BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts slope failure expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts roofing and waterproofing expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts eifs expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts reconstruction expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction expert witness public projectsCambridge Massachusetts expert witness roofingCambridge Massachusetts expert witness commercial buildings
    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


    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Las Vegas Team on Obtaining Summary Judgment for the Firm’s Landowner Client!

    Construction Resumes after Defects

    Texas Supreme Court Holds that Invoking Appraisal Provision and Paying Appraisal Amount Does Not Insulate an Insurer from Damages Under the Texas Prompt Payment of Claims Act

    California Contractor License Bonds to Increase in 2016

    Chicago Cubs Agree to Make Wrigley Field ADA Improvements to Settle Feds' Lawsuit

    What are the Potential Damages when a House is a Lemon?

    New York: The "Loss Transfer" Opportunity to Recover Otherwise Non-Recoverable First-Party Benefits

    Housing Sales Hurt as Fewer Immigrants Chase Owner Dream

    City Development with Interactive 3D Models

    Fourth Circuit Holds that a Municipal Stormwater Management Assessment is a Fee and Not a Prohibited Railroad Tax

    UCP Buys Citizen Homes

    Newmeyer Dillion Named 2023 Best Law Firm in Multiple Practice Areas By U.S. News-Best Lawyers

    Harborside Condo Construction Defect Settlement Moves Forward

    General Contractors Can Be Sued by a Subcontractor’s Injured Employee

    Is Ohio’s Buckeye Lake Dam Safe?

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in 2019 Edition of Who’s Who Legal

    COVID-19 Response: Executive Order 13999: Enhancement of COVID-19-Related Workplace Safety Requirements

    With an Eye Already in the Sky, Crane Camera Goes Big Data

    Delaware Strengthens Jurisdictional Defenses for Foreign Corporations Registered to Do Business in Delaware

    Plehat Brings Natural Environments into Design Tools

    Responding to Ransomware Learning from Colonial Pipeline

    The Quiet War Between California’s Charter Cities and the State’s Prevailing Wage Law

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

    DC Circuit Issues Two Important Clean Air Act and Administrative Law Decisions

    11th Circuit Affirms Bad Faith Judgement Against Primary Insurer

    AI Systems and the Real Estate Industry

    Colorado Statutes of Limitations and Repose, A First Step in Construction Defect Litigation

    Home Prices Up, Inventory Down

    Bert L. Howe & Associates to Join All-Star Panel at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Candlebrook Adds Dormitories With $230 Million Purchase

    California’s Right To Repair Act Is The Sole Remedy For Damages For Construction Defects In New Residential Construction

    Colorado Temporarily Requires Employers to Provide Sick Leave While Awaiting COVID-19 Testing

    What ‘The Curse’ Gets Wrong About Passive House Architecture

    Landlords Beware: Subordination Agreements

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    Seattle Crane Strike Heads Into Labor Day Weekend After Some Contractors Sign Agreements

    NTSB Sheds Light on Fatal Baltimore Work Zone Crash

    New Rule Prohibits Use of Funds For Certain DoD Construction and Infrastructure Programs and Projects

    Old Case Teaches New Tricks

    ACEC Research Institute Releases New Engineering Industry Forecast

    Ninth Circuit Construes Known Loss Provision

    ASBCA Validates New Type of Claim Related to Unfavorable CPARS Review [i]

    Federal Court Opinion Has Huge Impact on the Construction Industry

    Acord Certificates of Liability Insurance: What They Don’t Tell You Can Hurt You

    Risky Business: Contractual Protections in the 'New Normal'

    Coverage Denied for Insured's Defective Product

    District Court of Missouri Limits Whining About the Scope of Waiver of Subrogation Clauses in Wine Storage Agreements

    Misread of Other Insurance Clause Becomes Costly for Insurer

    New Law Raises Standard for Defense Experts as to Medical Causation

    Colorado statutory “property damage” caused by an “occurrence”
    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

    Sales of U.S. New Homes Decline After Record May Revision

    July 30, 2014 —
    Fewer new U.S. homes were sold in June than forecast and May data showed the biggest downward revision on record, painting a picture of a housing market that is struggling to gain traction. Sales of newly built homes declined 8.1 percent to a 406,000 annualized pace, the fewest since March and less than any economist surveyed by Bloomberg forecast, Commerce Department figures showed today in Washington. That followed a May reading of 442,000 that was 12.3 percent lower than estimated last month. Restrictive lending rules, limited land supply, higher mortgage rates and more expensive properties are keeping a lid on how much the housing recovery can accelerate. Continued employment gains and bigger increases in wages will be needed to support further growth in the industry, which has stalled since interest rates started climbing last year. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Victoria Stilwell, Bloomberg
    Ms. Stilwell may be contacted at vstilwell1@bloomberg.net

    Yes, Indeedy. Competitive Bidding Not Required for School District Lease-Leasebacks

    October 01, 2014 —
    Remember when you discovered that the tooth fairy wasn’t real? It was kind of a bummer on one hand learning that it wasn’t a fairy that magically appeared to swap your tooth for cold hard cash, but rather your mom or, visual horrors, dad. At the same time, it was, to your nearly-halfway-to-a-decade-on-this-planet-wizened-six-year-old mind, confirmation of what you had a sneaking suspicion was the case in any event. And, so it is with the next case. Lease-Leasebacks In California, most public school construction projects are built using the traditional design-bid-build project delivery method in which a design professional designs the project, the project is put out for competitive bid and the selected contractor builds the project. But not all school construction projects are built this way. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@kmtg.com

    Environmental and Regulatory Law Update: New Federal and State Rulings

    April 19, 2022 —
    The first quarter of 2022 has yielded a number of decisions, reversals and agency adjustments worth note. FEDERAL CIRCUIT U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit – Food & Water Watch v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission On March 11, 2022, the court decided the FERC case. On December 19, 2019, the Commission issued a Certificate to Tennessee Gas Pipeline and determined that a “modest expansion” and upgrade of the existing 11,000-mile natural gas pipeline would have no significant environmental impact. However, one of the Commissioners filed a partial dissent, arguing that the Commission’s treatment of the climate change impacts was inadequate. A petition for review was filed, and now the court has decided that the Commission erred in not accounting for the indirect effects of the expansion, namely the downstream emissions of greenhouse gas generated by the pipeline’s delivery of the gas to its customers. Consequently, NEPA’s requirement that a rigorous environmental assessment be made before the authorization was granted was violated. However, the court decided against vacating the Commission’s orders, which would have had a “disruptive effect” on the project which is, or soon will be, operational. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Charles Carter v. Pulte Home Corporation

    October 12, 2020 —
    In Carter v. Pulte Home Corp., __Cal.App.5th__(July 23, 2020), the California Court of Appeal affirmed the entry of judgment in favor of subcontractors in connection with a Complaint for Intervention based on equitable subrogation filed by Travelers Property Casualty Company of America (“Travelers”) seeking to recover defense costs incurred in defending Pulte Home Corporation (“Pulte”) in an underlying construction defect lawsuit. The parties’ dispute arose out of Travelers’ defense of Pulte as an additional insured under policies issued to four subcontractors involved in the underlying construction defect lawsuit. Several subcontractors involved in the underlying construction defect lawsuit refused to defend Pulte based on the indemnity clauses in their subcontracts. Such clauses promised to indemnify Pulte as follows: “all liability, claims, judgments, suits, or demands for damages to persons or property arising out of, resulting from, or relating to Contractor’s performance of work under the Agreement (“Claims”) unless such Claims have been specifically determined by the trier of fact to be the sole negligence of Pulte. . . .” Pulte eventually settled the construction defect lawsuit and its claims against all of the subcontractors. Travelers ultimately paid $320,491.82 for Pulte’s defense and recovered $164,400 from some of the subcontractors. Travelers’ intervention in the underlying lawsuit was intended to recover the remaining $156,091.82 from the subcontractors that refused to indemnify Pulte for the defense of the construction defect lawsuit. In the underlying trial, Travelers argued that the subcontractors were obligated to pay defense costs on a joint and several basis (minus what Travelers had already recovered). The trial court did not agree and held that Travelers was not entitled to equitable subrogation for the remaining defense costs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Velladao, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Velladao may be contacted at Michael.Velladao@lewisbrisbois.com

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap – Arbitration Motion Practice

    August 07, 2023 —
    In the June 22, 2023 edition of the Toolbox Talk Series, Adrian Bastianelli, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., and Brian Cashmere, Williams Mullen, moderated by Jennifer Millender of the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”), discussed motion practice in arbitration. Specifically, they offered advice on how to choose the right issue for a motion, how to get approval for a motion, how to write the motion, and how to get the arbitrator to grant it. They also discussed the pros and cons of motion writing in arbitration settings. 1. How to choose the “right issue” for a motion in arbitration The panel discussed what type of issues can, or should, be brought up in a motion in arbitration. Cashmere stated that a clear and concise issue is best for this type of review. For example, statute of limitations, notice, or contract interpretation issues may make great summary judgment or partial summary judgment motions. Essentially, an issue that the arbitrator may resolve via primarily a question of law is more likely to succeed. Bastianelli warned against submitting just any “available” motion, as the practice may turn the arbitrator against you. Both panelists mentioned the need to consider strategy before filing a motion—ask, “how will filing this motion help or hurt reachingArbi final resolution.” Cashmere noted that sometimes the threat of bringing the issue to a hearing can put pressure on the adverse party in a way that is favorable to your client’s goals; possibly even more so than actually submitting the issue. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Zehner, BBG Construction Law
    Mr. Zehner may be contacted at mzehner@bbglaw.com

    Update: Amazon Can (Still) Be Liable in Louisiana

    December 31, 2024 —
    On November 25, 2024, in Pickard v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 5:20-cv-01448, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215377, the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (District Court) ruled that Amazon.com, Inc. (Amazon) could be liable for manufacturer-seller liability under the Louisiana Products Liability Act (LPLA) for a defective product sold by a third-party seller through the “Fulfillment by Amazon” program (FBA). The court also dismissed two tort claims against Amazon as follows: (i) Amazon does not qualify as a “seller” for purposes of non-manufacturer seller liability (because passing title is required for that claim); and (ii) there is insufficient evidence to prove the decedent, Archie Pickard (Pickard), relied on Amazon’s safety practices when purchasing the defective product, precluding a claim for negligent undertaking. Background Pickard died from injuries sustained in a house fire allegedly caused by a defective battery charger he purchased on Amazon. Jisell, a Chinese company and a third-party seller, manufactured and sold the charger. Amazon never took title to the charger but stored it in its warehouse and delivered it to Pickard through the FBA. Pickard’s children filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Amazon alleging three claims: (i) manufacturer-seller liability under the LPLA; and tort-based claims of (ii) non-manufacturer seller liability and (iii) negligent undertaking. After Amazon moved for summary judgment on all claims, the District Court certified questions to the Supreme Court of Louisiana (Supreme Court) seeking guidance as there was minimal guidance regarding the application of products claims to online marketplaces. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Ciamaichelo, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Ciamaichelo may be contacted at ciamaichelom@whiteandwilliams.com

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap – Best Practices for Productive Rule 26(f) Conferences on Discovery Plans

    May 13, 2024 —
    In the April 4, 2024 edition of Division 1’s Toolbox Talk Series, Julian Ackert and Steve Swart presented on how to prepare for and structure Rule 26(f) conferences to be more effective. While Swart and Ackert focused on the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) regarding the requisite conference of the parties prior to a scheduling conference or scheduling order, it is worth noting that many states have substantially similar requirements. Rule 26(f) requires the parties to (i) discuss the nature and basis of their claims or defense; (ii) make or arrange for mandatory disclosures pursuant to Rule 26(a)(1); (iii) discuss issues about preserving discoverable information (including Electronically Stored Information – “ESI”); and (iv) develop a proposed discovery plan. Swart and Ackert’s presentation focused on the preservation of ESI and the proposed discovery plan. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas J. Mackin, Cozen O’Connor
    Mr. Mackin may be contacted at dmackin@cozen.com

    Sometimes It’s Okay to Destroy Evidence

    August 17, 2011 —

    The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled in the case of Miller v. Lankow that Mr. Miller was within his rights to remediate his home, even though doing so destroyed the evidence of water intrusion.

    Linda Lankow built a home in 1992. In 2001 or 2002, Lankow discovered a stucco problem at the garage which she attributed to moisture intrusion. She asked the original contractor to fix the wall. In 2003, Lankow attempted to sell her home, but the home inspection revealed fungal growth in the basement. Lankow made further repairs, including alterations to the landscaping.

    In 2004, Lankow put her house on the market once again and entered into an agreement with David Miller. Miller declined to have an independent inspection, as the home had been repaired by professional contractors.

    In 2005, Miller put the house on the market. A prospective buyer requested a moisture inspection. The inspection firm, Private Eye, Inc. found “significant moisture intrusion problems.”

    Miller hired an attorney who sent letters to the contractors and to Lankow and her husband. Lankow’s husband, Jim Betz, an attorney, represented his wife and sent a letter to Miller’s attorney that Miller had declined an opportunity to inspect the home.

    In 2007, Miller’s new attorney sent letters to all parties that Miller had decided to begin remediation work on the house. All stucco was removed. Miller then filed a lawsuit against the prior owners, the builders, and the realtors.

    Two of the contractors and the prior owners moved for summary judgment on the grounds that Miller had spoliated evidence by removing the stucco. They requested that Miller’s expert reports be excluded. The district court found for the defendants and imposed sanctions on Miller.

    The Minnesota Supreme court found that “a custodial party’s duty to preserve evidence is not boundless,” stating that “it may be particularly import to allow remediation in cases such as the one before us.” Their reasoning was that “remediation of the moisture intrusion problem in the home may be necessary, even essential, to address immediate health concerns.”

    Given that Miller needed to remediate the problem in order to continue living there, and that he had given the other parties a “full and fair opportunity to inspect,” the court found that he was within his rights. The court reversed the judgment of the lower court and remanded it to them for review.

    Read the court’s decision…

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