BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts roofing construction expertCambridge Massachusetts defective construction expertCambridge Massachusetts construction cost estimating expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts architecture expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction expert witnessesCambridge Massachusetts expert witness structural engineerCambridge Massachusetts consulting general contractor
    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


    New York Appellate Court Holds Insurers May Suffer Consequences of Delayed Payment of Energy Company Property and Business Interruption Claims

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

    Natural Hydrogen May Seem New in Town, but It’s Been Here All Along

    Construction Contractor “Mean Tweets” Edition

    Supreme Court Set to Alter Law on Key Project, Workforce Issues

    Part of the Whole: Idaho District Court Holds Economic Loss Rule Bars Tort Claims Related to Water Supply Line that was Part of Home Purchase

    DA’s Office Checking Workers Comp Compliance

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    FIFA May Reduce World Cup Stadiums in Russia on Economic Concern

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 29 White and Williams Lawyers

    Zetlin & De Chiara Ranked in the Top Tier for Construction Law by Legal 500 USA

    Three Key Takeaways from Recent Hotel Website ADA Litigation

    DHS Awards Contracts for Border Wall Prototypes

    Florida Issues Emergency Fraud Prevention Rule to Protect Policyholders in Wake of Catastrophic Storms

    Contractor Gets Green Light to Fix Two Fractured Girders at Salesforce Transit Center

    The Future of Pandemic Coverage for Real Estate Owners and Developers

    Residential Building Sector: Peaking or Soaring?

    The Importance of Preliminary Notices on Private Works Projects

    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment

    Personal Guarantor Cannot Escape a Personal Guarantee By…

    How to Challenge a Project Labor Agreement

    Angels Among Us

    Los Angeles Is Burning. But California’s Insurance Industry Is Not About to Collapse.

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “It’s One, Two… Eight Strikes: You’re Out!”

    Coyness is Nice. Just Not When Seeking a Default Judgment

    Florida Lawmakers Fail to Reach Agreement on Condominium Safety Bill

    Need to Cover Yourself for “Crisis” Changes on a Job Site? Try These Tips (guest post)

    Georgia Court Reaffirms Construction Defect Decision

    Complying With Data Breach Regulations in the Construction Industry

    North Carolina Learns More Lessons From Latest Storm

    When Construction Contracts Go Sideways in Bankruptcy

    What Makes a Great Lawyer?

    Colorado Drillers Show Sensitive Side to Woo Fracking Foes

    Nevada Supreme Court Clarifies the Litigation Waiver of the One-Action Rule

    Blockbuster Breakwater: Alternative Construction Method Put to the Test in Tampa Bay

    BWB&O Partner Tyler Offenhauser and Associate Lizbeth Lopez Won Their Motion for Summary Judgment Based on the Privette Doctrine

    American Arbitration Association Revises Construction Industry Rules and Mediation Procedures

    How AI and Machine Learning Are Helping Construction Reduce Risk and Improve Margins

    Suit Limitation Provision Upheld

    Changes in the Law on Lien Waivers

    More (and Simpler) Options Under New Oregon Retention Law

    Florida Decides Against Adopting Daubert

    Health Care Construction Requires Compassion, Attention to Detail and Flexibility

    Thousands of London Residents Evacuated due to Fire Hazards

    Fourth Circuit Rejects Application of Wrap-Up Exclusion to Additional Insured

    California Homeowners Can Release Future, Unknown Claims Against Builders

    Five LEED and Green Construction Trends to Watch in 2020

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

    Illinois Legislature Enables Pre-Judgment Interest in Personal Injury Cases

    Mortgage Applications in U.S. Jump 11.6% as Refinancing Surges
    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

    2023 Construction Law Update

    January 04, 2023 —
    As we approach 2023 we want to wish you and yours a happy holiday season. A total of 1,726 bills were introduced during the second half of the 2021-2022 legislative session of which 997 were signed into law. This compares with the 2,421 bills introduced during the first half of the 2021-2022 of which 770 were signed into law. Among the legislation taking effect in 2023 are new laws applying to contractors include new workers’ compensation laws (even if you don’t have employees), a continuation of a record number of new housing affordability laws as well as environmental laws aimed at climate change, and, of course, as we see nearly every year, new procurement authorizations.  Licensing AB 1747 – Authorizes the Contractors State License Board to issue penalties of up to $30,000 for the willful or deliberate disregard of state or local laws relating to the issuance of building permits. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Get Your Contracts Lean- Its Better than Dieting

    January 13, 2020 —
    I recently took the AGC Lean Construction Educations Program Units 1-7. After studying diligently, I’m happy to say that I passed the exam and earned my CM-Lean credential. Surprisingly, this makes me the first attorney to earn this distinction out of over 1,200 CM-Lean holders. So why is a construction attorney learning about lean? After all, this was my first exam in 20 years since I took the bar. Well, according to McKinsey Global Institute, construction actually became less productive from 1995 through 2009. When it comes to efficiency, construction still lags significantly behind the manufacturing sector and the overall economy. Construction contracts – what we sign and the way in which we negotiate them, or lack thereof – is a principal reason why construction productivity is stagnant. Contracting under an integrated lean project delivery method (ILPD) and incorporating Lean construction tools is the most powerful means to increase efficiency and add-value to owners. Owners are the client’s end-users of construction projects. ConsensusDocs has taken a leadership role in publishing the first standard ILPD contract which is an integrated form of agreement (IFOA). The ConsensusDocs 300 Integrated Project Delivery (IPD™) provides an off-the-shelf solution to contract utilizing lean tools. Not every owner can or is comfortable using an IPD approach. Consequently, ConsensusDocs produced the ConsensusDocs 305 Construction Lean Construction Addendum last year to provide an option for contracting for lean on Construction Management at-Risk and design-build projects. Some people call this approach IPD-lite or IPD’ish. Some disfavor such terms, because those terms have been used loosely on projects that aren’t very Lean. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Perlberg, Esq., Executive Director and Senior Counsel of ConsensusDocs
    ConsensusDocs may be contacted at support@consensusdocs.org

    Claims for Negligence? Duty to Defend Triggered

    July 09, 2019 —
    On June 17, 2019, the First Circuit held that an insurer’s duty to defend was triggered because the underlying complaint set forth claims that required a showing of intent as well as claims that sought recovery for conduct that “fits comfortably within the definition of an ‘accident.’” In Zurich American Ins. Co v. Electricity Maine, LLC, Zurich sought declaratory judgment that, under a D&O policy, it had no duty to defend the insured, Electricity Maine, an electrical utility company being sued in the underlying class action. Zurich argued it had no duty to defend because the underlying complaint failed to allege that Electricity Maine engaged in conduct that qualified as an “occurrence” or that caused “bodily injury” under the terms of the policy. The First Circuit disagreed. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Adriana A. Perez, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Ms. Perez may be contacted at aperez@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Navigating Construction Contracts in the Energy Sector – Insights from Sheppard Mullin’s Webinar Series

    October 01, 2024 —
    Construction contracts in the energy sector involve unique challenges and risks, particularly with respect to bonds and mechanic’s liens. Understanding how to navigate these challenges is key to protecting your projects from disputes with general contractors, subcontractors and suppliers. In our recent webinar, “Construction Contracts: Bond and Mechanic’s Lien Primer for Energy Projects,” I was joined by my Sheppard Mullin colleagues Chris Kolosov and Emily Anderson to discuss navigating common contract pitfalls and negotiation strategies to protect your interests. Here are our key takeaways.
    1. Know Local Mechanic’s Lien Laws: Mechanic’s liens are statutory and vary significantly from state to state. It is critical to understand the local laws and regulations at play in your project’s jurisdiction.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cesar Pereira, Sheppard Mullin
    Mr. Pereira may be contacted at cpereira@sheppardmullin.com

    Late Notice Kills Insured's Claim for Damage Due to Hurricane

    December 27, 2021 —
    The insurer's motion for summary judgment was granted based upon the insured's late notice nearly two years after a hurricane caused property damage. Ramirez v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 209716 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 29, 2021). Plaintiff alleged he suffered property loss due to wind and water damage from Hurricane Irma on September 10, 2017. The roof, exterior, and interior of the home were damaged. On May 20, 2019, twenty months after the hurricane, plaintiff first notified Scottsdale of his claim for damages. An adjuster inspected and observed wind, wear and tear, and deterioration damage to the roof tile, as well as interior water damage to portions of the home. The claim was denied based upon wind, wear and tear, and deterioration exclusions in the policy. 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

    Bad Faith and a Partial Summary Judgment in Seattle Construction Defect Case

    February 10, 2012 —

    The US District Court of Washington has issued a ruling in the case of Ledcor Industries v. Virginia Surety Company, Inc. Ledcor was the builder of a mixed-use real estate project in Seattle called the Adelaide Project. Ledcor purchased an insurance policy from Virginia Surety covering the project. After the completion of the project, Ledcor received complaints of construction defects from the homeowners, which they forwarded to Virginia Surety.

    Virginia Surety denied coverage on several grounds. Absent any lawsuit, Virginia claimed that there was “not yet any duty to defend or indemnify.” Further, as the policy commenced ten days after work on the project was substantially completed, Virginia cited a provision in the policy that excluded coverage for damage that occurred before the policy began. As problems included water intrusion, Virginia noted an exclusion for fungal damage. Finally, Virginia noted that it was not clear whether damage was due to Ledcor’s own actions.

    The homeowners sued over the construction defects. Ledcor settled these suits before trial. In this, they were defended by, and settlements were paid by American Home, another of Ledcor’s insurers. Ledcor claims that Virginia Surety acted in bad faith by denying coverage and by its failure to investigate the ongoing nature of the work at the project.

    The judge determined that Virginia Surety acted in bad faith when it invoked the fungus exclusion. Virginia noted that fungal damage “‘would have been’ referenced in the list of construction defects,” however, the HOAs claimed only “water stains” and “water damage,” and made no mention of mold or fungus. The court found that Virginia Surety “was not entitled to deny coverage simply because it may have suspected that mold or fungus damage existed.” The court noted that further proceedings would be needed to determine what portion of the settlement Virginia is obligated to pay.

    The court found that there were matters of fact to be determined on the further issues in the case. The judge wrote that although Virginia acted in bad faith in invoking the fungus exclusion, it still had to be determined if they were in breach of contract by failing to defend Ledcor. Ledcor still needs to show that the damages claimed by the HOA were due to work actually covered by Virginia Surety.

    Ledcor made an additional claim that Virginia Surety violated Washington’s laws concerning the insurance industry. Here, the court noted that the improper exclusion for fungus issues “constitutes a per se unfair trade practice.” Six other claims were made under this law. The court found that Virginia Surety did not misrepresent “pertinent facts or insurance policy provisions.” It also issued its denial letter promptly, satisfying the fifth provision. However, Virginia Surety did violate the second provision, in that it failed “to acknowledge and act reasonably promptly upon communications with respect to claims.” Two other issues could not be determined.

    Judge Martinez’s decision granted a summary judgment to Ledcor on the issue of bad faith. An additional summary judgment was granted that Virginia Surety violated Washington’s Insurance Fair Conduct Act. Judge Martinez did not grant summary judgment on any of the other issues Ledcor raised.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Defense Victory in Breach of Fiduciary Action

    February 26, 2015 —
    Earlier this month, Scott Calkins and Anthony Gaeta of Collinsworth, Specht, Calkins & Giampaoli, LLP obtained a defense verdict in a breach of fiduciary duty action involving a high-rise condominium in downtown San Diego, California. The Association asked for excess of over $3 million, however, the jury returned with a 10-2 defense verdict in favor of K. Hovnanian. Cortez Blu Community Association, Inc. v. K. Hovnanian at Cortez Hill, LLC, et al. initially involved construction defect claims against the developer, K. Hovnanian, and the general contractor, Turner Construction, as well as a claim of breach of fiduciary duty. However, the construction defect claims settled prior to trial leaving only the breach of fiduciary claim. “While it is now becoming ever more common for attorneys representing homeowners associations to allege a breach of fiduciary duty by the developer, there has been little actual litigation of the issues surrounding those claims which test the viability of the allegations or the defenses to them,” defense attorney Anthony Gaeta stated. “A breach of a fiduciary duty by a developer, which is demonstrated to damage the viability of an HOA either to perform regularly scheduled maintenance, or replace building components from its reserves, has the potential in economic terms to surpass the damages from purported construction defects. The Plaintiff argued that K. Hovnanian breached its fiduciary duty to the Association by failing to set adequate reserves within the initial Department of Real Estate budget (“DRE”) for painting, caulking, and power washing the exterior of the building, referencing Raven’s Cove Townhomes, Inc. v. Knuppe Development Co., Inc. (1981) 114 Cal. App. 3d 783. In response, K. Hovnanian stated that in part, the initial reserves as set forth in the DRE budget were adequate, good faith estimates and, therefore, there was no liability for breach of fiduciary duty. “Our case was exclusively concerned with the duties of the developer when forming the initial HOA, preliminary budgets, and reserves,” Gaeta said. “We litigated the duties and responsibilities of the initial board and whether a developer may rely on reports prepared by third-parties during the formation of a common interest development. The jury found our client’s actions and reliance on third-parties was reasonable and, thus, no breach of fiduciary duty occurred.” Collinsworth, Specht, Calkins & Giampaoli is a general civil litigation firm representing clients throughout California and Arizona. You may learn more about the firm at www.cslawoffices.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    GRSM Team Wins Summary Judgment in Million-Dollar HOA Dispute

    December 17, 2024 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Partner Bob Bragalone and Senior Counsel Ryan Fellman won a complete summary judgment on behalf of five board members who had been added to an HOA dispute by the defendant homeowners. The GRSM team resolved the matter within just 60 days of taking over the case, bringing an end to a legal battle that had lasted more than four years. The dispute began when the HOA, as plaintiff, filed suit against the homeowners in Denton County District Court. The HOA alleged that the homeowners had violated the HOA’s Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions by constructing a non-conforming carport and sought a declaratory judgment to resolve the issue. In response, the homeowners filed a counterclaim and third-party petition, adding the individual HOA board members to the lawsuit. They accused the board members—who were serving in a voluntary capacity—of mishandling the dispute and filed claims against them for intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and gross negligence. Reprinted courtesy of Robert A. Bragalone, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani and B. Ryan Fellman, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Mr. Bragalone may be contacted at bbragalone@grsm.com Mr. Fellman may be contacted at rfellman@grsm.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of