BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts structural engineering expert witnessesCambridge Massachusetts construction expert witness consultantCambridge Massachusetts construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction claims expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction expert witnessesCambridge Massachusetts building consultant expertCambridge Massachusetts expert witness windows
    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


    Michigan Supreme Court Finds Faulty Subcontractor Work That Damages Insured’s Work Product May Constitute an “Occurrence” Under CGL Policy

    Five-Year Peak for Available Construction Jobs

    House of the Week: Spanish Dream Home on California's Riviera

    Proposed Florida Construction Defect Act

    Court Grants Summary Judgment to Insurer in HVAC Defect Case

    California Limits Indemnification Obligations of Design Professionals

    Privity Problems Continue for Additional Insureds in the Second Circuit

    Changing Course Midstream Did Not Work in River Dredging Project

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2022 Southern California Rising Stars List

    A New Statute of Limitations on Construction Claims by VA State Agencies?

    Will The New U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Deal Calm Industry Jitters?

    Opoplan Introduces Generative AI Tools for Home-Building

    I’m Sorry, So Sorry: Legal Implications of Apologies and Admissions of Fault for Delaware Healthcare Professionals

    Title II under ADA Applicable to Public Rights-of-Way, Parks and Other Recreation Areas

    The Problem with One Year Warranties

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit with Additional Million

    How Long does a Florida Condo Association Have to File a Construction Defect Claim?

    U.K. Developer Pledges Building Safety in Wake of Grenfell

    Parks and Degradation: The Mess at Yosemite

    The Need for Situational Awareness in Construction

    California Fears El Nino's Dark Side Will Bring More Trouble

    COVID-19 Information and Resources

    Anatomy of an Indemnity Provision

    It Pays to Review the ‘Review the Contract Documents’ Clause Before You Sign the Contract

    Houston’s High Housing Demand due to Employment Growth

    Forecast Sunny for Solar Contractors in California

    Federal Court in New York Court Dismisses Civil Authority Claim for COVID-19 Coverage

    Miller Act Statute of Limitations and Equitable Tolling

    Continuous Injury Trigger Applied to Property Loss

    GE to Repay $87 Million for Scaled-Back Headquarters Plan

    Toddler Crashes through Window, Falls to his Death

    No Occurrence Where Contract Provides for Delays

    Goldberg Segalla Welcomes William L. Nimick

    When Is an Arbitration Clause Unconscionable? Not Often

    You Are Not A “Liar” Simply Because You Amend Your Complaint

    Texas Supreme Court to Rehear Menchaca Bad Faith Case

    Insured's Claim for Replacement Cost Denied

    Architectural Firm, Fired by School District, Launches Lawsuit

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured In Northern California Super Lawyers 2021!

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at Faster Pace in January

    Charlotte, NC Homebuilder Accused of Bilking Money from Buyers

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “D’Oh!”

    Addressing the Defective Stucco Crisis

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Motion for Remand

    Apartment Projects Fuel 13% Jump in U.S. Housing Starts

    Guilty Pleas Draw Renewed Interest In Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws

    Retrofitting Buildings Is the Unsexy Climate Fix the World Needs

    Insurance Law Client Alert: California Appeals Court Refuses to Apply Professional Services Exclusion to Products-Completed Operations Loss

    What Should Be in Every Construction Agreement

    OSHA Issues Final Rule on Electronic Submission of Injury and Illness Data
    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

    New York Court Finds No Coverage Owed for Asbestos Losses Because Insured Failed to Prove Material Terms

    February 15, 2021 —
    In the long-tail insurance context, it is not unusual to have issues arise addressing “lost” or “missing” policies. In an opinion issued on January 22, 2021, a New York court ruled that an insurer did not owe coverage to its insured for underlying asbestos claims because the insured had failed to establish the material terms of a “lost” policy under which it sought coverage for the underlying claims. The lawsuit, Cosmopolitan Shipping Company, Inc. v. Continental Insurance Company,[1] arose out of a coverage dispute between Plaintiff Cosmopolitan Shipping Co., Inc. (Cosmopolitan) and its insurance carrier, Continental Insurance Company (CIC), in connection with bodily injury claims arising out of asbestos exposure. The case provides a good analysis of what an insured must do to establish coverage under a “lost” or “missing” policy. During and after World War II, Cosmopolitan chartered and operated a number of shipping vessels on behalf of United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA). In the 1980s, seamen who had worked on board Cosmopolitan’s vessels between 1946 and 1948 filed lawsuits against Cosmopolitan seeking damages for injuries arising out of alleged exposure to asbestos on Cosmopolitan’s vessels. Cosmopolitan sought coverage from CIC for the claims, alleging that CIC had insured Cosmopolitan’s vessels during the relevant time period under a protection and indemnity policy issued to the UNRAA (the P&I Policy). Reprinted courtesy of Gregory S. Capps, White and Williams LLP and Marianne E. Bradley, White and Williams LLP Mr. Capps may be contacted at cappsg@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Bradley may be contacted at bradleym@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    An Oregon School District Files Suit Against Robinson Construction Co.

    March 19, 2014 —
    The Tigard-Tualatin School District in Tigard, Oregon filed a lawsuit against Robinson Construction for water damage to the Alberta Rider Elementary school, built in 2005, according to The Oregonian. The school district “is seeking $1.4 million in damages.” According to the suit, as quoted by The Oregonian, the school district “holds Robinson responsible for faulty construction of the school’s panel siding, windows, doors, exterior walls and more.” Repairs began in December of 2011, reported The Oregonian, and the cost so far is more than one million: “The district had to replace parts of the ‘exterior wall cladding system’ and remove and reinstall ‘storefront windows and window/door assemblies to ensure watertight performance,’ in addition to other alterations, the lawsuit reads.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Unpost, Post: Dynamex and the Construction Indianapolis

    July 10, 2018 —
    It’s been three months since the California Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, Case No. S222732 (April 30, 2018) and I’ve had a couple of readers (perhaps my only two) ask whether I was going to write about the decision. I’m not. Well, obviously, that’s not quite true if you’re reading this. Rather, I’ll tell you why I’m writing about not writing about the decision. Dynamex is certainly an important decision and one that will likely be cited for decades to come. In short, Dynamex changed the nearly 30-year old test, first elucidated in S.G. Borello & Sons Inc. v. Department of Industrial Relations (1989) 48 Cal.3d 341, for determining whether a worker is properly classified as an independent contractor or an employee. 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

    A Riveting (or at Least Insightful) Explanation of the Privette Doctrine

    May 02, 2022 —
    “The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine” – Plutarch And grind they do . . . slowly. For long time readers of the California Construction Law Blog you may recall a case we reported on over three years ago in 2018 – Sandoval v. Qualcomm Incorporated – a rather sad case about a severely injured employee of an electrical subcontractor with an even more surprisingly ending. In Sandoval, the 4th District Court of Appeals affirmed a $7 million judgment against project owner Qualcomm Incorporated in which a jury found that Qualcomm was liable under the Privette doctrine for injuries sustained by the employee who was severely burned over one third of his body by an “arc flash” from a live circuit breaker. The Court of Appeals, in a surprising decision, upheld the verdict holding that Qualcomm was liable even through: (1) Qualcomm had informed the electrical subcontractor that certain live circuit breakers were energized; (2) Qualcomm had not authorized the lower-tiered contractor to remove a panel that resulted in the arc flash; and (3) employees of Qualcomm were not in the room when the accident happened. Fast forward three years to September 2021. Qualcomm attorneys petition the California Supreme Court for review of the Court of Appeal’s decision. And the Supreme Court granted review. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Quick Note: October 1, 2023 Changes to Florida’s Construction Statutes

    November 13, 2023 —
    Effective October 1, 2023, there were changes to Florida’s statutory scheme dealing with construction projects. This includes Florida’s Lien Law. A copy of these changes can be found below which identify additions in blue and deletions with strikethroughs. No different than before, if you have questions or concerns as to your statutory rights on a construction project, do the prudent thing, consult a construction lawyer. A construction lawyer can help you understand changes to the applicable statutory scheme or how the statutory scheme pertains to your rights. This is important because you want to make sure you understand statutory changes that apply to your work and rights. A noteworthy change, bolded in blue below, is that there is now a basis to lien for a contractor performing construction management services “which include scheduling and coordinating construction and preconstruction phases for the construction project, or who provides program management services”:
    Fla. Stat. s. 713.01 (8) “Contractor” means a person other than a materialman or laborer who enters into a contract with the owner of real property for improving it, or who takes over from a contractor as so defined the entire remaining work under such contract. The term “contractor” includes an architect, landscape architect, or engineer who improves real property pursuant to a design- build contract authorized by s. 489.103(16). The term also includes a licensed general contractor or building contractor, as those terms are defined in s. 489.105(3)(a) and (b), respectively, who provides construction management services, which include scheduling and coordinating preconstruction and construction phases for the construction project, or who provides program management services, which include schedule control, cost control, and coordinating the provision or procurement of planning, design, and construction for the construction project.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Civil Engineers: Montana's Infrastructure Grade Declines to a 'C-'

    December 23, 2024 —
    Helena, MT — The Montana Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) today released the 2024 Report Card for Montana's Infrastructure, assigning 14 categories of infrastructure a cumulative grade of 'C-', which is on par with the national average from the 2021 Report Card for America's Infrastructure. This is a one-notch decrease from the 'C' grade Montana received in its last report in 2018, citing increasingly severe weather events putting strain on aging and underfunded assets, and one of the fastest growing populations requiring expansions of transportation, water and energy infrastructure. The report includes the first-ever chapter on Montana's broadband infrastructure, assigning an 'I' grade for 'incomplete' due to a lack of sufficient condition data; however, the chapter does note that 71% of Montana residents have access to adequate broadband service, and the IIJA provided nearly $630 million to expand this access across the state. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 160,000 civil engineers worldwide and is America's oldest national engineering society. ASCE works to raise awareness of the need to maintain and modernize the nation's infrastructure using sustainable and resilient practices, advocates for increasing and optimizing investment in infrastructure, and improve engineering knowledge and competency. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Massachusetts High Court to Decide if Insurers Can Recoup Defense Costs

    February 07, 2018 —
    The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) is set to hear argument on February 6 in a case that will decide whether insurers can recoup defense costs if it is later determined that they owed no duty to defend an underlying claim. At issue in Holyoke Mut. Ins. Co. v. Vibram USA, Inc., No SJC-12401, is Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig O'Neill, White and Williams, LLP
    Mr. O'Neill may be contacted at oneillc@whiteandwilliams.com

    Re-Thinking the One-Sided Contract: Considerations for a More Balanced Approach to Contracting

    November 21, 2022 —
    Construction projects can be inherently risky – often there are multiple parties (owners, architects, engineers, contractors, subcontractors, consultants, vendors, government officials, sureties, insurers, and many others), unforeseen site conditions, tangled supply chains, acts of God, inadequate funding, site safety matters, and a whole host of other issues that can make even a relatively straight-forward job complex. Parties necessarily want to minimize their individual risk to the greatest extent possible on construction projects. And to do so, they may seek to push as much risk as possible onto the other side through one-sided terms in their construction contract.   But is an entirely one-sided contract the best way to mitigate risk? In many instances, the answer is no. Every contract is different – and many considerations should be taken into account when drafting and negotiating contracts – but entirely one-sided can often have unintended consequences and create risks that otherwise might not exist in a contract that allocates and balances risk more equally across the parties. This article reviews several considerations (although it is not an exhaustive list) for avoiding one-sided contracts, including some of the benefits created through the use of equitable contract clauses. And for context, some examples of one-sided contract clauses include no relief for other contractor/owner-caused delays; no relief for force majeure events; no relief for unforeseen site conditions; and broad form indemnification clauses (i.e. one party assumes the obligation to pay for another party’s liability even if the other party is solely at fault). Again, this is a non-exhaustive list, and many other standard contract provisions can be altered to become one-sided. But the general premise of a “one-sided contract clause” is that it shifts all risk, obligation, and liability to one party. And this article examines why that might not be the best idea.   Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William Underwood, Jones Walker LLP
    Mr. Underwood may be contacted at wunderwood@joneswalker.com