BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts construction project management expert witnessesCambridge Massachusetts defective construction expertCambridge Massachusetts construction defect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts eifs expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction defect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts roofing and waterproofing expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction expert witness consultant
    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


    Lessons from the Sept. 19 Mexico Earthquake

    Are Construction Defect Claims Covered Under CGL Policies?

    Prevailing Payment Bond Surety Entitled to Statutory Attorneys’ Fees Even if Defended by Principal

    Another Reminder to ALWAYS Show up for Court

    Landlords, Brace Yourselves: New Law Now Limits Your Rental Increases & Terminations

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Nevada’s Changing Liability Insurance Landscape—State Insurance Regulator Issues Emergency Regulation and Guidance Addressing Controversial “Defense-Within-Limits” Legislation

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2023 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    No Coverage Under Installation Policy When Read Together with Insurance Application

    Women Make Slow Entry into Building Trades

    General Liability Alert: A Mixed Cause of Action with Protected and Non-Protected Activity Not Subject to Anti-SLAPP Motion

    Fraud Claims and Breach Of Warranty Claims Against Manufacturer

    Nine Gibbs Giden Partners Listed in Southern California Super Lawyers 2022

    New York Appellate Court Affirms 1966 Insurance Policy Continues to Cover WTC Asbestos Claims

    FIFA May Reduce World Cup Stadiums in Russia on Economic Concern

    Nevada Budget Remains at Impasse over Construction Defect Law

    Home Building on the Upswing in Bakersfield

    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Construction Defect Risks Shifted to Insurers in 2013

    Three Kahana Feld Attorneys Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® 2025

    New York Court of Appeals Takes Narrow View of Labor Law Provisions in Recent Cases

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2025 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Big Policyholder Win in Michigan

    Shifting the Risk of Delay by Having Float Go Your Way

    Tall Mass Timber Buildings Now Possible Under 2021 IBC Code Changes

    Deadline Nears for “Green Performance Bond” Implementation

    Sales of New U.S. Homes Fell in February to Five-Month Low

    Undocumented Debris at Mississippi Port Sparks Legal Battle

    Deterioration of Bridge Infrastructure Is Increasing Insurance Needs

    Breach of a Construction Contract & An Equitable Remedy?

    Harmon Towers to Be Demolished without Being Finished

    Battle of Experts Cannot Be Decided on Summary Judgment

    Outcry Over Peru’s Vast Graft Probe Prompts Top Lawyer to Quit

    Jet Crash Blamed on Runway Construction Defect

    Insured's Collapse Claim Survives Summary Judgment

    BWB&O Expands to North San Diego

    Do You Have A Florida’s Deceptive And Unfair Trade Practices Act Claim

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/30/24) – Life Science Construction to Increase, Overall Homeownership Is Majority Female, and Senators Urge Fed Chair to Lower Interest Rates

    California Supreme Court Protects California Policyholders for Intentional Acts of Employees

    US Court Questions 102-Mile Transmission Project Over River Crossing

    Appeals Court Upholds Decision by Referee in Trial Court for Antagan v Shea Homes

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Does the UCC Apply to the Contract for the Sale of Goods and Services

    Use of Dispute Review Boards in the Construction Process

    What is an Alternative Dispute Resolution?

    Construction Defects Are Not An Occurrence Under New York, New Jersey Law

    Environmental Roundup – May 2019

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces New Partners

    U.S. Stocks Fluctuate Near Record After Housing Data

    Lay Testimony Sufficient to Prove Diminution in Value
    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

    The United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, Finds Wrap-Up Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage of Additional Insureds

    February 18, 2020 —
    The United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, recently took a close look at the application of a “controlled insurance program exclusion” (wrap-up exclusion) to additional insureds on a commercial general liability policy. In Cont’l Cas. Co. v. Amerisure Ins. Co., 886 F.3d 366 (4th Cir. 2018), the Fourth Circuit examined the interplay of an enrolled party’s additional insured status on an unenrolled party’s commercial general liability (“CGL”) policy with a wrap-up exclusion. The court applied North Carolina law and found that pursuant to the policy’s own language, the exclusion only applied to the original named insured, not the additional insureds. The case arose out of an injury incurred by an employee of a second-tier subcontractor during the construction of a hospital. On this particular project, the owner maintained a “rolling owner controlled insurance program” (wrap-up insurance program) in which all tiers of contractors were required to enroll, but enrollment was not automatic. The general contractor was enrolled in the owner’s wrap-up policy, but neither the steel manufacturer subcontractor nor its sub-subcontractor, the steel installation company, were enrolled. The underlying plaintiff was injured while he was an employee of the steel installation company, but he did not name his employer in his personal injury lawsuit. The Cont’l Cas. Co. case was instituted by Continental Casualty Company (“Continental”) after it defended and settled the underlying plaintiff’s claims against its insured and additional insured, the steel manufacturer and general contractor, respectively. Continental sought to be reimbursed for the $1.7 million settlement and attorneys’ fees and costs incurred for the defense and indemnity of the underlying lawsuit. Continental alleged that Amerisure Insurance Company (“Amerisure”) breached its duty to defend and Amerisure’s policy provided the primary coverage for both the general contractor and steel manufacturer, who were additional insureds on the Amerisure policy. Amerisure denied a duty to defend the additional insureds based on the presence of the wrap-up exclusion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryan M. Charlson, Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.
    Mr. Charlson may be contacted at Ryan.Charlson@csklegal.com

    Construction Contractors Must Understand Retainage In 2021

    May 24, 2021 —
    Retainage has become a vital part of the contracting and construction process. If defined precisely, retainage is a practice of withholding a particular percentage of the payment until the project is delivered. However, the practice can turn to be a challenge for small contractors, as it is laid over a lack of trust in the potential and abilities of a contractor, which might cause financial downtime at the later stages of the project when contractors need to pay bills. Since 2020 proved to be a tough year for the entire construction industry, project owners, general contractors and construction firms new to the industry must understand what exactly retainage is. It is equally important for small contractors and subcontractors to understand the right way to manage the retainage. Reprinted courtesy of Ed Williams, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A New Statute of Limitations on Construction Claims by VA State Agencies?

    March 27, 2019 —
    I have discussed the Hensel Phelps case and the potential issues caused by both poorly drafted indemnity clauses and the lack of a statute of limitations applicable to the Commonwealth of Virginia and its agencies in 2017. New legislation (supported by various contractor groups including my friends at the AGC of Virginia) has been proposed for the 2019 General Assembly session that seeks to address at least part of this issue. While the indemnity provisions of your construction contracts can be addressed by careful drafting with the help of an experienced construction attorney, the proposed legislation (found in HB1667) seeks to address the statute of limitations issue. The proposed legislation is described as follows:
    Provides that no action may be brought by a public body on any construction contract, including construction management and design-build contracts, unless such action is brought within five years after substantial completion of the work on the project and that no action may be brought by a public body on a warranty or guarantee in such construction contract more than one year from the breach of that warranty, but in no event more than one year after the expiration of such warranty or guarantee. The bill also limits the time frame during which a public body, other than the Department of Transportation, may bring an action against a surety on a performance bond to within one year after substantial completion of the work on the project.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

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

    October 07, 2024 —
    Seyfarth Synopsis: In June 2024, Seyfarth published a blog article warning construction industry employers of recent anti-harassment guidelines issued by the EEOC. We predicted that the EEOC has “put the construction industry squarely in its sights.”[1] In this follow-up Alert, we discuss recent cases confirming the renewed regulatory focus on the construction sector, which demonstrate the need to put in place sound practices for non-discriminatory recruitment, hiring, and training of the work force in order to be prepared for this heightened risk of government scrutiny. Recent EEOC Settlements The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has indicated, in no uncertain terms, that over the next five years it intends to prioritize the mitigation of systemic workplace problems and the historical underrepresentation of women and workers of color in the construction sector.[2] Two recent cases confirm that the EEOC is true to its word when it comes to tackling racial and gender disparities in the construction work force. In August 2024, the EEOC secured two consent decrees with two separate construction firms in Florida, totaling nearly $3 million. Reprinted courtesy of Anthony LaPlaca, Seyfarth, Dawn Solowey, Seyfarth, Andrew Scroggins, Seyfarth and Adrienne Lee, Seyfarth Mr. LaPlaca may be contacted at alaplaca@seyfarth.com Ms. Solowey may be contacted at dsolowey@seyfarth.com Mr. Scroggins may be contacted at ascroggins@seyfarth.com Ms. Lee may be contacted at aclee@seyfarth.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Federal Court Finds Total Pollution Exclusion Does Not Foreclose a Duty to Defend Waterway Degradation Lawsuit

    October 24, 2022 —
    Evanston Ins Co. v. Tex. Concrete and Sand Gravel, Inc., No. 4:20-cv-00103 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 30, 2022) is a coverage dispute over Evanston Insurance Co.’s (“Evanston”) duty to defend and indemnify Texas Concrete Sand and Gravel, Inc. (“Texas Concrete”) and Apcon Services, LLC (“Apcon”) (collectively, the “Insureds”) for their contributions to the degradation of the waterways and retention lakes built to control flooding in the Houston area. On August 3, 2022, Magistrate Judge Yvonne Y. Ho recommended that Evanston’s motion for summary judgment be denied. On August 30, 2022, District Court Judge Alfred H. Bennett adopted Judge Ho’s Memorandum and Recommendations. In 2017, Hurricane Harvey caused significant flooding of the Houston area, which resulted in large-scale property damage. The underlying lawsuits alleged that, since 1954, Lake Houston’s waterways sustained a steady decline in capacity because of the release of materials into the waterway system. The Insureds allegedly contributed to the decline by allowing “materials and substances” (such as processed water, silt, sand, sediment, dirt, rock, and aggregate) to run off their privately controlled properties and into the Houston waterways. The reduced capacity, allegedly caused in part by the Insureds, exacerbated the flooding after Hurricane Harvey hit, increasing the damage from the hurricane. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy S. Macklin, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Macklin may be contacted at jmacklin@tlsslaw.com

    Justice Dept., EPA Ramp Up Environmental Justice Enforcement

    May 30, 2022 —
    The U.S. Justice Dept. plans to launch a new office within its Environment and Natural Resources Division that will focus on enforcing environmental laws in communities that are most affected by pollution and environmental-related crimes, administration officials said May 5. Reprinted courtesy of Pam McFarland, Engineering News-Record Ms. McFarland may be contacted at mcfarlandp@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    North Miami Beach Rejects as Incomplete 2nd Engineering Inspection Report From Evacuated Condo

    July 25, 2021 —
    North Miami Beach has rejected a new engineering inspection report provided by the Crestview Towers condominium association, keeping about 300 evacuated residents from returning to their apartments and raising new questions about engineering inspection reports in the aftermath of the Champlain Towers South collapse. Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Homes in Palo Alto to Be Electric-Car Ready

    October 01, 2013 —
    Electric cars are still fairly rare, but if you buy a new home in Palo Alto, you’ll have a place to charge it. The Palo Alto City Council has been enthusiastic about a measure that would require new homes to come wired for car chargers. The hope of the council is that the measure will make owning an electric car “convenient, easy and economical.” If added to the construction process, the wiring adds about $200 to the cost of the home, far less than the cost of adding it to an existing home. In addition to considering changes in the building code, the city also considered measures that would allow for the operation of public charging stations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of