BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts testifying construction expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction cost estimating expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts ada design expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness windowsCambridge Massachusetts expert witnesses fenestrationCambridge Massachusetts construction claims expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction experts
    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


    Excessive Corrosion Cause of Ohio State Fair Ride Accident

    Request for Stay Denied in Dispute Over Coverage for Volcano Damage

    Six Inducted into California Homebuilding Hall of Fame

    Insurance Law Alert: California Supreme Court Limits Advertising Injury Coverage for Disparagement

    Insurer's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings for Construction Defect Claim Rejected

    NTSB Pittsburgh Bridge Probe Update Sheds Light on Collapse Sequence

    Single-Family Home Gain Brightens U.S. Housing Outlook: Economy

    Nation’s Top Court Limits EPA's Authority in Clean Air Case

    Court of Appeal Holds Only “Named Insureds” May Sue for Bad Faith Under California FAIR Plan Policy

    Construction Defect Claim Did Not Harm Homeowner, Court Rules

    Home Builder Doesn’t See Long Impact from Hurricane

    Ortega Outbids Pros to Build $10 Billion Property Empire

    Court Voids Settlement Agreement in Construction Defect Case

    Insurer Must Produce Documents After Failing To Show They Are Confidential

    Coyness is Nice. Just Not When Seeking a Default Judgment

    Think Twice Before Hedging A Position Or Defense On A Speculative Event Or Occurrence

    CA Senate Report States Caltrans ‘Gagged and Banished’ its Critics

    Virtual Jury Trials: The Next Wave of Remote Legal Practice

    Former Trump Atlantic City Casino Set for February Implosion

    Legislative Update – The CSLB’s Study Under SB465

    What’s in a Name? Trademarks and Construction

    When Subcontractors Sue Only the Surety on Payment Bond and Tips for General Contractors

    Students for Fair Admissions: Shaking the Foundations of EEOC Programs and M/WBE Requirements

    Home Prices Expected to Increase All Over the U.S.

    Back Posting with Thoughts on Lien Waivers

    New York Court Rejects Owner’s Bid for Additional Insured Coverage

    Can a Contractor be Liable to Second Buyers of Homes for Construction Defects?

    South Carolina Court of Appeals Diverges from Damico Opinion, Sending Recent Construction Defects Cases to Arbitration

    Making the Construction Industry a Safer place for Women

    Property Owner Found Liable for Injuries to Worker of Unlicensed Contractor, Again

    Engineer at Flint Negligence Trial Details Government Water Errors

    What Happens When Dave Chappelle Buys Up Your Town

    Cybersecurity “Flash” Warning for Construction and Manufacturing Businesses

    Flushing Away Liability: What the Aqua Engineering Case Means for Contractors and Subcontractors

    The “Ugly” Property Next Door is Ruining My Property Value

    Construction Defect Lawsuits Hinted for Dublin, California

    Follow Up on Continental Western v. Shay Construction

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2022 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    Hunton Andrews Kurth Associate Cary D. Steklof Selected to Florida Trend’s Legal Elite Up & Comers List for 2019

    Construction Defect Claim over LAX Runways

    Governor Inslee’s Recent Vaccination Mandate Applies to Many Construction Contractors and their Workers

    Time to Update Your Virginia Mechanic’s Lien Forms (July 1, 2019)

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court: Fair Share Act Does Not Preempt Common Law When Apportioning Liability

    Insurer's Daubert Challenge to Insured's Expert Partially Successful

    Assembly Bill 1701 Contemplates Broader Duty to Subcontractor’s Employees by General Contractor

    Modified Plan Unveiled for Chicago's Sixth-Tallest Tower

    Facing Manslaughter Charges In Worker's 2021 Trench Collapse Death, Colorado Contractor Who Willfully Ignored Federal Law Surrenders To Police

    The U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Rules on Greystone

    Sixth Circuit Lifts Stay on OSHA’s COVID-19 Temporary Emergency Standards. Supreme Court to Review
    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

    Mental Health and Wellbeing in Construction: Impacts to Jobsite Safety

    August 16, 2021 —
    This article originally appeared in the National Wood Flooring Association's Hardwood Floors Magazine. In the construction industry, workplace safety efforts have often focused on eliminating the most-common causes of on-the-job accidents, such as falls, being struck by or caught in-between objects, electrocutions, or being exposed to hazardous chemicals and substances. For more than two decades, the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) has been at the forefront of enhancing physical safety and health in residential construction. NAHB takes proactive steps to keep members and affiliated state and local associations informed and educated about safety and health issues and trends affecting the building industry, including developing safety and health resources to help builders and contractors operate safe jobsites and lower workers’ compensation costs. However, we recently have learned that construction workers are particularly susceptible to mental health issues and suicide – which is a silent killer in construction, and we know that the home building industry is not immune to the issues in the construction industry at large. We also know that industry associations have a role to play in promoting the importance of worker health and well-being to their member organizations. Helping to create sustainable workplaces and healthy, thriving professionals strengthens the industry and deepens the volunteer leadership bench. In addition to the benefits to the association, workplace well-being is good for employee health and retention, may reduce the cost of insurance, sick time, and employee turnover, and increase productivity. This can be accomplished by addressing mental well-being as part of overall safety – both physical and psychological. How big is this problem of mental health and suicides in construction? According to the Centers for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC), the construction industry has one of the highest rates of death by suicide compared to other industries. In 2017, the suicide rate for construction workers was 53.3 per 100,000 workers, which is nearly five times greater than the rate for all fatal work-related injuries in construction (9.5 per 100,000 workers) from the physical hazards companies focus on eliminating. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of NAHB

    Seattle Developer Defaults on Renovated Office Buildings

    December 23, 2024 —
    A major developer in downtown Seattle defaulted on a loan backed by two of its most prized office properties, including one that formerly housed a branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Firms tied to Martin Selig Real Estate are in default on a more than $200 million loan, according to letters from lender Acore Capital dated Nov. 15 that were filed in Washington’s King County. The buildings would change ownership 30 days after that notice if no other action is taken, according to the letters. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anna Edgerton, Bloomberg

    Appellate Court of Maryland Construes Notice Conditions of A312 Performance Bond in Favor of Surety

    January 02, 2024 —
    The Appellate Court of Maryland issued a reported opinion in a case construing an American Institute of Architects (“AIA”) A312 performance bond. In Wildewood Operating Company, LLC v. WRV Holdings, LLC, et al. 2023 Md. App. LEXIS 720 (Oct. 30, 2023), the Appellate Court of Maryland held that a performance bond surety was discharged from liability where the owner/obligee failed to give the surety notice of the contractor’s default termination until after a third party had completed the work. The project concerned the construction of an assisted living facility in St. Mary’s County, Maryland. The owner, Wildewood Operating Company, LLC, entered into an A312-2010 performance bond with Clark Turner Construction, LLC, as contractor, and First Indemnity of America Insurance Company, as surety. When Clark Turner failed to complete certain stormwater management work adjacent to the site, Wildewood, Clark Turner, and other parties entered into a Work Agreement to address completion of the work. The surety was not a party to the Work Agreement. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joel P. Williams, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Williams may be contacted at williamsj@whiteandwilliams.com

    Suppliers Must Also Heed “Right to Repair” Claims

    October 16, 2013 —
    “Right to repair” statutes don’t only affect general contractors, but everyone involved in the building of a home, down to those who supply materials, warns Paul Gary in a post on Window & Door. He notes that “if you sell your window or door products in one of the growing number of states with a ‘Notice and Opportunity to Cure’ or ‘Right to Repair’ statute, you need a plan in the event you receive a defect notice relating to your product.” A supplier that receives a statement that a defect exists should, according to Mr. Gary, carefully document not only when the notice was received, but when it was sent, according to postmark, and whether the sender complied with all the regulations. From there, the supplier should determine if there were previous, informal complaints. Finally, determine sales information. At this point, the supplier has the information its insurer will require. His next caution is that in what follows, other may “seek defense and indemnity from you.” And while you may point out problems with the notice,” he counsels that “if you confirm there is an issue with your product, don’t be afraid to make a fair proposal for repair.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    How to Defend Stucco Allegations

    February 07, 2014 —
    Managing partner Paul McBride discusses how to defend stucco defect allegations in his article in Kring & Chung, LLP’s online publication. According to McBride, about “80% of construction defect lawsuits which [Kring & Chung] defend involve stucco-clad houses.” In the article, McBride addresses “improper building paper installation and stucco cracks.” “If you are defending the stucco subcontractor,” McBride advises to look “first, at the windows section of the plaintiffs’ defect report and cost of repair estimate.” He explains that “this is the section where the plaintiffs’ expert will allege water intrusion that will be allocation to your stucco subcontractor.” McBride declares that the “most important thing to understand about stucco cracks is that stucco cracking is common. This is both a common sense observation and a perfectly valid legal defense.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Florida Extends Filing Time for Claims Subject to the Statute of Repose

    June 13, 2018 —
    Under Florida’s construction-related statute of repose, Fla. Stat. § 95.11, actions based on the design, planning or construction of an improvement to real property are barred if not commenced within 10 years after the later of several possible dates, including the date of actual possession by the owner and the date of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Florida Legislature recently amended the statute to extend the time within which defendants subject to a suit filed close to the end of the 10-year period can file claims. Under the revised law, a defendant can file “counterclaims, cross-claims and third-party claims up to 1 year after the pleading to which such claims relate is served.” Regardless of when the cause of action at issue accrued, the law applies to actions commenced on or after July 1, 2018, except that any action that would not have been barred under Fla. Stat. § 95.11(3)(c) prior to the amendment may be commenced before July 1, 2019. The revised law provides relief to defendants because, under the prior law, they had to file claims against other potentially responsible third parties before the expiration of the statute of repose. Under the new law, defendants can bring third parties into the action after the expiration of the 10-year statute of repose period. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    Federal Court Dismisses Coverage Action in Favor of Pending State Proceeding

    October 12, 2020 —
    The federal district court declined to exercise jurisdiction over the coverage action that was parallel to a case pending in state court involving the same parties and same issues pending. Navigators Ins, Co. v. Chriso's Tree Trimming, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129711 (E.D. Calif. July 22, 2020). Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) entered into a tree, brush and wood removal contract with Mount F Enterprises, Inc. Mountain F subsequently entered into a subcontractor agreement with Chriso Tree Trimming, Inc. for work to be performed for PG&E. In August 2017, Chriso attempted to remove a tree, but the tree accidentally fell in the wrong direction and knocked down nearby powerlines. The powerlines came into contact with surrounding brush and started the "Railroad Fire." The fire was eventually contained on September 15, 2017, after 12, 407 acres were burned and 7 structures and 7 homes were destroyed. Five subrogation lawsuits were filed in state court against Chriso and Mountain F by various insurance companies that paid for the damage caused by the Railroad Fire. A policy limits demand to settle all claims against Chriso and Mountain F was made. Navigators insured Chriso for $9 million through a Commercial Excess Liability Policy, payable once all other insurance was exhausted. The policy included a "Professional Services Endorsement" (PSE Exclusion) that excluded coverage of "professional services." "Professional services" was defined through a list of 12 non-exclusive professions and services that generally referred to activities involving specialized knowledge or skill that was predominantly mental or intellectual in nature rather than physical or manual. 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

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    August 04, 2011 —

    On July 28, the Washington Court of Appeals ruled in Clasen Fruit & Cold Storage v. Frederick & Michael Construction Co., Inc. that more than six years had passed since a contractor had concluded work and so granted a summary dismissal of the suit.

    Frederick & Michael Construction Co., Inc. (F&M) was contracted to construct several buildings for Clasen Fruit and Cold Storage. These were completed in March, 1999. The buildings suffered wind damage to the roofs in 2001, 2003, 2005, and 2006. In the first two incidents, F&M repaired the roofs with Clasen paying for repairs.

    In 2005, Clasen hired Continuous Gutter to make repairs. The final incident was the collapse of the roof of one building. This was attributed to “excessive moisture in the roof’s vapor barriers.” At this point, Clasen demanded that F&M pay for repair and replacement costs. In 2008, Clasen sued F&M for damages for breach of contract and negligent design and construction of the roof.

    The decision then covered the meanings, in Washington law, of “termination of services” and “substantial completion.” The panel concluded that construction was “substantially completed in 1997” and “relevant services” by 2001. “But Clasen did not sue until 2008, some seven years after termination of any roof related services.”

    Read the court’s decision…

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