• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort expert witness Cedar Grove Florida tract home expert witness Cedar Grove Florida townhome construction expert witness Cedar Grove Florida parking structure expert witness Cedar Grove Florida custom home expert witness Cedar Grove Florida mid-rise construction expert witness Cedar Grove Florida custom homes expert witness Cedar Grove Florida industrial building expert witness Cedar Grove Florida landscaping construction expert witness Cedar Grove Florida production housing expert witness Cedar Grove Florida multi family housing expert witness Cedar Grove Florida high-rise construction expert witness Cedar Grove Florida low-income housing expert witness Cedar Grove Florida institutional building expert witness Cedar Grove Florida retail construction expert witness Cedar Grove Florida structural steel construction expert witness Cedar Grove Florida Subterranean parking expert witness Cedar Grove Florida Medical building expert witness Cedar Grove Florida concrete tilt-up expert witness Cedar Grove Florida housing expert witness Cedar Grove Florida office building expert witness Cedar Grove Florida hospital construction expert witness Cedar Grove Florida
    Cedar Grove Florida construction defect expert witnessCedar Grove Florida building code expert witnessCedar Grove Florida construction expert witness public projectsCedar Grove Florida expert witness roofingCedar Grove Florida construction expert testimonyCedar Grove Florida construction cost estimating expert witnessCedar Grove Florida defective construction expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Cedar Grove, 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 Cedar Grove 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

    Cedar Grove Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Cedar Grove Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Cedar Grove Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Cedar Grove Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Cedar Grove Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Cedar Grove Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Cedar Grove Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Cedar Grove Florida

    New California Construction Law for 2019

    Los Angeles Considering Census of Seismically Unstable Buildings

    That Boilerplate Language May Just Land You in Hot Water

    Appeals Court Affirms Carrier’s Duty to Pay Costs Taxed Against Insured in Construction Defect Suit

    Ireland Said to Plan Home Loans Limits to Prevent Bubble

    Sobering Facts for Construction Safety Day

    Insured's Experts Excluded, But Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied

    Changes to Pennsylvania Mechanic’s Lien Code

    Lump Sum Subcontract? Perhaps Not.

    Experts Weigh In on Bilingual Best Practices for Jobsites

    Autovol’s Affordable Housing Project with Robotic Automation

    Retired Judge Claims Asbestos in Courthouse gave him Cancer

    Building with Recycled Plastics – Interview with Jeff Mintz of Envirolastech

    Proposition 65: OEHHA to Consider Adding and Delisting Certain Chemicals of Concern

    Construction Recovery Still Soft in New Hampshire

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co.

    South Carolina Legislature Defines "Occurrence" To Include Property Damage Arising From Faulty Workmanship

    Mobile Home Owners Not a Class in Drainage Lawsuit

    Tighter Requirements and a New Penalty for Owners of Vacant or Abandoned Storefronts in San Francisco

    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem

    Haight’s Sacramento Office Has Moved

    Developer’s Failure to Plead Amount of Damages in Cross-Complaint Fatal to Direct Action Against Subcontractor’s Insurers Based on Default Judgment

    Settlement Payment May Preclude Finding of Policy Exhaustion: Scottsdale v. National Union

    Construction Defect Litigation at San Diego’s Alicante Condominiums?

    NYC Supertall Tower Condo Board Sues Over Alleged Construction, Design 'Defects'

    When Can a General Contractor’s Knowledge be Imputed to a Developer?

    Colorado Legislature Kills SB 20-138 – A Bill to Extend Colorado’s Statute of Repose

    United States Supreme Court Limits Class Arbitration

    Elon Musk’s Proposed Vegas Strip Transit System Advanced by City Council Vote

    Claim for Vandalism Loss Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    The Risks and Rewards of Sustainable Building Design

    NY Estimating Consultant Settles $3.1M Government Project Fraud Case

    Building Growth Raises Safety Concerns

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Housing Starts in U.S. Climb to an Almost Eight-Year High

    New Illinois Supreme Court Trigger Rule for CGL Personal Injury “Offenses” Could Have Costly Consequences for Policyholders

    U.S. Home Lending Set to Bounce Back in 2015 After Slump

    How a Robot-Built Habitat on Mars Could Change Construction on Earth

    Federal Court Dismisses Coverage Action in Favor of Pending State Proceeding

    Limiting Liability: Three Clauses to Consider in your Next Construction Contract

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    Federal Subcontractor Who Failed to Follow FAR Regulations Finds That “Fair” and “Just” are Not Synonymous

    Ninth Circuit Affirms Duty to Defend CERCLA Section 104 (e) Letter

    Client Alert: Stipulated Judgment For Full Amount Of Underlying Claim As Security For Compromise Settlement Void As Unenforceable Penalty

    Safety Data: Noon Presents the Hour of Greatest Danger

    Oregon Construction Firm Sued for Construction Defects

    Trump Soho May Abandon Condos to Operate Mainly as Hotel

    Plans Go High Tech
    Corporate Profile


    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Cedar Grove, Florida Construction Expert Witness Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Cedar Grove'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.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Cedar Grove, Florida

    Good News on Prices for Some Construction Materials

    June 28, 2021 —
    The elevated price of softwood lumber, a major talking point during much of the pandemic, appears to have peaked in early May at more than $1,700 per thousand board feet. As of June 23, the price has fallen below $900 per board feet, down about 49% in less than two months. That’s still an unusually lofty price by historic standards—prices remain almost twice as high as in February 2020—but the trend is very much in the right direction. Builders that had been hoarding lumber have now begun to sell from their own inventory, other builders have delayed lumber purchases in anticipation of lower prices and sawmill operators have been adding shifts, as well as expanding capacity, all of which puts downward pressure on prices. Reprinted courtesy of ABC, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    April 26, 2021 —
    Subcontractor claims happen. When those subcontractor claims are prompted by owner actions or responsibilities, the general contractor must always be vigilant to plan for and work to avoid a two-front war in which the general contractor is pushing the owner for recovery while at the same time disputing the subcontractor’s entitlement. Cooperation between the general contractor and the subcontractor and avoiding that two-front war can be accomplished through pass-through claims and ideally liquidating agreements. A pass-through claim is a claim by the subcontractor who has suffered damages by the owner with whom it has no contract, presented by the general contractor. A liquidating agreement or subcontract “liquidating language” goes a step further than simply a pass-through claim by “liquidating” the general contractor’s liability for the subcontractor’s claim and limiting the general contractor’s liability to the value recovered against the owner. The distinction between pass-through claims generally and use of liquidating agreements or language is described in greater detail below. Pass-through subcontractor claims are routine in construction and an important, common sense approach to deal with ever-present changes and the unexpected that can have cost and time implications. Despite the common sense basis for subcontractor pass-through claims, there are important legal considerations that must be addressed, and critical planning required, starting with the subcontract clauses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bradley Sands, Jones Walker LLP
    Mr. Sands may be contacted at

    When Employer’s Liability Coverage May Be Limited in New York

    June 28, 2021 —
    New York recognizes that coverage under Workers’ Compensation (“WC”) and Employer’s Liability (“EL”) policies is generally unlimited. See Tully Const. Co. v. Illinois Nat. Ins. Co., 131 A.D.3d 598 (2d Dept. 2015); Oneida Ltd. v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co., 263 A.D.2d 825, 694 N.Y.S.2d 221 (3d Dept. 1999). However, there is case holding that EL coverage may be limited in certain instances, such as when the primary EL carrier is listed as scheduled underlying insurance on an excess policy. In Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Ins. Co. of State of Pennsylvania, 43 A.D.3d 666, 841 N.Y.S.2d 288 (1st Dept. 2007), an employee of General Industrial Service Corporation (“General”), a subcontractor on a construction project, sought to recover under New York’s Labor Law against the project’s owner and construction manager. Those defendants, in turn, brought a third-party action for indemnification against General. The employee’s personal injury claim was ultimately settled for $2.5 million. After the settlement, the excess insurer, Liberty, filed suit against the primary employer’s liability insurers, The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania and American International Group of Companies (collectively, “AIG”), which had refused to participate in the defense or settlement of the underlying personal injury litigation. Although the issue of whether the plaintiff in the underling action had sustained a “grave injury” (necessary to support the common law indemnity claim against General and trigger coverage under the Employer’s Lability policy) had not yet been determined, the court held that “[i]n the event the existence of a grave injury is proven, AIG’s liability will be limited to $1 million.” Reprinted courtesy of Robert S. Nobel, Traub Lieberman and Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman Mr. Nobel may be contacted at Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Recommendations for Property Owners After A Hurricane: Submit a Claim

    October 04, 2021 —
    If you suffered damage as a result of a hurricane, you should submit a claim under any insurance policy you have that might apply. This includes:
    • Flood insurance
    • Homeowner’s insurance
    • Renter’s insurance
    • Condo insurance
    • Auto insurance
    Steps for Handling Your Hurricane Insurance Claim
    1. Submit Your Claim. As soon as possible, provide a written notice of claim to your insurer according to the notice provision of your policy. Keep a copy for your records. If you don’t have a copy of your policy, call the insurance company, ask them how to submit your claim, and request a copy of your policy.
    Reprinted courtesy of Kelly A. Johnson, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, Stephanie A. Giagnorio, Saxe Doernberger & Vita and Gregory D. Podolak, Saxe Doernberger & Vita Ms. Johnson may be contacted at Ms. Giagnorio may be contacted at Mr. Podolak may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Team Secures Appellate Victory on Behalf of Celebrity Comedian Kathy Griffin in Dispute with Bel Air Neighbor

    August 04, 2021 —
    San Diego Appellate Partner Jeffry A. Miller, Indian Wells Appellate Partner Wendy S. Dowse, and Los Angeles Partners Dana Alden Fox and Michael Moss recently prevailed in an appeal from a judgment entered after the trial court granted Lewis Brisbois clients Kathy Griffin and Randy Bick, Jr.’s motion for summary adjudication of the plaintiffs’ causes of action for invasion of privacy and violation of California Penal Code section 632, which prohibits recording confidential communications. As reported by Law360 in an article titled "Kathy Griffin Beats Calif. Neighbors' Backyard Spying Suit," and in a Bloomberg Law article titled "Comedian Kathy Griffin Beats Neighbor’s Invasion of Privacy Suit," the plaintiffs initially filed suit against Griffin and Bick, Jr. in 2018, alleging that their home security cameras recorded “every move and every communication” in the plaintiffs’ private backyard. They argued that the defendants' use of the security system invaded their privacy and violated California law. Prior to the lawsuit, Griffin and Bick, Jr. had made noise complaints about the plaintiffs to their homeowners' association and to the Los Angeles Police Department. The plaintiffs learned of the defendants' security cameras after a profane rant directed at the defendants and related to their noise complaint was recorded and reported in the media. Reprinted courtesy of Jeffry Miller, Lewis Brisbois, Wendy Dowse, Lewis Brisbois, Dana Fox, Lewis Brisbois and Michael Moss, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Miller may be contacted at Ms. Dowse may be contacted at Mr. Fox may be contacted at Mr. Moss may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Keep it Simple with Nunn-Agreements in Colorado

    June 28, 2021 —
    On May 24, 2021, the Colorado Supreme Court published its decision in Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Bolt Factory Lofts Owners Ass'n.[1] There, the Colorado Supreme Court was tasked with answering whether an insurer, who is defending its insured under a reservation of rights, is entitled to intervene as of right under C.R.C.P. 24(a)(2) where the insured enters into a Nunn agreement with a third-party claimant, but rather than entering into a stipulated judgment, agrees with the third party to proceed via an uncontested trial to determine liability and damages. Interestingly, however, while the Court ultimately answered the above question in the negative, the real lesson from the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision is that Colorado litigants should not seek a trial court’s blessing as to liability and damages through non-adversarial proceedings when using Nunn-Agreements. Or, as articulated in Justice Carlos Samour’s vociferous dissenting opinion, Colorado litigants desiring to enter into a Nunn-Agreement should not proceed with a non-adversarial hearing, as doing so is “offensive to the dignity of the courts,” constitutes a “bogus,” “faux,” “sham” and “counterfeit” proceeding, and the hearing provides “zero benefit.” By way of background, the case arrived in front of the Colorado Supreme Court based on the following fact pattern. A homeowner association (Bolt Factory Lofts Owners Association, Inc.) (“Association”) brought construction defect claims against a variety of prime contractors and those contractors subsequently brought third-party construction defect claims against subcontractors. One of the prime contractors assigned their claims against a subcontractor by the name Sierra Glass Co., Inc. (“Sierra”) to the Association. The other claims between the additional parties settled. On the eve of trial involving only the Association’s assigned claims against Sierra, the Association made a settlement demand to Sierra for $1.9 million. Sierra asked its insurance carrier, Auto-Owners Insurance, Co. (“AOIC”), which had been defending Sierra under a reservation of rights letter, to settle the case for that amount, but AOIC refused. This prompted Sierra to enter into a “Nunn-Agreement” with the Association whereby the case would proceed to trial, Sierra would refrain from offering a defense at trial, the Association would not pursue any recovery against Sierra for the judgment, and Sierra would assign any insurance bad faith claims it may have had against AOIC to the Association. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jean Meyer, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Meyer may be contacted at

    Virtual Jury Trials of Construction Disputes: The Necessary Union of Both Sides of the Brain

    May 17, 2021 —
    Bart Smith is the Senior Project Manager for Simply Best, a general contracting firm. He has been assigned to serve as the liaison with outside counsel in a lawsuit against Holly’s Harleys, a project owner who contracted with Best for the construction of a motorcycle showroom. Best filed suit in federal court for additional project costs it incurred, which it contends were caused by the specification of incompatible materials by Holly’s design firm. The coronavirus pandemic is still raging as the trial date approaches. Courthouse facilities are closed so civil trials are conducted using remote technology, if they occur at all. Bart negotiated the prime contract with Holly’s, and he regrettably allowed Best’s binding arbitration and jury trial waiver clauses in the prime contract to be deleted. Bart worries about how the intricacies of Best’s case can be adequately explained to a jury in a remote trial. His concern approaches panic when Best’s trial counsel explains how the trial will be conducted with none of the parties—their attorneys, the judge, the witnesses or the jury—present in the same location. Reprinted courtesy of John Dannecker, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    12 Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2022 U.S. News Best Lawyers in Multiple Practice Areas

    August 23, 2021 —
    Prominent business and real estate law firm Newmeyer Dillion is pleased to announce that twelve of the firm's attorneys were recently selected for inclusion and will be recognized in their respective areas in The Best Lawyers in America© 2022. Additionally, Greg Dillion has been selected to Best Lawyers 2022 Lawyer of the Year list in Construction Law. The twelve 2022 Best Lawyers are: Jason Moberly Caruso, Michael S. Cucchissi, Jeffrey M. Dennis, Greg L. Dillion, Joseph A. Ferrentino, Jon J. Janecek, Michael B. McClellan, Thomas F. Newmeyer, John A. O'Hara, Thomas H. Reilly, Bonnie T. Roadarmel and Jane M. Samson Best Lawyers is the oldest peer-review publication for the legal profession. Attorneys are chosen through intensive peer-review surveys in which leading lawyers evaluate their professional peers. Best Lawyers listings are published in almost 70 countries worldwide and are recognized for their reliable and unbiased selections. About Newmeyer Dillion For over 35 years, Newmeyer Dillion has delivered creative and outstanding legal solutions and trial results that achieve client objectives in diverse industries. With over 60 attorneys working as a cohesive team to represent clients in all aspects of business, employment, real estate, environmental/land use, privacy & data security and insurance law, Newmeyer Dillion delivers holistic and integrated legal services tailored to propel each client's operations, growth, and profits. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, with offices in Walnut Creek, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, Newmeyer Dillion attorneys are recognized by The Best Lawyers in America©, and Super Lawyers as top tier and some of the best lawyers in California and Nevada, and have been given Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review's AV Preeminent® highest rating. For additional information, call 949.854.7000 or visit Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of