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


    Turmoil Slows Rebuilding of Puerto Rico's Power Grid

    Green Construction Trends Contractors Can Expect in 2019

    Ben L. Aderholt Joins Coats Rose Construction Litigation Group

    Western Specialty Contractors Branches in San Francisco and Cleveland Take Home Top Industry Honors

    Clearly Determining in Contract Who Determines Arbitrability of Dispute

    Allen, TX Board of Trustees Expected to Approve Stadium Repair Plans

    Eleven WSHB Lawyers Honored on List of 2016 Rising Stars

    Carillion Fallout Affects Major Hospital Project in Liverpool

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

    Short on Labor, Israeli Builders Seek to Vaccinate Palestinians

    Association Bound by Arbitration Provision in Purchase-And-Sale Contracts and Deeds

    Construction Contract’s Scope of Work Should Be Written With Clarity

    Lumber Drops to Nine-Month Low, Extending Retreat From Record

    Taking the Stairs to Human Wellness and Greener Buildings

    Preventing Acts of God: Construction Accidents Caused by Outside Factors

    What If There Is a Design Error?

    KF-103 v. American Family Mutual Insurance: An Exception to the Four Corners Rule

    Someone Who Hires an Independent Contractor May Still Be Liable, But Not in This Case

    Nevada OSHA Provides Additional Requirements for Construction Employers to Address Feasibility of Social Distancing at Construction Sites

    Federal District Court Declines Invitation to Set Scope of Appraisal

    U.S. Building Permits Soared to Their Highest Level in Nearly Eight Years

    GOP, States, Industry Challenge EPA Project Water Impact Rule

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/17/24) – Housing Inflation to Remain High, Proptech Investment to Fall and Office Vacancy Rates to Reach Peak in 2025

    Bad Faith Claim for Investigation Fails

    Anthony Luckie Speaks With Columbia University On Receiving Graduate Degree in Construction Administration Alongside His Father

    Boston Water Main Break Floods Trench and Kills Two Workers

    Appeals Court Finds Manuscript Additional Insured Endorsements Ambiguous Regarding Completed Operations Coverage for Additional Insured

    Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 Not Just for Individual Homeowners Anymore?

    New California Construction Law for 2019

    Why Biden’s Infrastructure Plan Is a Green Jobs Plan

    Court of Appeals Confirms that King County Superior Court’s Jury Selection Process Satisfies Due Process Requirements

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

    Construction Executives Should Be Dusting Off Employee Handbooks

    Motion to Strike Insurer's Expert Opinion Granted

    Sub-Limit Restricts Insured's Flood Damage Recovery

    Occurrence Definition Trends Analyzed

    Wells Fargo Shuns Peers’ Settlement in U.S in Mortgage

    The Best Laid Plans: Contingency in a Construction Contract

    Nevada’s Home Building Industry can Breathe Easier: No Action on SB250 Leaves Current Attorney’s Fees Provision Intact

    Builders Association Seeks to Cut Down Grassroots Green Building Program (Guest Post)

    Engineer at Flint Negligence Trial Details Government Water Errors

    Missouri Protects Subrogation Rights

    Changes to Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act in New York Introduced

    Cybersecurity “Flash” Warning for Construction and Manufacturing Businesses

    Federal Court Asks South Dakota Supreme Court to Decide Whether Injunction Costs Are “Damages,” Adopts Restatement’s Position on Providing “Inadequate” Defense

    Bridges Need More Attention

    CA Supreme Court Expands Scope of Lawyers’ Statute of Limitations to Non-Legal Malpractice Claims – Confusion Predicted for Law and Motion Judges

    Canada Home Resales Post First Fall in Eight Months

    Under the Hood of U.S. Construction Spending Is Revised Data

    Indemnity Provision Prevails Over "Other Insurance" Clause
    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

    Insurance Law Alert: Incorporation of Defective Work Does Not Result in Covered Property Damage in California Construction Claims

    June 18, 2014 —
    In Regional Steel Corp. v. Liberty Surplus Ins. (No. B245961, filed 5/16/14, ord. pub. 6/13/14), a California appeals court held that the insured's use of the wrong steel seismic reinforcement hooks in construction of a mixed-use building was not an occurrence, and did not result in covered property damage. Regional Steel was the structural steel subcontractor on a 14-story mixed-use project in North Hollywood, California. Regional supplied plans which were approved by the developer and its structural engineers for installation of steel reinforcements, including seismic reinforcement hooks, to be encased in concrete. During construction, City inspectors determined that the plans called for the wrong hooks, necessitating repairs to finished portions of the work and delays in further construction. This ultimately resulted in a lawsuit between the developer, Regional Steel, the concrete subcontractor, the structural engineer and a quality assurance inspector. The project was insured under a wrap policy issued to the developer, with Regional named as an additional insured. The court rejected an argument that the wrap endorsement fundamentally changed the insurance, and the issue boiled down to whether incorporation of the wrong hooks, the damage caused by tearing out concrete to replace the hooks, or the resulting loss of use, triggered coverage. Liberty asserted that no damage to property was alleged and the purely economic losses caused by the need to reopen the poured concrete to correct the tie hook problem did not constitute "property damage" within the meaning of the policy. Liberty further posited that the tie hook problem did not constitute an “occurrence” within the meaning of the policy because the alleged damage was not caused by an accident. Reprinted courtesy of Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Chris Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Waive Your Claim Goodbye: Louisiana Court Holds That AIA Subrogation Waiver Did Not Violate Anti-Indemnification Statute and Applied to Subcontractors

    May 23, 2022 —
    In 2700 Bohn Motor, LLC v. F.H. Myers Constr. Corp., No. 2021-CA-0671, 2022 La. App. LEXIS 651 (Bohn Motor), the Court of Appeals of Louisiana for the Fourth Circuit (Court of Appeals) considered whether a subrogation waiver in an AIA construction contract was enforceable and, if so, whether the waiver also protected subcontractors that were not signatories to the contract. The lower court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment based on the subrogation waiver in the construction contract. The plaintiffs appealed the decision, arguing that the subrogation waiver violated Louisiana’s anti-indemnification statute. The plaintiffs also argued that even if enforceable, the subrogation waiver did not apply to the defendant subcontractors since they were not parties to the contract. The Court of Appeals ultimately held that the subrogation waiver did not violate the anti-indemnification statute because the waiver did not shift liability, which the statute was intended to prevent. In addition, the Court of Appeals found that the contract sufficiently satisfied the required elements for the defendant subcontractors to qualify as third-party beneficiaries of the contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Illinois Supreme Court Rules Labor Costs Not Depreciated to Determine Actual Cash Value

    November 19, 2021 —
    The Illinois Supreme Court determined that a homeowner insurer may not depreciate labor costs in calculating actual cash value (ACV) after a loss under the policy. Sproull v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co., 2021 Ill. LEXIS 619 (Ill. Sept. 23, 2021). Plaintiff was insured under a homeowner's policy that provided replacement cost coverage for structural damage. Under the policy, the insured would initially receive an ACV payment but then could receive replacement cost value (RCV) if repairs or replacement were completed within two years and the insurer was timely notified. The policy did not define "actual cash value." Plaintiff suffered wind damage to his residence and timely submitted a property damage claim to State Farm. The adjuster determined that the building sustained a loss with RCV of $1711.54. In calculating ACV, State Farm began with the RCV and then subtracted plaintiff's $1000 deductible and an additional $394.36, including taxes, for depreciation. Plaintiff thus received an ACV payment of $317.18. Plaintiff claimed that he was underpaid on his ACV claim because State Farm depreciated labor, which is intangible and thus not subject to wear, tear, and obsolescence. Further, labor should not have been depreciated because it was not susceptible to aging or wearing and its value did not diminish over time. 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

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in 2021 Best Lawyers in America and Best Lawyers: Ones To Watch!

    September 28, 2020 —
    Wilke Fleury congratulates attorneys David Frenznick, Adriana Cervantes and Dan Egan on their inclusion in the 2021 Edition of Best Lawyers in America! Since it was first published in 1983, Best Lawyers® has become universally regarded as the definitive guide to legal excellence. Best Lawyers lists are compiled based on an exhaustive peer-review evaluation. Almost 108,000 industry leading lawyers are eligible to vote (from around the world), and they have received over 13 million evaluations on the legal abilities of other lawyers based on their specific practice areas around the world. For the 2021 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America©, 9.4 million votes were analyzed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wilke Fleury

    Mandatory Arbitration Provision Upheld in Construction Defect Case

    May 18, 2011 —

    The Superior Court of New Jersey reversed the decision in Frumer v. National Home Insurance Company (NHIC) and the Home Buyers Warranty Corporation (HBW), stating that the mandatory arbitration provision within the Frumer’s home warranty policy was binding.

    The Frumers alleged that the construction defects were discovered immediately after moving into their million dollar home. After failing to achieve any results from dealing with the builder, they turned to their home warranty. There was some dispute over claims, and a settlement offer was rejected by the Frumers. The Frumers elected to commence litigation rather than utilize the binding arbitration.

    The NHIC and the HBW filed a motion to compel arbitration, however, the motion judge denied the motion: “…the Warranty leaves open the option for [plaintiffs] to commence litigation, which [plaintiffs have] done in this case. The clause also states that ‘the filing of a claim against this limited Warranty shall constitute the election of remedy and shall bar the Homeowner from all other remedies.’ However, the provision does not state that the filing of a claim elects arbitration as the exclusive remedy, and any ambiguity in the language must be inferred against the drafter.”

    The NHIC and the HBW appealed the decision. The Superior Court reversed the decision: “Where, such as here, the homeowner files a claim against the warranty for workmanship/systems defects, the warranty clearly and unequivocally establishes binding arbitration as the exclusive remedy. There is, however, no election of remedies for a dispute involving a major structural defect claim. The warranty clearly and unequivocally establishes binding arbitration as the exclusive remedy.”

    Charles Curley of Halberstadt Curley in Conshohocken, Pa., the local counsel for National Home and Home Buyers, told the New Jersey Law Journal that “the ruling reaffirms New Jersey’s commitment to enforcing arbitration agreements and requiring people to go to mandatory arbitration when the contracts call for it.”

    “At this point, their hope is that the warranty company will do what it's supposed to do — repair covered defects,” Eric McCullough, the Frumer’s lawyer said to the New Jersey Law Journal.

    Read the full story…

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

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    January 28, 2014 —
    On January 3rd of this year, Chad Abraham reported in the Aspen Daily News that the Ute City building—a condominium on Hopkins Avenue in Aspen, Colorado—“lacks proper entryways to apartments and a basement-level nightclub space for both tenants and the disabled.” The owners, Michael Sedoy and Natalia Shvachko, have been sued by the city after refusing “to allow access to an eastside staircase and elevator for other building residents and disabled patrons of a basement restaurant,” according to the Aspen Daily News. “Their stance has forced the other tenants and the disabled to use a westside, alleyway service entrance, according to the city.” Sedoy and Schvachko’s attorney retorts in court documents “that the city approved of a building map and declarations that allow access through the westside entry in the alley.” Furthermore, in another article by Abraham published in the Aspen Daily News on January 25th, he relates that the owners had filed more than “more than 30 noise complaints with the police and the city’s environmental health department about eateries and bars around their home on Restaurant Row. That led to a trial for the Aspen Brewing Co., which a jury acquitted in about 10 minutes last week.” In addition, the couple is being sued by Mountain Home Window Fashions, the Ute City building general contractor. According to the lawsuit as reported by the Daily Aspen News, Mountain Home claims they are owed $12,332. The owners have counter-sued, alleging “that there were defects in Mountain Home Window Fashions’ work” and that one of the employees “made unauthorized charges on Sedoy’s credit card.” Read the full story, January 3rd article ... Read the full story, January 25th article ... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Occurrence Where Contract Provides for Delays

    March 01, 2017 —
    Applying Montana law, the federal district court found there was no coverage for a subcontractor who was sued by the contractor for breach of the subcontract. Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Ed Boland Constr., Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6654 (D. Mont. Jan 18, 2017). Northbank was the general contractor on a project to repair a bridge for the Federal Highway Administration (FHA). Ed Boland Construction, Inc. (EBC) was the subcontractor to perform drilling and pile installation. After beginning its work, EBC ran into difficulties with unforeseen conditions at the work site. The FHA informed Northbank that it had concerns over EBC's ability to complete the work. The FHA alleged that EBC had brought equipment to the work site that differed from the equipment it had represented would be used. 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

    Bribe Charges Take Toll on NY Contractor

    February 22, 2018 —
    The federal bid-rigging trial of former executives of one-time Buffalo, N.Y., regional contracting giant LPCiminelli won’t start until late spring, more than 18 months after they were indicted, along with others, on bribery, corruption and fraud charges in a New York state contract “pay for play.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, Engineering News-Record