BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts stucco expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts architecture expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts building code compliance expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts roofing construction expertCambridge Massachusetts roofing and waterproofing expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction expert testimony
    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


    Insurer Entitled to Reimbursement of Defense Costs Under Unjust Enrichment Theory

    New Recommendations for Healthy and Safe Housing Conditions

    OSHA/VOSH Roundup

    St. Mary & St. John Coptic Orthodox Church v. SBS Insurance Services, Inc.

    New York High Court: “Issued or Delivered” Includes Policies Insuring Risks in New York

    Lenders and Post-Foreclosure Purchasers Have Standing to Make Construction Defect Claims for After-Discovered Conditions

    UConn’s Law-School Library Construction Case Settled for Millions

    No Damage for Delay? No Problem: Exceptions to the Enforceability of No Damage for Delay Clauses

    Update – Property Owner’s Defense Goes up in Smoke in Careless Smoking Case

    Contractor Gets Green Light to Fix Two Fractured Girders at Salesforce Transit Center

    Zinc in London Climbs for Second Day Before U.S. Housing Data

    Illinois Legislature Passes Bill Allowing Punitive Damages In Most Wrongful Death Actions

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Where Underlying Claim is Strictly Breach of Contract

    America’s Factories Weren’t Built to Endure This Many Hurricanes

    NYT Points to Foreign Minister and Carlos Slim for Collapse of Mexico City Metro

    Consequential Damage Claims for Insurer's Bad Faith Dismissed

    KB Homes Sues Condo Buyers over Alleged Cybersquatting and Hacking

    Amada Family Limited Partnership v. Pomeroy: Colorado Court of Appeals Expressly Affirms the Continuing Viability of the Common-Law After-Acquired Title Doctrine and Expressly Recognizes Utility Easements by Necessity

    A Court-Side Seat: Guam’s CERCLA Claim Allowed, a “Roundup” Verdict Upheld, and Judicial Process Privilege Lost

    Iowa Apartment Complex Owners Awarded Millions for Building Defects

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    Awarding Insurer Summary Judgment Before Discovery Completed Reversed

    Housing Starts Surge 23% in Comeback for Canadian Builders

    The California Legislature Passes SB 496 Limiting Design Professional Defense and Indemnity Obligations

    NYC Design Firm Executives Plead Guilty in Pay-to-Play Scheme

    Is it the Dawning of the Age of Strict Products Liability for Contractors in California?

    Economy in U.S. Picked Up on Consumer Spending, Construction

    Claim for Consequential Damages Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Understand Agreements in Hold Harmless and Indemnity Provisions

    When Customers Don’t Pay: What Can a Construction Business Do

    The Court of Appeals Holds That Indifference to Safety Satisfies the Standard for a Willful Violation Under WISHA

    LAX Construction Defect Suit May Run into Statute of Limitations

    Law Firm's Business Income, Civil Authority Claim Due to Hurricanes Survives Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    Deterioration of Bridge Infrastructure Is Increasing Insurance Needs

    California Senator Proposes Bill to Require Contractors to Report Construction Defect Cases

    Insurers' Communications Through Brokers Not Privileged

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    A Top U.S. Seller of Carbon Offsets Starts Investigating Its Own Projects

    Revisiting Termination For Convenience Clauses In Uncertain And Ever-Changing Economic Times

    New Home Construction Booming in Texas

    Real Case, Real Lessons: Understanding Builders’ Risk Insurance Limits

    Impaired Property Exclusion Bars Coverage When Loose Bolt Interferes with MRI Unit Operation

    12 Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2022 U.S. News Best Lawyers in Multiple Practice Areas

    New OSHA Vaccination Requirements For Employers With 100 Or More Employees (And Additional Advice for California Employers)

    Staffing Company Not Entitled to Make a Claim Against a Payment Bond and Attorneys’ Fees on State Public Works Payment Bonds

    The Double-Breasted Dilemma

    Insured's Claim for Replacement Cost Denied

    President Trump Repeals Contractor “Blacklisting” Rule

    OSHA: What to Expect in 2022

    Reservation of Rights Letter Merely Citing Policy Provisions Inadequate
    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

    California Mechanics’ Lien Case Treads Both Old and New Ground

    July 27, 2020 —
    People do the darnedest things. The next case, Carmel Development Company v. Anderson, Case No. H041005, 6th District Court of Appeals (April 30, 2020), involving a 10-plus year oral design and construction contract, inconsistent accounting practices, two mechanics liens, and side-agreements, takes us down some well traveled paths but also covers some new ground. Carmel Development Company v. Anderson Carmel Development Company, Inc. provided design and construction services at a luxury subdivision known as Monterra Ranch located in Monterey under an oral contract with developer Monterra LLC which spanned over more than a decade. Between 1996 and 2008, Carmel was involved in the infrastructure design and construction of the subdivision including lot design and layout, the location of building envelopes on each lot, water and sewage system layout and design, and roadway design, construction and repair. When roughly half of the lots were developed and sold Monterra ran out of money and Carmel sued. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Heads I Win, Tails You Lose. Court Finds Indemnity Provision Went Too Far

    May 25, 2020 —
    We all love David and Goliath stories. The underdog winning against the far stronger (and dastardly) opponent. Think Rocky Balboa versus Ivan Drago, the Star Wars Rebellion versus the Galatic Empire, Indiana Jones versus a good chunk of the Third Reich. And now, we have Margaret Williams. The Story of Margaret Williams and her LLC The story, told in Long Beach Unified School District v. Margaret Williams, LLC, Case No. B290069 (December 9, 2019), is about Margaret Williams. Ms. Williams (we’ll just call her “Margaret” going forward because it just sounds better when telling a story) worked for nearly ten years full-time for the Long Beach Unified School District, toiling day in and day out doing construction management and environmental compliance work, including work involving the clean up of material at a school construction site contaminated with arsenic. Although she worked full-time for the District for nearly ten years, she wasn’t an employee. Rather, she was a contractor. And, on top of it all, as a condition of working for the District, the District required that she form a company in order to contract with the District. According to Margaret, “In order to work with the District, I was directed . . . to form a corporation or partnership. This was the only way I could work for the District: I could not enter into a contract with the District as an individual.” So, in 2006, she formed a company, simply called Margaret Williams, LLC. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Court Grants Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment After Insured Fails to Provide Evidence of Systemic Collapse

    April 15, 2024 —
    With the insurer conceding that there was evidence of potential collapse at portions of eight specific building locations, the court granted the insurer's motion for partial summary judgment in determining no additional buildings suffered from collapse. Exec. 1801 LLC v. Eagle W. Ins. Co., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEZXIS 5923 (D. Or. Jan. 11, 2024). Executive 1801 owned a group of six buildings with eighty-six residential units. The court previously granted partial summary judgment on Executive 1801's rain damage claim, leaving only claims regarding collapse. Eagle insured "the property for direct physical los or damage to Covered Property . . . caused by or resulting from any Covered Cause of loss." The policy further provided, "We will pay for direct physical loss or damage to Covered Property, caused by collapse of a building or any part of a building insured under this policy, if the collapse is caused by . . . hidden decay." 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

    Texas Legislature Puts a Spear in Doctrine Making Contractor Warrantor of Owner Furnished Plans and Specifications

    May 31, 2021 —
    The Texas Legislature has just sent Senate Bill 219 (“S.B. 219”) to the Governor for signature; if this legislation is signed by the Governor, it will further erode the Texas legal doctrine that makes the contractor the warrantor of owner-furnished plans and specifications unless the prime contract specifically places this burden on the owner. Background 49 states follow what is known as the Spearin doctrine (named after the U.S. Supreme Court case of United States v. Spearin) in which owners warrant the accuracy and sufficiency of owner-furnished plans and specifications. Texas, on the other hand, follows the Texas Supreme Court created Lonergan doctrine, which has been an unfortunate presence in Texas construction law since 1907. In its “purest form,” as stated by the Texas Supreme Court, the Lonergan doctrine prevents a contractor from successfully asserting a claim for “breach of contract based on defective plans and specifications” unless the contract contains language that “shows an intent to shift the burden of risk to the owner.” Essentially, this then translates into the contractor warranting the sufficiency and accuracy of owner-furnished plans and specifications, unless the contract between them expressly places this burden on the owner. Over the years some Texas courts of appeal had ameliorated this harsh doctrine, but in 2012, the Texas Supreme Court indicated Lonergan was still the law in Texas, in the case of El Paso v. Mastec. In 2019, the Texas Legislature took the first step toward hopefully abrogating the Lonergan doctrine by implementing a new Chapter 473 to the Texas Transportation Code with respect to certain projects undertaken by the Texas Department of Transportation, and Texas political subdivisions acting under the authority of Chapters 284, 366, 370 or 431 of the Transportation Code, adopting, as it were, the Spearin Doctrine in these limited, transportation projects. Now, the legislature has further chipped away at the Lonergan doctrine with the passage of S.B. 219. Reprinted courtesy of Paulo Flores, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., Timothy D. Matheny, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Jackson Mabry, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Flores may be contacted at PFlores@Pecklaw.com Mr. Matheny may be contacted at tmatheny@pecklaw.com Mr. Mabry may be contacted at jmabry@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nevada Court Adopts Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    February 10, 2012 —

    Although the Nevada Supreme Court adopted the efficient proximate cause doctrine, it determined it did not apply to salvage coverage under an all-risk policy for a rain-damaged building. Fourth Street Place, LLC v. The Travelers Indemn. Co., 2011 Nev LEXIS 114 (Nev. Dec. 29, 2011).

    Fourth Street owned an office building which was insured by an all-risk policy issued by Travelers. Fourth Street hired Above It All Roofing to repair the roof of the office building. Above It All removed the waterproof membrane on the roof and prepared to replace the membrane the following week. Over the weekend, however, substantial rain hit. On Sunday, Above It All returned to cover the exposed portions of the roof with tarps, but wind later blew the tarps away. The building suffered significant interior damage as it continued to be exposed to the rain.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    Illusory Insurance Coverage: Real or Unreal?

    August 24, 2017 —
    In insurance coverage declaratory relief actions, there are times an insured will argue that the insurance policy coverage is illusory. Typically, an insured will raise this illusory argument if its insurer is denying coverage based on an exclusion or limitation in the policy. If a court agrees and deems the coverage illusory, the court will construe the policy to afford coverage to the insured. This is the obvious value of the argument: coverage! “A policy is illusory only if there is an internal contradiction that completely negates the coverage it expresses to provide.” The Warwick Corp. v. Turetsky, 42 Fla.L.Weekly D1797a (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). Thus, if a policy grants coverage in one section but then excludes the same coverage in another section, the coverage would be deemed illusory. Id. quoting Tire Kingdom, Inc. v. First S. Ins. Co., 573 So.2d 885, 887 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). An illusory policy was found in the following examples: (a) a policy covered certain intentional torts but then excluded intended acts; (b) a policy covered advertising injury but elsewhere excluded advertising injury; and (c) a policy covered parasailing but excluded watercrafts. Id. (citations omitted). In all examples, coverage in the policy was completely swallowed up by an exclusion rendering the coverage illusory. Stated differently, coverage was completely contradicted by an exclusion in the policy rendering the policy absurd. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at Dadelstein@gmail.com

    $17B Agreement Streamlines Disney World Development Plans

    July 22, 2024 —
    Walt Disney Parks and Resorts received the green light on $17 billion in development plans in and around Walt Disney World in Orange County, Fla,, garnering approval June 12 from the board of the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District (CFTOD) for its sprawling capital plan. Reprinted courtesy of Derek Lacey, Engineering News-Record Mr. Lacey may be contacted at laceyd@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    State Audit Questions College Construction Spending in LA

    August 17, 2011 —

    A state audit of the Los Angeles Community College District found many problems with their construction spending. Their report, as described in the Los Angeles Times, found construction money spent for other purposes, such as promotional photography and public relation tours, $28.3 million spent on projects that were later cancelled, and oversight committees that provided no oversight.

    Earlier this year, the LA Times ran a series of articles detailing problems with the Los Angles Community College District’s construction program. The LA Times reported that the State Controller’s audit reached many of the same conclusions.

    The Community College District disputed the findings.

    Read the full story…

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