BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building expert witness Orange Park Florida condominium expert witness Orange Park Florida condominiums expert witness Orange Park Florida hospital construction expert witness Orange Park Florida multi family housing expert witness Orange Park Florida Medical building expert witness Orange Park Florida low-income housing expert witness Orange Park Florida Subterranean parking expert witness Orange Park Florida concrete tilt-up expert witness Orange Park Florida housing expert witness Orange Park Florida production housing expert witness Orange Park Florida custom homes expert witness Orange Park Florida structural steel construction expert witness Orange Park Florida landscaping construction expert witness Orange Park Florida townhome construction expert witness Orange Park Florida retail construction expert witness Orange Park Florida custom home expert witness Orange Park Florida office building expert witness Orange Park Florida high-rise construction expert witness Orange Park Florida tract home expert witness Orange Park Florida institutional building expert witness Orange Park Florida mid-rise construction expert witness Orange Park Florida
    Orange Park Florida architectural engineering expert witnessOrange Park Florida architecture expert witnessOrange Park Florida expert witness windowsOrange Park Florida engineering expert witnessOrange Park Florida hospital construction expert witnessOrange Park Florida contractor expert witnessOrange Park Florida building code expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Orange Park, 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 Orange Park Florida

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Panama City (Fla)
    Local # 1042
    PO Box 979
    Panama City, FL 32402
    Orange Park Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Orange Park Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Orange Park Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Orange Park Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Orange Park Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Orange Park Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Forgotten Coast Builders Assoc
    Local # 1015
    PO Box 1005
    Port Saint Joe, FL 32457

    Orange Park Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Orange Park Florida


    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 5: Valuation of Loss, Sublimits, and Amount of Potential Recovery

    Goldberg Segalla Welcomes William L. Nimick

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

    Governor Inslee’s Recent Vaccination Mandate Applies to Many Construction Contractors and their Workers

    Apartment Building Damaged by Cable Installer’s Cherry Picker

    Industrialized Construction News 7/2022

    Measures Landlords and Property Managers Can Take in Response to a Reported COVID-19 Infection

    Third Circuit Limits Pennsylvania’s Kvaerner Decision; Unexpected and Unintended Injury May Constitute an “Occurrence” Under Pennsylvania Law

    Unintended Consequences of New Building Products and Services

    Existence of “Duty” in Negligence Action is Question of Law

    Napa Quake Seen Costing Up to $4 Billion as Wineries Shut

    Hawaii Federal District Rejects Another Construction Defect Claim

    So, You Have a Judgment Against a California Contractor or Subcontractor. What Next? How Can I Enforce Payment?

    California Clarifies Its Inverse Condemnation Standard

    Assessing Defective Design Liability on Federal Design-Build Projects

    Incorporation, Indemnity and Statutes of Limitations, Oh My!

    Meritage Acquires Legendary Communities

    Water Damage: Construction’s Often Unnoticed Threat

    Expansion of Statutes of Limitations and Repose in K-12 and Municipal Construction Contracts

    Seattle Expands Bridge Bioswale Projects

    Disgruntled Online Reviews of Attorney by Disgruntled Former Client Ordered Removed from Yelp.com

    South Caroline Holds Actual Cash Value Can Include Depreciation of Labor Costs

    Everyone's Moving to Seattle, and It's Stressing Out Sushi Lovers

    Yet Another Reminder that Tort and Contract Don’t Mix

    Alaska Supreme Court Finds Insurer Owes No Independent Duty to Injured Party

    Tick Tock: Don’t Let the Statute of Repose or Limitations Time Periods Run on Your Construction Claims

    The Louvre Abu Dhabi’s Mega-Structure Domed Roof Completed

    “Details Matter” is the Foundation in a Texas Construction Defect Suit

    Crowdfunding Comes to Manhattan’s World Trade Center

    Injured Subcontractor Employee Asserts Premise Liability Claim Against General Contractor

    "Multiple Claims" Provisions on Contractor's Professional Liability Policy Creates a Trap for Policyholders

    Gene Witkin Celebrates First Anniversary as Member of Ross Hart’s Mediation Team

    Insurer’s “Failure to Cooperate” Defense

    Quick Note: Not In Contract With The Owner? Serve A Notice To Owner.

    Texas contractual liability exclusion

    BWBO Celebrating Attorney Award and Two New Partners

    Basement Foundation Systems’ Getting an Overhaul

    Payment Bond Claim Notice Requires More than Mailing

    Minnesota Supreme Court Dismisses Vikings Stadium Funding Lawsuit

    17 Snell & Wilmer Attorneys Ranked In The 2019 Legal Elite Edition Of Nevada Business Magazine

    Depreciation of Labor in Calculating Actual Cash Value Against Public Policy

    Surviving the Construction Law Backlog: Nontraditional Approaches to Resolution

    Presidential Memorandum Promotes Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West

    Modular Homes Test Energy Efficiency Standards

    Conflicting Exclusions Result in Duty to Defend

    Damron Agreement Questioned in Colorado Casualty Insurance v Safety Control Company, et al.

    Home Prices Rose in Fewer U.S. Markets in Fourth Quarter

    CA Senate Report States Caltrans ‘Gagged and Banished’ its Critics

    Happenings in and around the West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Colorado Court Holds No Coverage for Breach of Contract Claim
    Corporate Profile

    ORANGE PARK FLORIDA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Orange Park, 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 Orange Park'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.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Orange Park, Florida

    Tech to Help Contractors Avoid Litigation

    November 01, 2022 —
    Risk mitigation is a bigger part of managing construction projects than most people outside the industry realize. Construction is a risky business by nature. However, with the right tools, contractors can protect their businesses from costly litigation and keep jobsites safer and more productive. Modern technology helps increase project visibility for internal and external stakeholders, helping them monitor risks and resolve potential issues as quickly as possible. How does increased visibility reduce risk? The most common causes of litigation in construction are quality issues, schedule delays and injuries. Each of these risks can be reduced with better communication and documentation. Reprinted courtesy of Brian Poage, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    A Lack of Sophistication With the Construction Contract Can Play Out In an Ugly Dispute

    November 07, 2022 —
    There are times where a lack of sophistication can come back to haunt you. This is not referring to a lack of sophistication of the parties. The parties, themselves, could be quite sophisticated. This is referring to a lack of sophistication with the construction contract forming the basis of the relationship. While parties don’t always want to buy into the contract drafting and negotiation process, it is oftentimes the first document reviewed. Because contract terms and conditions are important. They govern the relationship, the risk, scope, amount, and certain outcomes with disputes. However, a lack of sophistication can play out when that contract that should govern the relationship, the risk, the scope, the amount, and certain outcomes doesn’t actually do that, or if it does, it does it poorly. An example of how bad a dispute can play out when it comes to the lack of sophistication on the front end is Avant Design Group, Inc. v. Aquastar Holdings, LLC, 2022 WL 6852227 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022), where a cost-plus contract was treated as a lump sum contract. Here, an owner planned to perform an extensive interior build-out to a residential unit. The owner had an out-of-country architect; because the architect was not licensed in Florida, the owner hired a local architect/designer to oversee construction and obtain goods and services for the residential interior build-out. The contract was nothing but a proposal of items and costs. The proposal stated the owner “would pay the cost of goods and services of the vendors, plus pay a ‘20% Interior Design & Administrative Fee’” to the local designer. Avant Design Group, 2022 WL at *1. The proposal further stated, “This preliminary budget of the Client’s construction costs include [sic] anticipated costs for construction materials, labor and sales tax. Any other cost, including but not limited to freight, cartage, shipping, receiving, storage and delivery are not included in the preliminary budget and will be invoiced separately.” Id., n.2. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Late Notice Bars Insured's Claim for Loss Caused by Hurricane

    October 24, 2022 —
    The court found that the failure to provide prompt notice of damage caused by Hurricane Irma barred plaintiff's claim for coverage. Garcia v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149312 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 18, 2022). On September 10, 2017, plaintiff's property allegedly suffered damage due to Hurricane Irma. Shortly thereafter, plaintiff observed a water stain on the ceiling of the bedroom which was painted over. She did not take any pictures of the water stain before repainting. Plaintiff reported to her experts that she observed other water stains in various areas in 2017, 2018 and 2019, and that she painted over them each time. She again observed water stains in several rooms in 2020, at which time she became aware of the magnitude of the problem and went to an attorney. Plaintiff did not report her claim until May 27, 2020. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Subsequent Purchaser Can Assert Claims for Construction Defects

    October 17, 2022 —
    Can a subsequent purchaser pursue construction defect claims relating to the original construction of the property? This was the threshold issue on a motion for summary judgment by a drywall manufacturer against a subsequent purchaser of a home in Karpel v. Knauf Gips KG, 2022 WL 4366946 (S.D. Fla. 2022). This matter deals with the defective Chinese drywall that was installed in homes years ago. The plaintiffs, which were subsequent purchasers of a home, sued the manufacturer of the defective drywall for various theories including negligence, negligence per se, strict liability, breach of express and/or implied warranty, private nuisance, unjust enrichment, and Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. The trial court noted, from the onset, that Florida does NOT have a subsequent purchaser rule that prohibits subsequent purchasers from asserting construction defect claims. With this consideration in mind, the trial court went through the claims the plaintiff, as a subsequent purchaser, asserted against the manufacturer to determine whether they were viable claims as a matter of law. Negligence Claim The trial court found that a subsequent purchaser could sue in negligence. “Florida courts have long allowed subsequent purchasers to sue for negligence including in construction defect litigation.” Karpel, supra, at *2. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Contractors Should be Aware of Homeowner Duties When Invited to Perform Residential Work

    September 26, 2022 —
    Division 2 of the Court of Appeals[1] recently addressed a property owner’s liability to a contractor who is injured performing work on their property. The action arose from an incident in which Virgil Mihaila, a remodeling contractor, fell from a ladder while installing a new roof on the Troths’ shed and landed on a metal grounding rod that was sticking over a foot out of the ground. Mihaila saw the grounding rod as he was working and recognized the danger, but he claimed that he could not complete the roofing job without encountering it. Although he tried to position his ladder so that he would avoid the grounding rod if he fell, he somehow fell off the ladder and landed on the grounding rod, sustaining multiple rib fractures and a punctured lung. Mihaila filed a complaint against the Troths, alleging that they were negligent in failing to protect him from the danger of the grounding rod sticking out of the ground. The Troths denied that they were negligent and asserted the affirmative defense of contributory negligence. The Troths filed a motion for summary judgment, which the trial court granted, stating that summary judgment was appropriate regarding the Troths’ duty because Mihaila “became aware of the risk, undertook to encounter the risk, and made his own efforts to mitigate the risk.” The trial court denied Mihaila’s motion for reconsideration and Mihaila appealed. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joshua Lane, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Lane may be contacted at joshua.lane@acslawyers.com

    PSA: Pay If Paid Ban Goes into Effect on January 1, 2023

    December 05, 2022 —
    I have written a couple of times here at Musings regarding the new pay-if-paid legislation passed by the General Assembly last session. While the statute has some inconsistencies and a working group has made some recommendations, the legislation as passed will go into effect on January 1, 2023, without any changes (at least until next session). As always, such action by our legislature here in Virginia will create work for construction attorneys assisting their clients to amend contracts to meet the new rules. Essentially (and with minor inconsistencies between public and private contracts), the bill requires that any construction contract entered into after January 1, 2023 have the following provisions:
    • On public projects: A payment clause that obligates a contractor on a construction contract to be liable for the entire amount owed to any subcontractor with which it contracts. Such contractor shall not be liable for amounts otherwise reducible due to the subcontractor’s noncompliance with the terms of the contract. However, in the event that the contractor withholds all or a part of the amount promised to the subcontractor under the contract, the contractor shall notify the subcontractor, in writing, of his intention to withhold all or a part of the subcontractor’s payment with the reason for nonpayment.
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Don’t Be Lazy with Your Tenders

    October 24, 2022 —
    Our clients probably spend significant time, money and effort refining and updating their contract provisions covering indemnification and the duty to defend claims arising on their projects. But they should also consider spending an appropriate and adequate amount of time, money and effort when sending notices, or “tenders,” to enforce those critical provisions. Tenders demanding defense and indemnity are strictly interpreted based on what the contract documents require. Getting tenders wrong can result in losing one of the most significant risk-shifting tools in the contract. It can also be a monumental mistake if insurance coverage for indemnification damages and defense costs are lost because of an inadequate tender. The legal definition of “tender” is simple; it is “[a]n unconditional offer of money or performance to satisfy a debt or obligation.” Black’s Law Dictionary 1479-80 (7th ed. 1999). Whereas “tender of defense” for insurance is “the act in which one party places its defense and all costs associated with said defense with another due to a contract or other agreement … [which] transfers the obligation of the defense and possible indemnification to the party to which the tender was made.” Int’l Risk Mgmt. Inst., Glossary. Thus, when claims arise on your projects, notice by tenders of defense and indemnity will often determine dispute resolution and available insurance proceeds. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rick Erickson, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Erickson may be contacted at rerickson@swlaw.com

    Court Finds That $400 Million Paid Into Abatement Fund Qualifies as “Damages” Under the Insured’s Policies

    November 21, 2022 —
    In Sherwin-Williams Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, et al., the Court of Appeals for Ohio’s Eighth District reversed the lower court, finding that money paid by the insured into an abatement fund was “damages” as that undefined term was used in the policyholder’s insurance policies. 2022-Ohio-3031, ¶ 1. Sherwin-Williams is a cautionary tale about how insurers may try to narrow the meaning of undefined terms in their insurance policies. The dispute in Sherwin-Williams focused on coverage for $400 million that the policyholder and other defendants were ordered to pay into an abatement fund to be used by California cities and counties to mitigate the hazards caused by lead paint in homes. Id. ¶ 1. Although the underlying litigation proceeded in California, Ohio law governed coverage, which raised issues of first impression in Ohio. Id. Among other things, the insurers argued that the money paid into the abatement fund did not qualify as “damages” under the policies. Id. ¶ 57. The insured argued that, because the insurers did not define “damages” in the policies, the term had to be given its ordinary meaning. Id. ¶ 56. Reprinted courtesy of Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Yaniel Abreu, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Mr. Abreu may be contacted at yabreu@HuntonAK.com Read the full story...