BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts construction defect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts slope failure expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction claims expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness commercial buildingsCambridge Massachusetts construction code expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts structural concrete expertCambridge Massachusetts construction forensic 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


    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/22/24) – Federal Infrastructure Money, Hotel Development Pipelines, and Lab Space Construction

    Spearin Doctrine 100 Years Old and Still Thriving in the Design-Build Delivery World

    Point Taken: The UK Supreme Court Finally Confirms the General Law of Liquidated Damages (LDs)

    Water Damage: Construction’s Often Unnoticed Threat

    Detroit Craftsmen Sift House Rubble in Quest for Treasured Wood

    When Business is Personal: Negligent and Intentional Interference Claims

    Bad Faith Jury Verdict Upheld After Insurer's Failure to Settle Within Policy Limits

    Patrick Haggerty Promoted to Counsel

    Litigation Roundup: “You Can’t Make Me Pay!”

    Insured's Collapse Claim Survives Summary Judgment

    25 Years of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar

    Update Regarding New York City’s Climate Mobilization Act (CMA) and the Reduction of Carbon Emissions in New York City

    What Should Business Owners Do If a Customer Won’t Pay

    Want to Build Affordable Housing in the Heart of Paris? Make It Chic.

    Number of Occurrences Is On the Agenda at This Year's ICLC Seminar

    Want a Fair Chance at a Government Contract? Think Again

    U.S. Codes for Deck Attachment

    Ahead of the Storm: Preparing for Dorian

    Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Bars Coverage for Collapse of Building

    Safe Harbors- not just for Sailors anymore (or, why advance planning can prevent claims of defective plans & specs) (law note)

    The Law of Patent v Latent Defects

    Harsh New Time Limits on Construction Defect Claims

    Good Signs for Housing Market in 2013

    Home Sales Topping $100 Million Smash U.S. Price Records

    Scope of Alaska’s Dump Lien Statute Substantially Reduced For Natural Gas Contractors

    Construction is the Fastest Growing Industry in California

    Illinois Court Determines Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims

    HHMR Lawyers Recognized by Best Lawyers

    Trade Contract Revisions to Address COVID-19

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions

    Construction Contracts and The Uniform Commercial Code: When Does it Apply and Understanding the Pre-Dominant Factor Test

    Lease-Leaseback Fight Continues

    New Executive Orders Expedite the Need for Contractors to Go Green

    Insolvency of Primary Carrier Does Not Invoke Excess Coverage

    Congratulations to Las Vegas Team on Their Successful Motion for Summary Judgment!

    Houston’s High Housing Demand due to Employment Growth

    Factual Issues Prevent Summary Judgment Determination on Coverage for Additional Insured

    Build, Baby, Build. But Not Like This, Britain.

    Is Your Design Professional Construction Contract too Friendly? (Law Note)

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Coverage for Named Insured's Defective Work

    Colorado Senate Voted to Kill One of Three Construction Defect Bills

    Last, but NOT Least: Why You Should Take a Closer Look at Your Next Indemnification Clause

    You’ve Been Suspended – Were You Ready?

    Hunton Insurance Lawyer, Adriana Perez, Selected to the National Association of Women Lawyers’ 2023 Rising List

    Get Your Contracts Lean- Its Better than Dieting

    Appraisal Appropriate Despite Pending Coverage Issues

    Builder Must Respond To Homeowner’s Notice Of Claim Within 14 Days Even If Construction Defect Claim Is Not Alleged With The “Reasonable Detail”

    Insurers Must Defend Allegations of Faulty Workmanship

    Labor Shortages In Construction

    Goldman Veteran Said to Buy Mortgages After Big Short
    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

    Coverage Denied for Insured's Defective Product

    October 15, 2014 —
    The court found there was no coverage obligations for the insured's defective product. Titanium Indus., Inc. v. Federal. Ins. Co., 2014 WL 4428324 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Sept. 10, 2014). The insured, Titanium Industries, supplied titanium bar materials to Biomet Manufacturing Corporation. Biomet manufactured orthopedic implants and devises. The titanium was used to manufacture screws to incorporate into Biomet's products. Biomet notified the insured of a potential defect in some of the titanium material, described as "alloy segregation," i.e., the failure of alloys in a metal to completely melt, causing the alloy to separate and undermine the strength of the finished product. The insured and Biomet negotiated a settlement, which included lost profits and the cost of returning the titanium. 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

    No Coverage for Contractor's Faulty Workmanship

    July 10, 2018 —
    The Kentucky Supreme Court determined there was no coverage for the contractor's faulty workmanship in digging the existing basement of a building to make it deeper. Martin v. Acuity, 2018 Ky. LEXIS 188 (Ky. April 26, 2018). Martin Elias/Properties, LLC (MEP) purchased an older home to renovate and resell for profit. MEP hired Tony Gosney to renovate and expand the basement. Gosney agreed to dig the existing basement deeper, pour new footers and pour a new concrete floor. While performing his work, Gosney failed to support the existing foundation adequately before digging around it. Within days, the old foundation began to crack and eventually the entire structure began to sag. Gosney stopped work and notified his insurer, Acuity. 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

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    May 27, 2011 —

    In Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. The Overlook, LLC, No. 4:10cv69 (E.D. Va. May 13, 2011), homeowner Edmonds sued insured developer/general contractor Overlook seeking damages resulting from defective Chinese drywall installed in Edmonds’ home. Overlook’s CGL insurer Nationwide defended Overlook under a reservation of rights and filed a declaratory judgment action. The federal district trial court granted Nationwide’s motion for summary judgment.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

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

    Concurrent Causation Doctrine Applies Where Natural and Man-made Perils Combine to Create Loss

    January 19, 2017 —
    The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between the District Courts in applying the Concurrent Causation Doctrine where there were multiple causes creating the loss. Sebo v. Am. Home Assur. Co., 2016 Fla. LEXIS 2596 (Fla. Dec. 1, 2016). After purchasing his home, John Sebo procured an "all risks" homeowners policy provided by American Home Assurance Company (AHAC). Shortly after Sebo purchased the property, water began to intrude the home during rainstorms. Major water leaks occurred. It became clear that the home suffered from major design and construction defects. In October 2005, Hurricane Wilma further damaged the home. AHAC denied coverage for most of the claimed losses. It provided $50,000 for mold. The residence could not be repaired and was eventually demolished. 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

    Drought Dogs Developers in California's Soaring Housing Market

    September 17, 2015 —
    California’s already tight housing market is facing another long-term complication: drought. The state’s dry spell is creating challenges for developers at a time when home prices are soaring because of limited inventory. The metropolitan areas of San Jose, San Francisco and San Diego had the nation’s biggest gap between the number of new jobs and residential building permits from 2012 to 2014, according to a report Wednesday by the National Association of Realtors. Now the drought, into its fourth year, stands to curb affordability further. “It’s contributing to price appreciation by restricting supply,” said Mark Boud, founder of Real Estate Economics, a housing-consulting firm based in Irvine, California. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Gittelsohn, Bloomberg

    New Green Standards; Same Green Warnings for Architects & Engineers (law note)

    January 13, 2014 —
    The newest version of the LEED ratings system, LEED v4, has officially been released. For a comparison of the major changes between LEED 2009 and LEEDv4, check out this downloadable form from the USGBC. As the folks at Schinnerer’s pointed out, there is one major change that is fraught with peril for design professionals– the requirement for increased transparency concerning the composition and performance requirements of composition materials. Notes the insurance carrier: “While design firms always had a level of responsibility for ongoing product research, the lack of standardized, affirmative industry data made it difficult for design firms and project owners to assess the impact of building materials on human health. “As with many aspects of sustainability in design and construction, the danger to design firms is likely to come from self-inflicted perils. When a firm accepts responsibility to ‘ensure that a project meets its goals by using the best products that align with project requirements,’ it is essentially giving the project owner a guarantee that is both beyond the firm’s control and uninsurable by any insurance carried by a firm.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback
    Ms. Brumback can be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    Policy Sublimit Does Not Apply to Business Interruption Loss

    December 02, 2015 —
    Refusing to give the sublimit in a flood policy an expansive reading, the court found that the sublimit did not apply to business interruption loss. Federal-Mogul Corp. v. Ins. Co. of Pa., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137394 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 8, 2015). The insured's facility in Thailand was damaged by flood. The parties stipulated that the insured suffered a loss of $64,500,000, which included $39,406,467 in property damage and $25,093,533 in time element loss (i.e., economic loss due to an inability to operate normally). The insurer paid $30 million, stating that the High Hazard flood zone provision in the policy limited the amount owed under the policy. The insured argued the High Hazard sublimit applied only to physical loss or damage caused by the flood, and not to time element loss. Therefore, the insured was entitled to judgment on its time element loss claim for $29,093,533. The insurer argued it was entitled to judgment as a matter of law because the High Hazard sublimit applied to all loss caused by flood, including time element loss. 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

    South Carolina Clarifies the Accrual Date for Its Statute of Repose

    March 18, 2019 —
    In Lawrence v. General Panel Corp., 2019 S.C. LEXIS 1, No. 27856 (S.C. Jan. 1, 2019), the Supreme Court of South Carolina answered a certified question related to South Carolina’s statute of repose, S.C. Code § 15-3-640,[1] to wit, whether the date of “substantial completion of the improvement” is always measured from the date on which the certificate of occupancy is issued. The court held that a 2005 amendment to § 15-3-640 did not change South Carolina law with respect to the date of substantial completion. Thus, under the revised version of § 15-3-640, “the statute of repose begins to run at the latest on the date of the certificate of occupancy, even if there is ongoing work on any particular part of the project.” A brief review of prior case law may assist with understanding the court’s ruling in Lawrence. In Ocean Winds Corp. of Johns Island v. Lane, 556 S.E.2d 377 (S.C. 2001), the Supreme Court of South Carolina addressed the question of whether § 15-3-640 ran from substantial completion of the installation of the windows at issue or on substantial completion of the building as a whole. Citing § 15-3-630(b),[2] the court found that the windows “were ‘a specified area or portion’ of the larger condominium project” and, upon their incorporation into the larger project they could be used for the purpose for which they were intended. Thus, the court held that “the statute of repose began running when installation of the windows was complete.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com