BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts construction expert witness public projectsCambridge Massachusetts forensic architectCambridge Massachusetts expert witness roofingCambridge Massachusetts testifying construction expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction project management expert witnessesCambridge Massachusetts construction defect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction project management 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


    Implementation of CA Building Energy Efficiency Standards Delayed

    ETF Bulls Bet Spring Will Thaw the U.S. Housing Market

    Builders Beware: A New Class Of Defendants In Asbestos Lawsuits

    Builders Can’t Rely on SB800

    Get Your Contracts Lean- Its Better than Dieting

    Home Construction Slows in Las Vegas

    Court Grants Summary Judgment to Insurer in HVAC Defect Case

    Constructive Notice Established as Obstacle to Relation Back Doctrine

    Homeowner’s Claims Defeated Because “Gravamen” of Complaint was Fraud, not Breach of Contract

    The Colorado Court of Appeals Rules that a Statutory Notice of Claim Triggers an Insurer’s Duty to Defend.

    Vincent Alexander Named to Florida Trend’s Legal Elite

    Assert a Party’s Noncompliance of Conditions Precedent with Particularity

    Not a Waiver for All: Maryland Declines to Apply Subrogation Waiver to Subcontractors

    SNC-Lavalin’s Former Head of Construction Pleads Guilty to Bribery, Money Laundering

    Land Planners Not Held to Professional Standard of Care

    Zero-Energy Commercial Buildings Increase as Contractors Focus on Sustainability

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

    Home Building Likely to Stick to Slow Pace

    Starting July 1, 2020 General Contractors are “Employers” for All Workers on Their Jobsite

    U.S. Housing Starts Top Forecast on Single-Family Homes

    One World Trade Center Tallest Building in US

    Return-to-Workplace Checklist: Considerations and Emerging Best Practices for Employers

    Chattanooga Bridge Collapse Likely Resulted From Impact

    Lawmakers Strike Deal on New $38B WRDA

    OSHA Penalties—What Happened with International Nutrition

    Green Buildings Could Lead to Liabilities

    Insurer Must Pay To Defend Product Defect Claims From Date Of Product Installation

    Know Your Obligations Under Both the Prime Contract and Subcontract

    Supreme Court Eliminates Judicial 'Chevron' Deference to Federal Agency Statutory Interpretations

    Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co.

    Remote Trials Can Control Prejudgment Risk

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

    After Fatal House Explosion, Colorado Seeks New Pipeline Regulations

    Home Buyers Lose as U.S. Bond Rally Skips Mortgage Rates

    No Coverage Where Cracks in Basement Walls Do Not Amount to Sudden Collapse

    Corps Releases Final Report on $29B Texas Gulf Coast Hurricane Defense Plan

    Beware of Personal-Liability Clauses – Even When Signing in Your Representative Capacity

    Amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 – Expert Testimony

    Foreclosure Deficiency: Construction Loan vs. Home Improvement Loan

    Contractor Entitled to Defense for Alleged Faulty Workmanship of Subcontractor

    Executive Insights 2024: Leaders in Construction Law

    NY Estimating Consultant Settles $3.1M Government Project Fraud Case

    Super Lawyers Selects Haight Lawyers for Its 2023 California Rising Stars List

    Brown and Caldwell Appoints Stigers as Design Chief Engineer

    Supreme Judicial Court of Maine Addresses Earth Movement Exclusion

    Illinois Legislature Passes Bill Allowing Punitive Damages In Most Wrongful Death Actions

    SCOTUS Opens Up Federal Courts to Land Owners

    Subcontractor Not Estopped from Enforcing Lien Not Listed In Bankruptcy Petition

    The Vallagio HOA Appeals the Decision from the Colorado Court of Appeals

    US Secretary of Labor Withdraws Guidance Regarding Independent Contractors
    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. Leveraging 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

    New York City Dept. of Buildings Explores Drones for Facade Inspections

    December 13, 2021 —
    Drones have only seen limited use in New York City for construction documentation and facade inspections due to restrictive local ordinances. But that may be changing with the release of a new report from the New York City Dept. of Buildings, which sees future potential for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), or drones, to be used in building facade inspections. Reprinted courtesy of Jeff Rubenstone, Engineering News-Record Mr. Rubenstein may be contacted at rubenstonej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Sellers of South Florida Mansion Failed to Disclose Construction Defects

    October 08, 2014 —
    A couple who reportedly sold their custom, beach-front home on Golden Beach for more money than any other home in that town previously, may have failed to disclose construction defects, according to Daily Business Review. The original owners, reported Daily Business Review, claimed (according to court documents) that “they were ‘unable to spend even one night because an overwhelming smell of mold in the home triggered a severe reaction in Mrs. Hochberg.’" They also alleged the new home had “cracked walls, drafty doors, leaky windows, poorly cut marble and peeling stucco.” The owners sued the subcontractors, but lost due to not filing within the four-year statute of limitations. While water leaks were disclosed during the sale with a notation that all leaks had been repaired, “the extent of the home's repair history was not discussed during nearly eight months of haggling over the property, the buyer's broker said.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurance Policy Language Really Does Matter

    August 19, 2015 —
    The debate continues on whether a subcontractor’s faulty work constitutes property damage and an occurrence such that the insurer must cover the claim. The most recent court to weigh in on this issue is the New Jersey appellate court (one step down from the New Jersey Supreme Court) in Cypress Point Condominium Association, Inc. v. Adria Towers, LLC. In this case, the condominium association sued the general contractor, who also acted as the developer, and subcontractors for faulty workmanship. The condominium association also sued the insurer for the general contractor, demanding payment of consequential damages caused by a subcontractor’s faulty work. The trial court granted summary judgment to the insurer, holding that the subcontractor’s faulty work was not property damage and thus not an occurrence under the Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurance policy, so no coverage. The appellate court reversed the trial court’s decision, finding that the claims for consequential damages caused by faulty workmanship constituted property damage and an occurrence as defined in the policy. This was a shift from earlier opinions in New Jersey. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    St. Mary & St. John Coptic Orthodox Church v. SBS Insurance Services, Inc.

    January 18, 2021 —
    In St. Mary & St. John Coptic Orthodox Church v. SBS Insurance Services, Inc., ----Cal.App.5th--- (November 23, 2020), the California First District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's entry of judgment in favor of SBC Insurance Services ("SBC") regarding a claim for water damage sustained by a residence owned by St. Mary & John Coptic Church ("St. Mary") under property coverage afforded by a policy issued by Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company ("Philadelphia"). The policy was procured by SBC on behalf of St. Mary. Philadelphia denied coverage of the claim based on the vacancy exclusion in its policy, but entered into a settlement and loan receipt agreement, whereby St. Mary gave Philadelphia the right to control litigation in St. Mary’s name against SBC or third parties who might be liable for the loss in exchange for a loan of money to repair and remediate the damage sustained by the residence. The loan was to be repaid out of any recovery made against SBC or third parties. After a bench trial, the trial court found in favor of SBC and held that the vacancy exclusion was ambiguous. Essentially, the exclusion did not apply to the time period prior to the time St. Mary purchased the residence, such that the 60-day vacancy requirement could not be satisfied. The trial court reasoned that since St. Mary did not have an insurable interest in the property before it purchased the property, the 60-day requirement did not include the period before such residence was purchased and St. Mary held an insurable interest. The parties’ dispute arose of out of the Pope of the Coptic Church requesting St. Mary to purchase a home to be used as his papal residence in the Western United States. St. Mary also intended to use the home as a residence for visiting bishops. The home was purchased on May 28, 2015. As part of the purchase, SBC placed the home under St. Mary’s commercial policy, rather than purchasing a separate homeowner’s policy for the residence. Subsequently, the home sustained water damage due to a broken pipe. The water damage was discovered on July 24, 2015, 57 days after the inception of the Philadelphia policy and the loss. St. Mary tendered the property loss to Philadelphia, which denied coverage of the claim based on the reasoning that the home had been vacant for 60 consecutive days prior to the loss. Subsequently, St. Mary filed suit against SBC after securing the loan receipt agreement with Philadelphia based on the argument that the vacancy exclusion barred coverage of the claim and SBC breached its duty of care by not securing the proper coverage of the home. The trial court entered judgment in favor of SBC finding that the vacancy exclusion did not apply to bar coverage of the loss, such that SBC did not breach its duty of care owed to St. Mary as its broker. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Velladao, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Velladao may be contacted at Michael.Velladao@lewisbrisbois.com

    Building Group Has Successful 2012, Looks to 2013

    February 14, 2013 —
    The North State Building Industry Association has looked back at 2012, and feels that they are “well-positioned to addressed future challenges in 2013 and beyond.” The organization, which represents home builders in Northern California, had several major accomplishments in 2012. The NSBIA has managed to reduce fees that builders must pay. Due to their work with the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District and the Sacramento Area Sewer District over the last several years, a new rate and fee methodology has been adopted, saving builders $3,000 per single family unit in SRCSD fees and $1,000 per acre in SASD fees. Fees were also reduced through agreements with the Folsom Cordova unified and Elk Grove school districts. The city of Rancho Cordova reduced its transportation fee by $3,500 per home. In addition to their advocacy work, the NSBIA has continued its worker training programs. During 2012, 113 people participated in their Journeyman Upgrade classes, an increase of 20 from the prior year. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Senate Committee Approves Military Construction Funds

    June 29, 2011 —

    With a decrease in funding, as compared to the House bill, the Military Construction and Veteran’s Affairs subcommittee of the Senate moved on a $72 billion construction bill. The House version had approved an additional half billion dollars in funding. Senator Tim Johnson, Democrat of South Carolina, said that he expected easy reconciliation with the House version. The Senate bill will move to the full Senate Appropriations Committee on June 30.

    The bill, S 1255, includes funding for construction and remodeling of military housing, as well as construction and remodeling of base facilities.

    Read the full story…

    Read S1255

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

    Recent Federal Court Decision Favors Class Action Defendants

    October 26, 2020 —
    The commercial construction contracting and subcontracting industry in general is unique under the law for industry professionals, as they’re typically limited to wage and hour litigation under provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The majority of FLSA cases seek class action status or collective classification, while other FLSA litigation is initiated by individuals seeking damages. For the former, past and current employees can opt into class action litigation and seek collective damages against a construction company. The looming financial burden of class action or collective litigation against construction companies consume time, money and resources to the extent it’s often advisable for Defendants to negotiate an unfair settlement. Yet, thanks to a recent federal court decision on March 27, 2020, the legal maneuvering behind unreasonable Plaintiff demands may soon be counter-balanced by the class action Defendants’ right to due process review. A recent legal opinion in a recent FLSA case has potentially wide-ranging implications for Defendant employers mired in future class action litigation. Moreover, as the FLSA applies to all employers, this decision potentially applies to all ownership groups representing the commercial construction industry, extending to partners, contractors and subcontractors. Reprinted courtesy of Amber Karns & Dan Pipitone, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Pipitone may be contacted at dpipitone@munsch.com Ms. Karns may be contacted at akarns@munsch.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer Must Defend Contractor Against Claims of Faulty Workmanship

    May 30, 2018 —
    The magistrate judge recommended that the insurer's motion for summary judgment seeking to determine there was no coverage for claims of faulty workmanship be denied. Greystone Multi-Family Builders v. Gemini Ins. Co., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56770 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 26, 2018). TPG (Post Oak) purchased an OCIP policy to cover construction of an apartment complex. TPG was sued by the contractor, Greystone, after TPG cancelled the construction contract. TPG filed a counterclaim against the contractor, alleging that Greystone had failed to properly perform in building a luxury apartment complex which resulted in monetary damages to TPG. The complaint further alleged that the project was nine months behind its substantial completion date, far from complete, and over budget when TPG cancelled the contract. The cost to fix the mismanagement caused by Greystone was $18.9 million. 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