BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts structural engineering expert witnessesCambridge Massachusetts construction claims expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness concrete failureCambridge Massachusetts window expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction scheduling expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts civil engineering expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction claims 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


    Res Judicata Not Apply to Bar Overlapping Damages in Separate Suits Against Contractor and Subcontractor

    Construction is the Fastest Growing Industry in California

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Jessica Burtnett and Jessica Kull Obtain Dismissal of Claim Against Insurance Producer Based Upon Statute of Limitations

    How Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Decision Affects Coverage of Faulty Workmanship Claims

    OSHA Issues Final Rule on Electronic Submission of Injury and Illness Data

    Drop in Civil Trials May Cause Problems for Construction Defect Cases

    2021 2Q Cost Report: Industry Execs Believe Recovery Is in Full Swing

    A Court-Side Seat: SCOTUS Clarifies Alien Tort Statute and WOTUS Is Revisited

    Homeowner may pursue negligence claim for construction defect, Oregon Supreme Court holds

    Project Labor Agreements Will Now Be Required for Large-Scale Federal Construction Projects

    Megaproject Savings Opportunities

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

    Construction Contract Basics: Attorney Fee Provisions

    Where Standing, Mechanic’s Liens, and Bankruptcy Collide

    No Coverage for Contractor's Faulty Workmanship

    Partner Lisa M. Rolle and Associate Vito John Marzano Obtain Dismissal of Third-Party Indemnification Claims

    Equitable Lien Designed to Prevent Unjust Enrichment

    EEOC Sues Schuff Steel, J.A. Croson in New Racial Harassment Cases

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

    Subcontract Should Flow Down Delay Caused by Subcontractors

    Can a Non-Signatory Invoke an Arbitration Provision?

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

    How Many New Home Starts are from Teardowns?

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

    SCOTUS Opens Up Federal Courts to Land Owners

    Trump Soho May Abandon Condos to Operate Mainly as Hotel

    Drone Operation in a Construction Zone

    Assert a Party’s Noncompliance of Conditions Precedent with Particularity

    Wisconsin High Court Rejects Insurer’s Misuse of “Other Insurance” Provision

    Official Tried to Influence Judge against Shortchanged Subcontractor

    US Attorney Alleges ADA Violations in Chicago Cubs Stadium Renovation

    Collapse of Breezeway Attached to Building Covered

    Georgia Court of Appeals Holds Lay Witness Can Provide Opinion Testimony on the Value of a Property If the Witness Had an Opportunity to Form a Reasoned Opinion

    Senate Overwhelmingly Passes Water Infrastructure Bill

    Indirect Benefit Does Not Support Unjust Enrichment Claim Against Prime Contractor

    S&P Suspended and Fined $80 Million in SEC, State Mortgage Bond Cases

    Governor Signs Permit Extension Bill Extending Permit Deadlines to One Year

    Efficient Proximate Cause Applies to Policy's Collapse Provisions

    Pass-Through Subcontractor Claims, Liquidating Agreements, and Avoiding a Two-Front War

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

    Crime Policy Insurance Quotes Falsely Represented the Scope of its Coverage

    Another Reason to Always Respond (or Hensel Phelps Wins One!)

    Advice to Georgia Homeowners with Construction Defects

    Blackouts Require a New Look at Backup Power

    Sometimes You Just Need to Call it a Day: Court Finds That Contractor Not Entitled to Recover Costs After Public Works Contract is Invalidated

    Some Work Cannot be Included in a Miller Act Claim

    Solar and Wind Just Passed Another Big Turning Point

    Construction Defect Attorneys Call for Better Funding of Court System

    When is Mediation Appropriate for Your Construction Case?

    Construction of New U.S. Homes Declines on Plunge in South
    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

    Court of Appeals Finds Arbitration Provision Incorporated by Reference Unenforceable

    September 20, 2021 —
    Subcontractors have gotten accustomed to incorporation clauses in their contracts. While an incorporation clause can incorporate any document, most typically, it’s the prime contract between the general contractor and the project owner. Subcontractors will sometimes even accept these documents sight unseen which can be a recipe for disaster. But not in the next case. In Remedial Construction Services, LP v. AECOM, Inc., Case No. B303797 (June 15, 2021), the 2nd District Court of Appeal examined whether a subcontractor was bound to an arbitration provision contained in a prime contract that was incorporated by reference into the subcontractor’s contract. In this case, it was the prime contractor who was in for a surprise. The Remedial Construction Case In 2015, Shell Oil Products US, LLC entered into a prime contract with AECOM Technical Services, Inc. for the demolition, remediation and restoration of the Gaviota oil terminal in Goleta, California. AECOM in turn entered into a subcontract with Remedial Construction Services, LP to perform portions of the work. When AECOM refused to pay Remedial for delay costs asserted by Remedial, Remedial filed suit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    “Time Is Money!” In Construction and This Is Why There Is a Liquidated Damages Provision

    February 01, 2022 —
    In construction, the adage “Time is Money!” rings true for all parties involved on a project. This includes an owner of a project that wants a project completed on time, i.e., by a substantial completion date. While substantial completion is often defined as when an owner can use a project for its intended purpose, this intended purpose typically equates to beneficial occupancy (in new construction) and other factors as identified in the contract. The best mechanism for an owner to reinforce time and the substantial completion date is through a liquidated damages provision (also known as an LD provision) that includes a daily monetary rate for each day of delay to the substantial completion date. A liquidated damages provision is not designed, and should NEVER be designed, to serve as a penalty because then it would be unenforceable. Instead, it should be designed to reasonably compensate an owner for delay to the substantial completion date that cannot be ascertained with any reasonable degree of certainty at the time the contract is being negotiated and executed. (Liquidated damages are MUCH easier to prove than actual damages an owner may incur down the road.) As an owner, you don’t really want to assess liquidated damages because that means the project is not substantially completed on time. And, in reality, a timely completed and performing project should always be better and more profitable than a late and underperforming project. However, without the liquidated damages provision, there isn’t a great way to hold a contractor’s feet to the fire with respect to the substantial completion date. 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

    Amendments to California Insurance Code to Require Enhanced Claims Handling Requirements for Claims Arising Out Of Catastrophic Events

    September 04, 2019 —
    Senator Bill Dodd, who represents Napa County and surrounding areas in the California Senate, has recently introduced Senate Bill 240, known colloquially as The Insurance Adjuster Act of 2019. S.B. 240 would amend the California Insurance Code to streamline and organize claim processing, particularly during a state of emergency / catastrophic events. The proposal is in response to a series of devastating wildfires which ravaged the Sonoma County and Napa Valley wine country during the 2017 fire season (Atlas, Tubbs, and Nun fires). Many of Senator Dodd’s constituents reported difficulty in navigating the claim process due to multiple claim professionals handling a single claim, many of whom were outside of California, and many of whose capabilities were challenged. S.B. 240 would direct the Department of Insurance to issue annual notices setting forth legal developments as they relate to property insurance policies, including best practices for evaluating damage caused by an emergency, and requires out-of-state claims professionals to certify, under penalty of perjury, that they have read these notices along with claim adjusting literature also prepared by the Department of Insurance. S.B. 240 would also require insurers to designate a primary point of contact for their customers during a state of emergency until the claim is closed or litigation is initiated. While the proposed legislation would not prohibit multiple claims professionals handling a single claim, it would provide for training standards issued by the Department of Insurance on how best to handle claims in a state of emergency. Further, S.B. 240 would require claims professionals who are not licensed in California (1) to be supervised by a licensed California claims professional, and (2) to read and understand the annual emergency claim adjusting literature issued by the Department of Insurance within 15 calendar days of beginning adjusting of claims in California. The bill passed the Senate by unanimous vote and is pending in the Assembly. The bill is also supported by Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara. Accordingly, the bill is expected to pass the Legislature. Once enacted, S.B. 240 would significantly elevate claim adjusting requirements related to emergencies, such as natural disasters, by placing greater oversight in the Department of Insurance, and greater responsibility on claims professional within and outside of California. How pragmatic these requirements are and what practical impact they will have on the industry are developments which we will follow and provide further commentary as this bill makes its way through the California legislature and into the California Insurance Code. Reprinted courtesy of Jon A.Turigliatto, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger and Ravi R. Mehta, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger Mr. A.Turigliatto may be contacted at jturigliatto@cgdrblaw.com Mr. Mehta may be contacted at rmehta@cgdrblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Sinking S.F. Tower Prompts More Lawsuits

    January 19, 2017 —
    Homeowners on Jan. 6 added another lawsuit to the list pending against Millennium Partners, developer of the 645-ft-tall Millennium Tower, located in San Francisco’s South-of-Market district. The suit alleges that, as early as 2009, the developers knew the $350-million condo building was sinking faster than expected. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of JT Long, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Legislatures Shouldn’t Try to Do the Courts’ Job

    March 01, 2012 —

    David Thamann, writing in Property Casualty 360, argues that current actions by legislatures on insurance coverage amount to “legislative interference or overreach.” He notes that under current Colorado law, “a court shall presume that the work of a construction professional that results in property damage — including damage to the work itself or other work — is an accident unless the property damage is intended and expected by the insured.” He argues that here legislators are stepping into the role of the courts. “Insureds and insurers are not always going to be pleased with a court ruling, but that is the system we have.”

    Read the full story…

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

    Damages or Injury “Likely to Occur” or “Imminent” May No Longer Trigger Insurance Coverage

    January 05, 2017 —
    Washington Courts allow an insurer to determine its duty to defend an insured against a lawsuit based only on the face of the complaint and the limitations of the insurance policy. This is otherwise known as the “eight corners” rule (four corners of the complaint plus the four corners of the policy). In other words, the insurance company is not permitted to rely on facts extrinsic to the complaint in order to deny its duty to defend an insured. See Truck Ins. Exch. v. VanPort Homes, Inc., 147 Wn.2d 751, 763 (2002). The laws in Washington provide greater protection to the insured over the insurer when it comes to the insurer’s duty to defend. The duty to defend a claim is triggered if a claim could “conceivably” be covered under the policy. See Woo v. Fireman’s Insurance, 161 Wn.2d 43 (2007). If there is any ambiguity in a policy with regard to coverage, the ambiguity is interpreted in favor of the insured. As a result, contractors in Washington regularly tender claims or potential claims to their insurers even when damage has not occurred but will occur in the imminent future. Especially in the context of construction defect cases, a contractor will tender such a claim to its insurer to trigger the broad duty of the insurer to provide a defense. We also regularly recommend this to our contractor clients. For example, if a building owner serves a contractor with a claim that the construction and installation of a window system will imminently cause leaks and corrosion, we would recommend that the contractor tender the claim to its commercial general liability insurer. Washington courts have found a duty to defend when there are allegations in the complaint that covered damages will occur in the imminent future. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Masaki J. Yamada, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Mr. Yamada may be contacted at myamada@ac-lawyers.com

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Los Angeles Tier 1 “Best Law Firm” and Tier 2 for Orange County by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2023

    November 21, 2022 —
    Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP is listed in the U.S. News – Best Lawyers® (2023 Edition) “Best Law Firms” list with metro rankings in the following areas: Los Angeles
    • Metropolitan Tier 1
      • Insurance Law
      • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    Orange County
    • Metropolitan Tier 2
      • Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel

    Tesla Finishes First Solar Roofs—Including Elon's House

    August 02, 2017 —
    First the Model 3 electric car. Now the solar roof. In just one week, Tesla has challenged two distinct industries with radically new products. Tesla has completed its first solar roof installations, the company reported Wednesday as part of a second-quarter earnings report. Just like the first Model 3 customers, who took their keys last week, the first solar roof customers are Tesla employees. By selling to them first, Tesla says it hopes to work out any kinks in the sales and installation process before taking it to a wider public audience. “I have them on my house, JB has them on his house,” Musk said, referring to Tesla’s Chief Technology Officer J.B. Straubel. “This is version one. I think this roof is going to look really knock-out as we just keep iterating.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Randall, Bloomberg