BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts construction claims expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts architectural expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness roofingCambridge Massachusetts construction safety expertCambridge Massachusetts contractor expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction scheduling expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness structural engineer
    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


    Gloria Gaynor Sues Contractor over Defective Deck Construction

    Contractor Disputes Report Amid Amazon Warehouse Collapse Lawsuit

    Houston Bond Issue Jump-Starts 237 Flood Control Projects

    New Jersey Construction Worker Sentenced for Home Repair Fraud

    San Diego: Compromise Reached in Fee Increases for Affordable Housing

    Flood Policy Does Not Cover Debris Removal from Property

    Retired Judge Claims Asbestos in Courthouse gave him Cancer

    The Woodland Hills Office Secures a Total Defense Award on Behalf of their High-End Custom Home Builder Client!

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Title Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/22/24) – Federal Infrastructure Money, Hotel Development Pipelines, and Lab Space Construction

    Rhode Island Affirms The Principle That Sureties Must be Provided Notice of Default Before They Can be Held Liable for Principal’s Default

    Winners Announced in Seattle’s Office-to-Residential Call for Ideas Contest

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Tear Down This Wall!”

    Insurer Must Cover Portions of Arbitration Award

    White and Williams Earns National "Best Law Firm" Rankings from US News

    The “Builder’s Remedy” Looms Over Bay Area Cities

    Watch Your Step – Playing Golf on an Outdoor Course Necessarily Encompasses Risk of Encountering Irregularities in the Ground Surface

    AB 685 and COVID-19 Workplace Exposure: New California Notice and Reporting Requirements of COVID Exposure Starting January 1, 2021

    Earth Movement Exclusion Bars Coverage

    No Coverage Under Installation Policy When Read Together with Insurance Application

    Utility Contractor Held Responsible for Damaged Underground Electrical Line

    Trump Administration Announces New Eviction Moratorium

    New 2021 ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey Standards Effective February 23, 2021

    Toronto Contractor Bondfield Wins Court Protection as Project Woes Mount

    Idaho Supreme Court Address Water Exclusion in Commercial Property Exclusion

    Toddler Crashes through Window, Falls to his Death

    Final Furnishing Date is a Question of Fact

    Manhattan Homebuyers Pay Up as Sales Top Listing Price

    Ignoring Employee ADA Accommodation Requests Can Be Costly – A Cautionary Tale

    Privity Problems Continue for Additional Insureds in the Second Circuit

    Professional Services Exclusion Bars Coverage Where Ordinary Negligence is Inseparably Intertwined With Professional Service

    Arizona Supreme Court Clarifies Area Variance Standard; Property Owners May Obtain an Area Variance When Special Circumstances Existed at Purchase

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Welcomes Quinlan Tom

    Insurance Coverage Litigation Section to Present at Hawaii State Bar Convention

    Sales of Existing U.S. Homes Decrease on Fewer Investors

    OSHA Updates: You May Be Affected

    How to Prevent Forest Fires by Building Cities With More Wood

    Coffee Beans, Mars and the 50 States: Civil Code 1542 Waivers and Latent Defects

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Two Recent Cases Address Copyright Protection for Architectural Works

    Avoiding Wage Claims in California Construction

    What the FIU Bridge Collapse Says About Peer Review

    A Court-Side Seat: An End-of-Year Environmental Update

    The Case For Designers Shouldering More Legal Responsibility

    UCF Sues Architects and Contractors Over Stadium Construction Defects

    Windstorm Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    Travelers v. Larimer County and the Concept of Covered Cause of Loss

    Thinking About a Daubert Motion to Challenge an Expert Opinion?

    Japan Quake Triggers Landslides, Knocks Power Plant Offline

    Denver’s Proposed Solution to the Affordable Housing Crisis

    Construction Down in Twin Cities Area
    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

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Rules General Contractors Can Contractually Subordinate Mechanics Lien Rights

    November 26, 2014 —
    In Moorefield Construction, Inc. v. Intervest-Mortgage Investment Co., 230 Cal. App. 4th 146 (4th Dist. 2014), a California appellate court upheld an agreement executed by a general contractor which subordinated its mechanic’s lien to a construction lender’s deed of trust. In 2006, developer DBN Parkside LLC ("DBN") purchased land in San Jacinto, California (the "property") to build a medical complex (the "project"). DBN hired Moorefield Construction, Inc. (“Moorefield”) to act as general contractor and sought funding for the project from Intervest-Mortgage Investment Company (“Intervest”). Prior to the recordation of the construction loan, and unbeknownst to Intervest, Moorefield cleared and grubbed the project site. Pursuant to the construction loan agreement, Intervest required DBN to assign its rights and remedies under the construction contract to Intervest. Under its construction contract, Moorefield agreed to subordinate its lien rights to the construction loan. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys Steven M. Cvitanovic, Jessica M. Lassere Ryland and Colin T. Murphy Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com; Ms. Lassere Ryland may be contacted at jlassere@hbblaw.com; and Mr. Murphy may be contacted at cmurphy@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Federal Court Predicts Coverage In Nevada for Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    April 03, 2013 —
    Methodically analyzing the damage claims, the federal district court largely denied the insurers' motions for summary judgment for coverage of construction defect claims. Big-D Constr. Corp. v. Take It for Granite Too, 2013 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 8377 (D. Nev. Jan. 22, 2013). Big-D was the general contractor for a remodeling project of International Gaming Technologies' (IGT) building. Big-D subcontracted with Take it for Granite Too (TIFGT) to install various tiling and stonework on the interior and exterior of the building. After TIFGT began its stonework, a stone tile fill from an exterior wall. Over the next several months and after completion of TIFGT's work, two additional stones fell from exterior walls. IGT directed Big-D to replace TIFGT's stonework on the walls. Big-D notified TIFGT and requested that it make immediate repairs. TIFGT did not respond and eventually went out of business. Experts opined that the cause of the stones falling was efflorescence between the tile and the wall. Efflorescence occurred when the stone started to deteriorate, spall, and become soft. It was caused by water entering through an open joint and getting behind the stone tile. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    New York Court Finds Insurers Cannot Recover Defense Costs Where No Duty to Indemnify

    March 01, 2021 —
    In a case of first impression, the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, found the insurer had no right to reimbursement of defense costs paid to defend the insured. Am. W. Home Ins. Co. v. Gjoaj Realty & Mgt. Co., 2020 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8286 (N.Y. App. Div. Dec. 30, 2020). Gjonaj Realty was sued by Viktor Gecaj when he fell from a ladder at the premises managed by Gjonaj Realty. The matter was not tendered to American Western Home Insurance Company until four years after the accident and after a judgment of $900,000 had been entered against Gjonaj Realty after its default. American denied coverage after late notice was given. Thereafter, the Supreme Court in the underling action vacated the default judgment. American then agreed to defend under a reservation of rights. The Appellate Division reversed the vacatur of the default judgment and reinstated the default against the insured. American then advised Gjonaj Realty that it was denying coverage and reserving its right to recover any fees and costs incurred in defending the underlying action. 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

    And the Cyber-Beat Goes On. Yet Another Cyber Regulatory Focus for Insurers

    April 15, 2015 —
    Regulators and government agencies are sharpening their focus on the issues surrounding cyber risk. The number of pronouncements are too numerous to recite in a single client alert but the overarching message is clear – be prepared or be subject to attack. Attacks not only will come from hackers, customers, consumers and, ultimately the plaintiffs’ bar, but the regulators themselves. Vulnerability lies not only with cyber attacked companies but increasingly with the companies’ officers and directors who fail to adequately safeguard data. On March 26, 2015, the New York Department of Financial Services (DFS) announced that it would be expanding its information technology examination procedures to focus on cyber risk. This effort was a follow-up to its February 8, 2015 announcement of new cyber assessments (See "Not Just Another Client Alert about Cyber-Risk and Effective Cybersecurity Insurance Regulatory Guidance," March 24, 2015). Not to be outdone, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) proposed a comprehensive and mandatory filing for property casualty insurers that would give regulators a full range of information and data on cyber risk exposures issued by carriers in the insurance market. This proposal comes on the heels of President Obama’s proposal, just two months ago, to create the Cyber Threat Intelligent Integration Center (CTIIC), a new federal agency designed to fight cyber attacks, provide collaboration and encourage information sharing between the Federal government and private industry. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert Ansehl, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Ansehl may be contacted at ansehlr@whiteandwilliams.com

    David McLain Recognized Among the 2021 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America© for Construction Law

    October 19, 2020 —
    David McLain is a founding member of Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell. Mr. McLain has over 22 years of experience and is well known for his work in the defense of the construction industry, particularly in the area of construction defect litigation. He is a member of the Executive Committee of the CLM Claims College - School of Construction, which is the premier course for insurance, industry, and legal professionals. Law Week Colorado recently named Mr. McLain as the 2019 People’s Choice for Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants. HHMR is highly regarded for its expertise in construction law and the litigation of construction-related claims, including the defense of large and complex construction defect matters. Our attorneys provide exceptional service to individuals, business owners, Fortune 500 companies, and the insurance industry. The firm is experienced in providing legal support throughout trials and alternative dispute resolution such as mediations and arbitrations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Construction Picks Up Post-COVID and So Do Claims (and A Construction Lawyer Can Help)

    September 12, 2022 —
    I’m a construction attorney and proud to be one. Over the past couple of years, my expertise (and that of my fellow members of the Virginia construction bar) has been challenged by everything from COVID-related shutdowns to supply chain issues to unanticipated price increases. With each of these obstacles placed in front of my clients and friends in the Virginia construction industry, I have gotten calls and questions as to how to best handle the various issues facing the construction world. Needless to say, changes in price or material availability occurring between the date of a contract’s signing and the (likely delayed) start or completion of the contractual scope of work have caused some consternation and claims. Many of these claims did not come forward or reach my, or others, desk until after the world reopened post-COVID and construction began to speed up and money started to be owed. While one “easy” answer, particularly for those “upstream” in the payment chain, is “tough luck, you gave me a fixed price, signed a contract, and we expect you to honor it,” this may not be the best and most practical way to get the job done. 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

    Claims for Bad Faith and Punitive Damages Survive Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    August 02, 2017 —
    The court denied the insurer's motion for partial summary judgment seeking to dismiss claims for bad faith and for punitive damages. Van Der Weide v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101735 (N.D. Iowa June 30, 2017). The homeowner sued the insured general contractor after water was found leaking into the home, causing significant water damage. Cincinnati rejected the general contractor's tender and denied any duty to defend, contending that the alleged defects were discovered after Cincinnati's policy period had ended. Cincinnati was advised that two experts for the insured would testify that the property damage occurred due to construction defects and that the damage began shortly after completion of the home. Cincinnati still refused to defend. 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

    Judge Nixes SC's $100M Claim Over MOX Construction Delays

    February 16, 2017 —
    A federal judge on Feb. 8 dismissed a claim by the state of South Carolina against the U.S. Dept. of Energy over delayed construction of the Mixed-Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility, near Aiken, S.C. The claim for financial compensation was part of a lawsuit the state filed in February 2016 seeking payment of $1 million per day—or an annual maximum of $100 million—for the MOX facility not producing fuel by Jan. 1, 2016. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com