BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts reconstruction expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness roofingCambridge Massachusetts OSHA expert witness constructionCambridge Massachusetts construction project management expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction cost estimating expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness concrete failure
    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


    White Collar Overtime Regulations Temporarily Blocked

    Contractor Sues Yelp Reviewer for Defamation

    Interpreting Insurance Coverage and Exclusions: When Sudden means Sudden and EIFS means Faulty

    Surety Bond Producers Keep Eye Out For Illegal Waivers

    Arizona Supreme Court Clarifies Area Variance Standard; Property Owners May Obtain an Area Variance When Special Circumstances Existed at Purchase

    Corporate Transparency Act’s Impact on Real Estate: Reporting Companies, Exemptions and Beneficial Ownership Reporting (webinar)

    Insurer's Judgment on the Pleadings Based Upon Expected Injury Exclusion Reversed

    Sixth Circuit Holds that Some Official Actions Taken in the “Flint Water Crisis” Could Be Constitutional Due Process Violations

    Arguing Cardinal Change is Different than Proving Cardinal Change

    Considering Stormwater Management

    The Multigenerational Housing Trend

    Does a Landlord’s Violation of the Arizona Residential Landlord-Tenant Act Constitute Negligence Per Se?

    Injury to Employees Endorsement Eliminates Coverage for Insured Employer

    Production of Pre-Denial Claim File Compelled

    DIR Public Works Registration System Down, Public Works Contractors Not to be Penalized

    Will Future Megacities Be a Marvel or a Mess? Look at New Delhi

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

    Caltrans Reviewing Airspace Program in Aftermath of I-10 Fire

    Illinois Earns C- on its 2022 Infrastructure Report Card while Making Strides on Roads and Transit

    Unfair Risk Allocation on Design-Build Projects

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2023 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Subcontractor Strength Will Drive Industry’s Ability to Meet Demand, Overcome Challenges

    Can an Owner Preemptively Avoid a Mechanics Lien?

    What Buyers Want in a Green Home—and What They Don’t

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2024 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    California Supreme Court Holds that Design Immunity Does Not Protect a Public Entity for Failure to Warn of Dangerous Conditions

    Federal Judge Refuses to Limit Coverage and Moves Forward with Policyholder’s Claims Against Insurer and Broker

    COVID-19 Is Not Direct Physical Loss Or Damage

    Florida Enacts Sweeping Tort Reform Legislation, Raising Barriers to Insurance Coverage Claims

    Negligent Misrepresentation Claim Does Not Allege Property Damage, Barring Coverage

    The Miller Act: More Complex than You Think

    Texas Legislature Puts a Spear in Doctrine Making Contractor Warrantor of Owner Furnished Plans and Specifications

    Brenda Radmacher to Speak at Construction Super Conference 2024

    New Mexico Architect Is Tuned Into His State

    New York Court Rejects Owner’s Bid for Additional Insured Coverage

    Public Contract Code Section 1104 Does Not Apply to Claims of Implied Breach of Warranty of Correctness of Plans and Specifications

    English v. RKK- There is Even More to the Story

    California Ballot Initiative Seeks to Repeal Infrastructure Funding Bill

    Maritime Law: An Albatross for Contractors Navigating Marine Construction

    Benford’s Law: A Seldom Used Weapon in Forensic Accounting

    First Circuit: No Coverage, No Duty to Investigate Alleged Loss Prior to Policy Period

    Surveys: Hundreds of Design Professionals See Big COVID-19 Business Impacts

    DIR Reminds Public Works Contractors to Renew Registrations Before January 1, 2016 to Avoid Hefty Penalty

    Homebuilders Go Green in Response to Homebuyer Demand

    New Case Law Alert: Licensed General Contractors Cannot Sue Owners to Recover Funds for Work Performed by An Unlicensed Subcontractor

    Business Interruption Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    Storm Debby Is Deadly — Because It’s Slow

    Deadly Fire in Older Hawaii High-Rise Causes Sprinkler Law Discussion

    Digitalizing the Construction Site – Interview with Tenderfield’s Jason Kamha

    California Complex Civil Litigation Superior Court Panels
    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

    Can a Receiver Prime and Strip Liens Against Real Property?

    September 20, 2021 —
    Courts overseeing receivers generally enjoy broad discretion in directing and approving a receiver’s proposed actions. But does that authority extend to a receiver not only granting a super-priority lien ahead of existing liens, but also selling the real property free and clear of all liens? In County of Sonoma v. Quail, 56 Cal.App.5th 657 (Ct. App. 2020), the California Court of Appeals answered that question in the affirmative. Quail involved a 47,480 square-foot lot with two houses, a few garages, several outbuildings, and numerous trailers surrounded by a veritable junk yard. Despite many of these structures being uninhabitable, unsanitary, and dangerous, multiple families resided on the lot. Although Sonoma County (the “County”) ordered the owner to remediate the property several times, he failed and refused to do so. After several years of these violations going unabated, the County ultimately sought and obtained the appointment of a receiver over the real property. To obtain funds necessary to repair the property, the receiver asked the court for permission to borrow money through the issuance of a receivership certificate to be secured by a super-priority lien—i.e., a lien ahead of all other liens—against the real property. Although the trial court initially declined to prime existing liens, when the receiver could find no one to lend money (since the land lacked equity), the trial court relented and approved a super-priority lien despite the senior secured lender’s objection (the “lender”). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ben Reeves, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Reeves may be contacted at breeves@swlaw.com

    Keeping Up With Fast-moving FAA Drone Regulations

    February 28, 2018 —
    One of the biggest changes in recent years relating to commercial drone regulations has been FAA rule Part 107. Prior to 107, drone pilots were required to hold a current, manned aircraft pilot certificate, and had to pass a written, practical and oral exam to earn that credential. After 107 came into effect, a drone pilot was only required to pass a written exam to earn this commercial drone license. The majority of people working at construction companies who take the Part 107 exam don’t have any type of aviation background, so it’s recommended that they give themselves at least two hours of study a day over two weeks to prepare for the exam. This commitment allows enough time for the student to both master any prepared test materials as well as do any additional research when necessary. The Part 107 certification is good for 24 months. While the FAA hasn’t posted anything about a recertification process yet, it will need to do so soon because everyone who took the exam when it was available in September 2016 will need to be recertified by August 2018. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dick Zhang, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved.
    Mr. Zhang may be contacted at contact@identifiedtech.com

    Congratulations to BWB&O for Ranking #4 in Orange County Business Journal’s 2023 Book of Lists for Law Firms!

    April 10, 2023 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is excited to announce that Orange County Business Journal has ranked our firm as a top 4 law firm in the 2023 Book of Lists! BWB&O continues to grow and strives to provide a consistently excellent work product and solution-oriented approach to our clients’ legal issues, coupled with hiring, and retaining diverse and outstanding lawyers, all while providing an outstanding work life balance/integration. We foster a culture that embraces family, friendship, and fun while also supporting individual growth. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Patent or Latent: An Important Question in Construction Defects

    October 25, 2013 —
    Pieter M. O’Leary, writing for the site AVVO offers the advice that whether a construction defect is patent or latent could influence whether or not it’s covered in a construction defect claim. He notes that a “patent defect” is “a construction defect that is ‘readily observable or evident,’” while a “latent defect” is “a construction defect that is present but not readily detectable even with reasonable care.” While this may sound like a simple distinction, he notes that “distinguishing between the two can often be difficult and sometimes highly contested by the various parties in a lawsuit.” The first question is “whether the average consumer, during the course of a reasonable inspection, would discover the defect.” The question arises because “if a defect is hidden and not detectable (latent defect), a longer time period exists for the claimant to file a claim.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Windstorm Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    September 10, 2018 —
    The Second Circuit reversed the District Court's issuance of summary judgment to the insurer because a windstorm exclusion was deemed ambiguous. 7001 East 71st Street, LLC v. Continental Cas. Co., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 17334 (2nd Cir. June 26, 2018). A windstorm during Hurricane Sandy caused the roof of 7001 East 71st Street LLC (7001) to tear, allowing rainwater to seep in and damage 7001's "Covered Equipment" as defined by the policy. Continental denied coverage based upon the windstorm exclusion and the district court granted summary judgment to Continental. 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

    Colorado Supreme Court Weighs in on Timeliness of Claims Against Subcontractors in Construction Defect Actions

    March 16, 2017 —
    On February 27, 2017, the Colorado Supreme Court announced its decision in the Goodman v. Heritage Builders, No. 16SA193, 2017 CO 13 (Colo. February 27, 2017) case. In ten short pages, the Colorado Supreme Court completely reshuffled Colorado construction law with respect to application of the statutes of limitation and repose on third-party claims in construction defect cases. Specifically, the Colorado Supreme Court overruled a series of earlier Court of Appeals' decisions that found C.R.S. § 13-80-104(1)(b)(II) (“104(1)(b)(II)”) had no effect on the six-year statute of repose. For context, 104(1)(b)(II) permitted third-party actions for indemnity and contribution to toll until ninety days after the claims in the underlying action were resolved by settlement or judgment. In the construction context, 104(1)(b)(II) was intended to allow a general contractor’s claims against liable subcontractors to toll for the statutorily defined period. This allowed the general contractor to first focus its attention on defending the claims against and thereafter to pursue its claims against the subcontractors. However, beginning in 2008, in the Thermo Dev., Inc. v. Cent. Masonry Corp., 195 P.3d 1166 (Colo. App. 2008) case, the Colorado Court of Appeals began chipping away at the force of 104(1)(b)(II). This trend continued in the Shaw Constr., LLC v. United Builder Servs., Inc., 2012 COA 24, 296 P.3d 145 decision, the Sierra Pac. Indus., v. Bradbury, 2016 COA 132, ­_ P.3d_ decision, and culminating in the Sopris Lodging, LLC v. Schofield Excavation, Inc., 2016 COA 158, reh'g denied (Nov. 23, 2016) decision. Effectively, in these decisions, the Colorado Court of Appeals determined that third-party claims could not be brought beyond Colorado’s six-year statute of repose, regardless if they were brought within the ninety day tolling provision set forth in 104(1)(b)(II). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jean Meyer, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Meyer may be contacted at meyer@hhmrlaw.com

    New Orleans Drainage System Recognized as Historic Civil Engineering Landmark

    May 29, 2023 —
    NEW ORLEANS, La. – The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) today recognized the New Orleans Drainage System in New Orleans, Louisiana as a Historic Civil Engineering Landmark. The project was innovative and largely unprecedented for its time, and the first portions came online in the year 1900. The system now consists of 22 drainage pumping stations and 1,200 miles of network drains, as well as green infrastructure elements to manage stormwater runoff. The infrastructure is largely credited for making the existence of New Orleans possible, and the improved drainage and reduction in standing water contributed to better public health and reduced the number of malaria and typhoid deaths in the early 20th century. New Orleans' position near the mouth of the Mississippi River made it a vital city for trade and commerce in the U.S. economy since the early 1800s, despite its problematic natural environment. The city was perched along the banks of the Mississippi River and next to Lake Pontchartrain, surrounded by swamps. Improvements to levee systems prevented the city from being inundated with flooding from the river, but rainfall became a pervasive issue as the city's population grew in the 1870s. The drainage system was first proposed in 1876 to replace primitive "drainage machines," steam-powered paddle wheels that moved water runoff into canals that led to Lake Pontchartrain. The existing system was inefficient and could not handle the frequent, heavy tropical rain New Orleans experiences and could not lift water sufficiently to drain the city. After several proposals, construction on the current drainage system started in 1897, and the first portions of the system came online in 1900. The system drains stormwater through pipes and canals to reach drainage pump stations which expel the water into several bodies of water surrounding the city. Engineers have repeatedly expanded and enlarged the drainage system, including a massive investment in the drainage system authorized by the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project and approved by Congress in 1996. The Sewerage and Water Board's green infrastructure plan is a critical partner and complement to the drainage system today. The New Orleans Drainage System's design has inspired water management system design in communities around America and worldwide. In Southeastern Florida, water management systems using pumps and canals divert excess water away from heavily populated areas during heavy rain, including tropical storms and hurricanes. Engineers in Kolkata, India and Shanghai, China have also used drainage and pumping systems like the ones in New Orleans to assist with water management. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 150,000 civil engineers worldwide and is America's oldest national engineering society. ASCE works to raise awareness of the need to maintain and modernize the nation's infrastructure using sustainable and resilient practices, advocates for increasing and optimizing investment in infrastructure, and improve engineering knowledge and competency. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    City of Sacramento Approves Kings NBA Financing Plan

    May 21, 2014 —
    Sacramento, California’s city council recently approved a financing plan that will enable the construction of the $477 million downtown arena project to move forward, reported KNOE News. Sacramento will now be responsible for a $223 million subsidy, and “the Kings would contribute $254 million to construct the arena and develop surrounding land with a hotel, office tower and shopping.” “Kings President Chris Granger called it a historic day for the team and Sacramento region, saying the arena would serve as a hub for economic development,” according to KNOE News. “The project would bring 11,000 construction jobs and 4,000 permanent jobs, [Granger] said.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of