BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts architectural expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction project management expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts civil engineer expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts building expertCambridge Massachusetts architecture expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction forensic expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts building code 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


    Contractors Can No Longer Make Roof Repairs Following Their Own Inspections

    ASCE Statement on Senate Passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024

    Dusseldorf Evacuates About 4,000 as World War II Bomb Defused

    Green Construction Trends Contractors Can Expect in 2019

    New Orleans Is Auctioning Off Vacant Lots Online

    When a Construction Lender Steps into the Shoes of the Developer, the Door is Open for Claims by the General Contractor

    Alleging and Proving a Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA) Claim

    Ohio School Board and Contractor Meet to Discuss Alleged Defects

    2018 California Construction Law Update

    Engineers Found ‘Hundreds’ of Cracks in California Bridge

    Taking Service Network Planning to the Next Level

    National Coalition to Provide Boost for Building Performance Standards

    $48 Million Award and Successful Defense of $135 Million Claim

    Contractor’s Charge Of Improvements To Real Property Not Required For Laborers To Have Lien Rights

    Playing Hot Potato: Indemnity Strikes Again

    Baby Boomer Housing Deficit Coming?

    Trump Sues Casinos to Get Conditions Fixed or Name Off

    What is the True Value of Rooftop Solar Panels?

    BHA has a Nice Swing: Don’t Forget to Visit BHA’s Booth at WCC to Support Charity

    Now Available: Seyfarth’s 50 State Lien Law Notice Requirements Guide (2023-2024 Edition)

    Pulte Home Corp. v. CBR Electric, Inc.

    In Colorado, Repair Vendors Can Bring First-Party Bad Faith Actions For Amounts Owed From an Insurer

    Defense Dept. IG: White House Email Stonewall Stalls Border Wall Contract Probe

    Who Would Face Liability For Oroville Dam Management: Brett Moore Authors Law360 Article

    Critical Updates in Builders Risk Claim Recovery: Staying Ahead of the "Satisfactory State" Argument and Getting the Most Out of LEG 3

    Hawaii Bill Preserves Insurance Coverage in Lava Zones

    Home Buyer Disclosures, What’s Required and What Isn’t

    California Supreme Court Finds Vertical Exhaustion Applies to First-Level Excess Policies

    Do You Have the Receipt? Pennsylvania Court Finds Insufficient Evidence That Defendant Sold the Product

    Federal Court of Appeals Signals an End to Project Labor Agreement Requirements Linked to Development Tax Credits

    Construction Defects and Commercial General Liability in Illinois

    Massachusetts Federal Court Rejects Adria Towers, Finds Construction Defects Not an “Occurrence”

    Can a Contractor be Liable to Second Buyers of Homes for Construction Defects?

    Travelers’ 3rd Circ. Win Curbs Insurers’ Asbestos Exposure

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Preserves Possibility of Coverage

    What If an Irma-Like Hurricane Hit the New York City Metro Area?

    Architectural Firm, Fired by School District, Launches Lawsuit

    Carillion Fallout Affects Major Hospital Project in Liverpool

    SNC-Lavalin’s Former Head of Construction Pleads Guilty to Bribery, Money Laundering

    Construction Managers, Are You Exposing Yourselves to Labor Law Liability?

    No Duty to Indemnify When Discovery Shows Faulty Workmanship Damages Insured’s Own Work

    Cincinnati Team Secures Summary Judgment for Paving Company in Trip-and-Fall Case

    Georgia Law: “An Occurrence Can Arise Where Faulty Workmanship Causes Unforeseen or Unexpected Damage to Other Property”

    OSHA Joins the EEOC in Analyzing Unsafe Construction Environments

    Colorado Drillers Show Sensitive Side to Woo Fracking Foes

    Forecast Sunny for Solar Contractors in California

    A Termination for Convenience Is Not a Termination for Default

    U.S. Home Sellers Return for Spring as Buyers Get Relief

    South Carolina School District Investigated by IRS and FBI

    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

    DIR Reminds Public Works Contractors to Renew Registrations Before January 1, 2016 to Avoid Hefty Penalty

    December 17, 2015 —
    I know. You’re busy. Perhaps even a bit overwhelmed. You’ve got trees to trim, halls to deck with boughs of holly, and when you throw in (the office, your kids’ school, and the bowling league’s) holiday parties, you’re at the point where you’ve got visions of sugar plums (although it may vary) dancing through your head. Well, the DIR has come to give you its own yuletide greeting. Think of it as a Christmas card of sorts. Merry Christmas. The Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) announced today that a mandatory renewal deadline is approaching for contractors who bid or work on public works projects in California. Contractors whose public works contractor registration expired June 30, 2015, and have ongoing public works projects or plan to bid on new ones, must pay the $300 renewal fee before January 1, 2016 or face an additional $2,000 late penalty after that date. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Coverage for Construction Defect Barred by Contractual-Liability Exclusion

    July 30, 2014 —
    Relying upon precedent from the Texas Supreme Court, the Fifth Circuit upheld the District Court's denial of coverage based upon the policy's contractual-liability exclusion. Crownover v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 12158 (5th Cir. June. 27, 2014). The Crownovers entered a construction contract with Arrow Development, Inc. to construct a home. Paragraph 23.1 of the contract contained a warranty-to-repair clause, which provided Arrow "would correct work . . . failing to conform to the requirements of the Contract Documents." After the work was completed, cracks began to appear in the walls and foundation of the Crownovers' home. Additional problems with the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system caused leaking in exterior lines and air ducts inside the home. When Arrow refused to correct the problems, the Crownovers initiated arbitration. The arbitrator found that the Crownovers had a meritorious claim for breach of the express warranty to repair contained in paragraph 23.1 of the construction contract. Damages were awarded. 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

    Immigrants' Legal Status Eyed Over Roles in New York Fake Injury Lawsuits

    January 07, 2025 —
    Edison Fernando Pesantez Ramon says that early on the morning of Sept. 29, 2021, while working on a building renovation project on 96th Street in Manhattan, he tripped and fell badly on a staircase. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, ENR
    Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com

    New Jersey Traffic Circle to be Eliminated after 12 Years of Discussion

    February 04, 2014 —
    The online publication New Jersey.com reported that on February 6th a “Pre-Construction Public Information hearing” will be held in Little Ferry, New Jersey, to discuss “the upcoming Route 46 Circle Elimination construction project.” The project includes “installation of a storm water pump station” as well as reconfiguring the circle into “a conventional four-way signalized intersection with a brand new traffic signal.” Conti Enterprises of Edison was awarded the bid “at a cost of $33,837,739,” according to New Jersey.com. The project, which has been discussed for over a decade, stalled over combining the elimination of the traffic school with rehabilitation of a bridge. Improvements include “replacing of the entire bridge deck, structural steel member replacement and strengthening, sidewalk replacement on both sides of the structure and substructure patching, crack sealing and reconstruction where needed.” The informational meeting will introduce the public to the engineer and contractor for the project. "This information session will help residents learn more about the project and what to expect as the state undertakes this work," Little Ferry Mayor Mauro Raguseo told New Jersey.com. "I wish we could fast forward to the completion of the project so we can realize the benefits without the headaches, but that's not reality. We all need to be prepared." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Metaphysics of When an Accident is an “Accident” (or Not) Under Your Insurance Policy

    August 02, 2017 —
    As an undergrad, I remember taking an introductory philosophy class. When we came to the chapter on metaphysics our professor asked what makes an apple an apple? “We have a specific name for it, presumably, to distinguish it from other things,” she said. “But what makes an apple an apple?” From there we went into a rabbit hole. With some students describing an apple by its colors, shape, size, smell and that it grows on trees and others trying to distinguish an apple from other things, which in turn led to further discussions such as why we believe apples come in red, green and yellow, whether an apple is still an apple if a person was colorblind, etc. In the end, we were questioning whether we were even in existence and sitting in a university classroom. Insurance can be a bit like that sometimes. When is an accident an accident? If you engage in an intentional act that results in an unintended consequence, is it an accident? In Navigators Specialty Insurance Company v. Moorefield Construction, Inc. (December 27, 2016) 6 Cal.App.5th 1258, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth District, while not answering the question of the nature of existence, did shed some light on when an accident is an accident. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Illinois Appellate Court Addresses Professional Services Exclusion in Homeowners Policy

    August 03, 2022 —
    In Stonegate Ins. Co. v. Smith, 2022 IL App (1st) 210931, the Insured was performing plumbing work at a multi-story townhouse when a fire ensued causing damage to the second story unit. Although a carpenter by trade, the Insured was performing plumbing work consisting of the replacement of a shower valve as a favor for a friend. To accomplish the task, the Insured utilized a small propane torch to attempt to remove the old water piping to the shower. In doing so, the insulation behind the bathroom wall caught fire and the flame spread upward to the neighboring unit. Stonegate had issued a homeowner’s policy to the Insured during the relevant time period. The homeowner's policy excluded coverage for property damage "[a]rising out of the rendering of or failure to render professional services." Subsequent to tender of the loss, Stonegate initiated a declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration that it owned no duty to defend or indemnity pursuant to the professional services exclusions. In finding in favor of the Insured, the Court began its analysis by noting that the homeowner's policy did not define the term "professional services" such that it was the Court’s task to determine whether the Insured’s work qualified as a "professional service" for purposes of the exclusion. The Court further prefaced its holding by stating that for an exclusionary clause to effectively deny coverage, its applicability must be clear and free from doubt because any doubts as to coverage will be resolved in favor of the insured. Looking to Illinois case precedent, the Court found that the term "professional service" is not limited to services for which the person performing them must be licensed by a governmental authority. Rather, "professional services" encompass any business activity conducted by an insured that (1) involves specialized knowledge, labor, or skill, and (2) is predominantly mental or intellectual as opposed to physical or manual in nature. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James M. Eastham, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Eastham may be contacted at jeastham@tlsslaw.com

    Teaming Agreements- A Contract to Pursue a Solicitation and Negotiate

    November 23, 2020 —
    Teaming agreements are practical and useful agreements on public projects where a prime contractor teams with a subcontractor for purposes of submitting a bid or proposal in response to a solicitation. The prime contractor and subcontractor work together to pursue that solicitation and have the government award the contract to the prime contractor. The teaming agreement allows for information to be confidentially shared (estimating and pricing, construction methodologies, systems, and suggestions, value engineering, etc.) where the subcontractor agrees that it will only pursue the solicitation with the prime contractor. In other words, the subcontractor ideally is not going to submit pricing to another prime contractor proposing or bidding on the same project and is not going to share information the prime contractor has furnished to it. Likewise, the prime contractor is not going to use the subcontractor’s information for purposes of finding another subcontractor at a lower price and is agreeing to use its good faith efforts or best attempts to enter into a subcontract with the subcontractor if it is awarded the project. This is all memorialized in the teaming agreement. The potential problem lies with language that requires the parties to use their good faith efforts or best attempts to enter into a subcontract if the project is awarded to the prime contractor. In essence, this can become a disfavored “agreement to agree” to a future contract that could allow either party to create an argument to back out of the deal under the auspice that they could not come to terms with the subcontract. 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

    U.S. Steel Invoking Carnegie’s Legacy in Revival Strategy

    July 23, 2014 —
    In March 2013, Mario Longhi lobbed an unexpected question into a roomful of 150 U.S. Steel Corp. managers: Who here would buy the company’s stock, tomorrow? He gave them three seconds, and “only a few reacted in that time frame positively,” Longhi said. Since that meeting, Longhi has been promoted to chief executive officer, and nine months into his tenure he’s closed one plant permanently, two more are temporarily idled and he’s planning to overhaul another. It’s all part of his plan to transform the 144-year-old company into a lean, modern steel producer. Investors are taking note, with the shares up 53 percent since he took over. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sonja Elmquist, Bloomberg
    Ms. Elmquist may be contacted at selmquist1@bloomberg.net