brexit Anymore

    Five-Year Statute of Limitations on Performance-Type Surety Bonds

    Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP Expands into Georgia

    Tennessee Court of Appeals Holds Defendant Has the Burden of Offering Alternative Measure of Damages to Prove that Plaintiff’s Measure of Damages is Unreasonable

    Insurer Must Defend Insured Against Construction Defect Claims

    Industry Practices Questioned After Girder Fractures at Salesforce Transit Center

    Gilroy Homeowners Sue over Leaky Homes

    Feds, County Seek Delay in Houston $7B Road Widening Over Community Impact

    Not Pandemic-Proof: The Ongoing Impact of COVID-19 on the Commercial Construction Industry

    FDOT Races to Re-Open Storm-Damaged Pensacola Bridge

    Google Advances Green Goal With AES Deal for Carbon-Free Power

    The G2G Year-End Roundup (2022)

    Holding the Bag for Pre-Tender Defense Costs

    Canada Home Resales Post First Fall in Eight Months

    Labor Under the Miller Act And Estoppel of Statute of Limitations

    Carillion Fallout Affects Major Hospital Project in Liverpool

    Denver’s Mayor Addresses Housing and Modifying Construction Defect Law

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa Rolle and Christopher Acosta Win Motion to Dismiss in Bronx County Trip and Fall

    Determining Duty to Defend in Wisconsin Does Not Include Extrinsic Evidence

    Exculpatory Provisions in Business Contracts

    Malerie Anderson Named to D Magazine’s 2023 Best Lawyers Under 40

    Eye on Housing Examines Costs of Green Features

    Miller Act Payment Bond Surety Bound to Arbitration Award

    Extreme Flooding Overwhelms New York Roadways, Killing 1 Person

    AI Systems and the Real Estate Industry

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Tier 1 and Tier 2 “Best Law Firm” by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2025

    Intricacies of Business Interruption Claim Considered

    Termination for Convenience Clauses: Maybe More Than Just Convenience

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

    “A No-Lose Proposition?”

    Legal Fallout Begins Over Delayed Edmonton Bridges

    Court Agrees to Stay Coverage Matter While Underlying State Action is Pending

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2023 Illinois Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    NY Appeals Court Ruled Builders not Responsible in Terrorism Cases

    Amazon Urged to Review Emergency Plans in Wake of Deadly Tornado

    Seventh Circuit Remands “Waters of the United States” Case to Corps of Engineers to Determine Whether there is a “Significant Nexus”

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2024 “Atlanta 500” List

    Maine Court Allows $1B Hydropower Transmission Project to Proceed

    Insurance Law Alert: Ambiguous Producer Agreement Makes Agent-Broker Status a Jury Question

    Condo Buyers Seek to Void Sale over Construction Defect Lawsuit

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Causing Property Damage to Insured's Product Only

    Construction Spending Had Strongest Increase in Four Years

    Diggerland, UK’s Construction Equipment Theme Park, is coming to the U.S.
    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

    Labor Development Impacting Developers, Contractors, and Landowners

    June 25, 2019 —
    It is unlawful for unions to secondarily picket construction sites or to coercively enmesh neutral parties in the disputes that a union may have with another employer. This area of the law is governed by the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”), the federal law that regulates union-management relations and the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”), the federal administrative agency that is tasked with enforcing the NLRA. But NLRB decisions issued during the Obama administration have allowed a union to secondarily demonstrate at job sites and to publicize their beefs over the use of non-union contractors there, provided the union does not actually “picket” the site. In those decisions, the NLRB narrowed its definition of unlawful “picketing,” thereby, limiting the scope of unlawful activity prohibited by law. Included in such permissible nonpicketing secondary activity is the use of stationary banners or signs and the use of inflatable effigies, typically blow-up rats or cats, designed to capture the public’s attention at an offending employer’s job site or facilities. A recently released NLRB advice memo, however, signals the likely reversal of those earlier decisions and that contractors and owners may now be able to stop such harassing union job site tactics simply by filing a secondary boycott unfair labor practice change with the NLRB. The 18 page memo, dated December 20, 2018 (and released to the public on May 14, 2019), directs the NLRB’s Region 13 to issue a complaint against the Electrician’s Union in a dispute coming out of Chicago where the union erected a large, inflatable effigy, a cat clutching a construction worker by the neck, and posted a large stationary banner proclaiming its dispute to be with the job’s general contractor over the use of a non-union electrical sub at the job site’s entrance. Though not an official Board decision, the memo suggests the NLRB General Counsel’s (GC) belief that the earlier Obama era decisions may have been wrongly decided and should be reconsidered by the NLRB on the theories that the Union’s nonpicketing conduct was tantamount to unlawful secondary picketing, that it constituted “signal” picketing that unlawfully induced or encouraged the employees of others to cease working with the subs or that it constituted unlawful coercion. Reprinted courtesy of John Bolesta, Sheppard Mullin and Keahn Morris, Sheppard Mullin Mr. Bolesta may be contacted at jbolesta@sheppardmullin.com Mr. Morris may be contacted at kmorris@sheppardmullin.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Lack of Sophistication With the Construction Contract Can Play Out In an Ugly Dispute

    November 07, 2022 —
    There are times where a lack of sophistication can come back to haunt you. This is not referring to a lack of sophistication of the parties. The parties, themselves, could be quite sophisticated. This is referring to a lack of sophistication with the construction contract forming the basis of the relationship. While parties don’t always want to buy into the contract drafting and negotiation process, it is oftentimes the first document reviewed. Because contract terms and conditions are important. They govern the relationship, the risk, scope, amount, and certain outcomes with disputes. However, a lack of sophistication can play out when that contract that should govern the relationship, the risk, the scope, the amount, and certain outcomes doesn’t actually do that, or if it does, it does it poorly. An example of how bad a dispute can play out when it comes to the lack of sophistication on the front end is Avant Design Group, Inc. v. Aquastar Holdings, LLC, 2022 WL 6852227 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022), where a cost-plus contract was treated as a lump sum contract. Here, an owner planned to perform an extensive interior build-out to a residential unit. The owner had an out-of-country architect; because the architect was not licensed in Florida, the owner hired a local architect/designer to oversee construction and obtain goods and services for the residential interior build-out. The contract was nothing but a proposal of items and costs. The proposal stated the owner “would pay the cost of goods and services of the vendors, plus pay a ‘20% Interior Design & Administrative Fee’” to the local designer. Avant Design Group, 2022 WL at *1. The proposal further stated, “This preliminary budget of the Client’s construction costs include [sic] anticipated costs for construction materials, labor and sales tax. Any other cost, including but not limited to freight, cartage, shipping, receiving, storage and delivery are not included in the preliminary budget and will be invoiced separately.” Id., n.2. 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

    Contract Provisions That Help Manage Risk on Long-Term Projects

    June 29, 2020 —
    Few things can dampen the thrill and promise of a newly closed construction deal than the realization that it could quickly become a losing proposition for the contractor depending on economic and other conditions. In an era of instant information, constantly adjusting markets and political extremes, projects that start under one set of assumptions or conditions can occur or conclude under much different ones. While no one has a crystal ball, there are contractual provisions that can provide clear guidance in the face of many “what ifs” that can arise in construction. One of the chief concerns a contractor should have in a project lasting more than a few months is what impact price increases will have on the profitability of the job. On a true cost-plus project, this may be of little concern, but on any project with a limitation on costs or a guaranteed maximum price, contractors should insist on a procedure to revisit the limitation or price if certain conditions change. This can be as simple as allowing the contractor to receive an upward adjustment in the price if costs increase by more than a certain percentage. It can be as complicated as requiring multiple new bids and disclosures to the property owner, architect or project manager and allowing approval of new suppliers or subcontractors to limit cost increases to the cheapest increase. The protection—and certainty—to the contractor though, comes from having a process in the contract to address cost increases, whether it is simple or complex. Reprinted courtesy of Jason Lambert, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Lambert may be contacted at Jason.lambert@dinsmore.com

    Latest Updates On The Coronavirus Pandemic

    March 30, 2020 —
    Coronavirus has struck a heavy blow against the world economy as it forces countries into lockdown with "closed for business" signs, hollows out the tourism, travel and hospitality sectors, turns out the lights on business gatherings and events, sends employees home to work and drives the stock market into a dizzying tumble. ENR Editors ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story for ENR's ongoing reporting, analysis and commentary on construction sector developments Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Edward Beitz and William Taylor Recognized by US News – Best Lawyers as a "Lawyer of the Year"

    August 31, 2020 —
    White and Williams is proud to announce that Edward Beitz and William Taylor have been recognized by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® as a “Lawyer of the Year” in their respective practices in Philadelphia. Ed was named in the area of Medical Malpractice and Bill was named in Construction Law. "Lawyer of the Year" recognitions are awarded to individual lawyers with extremely high overall peer-feedback for a specific practice area and geographic location. Ed is a member of the Healthcare Group and focuses his practice on medical malpractice defense, defending doctors, nurses, physician assistants and hospitals at the trial and appellate court levels, as well as general liability matters. He has successfully defended numerous medical malpractice cases at trial involving complex issues of the human anatomy, such as cardiac surgery, neurosurgery, orthopedic surgery, nursing care, obstetrical complications, nerve injury and vascular injury. Ed has authored briefs on appellate issues in healthcare and coverage matters to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, the New Jersey Appellate Division and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. Reprinted courtesy of Edward Beitz, White and Williams and William Taylor, White and Williams Mr. Beitz may be contacted at beitze@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Taylor may be contacted at taylorw@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Faulty Workmanship Claim

    December 21, 2020 —
    The manufacturer of roofing and waterproofing systems was unsuccessful in securing coverage for alleged faulty workmanship due to the "your work" and "your product" exclusions. Siplast, Inc. v. Emplrs Mut. Cas. Co., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176539 (N.D. Texas Sept. 25, 2020). Siplast was sued in New York by the Archdiocese for work done at Cardinal Spellman High School. The Archdiocese purchased a Siplast Roof System for the high school. Vema Enterprises installed the roof system. The roof system was covered by a guarantee. After completion, school officials noticed water damage in the ceiling tiles throughout the school. A consultant hired by the Archdiocese concluded that the leaks were caused by the workmanship and the materials that were compromising the entire roof membrane and system. Siplast determined the guarantee was not applicable. The Archdiocese informed Siplast that it would repair the roof and hold Siplast liable for the costs. Siplast gave notice of the claim to Employers, but coverage was denied. 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

    The Best Laid Plans: Contingency in a Construction Contract

    September 13, 2021 —
    This article is the first of a three-part series on contingencies in construction contracts. This series will explain:
    • what a construction contingency is;
    • the two primary schools of thought regarding how a construction contingency fund should be used and managed; and
    • construction contract drafting considerations for contingency clauses.
    Armed with this information, owners and contractors will be better equipped to tackle the inevitable project surprises. Life is full of surprises, some good and some not too good. Surprises during construction are seldom welcome events. However, experienced owners and contractors know to expect the unexpected and plan accordingly by including contingency funds in their budgets. For them, the question is not whether or not to include a contingency, but how much to set aside and how to structure and manage the fund. Reprinted courtesy of Josh Levy, Katesha Long & Samantha Schacht, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Ms. Schacht may be contacted at samantha.schacht@huschblackwell.com Ms. Long may be contacted at katesha.long@huschblackwell.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Flow-Down Clauses Can Drown Your Project

    August 26, 2015 —
    Flow-Down or pass-through clauses obligate downstream contractors to certain provisions contained in the up up-stream contractor contracts, such as the contract between the general contractor and the owner. These clauses are contained in every major form subcontract and they can expand the scope of your potential liability. This blog will look at typical language of a flow-down clause, what it means and how you can deal with them. Typical Flow-Down Clause A simple flow down clause might provide:
    “The Subcontractor agrees to be bound to the Contractor by the terms of the prime contract and to assume to the Contractor all the obligations and responsibilities that the Contractor by those documents assumes to the Owner, except to the extent that the provisions contained therein are by the terms or by law applicable only to the Contractor.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com