BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts OSHA expert witness constructionCambridge Massachusetts expert witness structural engineerCambridge Massachusetts multi family design expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction project management expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts building code expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness commercial buildingsCambridge Massachusetts construction cost estimating 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


    California Supreme Court Declares that Exclusionary Rule for Failing to Comply with Expert Witness Disclosures Applies at the Summary Judgment Stage

    As Single-Family Homes Get Larger, Lots Get Smaller

    No Coverage for Homeowner Named as Borrower in Policy but Not as Insured

    Federal Contractors – Double Check the Terms of Your Contract Before Performing Ordered Changes

    Just Because You Caused it, Doesn’t Mean You Own It: The Hooker Exception to the Privette Doctrine

    Summary Findings of the Fourth National Climate Assessment

    Construction Law Alert: Builder’s Alternative Pre-litigation Procedures Upheld Over Strong Opposition

    Trump Abandons Plan for Council on Infrastructure

    Power to the Office Worker

    2017 Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure

    Thank You for 17 Years of Legal Elite in Construction Law

    Appraisal Can Go Forward Prior to Resolution of Coverage Dispute

    Can Your Small Business Afford to Risk the Imminent Threat of a Cyber Incident?

    Colorado Chamber of Commerce CEO Calls for Change to Condo Defect Law

    Los Angeles Construction Sites May Be on Fault Lines

    Palo Alto Proposes Time Limits on Building Permits

    Changes To Commercial Item Contracting

    Two Firm Members Among the “Best Lawyers in America”

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolution Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    Does Your U.S. Company Pull Data From European Citizens? Fall In Line With GDPR by May 2018 or Suffer Substantial Fines

    Retainage: What Contractors Need to Know and Helpful Strategies

    Water Leak Covered for First Thirteen Days

    Connecticut District Court to Review Proposed Class Action in Defective Concrete Suit

    Insured Survives Motion for Summary Judgment in Collapse Case

    New Window Insulation Introduced to U.S. Market

    Contractor’s Burden When It Comes to Delay

    Cincinnati Goes Green

    A “Flood” of Uncertainty; Massachusetts SJC Finds Policy Term Ambiguous

    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara LLP Attorneys to Speak at the 2016 National Construction Claims Conference

    CDJ’s #5 Topic of the Year: Beacon Residential Community Association v. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, et al.

    Lewis Brisbois Moves to Top 15 in Law360 2022 Diversity Snapshot

    Legislative Update – The CSLB’s Study Under SB465

    Construction Defect Bill Introduced in California

    The Final Nail: Ongoing Repairs Do Not Toll the Statute of Repose

    Harsh New Time Limits on Construction Defect Claims

    California Bullet Train Clears Federal Environmental Approval

    Duuers: Better Proposals with Less Work

    Renovation Contractors: Be Careful How You Disclose Your Projects

    Daily Reports – The Swiss Army Knife of Project Documentation

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    Ohio Rejects the Majority Trend and Finds No Liability Coverage for a Subcontractor’s Faulty Work

    Biden’s Solar Plans Run Into a Chinese Wall

    New York Team Secures Appellate Win on Behalf of National Home Improvement Chain

    Concerns About On-the-job Safety Persist

    Bad Faith Claim For Independent Contractor's Reduced Loss Assessment Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Meet Your Future Team Members: AI Agents

    Summary Judgment for Insurer on Construction Defect Claim Reversed

    Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review Regarding Necessary Parties in Lien Foreclosure Actions

    Insurer Sued for Altering Policies after Claim

    The Value of Photographic Evidence in Construction Litigation
    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. Drawing 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

    Updates to the CEQA Guidelines Have Been Finalized

    February 06, 2019 —
    The California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) recently posted final adopted text for amendments to the CEQA Guidelines. The result of over five years of development efforts by the Governor’s Office of Planning & Research and CNRA, the amendments are the most comprehensive update to the CEQA Guidelines since 1998. In “Natural Resources Agency Finalizes Updates to the CEQA Guidelines,” Pillsbury environmental attorneys Norman F. Carlin, Kevin Ashe and Eric Moorman explore the wide range of issues covered in the amendments, including the new Vehicle-Miles-Traveled (VMT) methodology for analyzing transportation impacts; use of regulatory standards as significance thresholds; environmental baselines; and numerous procedural and technical improvements. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

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

    February 28, 2022 —
    JUNEAU, Alaska — The Alaska Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) today released preliminary findings from the 2021 Report Card for Alaska's Infrastructure, with the full report slated to be released in coming weeks. Alaska civil engineers gave 12 categories of infrastructure an overall grade of a 'C-' meaning the state's infrastructure is in mediocre condition and requires attention. Alaska has consistently maintained its transportation infrastructure, solid waste and energy sectors despite omnipresent environmental threats, seismic events, permafrost and shore erosion. However, some sectors such as drinking water, wastewater, and Alaska's marine highways have fallen behind due to a lack of funding to keep up with current and future needs. Civil engineers graded aviation (C), bridges (B-), dams (C), drinking water (D), energy (C-), marine highways (D), ports and harbors (D+), rail (C), roads (C), solid waste (C), transit (B-) and wastewater (D). "Our systems and state agencies have demonstrated commendable resilience in the face of seismic events and other natural disasters," said David Gamez, co-chair, 2021 Report Card for Alaska's Infrastructure. "Unfortunately, we face many other threats, ranging from shore erosion to permafrost, major temperature fluctuations and avalanches. We must keep our foot on the gas to address current and future challenges to prevent power outages, road closures, suspended drinking water services, and many more vital services." To view the report card and all 12 categories, visit https://infrastructurereportcard.org/state-item/alaska/. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 150,000 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

    A Court-Side Seat: May Brings Federal Appellate Courts Rulings and Executive Orders

    June 29, 2020 —
    Here are a few interesting new rulings from the federal appellate courts. COURT ORDERS Like a Good Neighbor …?State of Maryland v. EPA On May 19, 2020, the D.C. Circuit decided a Clean Air Act case involving the use of the “Good Neighbor Provision” of the Act, which is triggered when one state has a complaint about emissions generated in a neighboring upwind state that settle in the downwind state. Here, Maryland and Delaware filed petitions with EPA seeking relief from the impact of emissions from coal-fired power plants that allegedly affect their states’ air quality. EPA largely denied relief, and the court largely upheld the agency’s use and interpretation of the Good Neighbor Provision. The opinion is valuable because of its clear exposition of this complicated policy. A Volatile Underground IssueWayne Land and Mineral Group v. the Delaware River Basin Commission Also on May 19, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a ruling involving the Delaware River Basin Commission. Established in 1961, the Commission oversees and protects the water resources in the Basin. Not long ago, the Executive Director of the Commission, citing a rule of the Commission, imposed very strict limitations on fracking operations in the Basin. This decision has been very controversial with the Third Circuit opining that the Commission’s authority to regulate fracking operations—thought to be a province of state authority—was not clear-cut. In this case, three Pennsylvania state senators filed motions to intervene in the case, but the lower court rejected their request. The Third Circuit has directed the lower court to take another look at their standing to participate in this litigation. This is a volatile issue in Pennsylvania. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Couple Gets $79,000 on $10 Million Construction Defect Claim

    September 24, 2013 —
    A Florida couple who sought more than $10 million in damages in a construction defect suit, has received a jury verdict of only $79,000. Leo and Kathryn Vecellio bought the 25,000 square-foot home in 2008, after which they discovered water intrusion issues. They sued both the builder and couple from whom they had bought the house. Although the Vecellios spent more than $11 million to repair their home, the jury concluded that the builder did not know about the construction defects. The jury did determine that the builder, Dan E. Swanson, did either lie about or conceal certain facts about the construction. He was ordered to pay the $79,000 in damages to the Vecellios. Lawyers for the defendants argued that the leaks were not from the original construction of the home, but were instead caused by the renovations made by the Vecellios. The Vecellios are pursuing whether they are entitled to money from home warranties. “There will be more evidence to be considered. I’m determined to see this through,” said Leo Vecellio. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Brooklyn’s Industry City to Get $1 Billion Modernization

    March 12, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- A late 19th century industrial complex on New York’s Brooklyn waterfront is slated for a $1 billion makeover that aims to transform the property into a modern hub for manufacturing and technology. The owners of Industry City, Atlanta-based Jamestown and its partners, plan to invest about $890 million over the next 12 years, and anticipate tenants will put in about $150 million of their own money, according to a proposal announced Monday. The project will create one of the largest centers for the “innovation economy” in the U.S., and one of New York’s biggest engines of job growth, said Andrew Kimball, chief executive officer of Industry City. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. Levitt, Bloomberg
    Mr. Levitt may be contacted at dlevitt@bloomberg.net

    The Dog Ate My Exclusion! – Georgia Federal Court: No Reformation to Add Pollution Exclusion

    September 28, 2017 —
    While schoolchildren know that the classic “the dog ate my homework” excuse doesn’t work, insurance companies are willing to try a variation of that excuse. Ace American Insurance Company (Ace), sold a property policy (the Policy) to Exide Technologies, Inc. (Exide). Exide sought coverage under the Policy for acid damage at its former battery factory. Ace denied coverage, citing to the pollution exclusion. The only problem? The Policy contained no pollution exclusion! Exide had procured policies from other insurers for several years prior to the inception of the Policy, all of which contained pollution exclusions. Exide instructed Marsh USA Inc. (Marsh), its broker, to procure insurance “on the same or better terms and conditions.” The resulting policy contained no pollution exclusion, and Exide sought coverage under the Policy for pollution-related losses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Philip M. Brown-Wilusz, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Brown-Wilusz may be contacted at pbw@sdvlaw.com

    Hawaii Federal District Court Again Rejects Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    January 13, 2017 —
    The federal district court for the District of Hawaii continued its longstanding pattern of finding no coverage for claims based upon construction defects. Am. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Haw. Nut & Bolt, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174243 (D. Haw. Dec. 16, 2016). Safeway filed a complaint against Hawaii Nut & Bolt (HNB). The complaint involved issues pertaining to the construction of the roof deck at a Safeway store. HNB was a subcontractor hired to supply a coating system on the roof of the store to make it waterproof. The product was manufactured by VersaFlex. After the store opened, there were water leaks from the roof. This disrupted business operations and caused damage to Safeway's business and reputation. HNB tendered the claims to its CGL carrier, Fireman's Fund Insurance Corporation (FFIC). FFIC defended the underlying lawsuit for six years under a reservation of rights. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Dispute Among Joint Venture Partners and Joint Venture Agreement

    January 28, 2025 —
    In a dispute involving joint venture partners and a joint venture agreement, one of the partners sued a third party (which purchased the assets of the other partner). Claims against the third party included tortious interference of the joint venture agreement between the partners, conspiracy to tortiously interfere with the joint venture agreement between the partners, aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty by the other partner, and conspiracy with the other partner to breach a fiduciary duty. The dispute was tried in a non-jury trial. The other partner and the third party prevailed. A few key points on the above claims asserted against the third party that failed:
    1. Tortious interference of the contract -- Since the trial court found that the other partner did NOT breach the joint venture agreement, the cause of action for tortious interference failed. “No cause of action for tortious interference with a contract can exist in the absence of a breach.”
    2. Conspiracy to tortiously interfere with a contract -- “If an underlying tort [e.g., tortious interference] has not been established, a count for conspiracy to commit that tort will not lie.”
    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