BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts window expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts testifying construction expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction safety expertCambridge Massachusetts concrete expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts building expertCambridge Massachusetts construction defect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts defective construction expert
    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


    Construction Contracts Need Amending Post COVID-19 Shutdowns

    Lightstone Committing $2 Billion to Hotel Projects

    Six Inducted into California Homebuilding Hall of Fame

    California Department of Corrections Gets Hit With the Prison Bid Protest Blues

    L.A. Mixes Grit With Glitz in Downtown Revamp: Cities

    Surety's Settlement Without Principal's Consent Is Not Bad Faith

    Partners Patti Santelle and Gale White honored by as "Top Women in Law" The Legal Intelligencer

    Wendel Rosen Construction Attorneys Recognized by Super Lawyers

    New York’s Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act Imposes Increased Disclosure Requirements On Defendants at the Beginning of Lawsuits

    CSLB Joint Venture Licenses – Providing Contractors With The Means To Expand Their Businesses

    Federal Public Works Construction Collection Remedies: The Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    The Road to Hell is Paved with Good Intentions: A.B. 1701’s Requirement that General Contractors Pay Subcontractor Employee Wages Will Do More Harm Than Good

    What Types of “Damages Claims” Survive a Trustee’s Sale?

    Providing “Labor” Under the Miller Act

    Courts Will Not Rewrite Your Post-Loss Property Insurance Obligations

    Replacement of Gym Floor Due to Sloppy Paint Job is Not Resulting Loss

    So, You Have a Judgment Against a California Contractor or Subcontractor. What Next? How Can I Enforce Payment?

    Tighter Requirements and a New Penalty for Owners of Vacant or Abandoned Storefronts in San Francisco

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit

    One Way Arbitration Provisions are Enforceable in Virginia

    Inability to Confirm Coverage Supports Setting Aside Insured’s Default Judgment on Grounds of Extrinsic Mistake

    Waiving Consequential Damages—What Could Go Wrong?

    Commercial Real Estate in 2023: A Snapshot

    In a Win for Property Owners California Court Expands and Clarifies Privette Doctrine

    Uniwest Rides Again (or, Are Architects Subject to Va. Code Section 11-4.1?)

    Franchisors Should Consider Signing a Conditional Lease Assignment Rather Than a Franchisee’s Lease

    Unbilled Costs Remain in Tutor Perini's Finances

    California Supreme Court Finds Negligent Supervision Claim Alleges An Occurrence

    Housing-Related Spending Makes Up Significant Portion of GDP

    Housing Bill Threatened by Rift on Help for Disadvantaged

    Used French Fry Oil Fuels London Offices as Buildings Go Green

    Insurance Policy’s “No Voluntary Payment” Clauses Lose Some Bite in Colorado

    Construction Defect Claims are on the Rise Due to Pandemic-Related Issues

    As Single-Family Homes Get Larger, Lots Get Smaller

    Flag on the Play! Expired Contractor’s License!

    Who Will Pay for San Francisco's $750 Million Tilting Tower?

    Quick Note: Unenforceable Language in Arbitration Provision

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Louisiana Supreme Court Holds Architect Has No Duty to Safeguard Third Parties Against Injury, Regardless of Knowledge of Dangerous Conditions on the Project

    Caltrans Hiring of Inexperienced Chinese Builder for Bay Bridge Expansion Questioned

    Construction Defect Dispute Governed by Contract Disputes Act not yet Suited to being a "Suit"

    When Does a Claim Against an Insurance Carrier for Failing to Defend Accrue?

    2019 Promotions - New Partners at Haight

    Builder Waits too Long to Dispute Contract in Construction Defect Claim

    Development in CBF Green Building Case in Maryland

    EPA Can't Evade Enviro Firm's $2.7M Cleanup Site Pay Claim, US Court Says

    OSHA Updates: New Submission Requirements for Injury and Illness Records

    Georgia Court Clarifies Landlord Liability for Construction Defects

    Crane Dangles and So Do Insurance Questions

    Federal District Court Continues to Find Construction Defects do Not Arise From An Occurrence

    What You Need to Know About CARB’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel Regulations
    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

    Texas Federal Court Delivers Another Big Win for Policyholders on CGL Coverage for Construction-Defect Claims and “Rip-and-Tear” Damages

    March 14, 2022 —
    Insurers regularly argue that commercial general liability (“CGL”) policies are not performance bonds and therefore there is no coverage for claims seeking damages for defective or faulty workmanship. Insurers also argue there is no coverage for so-called “tear-out” or “rip-and-tear” damages, where fixing property damage requires replacing defective work that has not itself been damaged. Fortunately, in a newly decided case, a Texas federal district court rejected both arguments by an insurer. Amerisure Mutual Insurance Company v. McMillin Texas Homes, LLC, No. SA-20-CV-01332-XR, 2022 WL 686727 (W.D. Tex. Mar. 8, 2022). As with most construction-defect claims, this case involved homeowner claims against a residential developer, McMillin Texas Homes (“McMillin”). After the homes were completed, homeowners complained about defects in the artificial stucco exterior finish and filed suit. McMillin tendered to its insurer, Amerisure Mutual Insurance Company (“Amerisure”). Amerisure then sued McMillin for declaratory relief, arguing that it had no duty to defend or indemnify the homeowner claims. McMillin filed a counterclaim alleging Amerisure breached its policies by refusing to defend or indemnify McMillin. Reprinted courtesy of Blake A. Dillion, Payne & Fears, Jared De Jong, Payne & Fears and Scott S. Thomas, Payne & Fears Mr. Dillion may be contacted at bad@paynefears.com Mr. De Jong may be contacted at jdj@paynefears.com Mr. Thomas may be contacted at sst@paynefears.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    White Collar Overtime Regulations Temporarily Blocked

    November 23, 2016 —
    On November 22, 2016, a Texas federal court issued a preliminary injunction that temporarily blocks the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) from implementing and enforcing its revised white collar overtime regulations nationwide. The regulations were to take effect on December 1, 2016. For background on the DOL's Final Rule, see our alert, DOL Issues Final Rule Amending Overtime Exemptions Under FLSA. The decision was issued in a consolidated set of cases brought by 21 states and several business organizations. The cases challenge the changes to 29 C.F.R. Part 541, which defines the standards for evaluating whether employees are exempt executive, administrative, and/or professional employees. Under the current regulations, the minimum salary requirement for these exemptions is $455 per week. Under the revised regulations, the minimum salary would more than double to $913 per week. The Texas court found that the plaintiffs’ challenge to the final regulations has a substantial likelihood of success and that the plaintiffs have shown that they would be irreparably harmed if the rule was not enjoined. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of George Morrison, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Morrison may be contacted at morrisong@whiteandwilliams.com

    Economic Loss Not Property Damage

    November 04, 2019 —
    The Fifth Circuit agreed with the district court that the insured subcontractor's economic losses did not amount to covered property damage. Greenwich Ins. Co. v. Capsco Industries, Inc., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 23949 (5th Cir. Aug 12, 2019). Capsco Industries, Inc. was a subcontractor on the construction of a casino. Capsco subcontracted with Ground Control to install water, sewage, and storm-drain lines. Ground Control was terminated from the project by the general contractor for alleged safety violations and failed drug tests of its employees. Ground Control sued in state court against multiple parties, including Capsco, seeking payment for work on the project. The claims were dismissed on summary judgment because neither party had obtained the required certificates of responsibility from the state, making the parties' contract void. The Mississippi Supreme Court agreed the contract was void, but reversed and remanded for further proceedings based solely on theories of unjust enrichment and quantum meruit. While the state case was on remand, Capsco's liability insurers, Greenwich Insurance Company and Indian Harbor Insurance Company, filed a compliant for declaratory judgment in federal district court seeking a declaration that they did not owe a defense or indemnity to Capsco. The defendants were Ground Control, Capsco, the general contractor, and the casino owner. The latter two parties were dismissed. Ground Control counterclaimed for coverage of its claims against Capsco. The district court stayed proceedings until the state court litigation ended. 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

    Court Upholds Plan to Eliminate Vehicles from Balboa Park Complex

    June 10, 2015 —
    In Save Our Heritage Organisation v. City of San Diego, et al. (No. D063992, filed 5/28/15), the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District upheld a controversial plan to eliminate vehicles from various plazas in historic Balboa Park. In reaching its decision, the Court of Appeal considered a question of first impression involving the interpretation of San Diego Municipal Code section 126.0504. Balboa Park, designated a National Historic Landmark in 1940, is a large urban park in the center of San Diego. The City of San Diego (“City”) recently approved a proposed plan (“Project”) to eliminate vehicles from the plazas within the Balboa Park complex and to return the plazas to purely pedestrian zones. Subsequently, a community group named Save Our Heritage Organisation (“SOHO”) filed a petition for a writ of mandate alleging, among other things, the City erroneously approved the Project. SOHO contended Municipal Code section 126.0504 mandated two key findings be made before the Project could be approved: (1) that the intended purpose of the property would not be adversely affected; and (2) without the proposed project, the property would not be put to a “reasonable beneficial use.” SOHO argued that although the City made the requisite findings, those findings lacked substantial evidentiary support. The trial court agreed with SOHO and directed the City to rescind the site development permit. The City argued on appeal that Municipal Code section 126.0504 vested it with “discretion to make a qualitative determination of whether an existing use of the property, even if deemed beneficial, is also a reasonable use of that property under all of the facts and circumstances applicable to the particular property in question.” The Court of Appeal agreed and reversed. Reprinted courtesy of Kristen Lee Price, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Lawrence S. Zucker II, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Price may be contacted at kprice@hbblaw.com; Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    In South Carolina, Insurer's Denial of Liability Does Not Waive Attorney-Client Privilege for Bad Faith Claim

    October 14, 2019 —
    Determining the scope of discovery can be challenging, particularly when an insurance bad faith claim is involved. Courts often face the difficult decision of weighing the importance of preserving attorney-client privilege with the public policy rationale of protecting an insured against their insurer’s bad faith behavior. The Supreme Court of South Carolina recently recognized this dilemma by rejecting a hardline approach to bad faith discovery disputes and adopting a case-by-case analysis. The case, In re Mt. Hawley Ins. Co.,1 arose out of a construction defect claim. ContraVest Construction Company (“ContraVest”) constructed a development in South Carolina and was later sued for alleged defective construction. ContraVest sought coverage for the lawsuit from its insurers, including Mount Hawley Insurance Company (“Mount Hawley”), which had provided excess commercial liability insurance to ContraVest during the relevant timeframe. Mount Hawley denied the claim, which prompted ContraVest to sue it for bad faith, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment. Reprinted courtesy of Ashley L. Cooper, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Bethany L. Barrese, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Cooper may be contacted at alc@sdvlaw.com Ms. Barrese may be contacted at blb@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Florida Supreme Court Decision Limits Special Damages Presented to Juries

    July 18, 2022 —
    Tampa, Fla. (June 16, 2022) - Verdicts in personal injury cases are greatly impacted by the amount of medical expenses a plaintiff can present to juries. In Florida, collateral sources of compensation, such as insurance payments, are generally not disclosed to juries. However, caselaw also typically does not allow plaintiffs to recover the gross amount of medical bills, but instead the amount after insurance adjustments. For decades, Florida courts have considered whether the bills are reduced by the adjustments before or after verdict. The recent Florida Supreme Court decision in Dial v. Calusa Palms Master Association, Inc., No. SC21-43 (Fla. Apr. 28, 2022), has standardized the way past medical expenses are presented to juries where the plaintiff was treated under Medicare. As is commonly understood, the original amount billed by medical providers is far different than the amount actually paid. Most treatment is subject to some private or government insurance and those insurers typically have negotiated rates for treatment. Thus, the bills are reduced subject to insurance contractual adjustments and the resulting net bills are far lower. For decades, defense attorneys have argued that juries should hear only the lower net amount. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Rine, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Rine may be contacted at John.Rine@lewisbrisbois.com

    Court Finds Duty To Defend Environmental Claim, But Defense Limited to $100,000

    August 14, 2023 —
    While agreeing with the insured there was a duty to defend, the court determined the defense of an environmental claims was limited to $100,000. Casa Nido Partnership v. JAE Kwon, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97701 (N.D. Calif. June 5, 2023). In 1976, Casa Nido purchased the property and remains the current owner to this day. Catherine O'Hanks owned and operated a dry-cleaning facility at the property from 1960 to 1992. In August 2016, Casa Nido learned of Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) subsurface contamination. Casa Nido stipulated that it did not know, nor had any reason to know, before 2016, of the existence of the subsurface contamination. Casa Nido alleged that due to equipment malfunction or improper usage, there were sudden and accidental spills and equipment overflows of PCE during the 32-year period that defendant O'Hanks operated the dry-cleaning business on the property. Casa Nido spent hundreds of thousands of dollars remediating the environmental damage. 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

    Arizona Is the No. 1 Merit Shop Construction State, According to ABC’s 2020 Scorecard

    February 15, 2021 —
    Associated Builders and Contractors released its 2020 Merit Shop Scorecard, an annual ranking based on state policies and programs that encourage workforce development, strengthen career and technical education, grow careers in construction, and promote fair and open competition for taxpayer-funded construction projects. Arizona topped the rankings for the first time this year based on the state’s promotion of free enterprise and investment in tomorrow’s construction workforce, a top priority for ABC. Georgia followed Arizona in second place this year, up from fifth in 2019. Florida, a year-to-year high performer, remained in the top five after two years in the top rank in 2018 and 2019. “A foundational pillar of ABC is building the next generation of craft professionals, and the top states in this year’s rankings lead the country in workforce development policies,” said Ben Brubeck, ABC’s vice president of regulatory, labor and state affairs. “The merit shop contractor can flourish in free enterprise environments created in states like Arizona and Florida, which has positive ripple effects on a state’s overall economic growth.” Reprinted courtesy of ABC, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of