BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida Medical building expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida office building expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida mid-rise construction expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida concrete tilt-up expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida production housing expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida landscaping construction expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida industrial building expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida custom home expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida tract home expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida low-income housing expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida townhome construction expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida housing expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida custom homes expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida condominium expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida parking structure expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida high-rise construction expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida condominiums expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida institutional building expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida hospital construction expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida Subterranean parking expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida retail construction expert witness Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida
    Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida expert witness roofingBowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida building consultant expertBowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida construction expert witness public projectsBowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida soil failure expert witnessBowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida architectural expert witnessBowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida multi family design expert witnessBowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida architectural engineering expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys, Florida

    Florida Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: In Title XXXIII Chapter 558, the Florida Legislature establishes a requirement that homeowners who allege construction defects must first notify the construction professional responsible for the defect and allow them an opportunity to repair the defect before the homeowner canbring suit against the construction professional. The statute, which allows homeowners and associations to file claims against certain types of contractors and others, defines the type of defects that fall under the authority of the legislation and the types of housing covered in thelegislation. Florida sets strict procedures that homeowners must follow in notifying construction professionals of alleged defects. The law also establishes strict timeframes for builders to respond to homeowner claims. Once a builder has inspected the unit, the law allows the builder to offer to repair or settle by paying the owner a sum to cover the cost of repairing the defect. The homeowner has the option of accepting the offer or rejecting the offer and filing suit. Under the statute the courts must abate any homeowner legal action until the homeowner has undertaken the claims process. The law also requires contractors, subcontractors and other covered under the law to notify homeowners of the right to cure process.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Tri-County Home Builders
    Local # 1073
    PO Box 420
    Marianna, FL 32447

    Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Tallahassee Builders Association Inc
    Local # 1064
    1835 Fiddler Court
    Tallahassee, FL 32308

    Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of Okaloosa-Walton Cos
    Local # 1056
    1980 Lewis Turner Blvd
    Fort Walton Beach, FL 32547

    Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of West Florida
    Local # 1048
    4400 Bayou Blvd Suite 45
    Pensacola, FL 32503

    Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Florida Home Builders Association (State)
    Local # 1000
    PO Box 1259
    Tallahassee, FL 32302

    Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Columbia County Builders Association
    Local # 1007
    PO Box 7353
    Lake City, FL 32055

    Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Northeast Florida Builders Association
    Local # 1024
    103 Century 21 Dr Ste 100
    Jacksonville, FL 32216

    Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys Florida


    Court Finds No Coverage for Workplace “Prank” With Nail Gun

    Is Your Contract “Mission Essential?” Recovering Costs for Performing During a Force Majeure Event Under Federal Regulations

    Indemnity Payment to Insured Satisfies SIR

    Construction Defect Scam Tied to Organized Crime?

    Washington Supreme Court Upholds King County Ordinance Requiring Utility Providers to Pay for Access to County’s Right-of-Way and Signals Approval for Other Counties to Follow Suit

    The Roads to Justice: Building New Bridges

    Where Breach of Contract and Tortious Interference Collide

    New Jersey Supreme Court Holding Impacts Allocation of Damages in Cases Involving Successive Tortfeasors

    And the Cyber-Beat Goes On. Yet Another Cyber Regulatory Focus for Insurers

    How Mansions Can Intensify Wildfires

    Texas Supreme Court Authorizes Exception to the "Eight-Corners" Rule

    For Breach of Contract Claim, There Needs to be a Breach of a Contractual Duty

    How is Negotiating a Construction Contract Like Buying a Car?

    Attorney's Erroneous Conclusion that Limitations Period Had Not Expired Was Not Grounds For Relief Under C.C.P. § 473(b)

    Liability Cap Does Not Exclude Defense Costs for Loss Related to Deep Water Horizon

    DOD Contractors Receive Reprieve on Implementation of Chinese Telecommunications Ban

    Delaware Strengthens Jurisdictional Defenses for Foreign Corporations Registered to Do Business in Delaware

    Housing Starts Rebound in U.S. as Inflation Eases: Economy

    Happenings in and around the West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Power Point Presentation on Nautilus v. Lexington Case

    OSHA Releases COVID-19 Guidance

    Measure Of Damages for Breach of Construction Contract

    Denver Passed the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

    Apartment Projects Fuel 13% Jump in U.S. Housing Starts

    Connecting IoT Data to BIM

    Distinguishing Hawaii Law, New Jersey Finds Anti-Assignment Clause Ineffective

    Delay Leads to Problems with Construction Defects

    Port Authority Approves Subsidies for 2 World Trade Project

    Product Liability Alert: Evidence of Apportionment of Fault Admissible in Strict Products Liability Action

    Time to Repair Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws?

    Impact of Lis Pendens on Unrecorded Interests / Liens

    OSHA Announces Expansion of “Severe Violator Enforcement Program”

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorney Alan Packer Selected to the 2017 Northern California Super Lawyers List

    Boilerplate Contract Language on Permits could cause Problems for Contractors

    North Dakota Supreme Court Clarifies Breadth of Contractual Liability Coverage

    Timely Written Notice to Insurer and Cooperating with Insurer

    CDC Issues Moratorium on Residential Evictions Through 2020

    Litigation Privilege Saves the Day for Mechanic’s Liens

    Scary Movie: Theatre Developer Axed By Court of Appeal In Prevailing Wage Determination Challenge

    Virginia Chinese Drywall “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and number of “occurrences”

    “Based On”… What Exactly? NJ Appellate Division Examines Phrase and Estops Insurer From Disclaiming Coverage for 20-Month Delay

    Fannie Overseer Moves to Rescue Housing With Lower Risk to Lenders

    Third Circuit Court of Appeals Concludes “Soup to Nuts” Policy Does Not Include Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    Dreyer v. Am. Natl. Prop. & Cas. Co. Or: Do Not Enter into Nunn-Agreements for Injuries that Occurred After Expiration of the Subject Insurance Policy

    Connecticut Court Finds Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Enforceable

    Don’t Sign a Contract that Doesn’t Address Covid-19 (Or Pandemics and Epidemics)

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Confident about Construction Defect Bill

    Death, Taxes and Attorneys’ Fees in Construction Disputes

    Dorian’s Wrath: How Event Cancellation Insurance Helps Businesses Recoup Losses from Severe Weather

    Cameron Kalunian to Speak at Casualty Construction Defect Seminar
    Corporate Profile

    BOWLING GREEN FLORIDA EXPERT WITNESSES FENESTRATION REPRESENTING CONSTRUCTION ATTORNEYS FLORIDA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys, Florida Construction Expert Witness 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 Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys' most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Bowling Green Florida expert witnesses fenestration representing construction attorneys, Florida

    Gone Fishing: Tenant’s Insurer Casts A Line Seeking To Subrogate Against The Landlord

    October 17, 2022 —
    In J&J Fish on Ctr. Str., Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co., No. 20-cv-644-bhl, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16361, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin (District Court) recognized that “[t]here will be no further fish fries on Center Street until someone pays to repair the collapsed floor at J&J Fish on Center Street, Inc. (J&J Fish).” The contenders were: 1) J&J Fish; 2) its’ insurer, Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Company (Insurer); and 3) J&J Fish’s landlord, Vision Land, LLC (Vision). Recognizing Insurer’s right to subrogate against Vision based on the terms of the parties’ lease, the District Court held Insurer owed J&J Fish coverage for the losses it sustained, but that Insurer could subrogate against Vision for anything it had to pay J&J Fish. In J&J Fish, Vision and J&J Fish signed a lease (Lease) for a building (the Building) located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The Lease required Vision to “purchase and keep in full force and effect on the building(s) . . . insurance against fire and such other risks as may be included in all-risks policies . . .” Vision, however, never obtained any insurance on the Building. Pursuant to the Lease, Vision also agreed to “maintain and repair the structure including the slab floor and exterior walls of the Premises.” With respect to J&J Fish, the Lease required J&J Fish to maintain “Physical Damage insurance, including but not limited to fire . . . and all other risks of direct physical loss as insured . . . for the full replacement cost of all additions, improvements (including leasehold improvements) and alterations to the Premises.” J&J Fish purchased a commercial property and casualty insurance policy (the Policy) from Insurer. The Policy covered “additions, improvements . . . and alterations” as the Lease required. In addition, it insured the Building itself against “collapse,” subject to certain exceptions. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    U.S. District Court of Colorado Interprets Insurance Policy’s Faulty Workmanship Exclusion and Exception for Ensuing Damage

    August 15, 2022 —
    Recently, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado interpreted a faulty workmanship exclusion in a property insurance policy in The Lodge at Mountain Village Owner Association v. Eighteen Certain Underwriters of Lloyd’s of London, 22 U.S Dist. Ct LEXIS 48883*, decided on March 18, 2022. The Court held that the faulty workmanship exclusion at issue extended to preclude coverage for later ensuing damage that arose from the faulty workmanship, even though the damage was weather related, because faulty workmanship was the primary cause of the ensuing damage. The claims in The Lodge at Mountain Village arose from maintenance work performed on log siding at three multi-unit condominium buildings in Telluride. The maintenance work to the log siding included staining, finishing, and chinking repairs to joints between the logs. About a year after completion of the work, The Lodge at Mountain Village Owners Association (“The Lodge”) notified the maintenance contractor that logs were extremely weathered and that its work was defective. The Lodge retained an expert who prepared a report stating that the log finish and underlying wood was deteriorating because of the contractor’s work and that some areas were not properly protected from exposure to snow, rain, and brine from ice-melting salt. The Lodge pursued and settled its claims against the contractor. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Carin Ramirez, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Ramirez may be contacted at ramirez@hhmrlaw.com

    Supreme Court’s New York Harbor Case Isn’t a ‘Sopranos’ Episode

    August 03, 2022 —
    The long-simmering harbor dispute between New York and New Jersey has observers reaching for illustrations from “The Sopranos” and “On the Waterfront.” But now that the US Supreme Court has agreed to adjudicate the spat, I wonder whether a more useful resource might be “The Paper Chase.” The disagreement stems from New Jersey’s determination to exit the Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, an entity established by the two states back in 1953 in response to news reports of widespread corruption and violence among those who loaded and unloaded ships. New Jersey argues that as a sovereign state, it can’t be forced to remain in the pact forever. New York replies that the deal has the force of law and neither state can quit without the permission of the other. (And Congress!) The Supreme Court is now involved because that’s the venue the Constitution prescribes when one state sues another. Four days before New Jersey’s announced departure date of March 28, the justices issued an injunction preventing the move. This week they agreed to adjudicate the dispute and set an accelerated schedule for briefs and oral argument. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stephen L. Carter, Bloomberg

    Editorial: Qatar Is Champion of Safety Hypocrisy in Migrant Worker Deaths

    December 26, 2022 —
    Once the World Cup soccer tournament concludes, decency dictates that someone should put a wrecking ball to Qatar’s Al Bayt and Lusail stadiums, where the opening ceremonies and matches were held. There’s no polite way to say it: bulldozing the World Cup sports facilities is the only way to amplify to the world the cost in migrant construction workers lives in all that was constructed. Reprinted courtesy of ENR Editorial Board, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story...

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

    October 24, 2022 —
    The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has renewed its effort to combat discrimination and harassment in the construction industry, filing in September four federal lawsuits against construction employers, including major specialty contractors such as erector Schuff Steel and mechanical contractor J.A. Croson. Each has been charged with violating federal laws against racial harassment in the workplace. Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the full story...

    Co-Housing Startups Fly in the Face of Old-School NYC Housing Law

    December 18, 2022 —
    A room in an eight-bedroom Bed-Stuy brownstone with “charming views.” A five-bedroom “modern Manhattan” home. In a housing market as hot as New York City’s, these units advertised on co-housing companies’ websites sound promising. According to the city’s housing regulations, however, neither is legal. That hasn’t stopped companies from offering the rooms, as renters clamor for affordable living space. With the average studio apartment in Manhattan going for nearly $3,100 a month, newcomers to the city often find living with multiple roommates to be their best affordable-housing option. It’s a trend that startups have jumped on, and one some experts endorse as a way to quickly scale up affordable housing — even though municipal housing laws aren’t on board yet. The reality is that in many cities, housing laws that limit the number of unrelated individuals in a dwelling are still in place. New York, for instance, doesn’t allow more than three unrelated people to live in the same unit. To be sure, New Yorkers often break that law, as expensive housing forces people to find roommates through friends or on sites like Craigslist. But multimillion-dollar companies breaking that law is new.  Reprinted courtesy of Amelia Pollard, Bloomberg and Diego Lasarte, Bloomberg Read the full story...

    Claim for Punitive Damages Based on Insurers' Alleged Bad Faith Business Practices Fails

    September 05, 2022 —
    The court granted the insurer's motion to dismiss the bad faith claim based upon allegations of a general business practice of acting recklessly toward an insured's rights under the policy. Sandpiper Isle Condo. Ass'n v. Empire Indem. Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114279 (M.D. Fla. June 28, 2022). Sandpiper suffered property damage from Hurricane Irma. Empire accepted the claim but there was disagreement on the value of the damage. An appraisal issued an award in favor of Sandpiper but Empire failed to pay the benefits for two years. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    California Court Forces Insurer to Play Ball in COVID-19 Insurance Coverage Suit

    December 13, 2022 —
    One of the threshold issues in COVID-19 insurance coverage cases that have been brought across the country is whether the policyholder’s allegations meet the applicable pleading standard in alleging that the virus caused physical loss or damage. In many cases, the courts have gotten it wrong, effectively holding policyholders to a higher standard than required. But recently, a California federal judge righted those wrongs by acknowledging the correct pleading standard in that case, which is whether the allegations state a plausible claim for relief. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009). The Court, here, correctly recognized that the policyholder, the Los Angeles Lakers, met that pleading standard when it alleged that the COVID-19 virus can cause physical loss or damage by physically altering property. In its complaint, the Los Angeles Lakers alleged that the virus physically altered its property by changing its chemical and physical property conditions, creating viral vectors that required remedial measures before the property was safe again. Los Angeles Lakers, Inc. v. Fed. Ins. Co., 591 F. Supp. 3d 672 (C.D. Cal. 2022), adhered to on reconsideration, 2022 WL 16571193 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 26, 2022). The Court agreed that these allegations by the Lakers adequately pled physical alteration to support a claim for property damage. The insurer requested reconsideration of the decision, and the Court emphatically affirmed its prior decision, explaining its rationale as follows: The Court lacks the scientific expertise necessary to conclude, based solely on the allegations in the FAC . . . that it is not plausible for the Lakers’ property to have been physically altered by the Virus, which the Lakers adequately alleged. Consequently, the Court, in the March 17 Order, concluded that the Lakers’ theory was plausible. Whether the Lakers can actually prove its theory will be determined at summary judgment or trial. Reprinted courtesy of Latosha M. Ellis, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Yosef Itkin, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Ellis may be contacted at lellis@HuntonAK.com Mr. Itkin may be contacted at yitkin@HuntonAK.com Read the full story...