BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts civil engineer expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts building code compliance expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness commercial buildingsCambridge Massachusetts construction expert witness public projectsCambridge Massachusetts forensic architectCambridge Massachusetts delay claim expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction expert witnesses
    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


    Indemnity Provision Provides Relief to Contractor; Additional Insured Provision Does Not

    Winners Announced in Seattle’s Office-to-Residential Call for Ideas Contest

    Loaded Boom of Burning Tower Crane Collapses in Manhattan, Injuring Six

    Wall Street’s Favorite Suburban Housing Bet Is Getting Crowded

    Substitute Materials — What Are Your Duties? What Are Your Risks? (Law Note)

    OSHA Set to Tag More Firms as Severe Violators Under New Criteria

    Constructive Change Directives / Directed Changes

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

    Judge Who Oversees Mass. Asbestos Docket Takes New Role As Chief Justice of Superior Court

    CDJ’s #3 Topic of the Year: Burch v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 223 Cal.App.4th 1411 (2014)

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2021 New York – Metro Super Lawyers®

    Addressing Safety on the Construction Site

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

    Lumber Liquidators’ Home-Testing Methods Get EPA Scrutiny

    Tesla Finishes First Solar Roofs—Including Elon's House

    Impaired Property Exclusion Bars Coverage When Loose Bolt Interferes with MRI Unit Operation

    Arizona Court of Appeals Awards Attorneys’ Fees in Quiet-Title Action

    Blackstone Suffers Court Setback in Irish Real Estate Drama

    Dallas Condo Project to Expand

    Recording a Lis Pendens Is Crucial

    Wonder How 2021 May Differ From 2020? Federal Data Privacy May Be Enacted - Be Prepared

    You’re Only as Good as Those with Whom You Contract

    Insurance Policy Provides No Coverage For Slab Collapse in Vision One

    Coverage Denied for Faulty Blasting and Improper Fill

    CA Court of Appeal Reinstates Class Action Construction Defect Claims Against Homebuilder

    Guardrail Maker Defrauded U.S. of $175 Million and Created Hazard, Jury Says

    Apprentices on Public Works Projects: Sometimes it’s Not What You Do But Who You Do the Work For That Counts

    Update Coverage for Construction Defect Claims in Colorado

    A Discussion on Home Affordability

    I’m Sorry Ms. Jackson, I [Sovereign Immunity] am For Real

    So You Want to Arbitrate? Better Make Sure Your Contract Covers All Bases

    Rhode Island Sues 13 Industry Firms Over Flawed Interstate Bridge

    Whose Lease Is It Anyway: Physical Occupancy Not Required in Landlord-Tenant Dispute

    Justin Clark Joins Newmeyer & Dillion’s Walnut Creek Branch as its Newest Associate

    Be Strategic When Suing a Manufacturer Under a Warranty with an Arbitration Provision

    Contractor Convicted of Additional Fraud

    May Heat Wave Deaths Prompt New Cooling Rules in Chicago

    The Importance of Preliminary Notices on Private Works Projects

    Prejudice to Insurer After Late Notice of Hurricane Damage Raises Issue of Fact

    Construction Job Opening Rise in October

    Adobe Opens New Office Tower and Pledges No Companywide Layoffs in 2023

    The “Program Accessibility” Exception for Public Entities Under the ADA

    Caterpillar Said to Be Focus of Senate Overseas Tax Probe

    “Incidental” Versus “Direct” Third Party Beneficiaries Under Insurance Policies in Which a Party is Not an Additional Insured

    What Every Project Participant Needs to Know About Delay Claims

    Best Practices: Commercial Lockouts in Arizona

    Construction Industry Groups Challenge DOL’s New DBRA Regulations

    Expired Contract Not Revived Due to Sovereign Immunity and the Ex Contractu Clause

    Design Immunity of Public Entities: Sometimes Designs, Like Recipes, are Best Left Alone

    Proposed Legislation for Losses from COVID-19 and Limitations on the Retroactive Impairment of Contracts
    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

    General Contractors Can Be Sued by a Subcontractor’s Injured Employee

    November 05, 2014 —
    General contractors that exercise control over the worksite can be sued by a subcontractor’s injured employee. The Nebraska Supreme Court’s recent opinion, Gaytan v. Wal-Mart, should serve as a reminder that general contractors may be responsible for the safety of all workers on a job site. In this case, a roofing subcontractor’s employee died after falling through the roof of the under-construction Wal-Mart. The deceased employee’s estate sued Wal-Mart and Gram Construction, the general contractor, alleging that they were negligent in maintaining a safe worksite. The court initially acknowledged that an owner, the employer of an independent contractor, does not typically owe a subcontractor’s employee a duty because the owner typically has no control over the manner in which the work is to be done by the contractor. This general rule, however, has exceptions, such as where the owner retains control over the contractor’s work. But, for the exception to apply, the owner must have (1) supervised the work that caused the injury, (2) actual or constructive knowledge of the danger that caused the injury, and (3) the opportunity to prevent the injury. 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

    Harmon Towers Duty to Defend Question Must Wait, Says Court

    March 01, 2012 —

    The Harmon Towers project in Las Vegas was eventually halted short of the planned forty-seven stories after “it was determined that there was substantial defective construction, including defective installation of reinforcing steel throughout the Harmon.” The American Home Insurance Company and Lexington Insurance Company put forth a claim that they had no duty to defend Perini Construction, the builder of the defective Harmon Towers. Further, American Home seeks to recover the monies American reimbursed Perini. The United States District Court of Nevada ruled in the case of American Home Assurance Co. v. Perini Building on February 3, 2012.

    The two insurance companies covered Perini and its subcontractors, Century Steel, Pacific Coast Steel, and Ceco Concrete Construction. Century Steel was the initial subcontractor for the reinforcing steel; they were later acquired by Pacific Coast Steel. In this current case, Perini Construction is the sole defendant.

    Perini sought a dismissal of these claims, arguing that without the subcontractors joined to the case, “the Court cannot afford complete relief among existing parties.” The court rejected this claim, noting that the court can determine the duties of the insurance companies to Perini, which the court described as “separate and distinct from those of the subcontractors.” The subcontractors “have not claimed an interest in the subject matter of the action.” The court concluded that it could determine whether Perini was entitled or not to coverage without affecting the subcontractors. The court rejected Perini’s claim.

    Perini also asked the court to abstain from the case, arguing that it was better heard in a state court. The court noted that several considerations cover whether a case is heard in state or federal courts. The court noted that if the case weighed heavily on state law, the state courts would be the obvious location. Further, if there were a parallel action in the state courts, “there is a presumption that the whole suit should be heard in state courts.” This is, however, no parallel state suit, although the court noted that Perini has “threatened” to do so.

    However, the issue of who is to blame for the problems at Harmon Towers has not been resolved. The court concluded that until the “underlying action” was concluded, it was premature to consider the issues raised in this case while the earlier lawsuit was still in progress. The court denied Perini’s motion to dismiss the case. Given that the outcome of the earlier construction defect case may lead to further litigation in state court, the District Court granted Perini’s motion to abstain, but staying their judgment until the construction defect case is resolved.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Anti-Assignment Provision Unenforceable in Kentucky

    December 20, 2012 —
    On a certified question from the Federal District Court, the Supreme Court of Kentucky decided that an anti-assignment provision in a policy is unenforceable.Wehr Constructors v. Paducah Div. Assur. Co. of Am., 2012 Ky. LEXIS 183 (Ky. Oct. 25, 2012). Before building an addition to its hospital, Murray Calloway County Hospital purchased a builder's risk policy from Assurance Company of America.The policy provided, "Your rights and duties under this policy may not be transferred without Assurance's written consent . . . ." The Hospital contracted with Wehr Constructors to install concrete subsurfaces and vinyl floors in order to expand the hospital. After installation, a portion of the floors and subsurface work was damaged. The Hospital submitted a claim to Assurance for $75,000, but the claim was denied. Wehr sued the Hospital to recover money for its work on the construction project. In settling the case, the Hospital assigned to Wehr any claim or rights the Hospital had against Assurance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii.
    Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Congratulations to San Diego Partner Alex Giannetto and Senior Associate Michael Ibach on Settling a Case 3 Weeks Into a 5-Week Trial!

    April 15, 2024 —
    Partner Alex Giannetto and Senior Associate Michael Ibach of BWB&O’s San Diego office started a trial in San Diego set to last at least five weeks. Plaintiffs alleged causes of action of negligence, trespass and nuisance against BWB&O’s client, arguing the owner/property manager did not properly handle alleged overwatering of the front yard, allegedly resulting in a landslide impacting 8 homes on a City slope in Carlsbad. Cross-Complainant City alleged independent negligence to fix the slope it owned and controlled as well as various indemnity-based causes of action against BWB&O’s client. Plaintiffs claimed over $24 million in damages, while Cross-Complainant placed sole blame for the incident on BWB&O’s client around $6 million. Heading into trial, it was made clear that neither Plaintiffs nor Cross-Complainant would accept anything less than 7-figures to settle BWB&O’s client out of the case. In the first week of trial, BWB&O was able to leverage motions in limine, opening statements, and cross-examinations to secure a dismissal of three of the four causes of action alleged by Plaintiff that were associated with pain & suffering. In the second week of trial, BWB&O secured a dismissal of Cross-Complainant’s negligence cause of action paving the way for a settlement with Plaintiffs. Leveraging the threat of a non-suit when Plaintiffs rested, BWB&O secured resolution of Plaintiffs’ complaint for a fraction of what had previously been sought. Finally, BWB&O was able to secure a dismissal of the remaining indemnity-based causes of action in the cross-complaint and fully extract the client from the matter. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Banks Loosening U.S. Mortgage Standards: Chart of the Day

    August 13, 2014 —
    Perhaps more U.S. banks than at any time in two decades are making it easier to qualify for a mortgage. The CHART OF THE DAY shows the net share of banks telling the Federal Reserve that they’re tightening standards in the home-loan market. In the central bank’s July survey of senior loan officers released last week, the net percentage for prime mortgages was negative 18.3 percent, by far the most loosening since it started asking the question by loan-quality category in 2007. It was also greater than the highest net share of banks easing in “all” mortgages in the 1990s or 2000s. Still, lenders have a long way to go before they unwind the restrictions they imposed in the wake of the global financial crisis that risky home loans helped to create. The current trend is mainly about “small tweaks around the edges,” according to JPMorgan Chase & Co. mortgage-bond analysts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jody Shenn, Bloomberg
    Ms. Shenn may be contacted at jshenn@bloomberg.net

    Harrisburg Sought Support Before Ruinous Incinerator Retrofit

    September 20, 2017 —
    When former Harrisburg, Pa., Mayor Stephen Reed (D) and his aides set out to retrofit the city’s aging incinerator in late 2000, the project spun out of control over the coming years, enlarging the debt the city owed on the facility to $300 million and sinking Harrisburg into financial ruin. Reprinted courtesy of Jonathan Barnes, ENR and Richard Korman, ENR ENR staff may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    When Construction Defects Appear, Don’t Choose Between Rebuilding and Building Your Case

    October 11, 2021 —
    When construction defects occur during construction, they intensify pressure from a schedule that may already be tight. Defects must be analyzed, confirmed, removed, and replaced and this can be time consuming. Or course, a construction schedule rarely anticipates defects, demolition, and rework and the owner will still expect the project to be completed on time; however, pressing forward with immediate remediation may have unintended consequences. Before starting demolition, consider the evidentiary doctrine of spoliation. Spoilation occurs when a party destroys or unreasonably deprives another party of evidence and courts have imposed sanctions on a party that deprives an opponent of evidence. The doctrine has historically concerned documents, but its application has extended to electronic data, and courts also apply it to building conditions in construction defects cases. So, before tearing out or fixing defective work, consider the need to allow the opposing party to inspect, test and document it. Imagine this scenario. The concrete in a slab placed by your subcontractor shows low compressive strength results in the 28-day cylinder tests. Tearing out the slab and replacing it will put you at least a month behind schedule and you don’t want to waste any time before removing and replacing it. Nevertheless, while you’re rebuilding the defective slab, be mindful that you are also building a case. If you plan to recover the costs you incur because of the defective concrete from the responsible parties, you should allow the subcontractor (and possibly the concrete supplier and other implicated parties) to examine, preserve, and/or test the work in question. Failure to do so may subject you to spoliation sanctions and jeopardize your right to recover damages. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Curtis Martin, Peckar & Abramson
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@pecklaw.com

    Homebuilding Continues to Recover in San Antonio Area

    December 04, 2013 —
    There was a slowing in the third quarter, but home builders expect that 2013 will see more than 9,000 home starts in the San Antonio area. And even though the third quarter was slow, it was still about 3% above the same quarter in 2012. And the new homes are more expensive. Jack Inselmann, a senior vice president at MetroStudy noted that “in 2011, 40 percent of housing activity was under $175,000. And here we are two years later and 31 percent is under $175,000.” He worries that people looking for homes will go to the resale market, instead of buying a new home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of