BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts architect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts consulting architect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts fenestration expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts building consultant expertCambridge Massachusetts architecture expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts architectural expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts engineering expert witness
    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


    Iconic Seattle Center Arena Roof the Only Piece to Stay in $900-Million Rebuild

    Hawaii Supreme Court Tackles "Other Insurance" Issues

    Art Dao, Executive Director of the Alameda County Transportation Commission, Speaks at Wendel Rosen’s Infrastructure Forum

    Homebuilders Offer Hope for U.K. Economy

    Construction Spending Had Strongest Increase in Four Years

    ABC Announces Disaster Relief Efforts and Resources Following Hurricane Milton

    Don’t Fall in Trap of Buying the Cheapest Insurance Policy as it May be Bad for Your Business Risks and Needs

    Providence Partner Monica R. Nelson Helps Union Carbide Secure Defense Verdict in 1st Rhode Island Asbestos Trial in Nearly 40 Years

    Client Alert: Disclosure of Plaintiff’s Status as Undocumented Alien to Prospective Jury Panel Grounds for Mistrial

    Janus v. AFSCME

    Factual Issues Prevent Summary Judgment Determination on Coverage for Additional Insured

    Pennsylvania Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C-" Grade

    Insurance Tips for Contractors

    Claim for Collapse After Demolition of Building Fails

    Construction Materials Company CEO Sees Upturn in Building, Leading to Jobs

    Read the Property Insurance Policy to be Sure You are Complying with Post Loss Obligations

    Beware of Personal-Liability Clauses – Even When Signing in Your Representative Capacity

    Sanctions Issued for Frivolous Hurricane Sandy Complaint Filed Against Insurer

    Drywall Originator Hopes to Sell in Asia

    Utah Supreme Court Allows Citizens to Block Real Estate Development Project by Voter Referendum

    Judgment for Insured Upheld After Insurer Rejects Claim for Hurricane Damage

    TOP TAKE-AWAY SERIES: The 2023 Annual Meeting in Vancouver

    Daniel Ferhat Receives Two Awards for Service to the Legal Community

    Insurance Coverage Litigation Section to Present at Hawaii State Bar Convention

    Construction Litigation Group Listed in U.S. News Top Tier

    Pennsylvania Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Hacking Claim Under E&O Policy

    A New Perspective on Mapping Construction Sites with the Crane Camera System

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 5: Valuation of Loss, Sublimits, and Amount of Potential Recovery

    Florida Property Bill Passes Economic Affairs Committee with Amendments

    Don't Count On a Housing Slowdown to Improve Affordability

    Demonstrating A Fraudulent Inducement Claim Or Defense

    Unjust Enrichment and Express Contract Don’t Mix

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured In Northern California Super Lawyers 2021!

    Golden Gate Bridge's $76 Million Suicide Nets Near Approval

    UPDATE - McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court

    2020s Most Read Construction Law Articles

    Multiple Occurrences Found For Claims Against Supplier of Asbestos Products

    Value in Recording Lien within Effective Notice of Commencement

    GA Federal Court Holds That Jury, Not Judge, Generally Must Decide Whether Notice Was Given “As Soon as Practicable” Under First-Party Property Damage Policies

    Quick Note: Aim to Avoid a Stay to your Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules

    No Coverage Based Upon Your Prior Work Exclusion

    BofA Said to Near Mortgage Deal for Up to $17 Billion

    When a Construction Lender Steps into the Shoes of the Developer, the Door is Open for Claims by the General Contractor

    New York’s 2022 Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act: Significant Amendments to the C.P.L.R.

    Staying the Course, Texas Supreme Court Rejects Insurer’s Argument for Exception to Eight-Corners Rule in Determining Duty to Defend

    What Is a Construction Defect in California?

    Henderson Land to Spend $839 Million on Hong Kong Retail Complex

    Back to Basics – Differing Site Conditions

    The Quiet War Between California’s Charter Cities and the State’s Prevailing Wage Law
    Corporate Profile

    CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Cambridge, Massachusetts Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Cambridge's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Superior Court Of Pennsylvania Holds That CASPA Does Not Allow For Individual Claims Against A Property Owner’s Principals Or Shareholders

    January 07, 2015 —
    In Scungio Borst Assocs. v. 410 Shurs Lane Developers, LLC, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania held that an individual principal/shareholder of a property owner could not be held personally liable as an “agent of the owner” for unpaid invoices, penalties, and attorneys fees under the Pennsylvania Contractor and Subcontractor Payment Act (CASPA), 73 P.S. §§ 501-516, even though the property owner itself had failed to make payments allegedly due under a construction contract. CASPA is a Pennsylvania statute which is designed to protect contractors and subcontractors from nonpayment and which, to that end, establishes rules and deadlines for payment under construction contracts between property owners, contractors, and subcontractors. An owner or contractor who does not adhere to the Act’s payment requirements is subject to the imposition of interest, penalties, and attorneys’ fees. In this recent case, the property owner, a limited liability company, had retained the plaintiff contractor to perform construction services on a condominium project. Upon completion of the work, the contractor was not paid approximately $1.5 million that it was owed under the contract. The contractor filed suit under CASPA to obtain the payment it was owed plus interest, penalties and fees, and named both the property owner and its individual principal as defendants. The trial court granted summary judgment to the individual principal on all claims asserted against him, and the contractor appealed, arguing that CASPA allows for claims against both a property owner and its principal when the principal is an “agent of the owner acting with the owner’s authority.” Reprinted courtesy of Michael Jervis, White and Williams LLP and William J. Taylor, White and Williams LLP Mr. Jervis may be contacted at jervism@whiteandwilliams.com; Mr. Taylor may be contacted at taylorw@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Netflix Plans $900M Facility At Former New Jersey Army Base

    January 23, 2023 —
    (AP) -- Netflix said Wednesday it plans to build a state-of-the-art production facility at a former Army base at the Jersey Shore that will cost more than $900 million, and create thousands of jobs. The subscription video streaming company will pay $55 million for a 292-acre site on the former Fort Monmouth military base in Eatontown and Oceanport. The California-based company plans an additional $848 million worth of investments in 12 sound stages and for other uses related to the film industry. “We’re thrilled to continue and expand our significant investment in New Jersey and North America,” said Ted Sarandos, the company's co-CEO and chief content officer. “We believe a Netflix studio can boost the local and state economy with thousands of new jobs and billions in economic output, while sparking a vibrant production ecosystem in New Jersey.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg

    Wilke Fleury and Attorneys Recognized as ‘Best Law Firm’ and ‘Best Lawyers’ by U.S. News!

    November 08, 2017 —
    Wilke Fleury is pleased to announce its inclusion in the 2018 editions of ‘Best Law Firms’ in America and ‘Best Lawyers’ in America. The two award categories reflect excellence in legal service – firms included in the 2018 “Best Law Firms” list are recognized for professional excellence by clients and peers and Best Lawyers® has become universally regarded as the definitive guide to legal excellence. Wilke Fleury Recognized in U.S. News 2018 Edition ‘Best Law Firms’ in America Wilke Fleury is honored to be recognized among the nation’s Best Law Firms by U.S. News – Best Lawyers. “Firms included in the 2018 “Best Law Firms” list are recognized for professional excellence with persistently impressive ratings from clients and peers. Achieving a tiered ranking signals a unique combination of quality law practice and breadth of legal expertise.” Wilke Fleury Attorneys Elected to U.S. News 2018 Edition ‘Best Lawyers’ in America Congratulations to David A. Frenznick and Ernest James Krtil on their election to the 2018 Edition ‘Best Lawyers in America.’ Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wilke Fleury

    Is Settling a Bond Claim in the Face of a Seemingly Clear Statute of Limitations Defense Bad Faith?

    October 11, 2021 —
    We have often discussed payment and performance bonds here at Construction Law Musings, most often in the context of payment bond claims relating to federal and state-owned. construction projects. A late 2020 case out of the Eastern District of Virginia federal court examined what happens after such a claim, in this case, based upon a developer’s subdivision bonds, is made and negotiations commence between the surety and the claimant. Specifically, Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland v. Ransgate Corp., et. al. looked at claims for indemnity by a surety and the principal/indemnitors in the event that the Surety settled such a claim. In the Ramsgate case, Surety provided two separate subdivision subcontract bonds to Ramsgate. Pursuant to those bonds and the indemnity clause of its indemnity agreement, the Surety sought reimbursement of its $80,000.00 settlement payment to the local building authority that it paid to resolve what was originally a claim for over $420,000.00 by the City. The project was started in 2002 and after many years of failures to complete (according to the City of Suffolk), the City made its claim for expenses in 2017. Ramsgate claimed that it completed the subdivisions in 2003. 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

    Erasing Any Doubt: Arizona FED Actions Do Not Accrue Until Formal Demand for Possession is Tendered

    July 13, 2017 —
    Clearing up any lingering confusion, in Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC v. Woods, 767 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 4 (June 22, 2017), the Arizona Court of Appeals confirmed that residential forcible entry and detainer actions in Arizona accrue for statute of limitations purposes when a party entitled to possession makes a formal demand for return of possession not when the party could have made a demand for return of possession. In Carrington, the borrowers (the Woodses) remained in property that they had acquired in 2008 but then lost to foreclosure several years later. The original lender obtained title to the property at a trustee’s sale on February 16, 2010, but did not take any action to remove the Woodses at that time. Title to the property was then transferred through a series of transactions over the next six years. Ultimately, Carrington acquired the title and, in 2016, sent a formal “Notice to Vacate” the premises to the Woodses. After the Woodses failed to timely vacate pursuant to the demand, Carrington initiated an FED action to evict them from the property. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bob Henry, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Henry may be contacted at bhenry@swlaw.com

    How Your Disgruntled Client Can Turn Into Your Very Own Car Crash! (and How to Avoid It) (Law Tips)

    January 21, 2019 —
    Over the summer, I was involved in a car crash. It was *not* my fault– heck, I wasn’t even driving but riding shotgun. But it wasn’t my husband’s fault either. A guy pulling out of a parking lot was watching the traffic coming up the road, but failed to see our car sitting in the same intersection waiting to turn into the same parking lot. He ran right into us. It may not look like much, but the panels were so damaged it cost almost $9k in damages, over a month of car rental fees, and a LOT of aggravation on our part. The guy who hit us was very nice, apologized, and was concerned if we were injured. His insurance company ultimately paid for all of the damage. However– it wasn’t he who suddenly got a new part time job– that was me. I had to spend lots of time with police, insurance representatives, auto body mechanics, rental car places, you name it. If you’ve ever been in an accident, you know the headache involved. In fact, I have had 2 other accidents over the years (again, neither of which were my fault– I think I’m just a beacon for bad drivers?). One of those accidents was a 4 car accident– a driver hit my car, pushing it into the car ahead, which went into the car ahead of that. In that accident, my car was actually totaled. Fun times! How is this relevant to your life as an architect or engineer? If you stay in the game (that is, the design field) long enough, chances are, you will, at some point, end up dealing with disgruntled clients. One of those clients may even file a lawsuit against you. Or, for that matter, you may end up getting sued by another party involved in your construction projects– one that you don’t even have a contract with. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    More Business Value from Drones with Propeller and Trimble – Interview with Rory San Miguel

    August 10, 2017 —
    Here’s my interview with Rory San Miguel, CEO of Propeller Aerobotics, a UAV tech company. We’re discussing the use of drones in construction and the company’s recently announced collaboration with Trimble to deliver efficient UAV workflows. You’re a co-founder of Propeller. How did your company come about? I met Francis (Propeller co-founder) in 2013 at a drone delivery startup called Flirtey. There we worked closely on drone technology as engineers but ultimately felt like there were nearer term revenue opportunities for drones in the mapping/surveying space. We quickly spun out to start Propeller and have focussed on making drone data easy for construction, mining, quarries and landfills since then. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at info@aepartners.fi

    Alarm Cries Wolf in California Case Involving Privette Doctrine

    May 06, 2019 —
    It’s one of the most quoted phrases in legal history: “Shouting fire in a [crowded] theater.” It comes from the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 1919 decision in Schenck v. U.S. and has come to stand for the proposition that not all speech, in particular dangerous speech, is protected by the First Amendment. The next case also involves a false alarm. But not of the First Amendment kind. In Johnson v. The Raytheon Company, Inc., California Court of Appeal for the Second District, Case No. B281411 (March 8, 2019), a false alarm investigated by maintenance engineering staff led to a Privette Doctrine claim against a property owner when a ladder on which the maintenance staff was standing slipped on wet flooring. Johnson v. Raytheon Lawrence Johnson worked as a maintenance engineer for ABM Facilities Services, Inc. ABM was hired by Raytheon Company, Inc. to staff the control room at one of Raytheon’s facilities in Southern California. Among other things, control room staff monitored water cooling towers owned by Raytheon to ensure that the water in the cooling towers were maintained at minimum levels. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel, Rosen, Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com