BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    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 retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts construction defect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction claims expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts soil failure expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts multi family design expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts forensic architectCambridge Massachusetts roofing construction expertCambridge Massachusetts construction expert witness public projects
    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


    White House’s New Draft Guidance Limiting NEPA Review of Greenhouse Gas Impacts Is Not So New or Limiting

    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    Pancakes Decision Survives Challenge Before Hawaii Appellate Court

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/18/23) – Zillow’s New Pilot Program, Production Begins at Solar Panel Plant in Georgia, and More Diversity on Contracts for Buffalo Bills Stadium

    Project-Specific Commercial General Liability Insurance

    Implied Warranty Claims–Not Just a Seller’s Risk: Builders Beware!

    Seattle Expands Bridge Bioswale Projects

    Gain in Home Building Points to Sustained U.S. Growth

    Architects and Engineers Added to Harmon Towers Lawsuit

    White and Williams LLP Secures Affirmation of Denial to Change Trial Settings Based on Plaintiffs’ Failure to Meet the Texas Causation Standard for Asbestos Cases

    Second Circuit Finds Potential Ambiguity in Competing “Anti-Concurrent Cause” Provisions in Hurricane Sandy Property Loss

    Housing Starts Plunge by the Most in Four Years

    Deadline for Hurricane Ian Disaster Recovery Applications Announced

    How the Parking Garage Conquered the City

    Housing Gains Not Leading to Hiring

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

    Awarding Insurer Summary Judgment Before Discovery Completed Reversed

    Kansas Man Caught for Construction Scam in Virginia

    California Supreme Court Declines Request to Expand Exceptions to Privette Doctrine for Known Hazards

    Time to Reform Construction Defect Law in Nevada

    The Coverage Fun House Mirror: When Things Are Not What They Seem

    False Implied Certifications in Making Payment Requests: What We Can Learn from Lance Armstrong

    2023 Executive Insights From Leaders in Construction Law

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

    Construction Firm Settles Suit Over 2012 Calif. Wildfire

    #9 CDJ Topic: Vallagio at Inverness Residential Condominium Association, Inc. v. Metropolitan Homes, Inc., et al.

    Construction Needs Collaborative Planning

    Trial Court’s Grant of Summary Judgment On Ground Not Asserted By Moving Party Upheld

    The Brexit Effect on the Construction Industry

    Building the Secondary Market for Reclaimed Building Materials

    COVID-19 Could Impact Contractor Performance Bonds

    Navigating the Construction Burrito: OCIP Policies in California’s Construction Defect Cases

    Storm Eunice Damage in U.K. Could Top £300 Million

    How Do You Get to the Five Year Mark? Some Practical Advice

    El Paso Increases Surety Bond Requirement on Contractors

    Contractor Sues Supplier over Defective Products

    Construction Costs Must Be Reasonable

    Second Circuit Court Differentiates the Standard for Determining Evident Partiality for a Neutral Arbitrator and a Party-Appointed Arbitrator

    Recommendations and Drafting Considerations for Construction Contingency Clauses Part III

    Mexico City Metro Collapse Kills 24 After Neighbors’ Warnings

    D.C. Decision Finding No “Direct Physical Loss” for COVID-19 Closures Is Not Without Severe Limitations

    Mediation is (Almost) Always Worth a Shot

    East Coast Evaluates Damage After Fast-Moving 'Bomb Cyclone'

    Another Guilty Plea In Nevada Construction Defect Fraud Case

    Panthers Withdraw City, County Deal Over Abandoned Facility

    Certifying Claim Under Contract Disputes Act

    New Jersey Supreme Court Ruled Condo Association Can’t Reset Clock on Construction Defect Claim

    New Jersey Court Adopts Continuous Trigger for Construction Defect Claims

    Alleged Negligent Misrepresentation on Condition of Home is Not an Occurrence Causing Property Damage

    As Trump Visits Border, Texas Landowners Prepare to Fight the Wall
    Corporate Profile

    CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Cambridge, Massachusetts Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Cambridge, Massachusetts

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

    July 28, 2016 —
    The Iowa Supreme Court held that property damage caused by a subcontractor's defective work was an "occurrence." Nat'l Sur. Corp. v. Westlake Invs., LLC, 2016 Iowa LEXIS 71 (Iowa June 10, 2016). In 2002, the insureds, the developers and general contractor, began construction on an apartment complex. While the complex was still under construction, it was purchased by Westlake Investments, LLC. During construction, numerous problems surfaced, including visible water penetration issues in several buildings. In February 2008, Westlake sued the insureds, seeking to recover lost profits, repair costs, and other damages under tort and contract theories. Arch Insurance Group defended under the primary policy. A settlement was eventually reached whereby a consent judgment for $15,600,000 was entered against the insureds and in favor of Westlake. Arch contributed its policy limits of $1,000,000 to the settlement. Other third party defendants contributed $1,737,500, leaving $12,762,500 of the judgment unsatisfied. The insureds assigned rights under their excess policy with National Surety Corporation (NSC) to Westlake. NSC's policy was a following-form policy. 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

    Toll Brothers Faces Construction Defect Lawsuit in New Jersey

    October 10, 2013 —
    Toll Brothers is facing a construction defect lawsuit from homeowners in West Windsor, New Jersey. The homebuilding company had a lengthy battle with the town over its intention to build the community they named the Estates at Princeton Junction, now its residents are alleging defects in the construction of their homes and the common infrastructure. The community is close to Princeton University, parts of which are also in West Windsor. Toll Brothers states that they are “working very closely with the HOA Board to investigate the claims that have been alleged in the lawsuit.” Andrea Marushack, the spokesperson for Toll Brothers would not elaborate due to the lawsuit. Among the allegations are claims that the townhomes in the development are prone to water intrusion. The complaint also claims that there were defects in the construction of sidewalks, roads, and other common features. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is an Initial Decision Maker, Project Neutral, or Dispute Resolution Board Right for You?

    July 14, 2016 —
    Recently, I participated in a roundtable hosted by JAMS with experienced South Florida construction lawyers and retired circuit court judges to discuss the pros and cons of utilizing an initial decision maker (“IDM” and also referred to as a project neutral) or a dispute resolution board (“DRB”) to resolve disputes on construction projects. The IDM and DRB are designed to resolve disputes, specifically claims (whether for time, money, or both), during construction to keep the project progressing forward without being bogged down by the inevitable claim. There are numerous avenues to resolve disputes without resorting to filing a lawsuit or a demand for arbitration. The thought is that dispute resolution will be facilitated by techniques designed to assist the parties with the resolution of claims during construction. While direct discussions between the parties, meetings with the executives for business decision purposes, mediations, etc., are certainly helpful, sometimes these avenues are simply not enough to truly resolve a complex claim on a construction project that occurs during construction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Trends and Issues which Can Affect Workers' Compensation Coverage for Construction Companies

    December 26, 2022 —
    Recent trends in workers’ compensation coverage suggest that the number of claims are likely to continue to increase, specifically for high-risk industries, like the construction industry. This article explores multiple trends and issues which are likely to impact workers’ compensation insurance for construction companies. Several of these trends and issues reflect demographic, labor, and technological shifts, which have important implications for contractors and construction companies. 1. Technological Innovation and Worker Safety New wearable technologies and other data-collecting products such as helmets which warn of employee fatigue and sensors which help with ergonomic corrections have emerged in the markets to support safety measures in the construction industry. Although devices such as these tools can help business owners to demonstrate the implementation of safety programs to their insurance carriers, they can also distract the workers who are wearing them or go through a product malfunction, which could lead to injuries in the workplace and could also result in higher workers’ compensation premiums. While these new technological devices are intended to support worker safety on construction sites, it is also important for business owners to evaluate the potential risks of new technologies on a project site. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.

    Court Holds That One-Year SOL Applies to Disgorgement Claims Under B&P Section 7031

    November 23, 2020 —
    We’ve talked before about Business and Professions Code section 7031 which courts have referred to as “harsh[ ],” “unjust[ ]” and even “draconian.” Under Section 7031, a contractor performing work requiring a contractor’s license, but who doesn’t: (1) is prohibited from suing to recover payment for work performed; and (2) is required to disgorge all money paid by the project owner for work performed. This is true even if the project owner knew that the contractor was unlicensed, the contractor was only unlicensed during part of the time it performed work requiring a license, and even if the work performed by the contractor was free of defects. In short, it’s the nuclear bomb of remedies against a contractor. However, until now, no court has addressed when a project owner is permitted to raise a Business and Professions Code section 7031 claim against a contractor. In the next case, Eisenberg Village of the Los Angeles Jewish Home for the Aging v. Suffolk Construction Company, Inc., Case No B297247 (August 26, 2020), the 2nd District Court Appeal finally answers this question. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Toll Brothers Shows how the Affluent Buyer is Driving Up Prices

    July 09, 2014 —
    John McManus of Big Builder explained how prices per square foot are rising due to an increase in more affluent buyers: “Discretionary buyers—ones with access to cash treasure troves, robust and growing stock portfolios, sovereign wealth in search of anti-inflationary investment, and, for good measure, throw in a smattering of seven-figure income households flush with this year’s bonus payouts—are who, unit by unit, have electrified the housing market’s recovery on the heels of institutional bulk buyers of 2012 and early 2013.” Toll Brothers, according to McManus, “was, is, and will be the organization most committed to home buying’s discretionary buyer.” “Thanks to the demand for luxury, and for three- and four-bedroom places, we’re seeing pricing-per-square-foot get better and better the greater number of square feet we offer,” David Von Spreckelsen, Toll Brothers City Living division president, told Big Builder. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Congratulations to Jonathan Kaplan on his Promotion to Partner!

    February 10, 2020 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is proud to announce the promotion of Jonathan Kaplan to Partner! Jonathan has been with the firm for nearly eight years out of our Newport Beach office. He focuses his practice on general liability defense and construction litigation matters, in addition to handling high-profile plaintiff defect cases. Jonathan earned his law degree from Chapman University School of Law, obtaining a certificate in Environmental, Real Estate and Land Use Law, and went to undergrad at the University of Washington. Jonathan is an active participant within the firm’s Hiring Committee and assists with legal recruitment at the prominent Orange County law schools. Jonathan is also an avid hiker and has coordinated several hiking events for our Southern California offices. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

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

    May 20, 2024 —
    New York, N.Y. (May 9, 2024) - New York Partners Jennifer Oxman and Andrew Harms recently secured dismissal of a personal injury plaintiff’s complaint on summary judgment in Queens County, with a state judge accepting their argument that a porter who allegedly tripped and fell on loose wood in a stairwell had no cause of action against the property owner because it was his job to clean the stairs in the first instance. The porter was not an employee of the property owner, but rather an employee of a property management company. Therefore, the workers compensation bar did not apply to the employee’s claims. In a four-page decision, Justice Chereé A. Buggs of Queens County Supreme Court found that plaintiff’s duties as a porter included cleaning the stairwell and that he saw and cleaned loose pieces of wood on occasions prior to his accident. Justice Buggs held that while the wood debris likely came from an “outside source”, i.e. a contractor performing work at a neighboring building, the source of the debris was not relevant. Rather, what mattered was the fact that the hazard upon which plaintiff tripped was “inherent in or related to” plaintiff’s work responsibilities. By contrast, Justice Buggs held that the contractor who allegedly was the source of the wood was not entitled to summary judgment under the same legal theory because it arguably caused and created the hazard upon which plaintiff tripped. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois