BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida mid-rise construction expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida townhome construction expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida structural steel construction expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida office building expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida production housing expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida multi family housing expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida tract home expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida industrial building expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida Medical building expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida condominium expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida housing expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida custom homes expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida institutional building expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida hospital construction expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida parking structure expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida Subterranean parking expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida retail construction expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida casino resort expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida condominiums expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida high-rise construction expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida landscaping construction expert witness Ponce de Leon Florida
    Ponce de Leon Florida construction expert witnessesPonce de Leon Florida expert witness roofingPonce de Leon Florida consulting engineersPonce de Leon Florida construction defect expert witnessPonce de Leon Florida expert witness concrete failurePonce de Leon Florida expert witnesses fenestrationPonce de Leon Florida structural concrete expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Ponce de Leon, 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 Ponce de Leon 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

    Ponce de Leon Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Ponce de Leon Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Ponce de Leon Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Ponce de Leon Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Ponce de Leon Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Ponce de Leon Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Ponce de Leon Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Ponce de Leon Florida


    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Listed in the Best Lawyers in America© 2017

    New Jersey Court Washes Away Insurer’s Waiver of Subrogation Arguments

    2019’s Biggest Labor and Employment Moves Affecting Construction

    Serving the 558 Notice of Construction Defect Letter in Light of the Statute of Repose

    Coping with Labor & Install Issues in Green Building

    Court Finds That Split in Underground Storage Tank is Not a Covered Collapse

    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem

    Hong Kong Popping Housing Bubbles London Can’t Handle

    Mass-Timber Furnished Apartments Fare Well in Fire Tests

    Tesla Finishes First Solar Roofs—Including Elon's House

    Construction Industry Survey Says Optimism Hits All-Time High

    Colorado homebuilders target low-income buyers with bogus "affordable housing" bill

    Absence of Property Damage During Policy Period Equates to No Coverage

    Claims for Breach of Express Indemnity Clauses Subject to 10-Year Statute of Limitations

    Homeowner Alleges Pool Construction Is Defective

    Seller Faces Federal Charges for Lying on Real Estate Disclosure Forms

    July Sees Big Drop in Home Sales

    Meet the Hipster Real Estate Developers Building for Millennials

    House Bill Clarifies Start Point for Florida’s Statute of Repose

    Louisiana 13th in List of Defective Bridges

    Predicting Our Future with Andrew Weinreich

    New Jersey Condominium Owners Sue FEMA

    Court Orders City to Pay for Sewer Backups

    Finalists in San Diego’s Moving Parklet Design Competition Announced

    Construction Defect Lawsuit Came too Late in Minnesota

    Former Mayor Arrested for Violating Stop Work Order

    Form Contracts are Great, but. . .

    Welcome to SubTropolis: The Massive Business Complex Buried Under Kansas City

    Windows and Lawsuits Fly at W Hotel

    A Few Green Building Notes

    Civil RICO Case Against Johnny Doc Is Challenging

    Two Things to Consider Before Making Warranty Repairs

    Economic Loss Not Property Damage

    General Contractor’s Excess Insurer Denied Equitable Contribution From Subcontractor’s Excess Insurer

    Study Finds San Francisco Bay is Sinking Faster than Expected

    California Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Commissioner’s Authority to Regulate Replacement Cost Estimates

    20 Years of BHA at West Coast Casualty's CD Seminar: Chronicling BHA's Innovative Exhibits

    Economic Damages Cannot be Based On Speculation

    Denver’s Mayor Addresses Housing and Modifying Construction Defect Law

    Constructive Change Directives / Directed Changes

    2016 California Construction Law Upate

    World Green Building Council Calls for Net-Zero Embodied Carbon in Buildings by 2050

    Do Construction Contracts and Fraud Mix After All?

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    Perrin Construction Defect Claims & Trial Conference

    Construction Up in Northern Ohio

    Dallas Condo Project to Expand

    Eighth Circuit Remands to Determine Applicability of Collapse Exclusion

    Dispute Over Exhaustion of Primary Policy

    2017 California Construction Law Update
    Corporate Profile

    PONCE DE LEON FLORIDA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Ponce de Leon, 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 Ponce de Leon'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
    Ponce de Leon, Florida

    California Supreme Court Holds that Requirement of Prejudice for Late Notice Defense is a Fundamental Public Policy of the State for Choice of Law Analysis

    November 04, 2019 —
    California’s highest court held yesterday in Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Co., that the state’s insurance notice-prejudice rule is a “fundamental public policy” for the purpose of choice of law analyses. This unanimous ruling, issued in response to certified questions from the Ninth Circuit, confirms and emphasizes California’s common law rule that policyholders who provide “late notice” may proceed with their insurance claim, absent a showing by the insurer of substantial prejudice. The California Supreme Court also extended the prejudice requirement, holding that a first-party insurer must show that it was prejudiced before denying coverage under a policy’s “consent provision,” which typically provides that the policyholder must obtain the insurer’s “consent” before incurring costs and expenses. Reprinted courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth attorneys Lorelie S. Masters, Michael S. Levine and Michelle M. Spatz Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Ms. Spatz may be contacted at mspatz@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer's Quote on Coverage for Theft by Hacker Creates Issue of Fact

    December 16, 2019 —
    The appellate court found that the insurer's quote created an issue of fact on whether loss caused by a computer hacker would be covered. Metal Pro Roofing, LLC v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 2019 Ind. App. LEXIS 355 (Ind. Ct. App. Aug. 9, 2019). The insureds, Metal Pro Roofing, LLC and Cornett Restoration, LLC ("LLC's") discovered that their bank accounts had been hacked and over $78,000 stolen. They submitted claims to their insurer, Cincinnati. Coverage was denied, and the LLCs filed suit. Cross-motions for summary judgment were filed, and the court granted summary judgment to Cincinnati. The "Forgery or Alternation" coverage applied to losses resulting directly from the "'forgery' or alteration of checks, drafts, promissory notes, or similar written promises, order or directions to pay a sum of money." "Forgery" was defined as "the signing of the name of another person or organization with the intent to deceive." The LLCs did not cite any evidence that the hacker "signed" anything, let alone that they signed "the name of another person or organization." 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

    DC Circuit Issues Two Important Clean Air Act and Administrative Law Decisions

    December 16, 2019 —
    The U.S. Court of Appeals or the District of Columbia has recently issued two important rulings on the Clean Air Act in particular and administrative law in general: California Communities Against Toxics, et al., v. EPA and Murray Energy Corporation v. EPA. The Battle of the Memos: Seitz Makes Way for Wehrum In the California Communities case, decided on August 20, 2019, the court held, in a 2 to 1 decision, that a petition to review a change in EPA policy announced in an agency memorandum which reversed an agency policy announced nearly 25 years ago in another agency memo must be rejected because the memo at issue was not a “final agency action” subject to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). In 1995, the “Seitz Memo,” which interpreted Section 112 of the Clean Air Act and addresses the regulation and control of hazardous air pollutants from stationary sources, stated that once a source of toxic emissions is classified as “major,” the facility remains subject to regulation as a major source even if the facility makes changes to the facility to limit its potential to emit such toxics below the major source threshold. Then, in 2018 under a new administration, the “Wehrum Memorandum” was issued which reversed this policy and its interpretation of the law. (Both memos were issued without any kind of advance notice or opportunity to comment.) If a source takes steps to limit its potential to emit, then it may be regulated as an area source, and subject to less rigid regulation. The court majority held that the Wehrum Memo was not a final agency action and was not subject to judicial review when it was measured against both prongs of the “finality test” devised by the Supreme Court in the cases of Bennet v. Spear, 520 US 154 (1997) and US Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes, 136 S. Ct. 1807 (2016). While the memo undoubtedly represented the consummation of the agency’s decision-making process, the memo had no direct and appreciable legal consequences, and not therefore being a final action, the case must be dismissed. Judge Rogers filed a strong dissenting opinion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Insurer’s Duty to Indemnify Not Ripe Until Underlying Lawsuit Against Insured Resolved

    February 03, 2020 —
    A liability insurer has two duties: 1) the duty to defend its insured; and 2) the duty to indemnify its insured. With respect to the second duty – the duty to indemnify – this duty is typically “not ripe for adjudication unless and until the insured or putative insured has been held liable in the underlying action.” Hartford Fire Ins Co. v. Beazer Homes, LLC, 2019 WL 5596237, *2 (M.D.Fla. 2019) (internal quotation omitted). For instance, Beazer Homes involved an insurance coverage dispute stemming from construction defects. An owner sued its general contractor for construction defects relating to stucco problems. The general contractor paid for the repairs. The general contractor then sued its stucco subcontractor to recover the costs it incurred. The subcontractor tendered the defense of the lawsuit to its commercial general liability insurer which is defending its insured-subcontractor under the commonly issued reservation of rights. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

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

    December 16, 2019 —
    As the 2019 hurricane season peaks, the Bahamas and the Southeast United States have already endured a catastrophic storm. Hurricane Dorian not only tragically caused loss of life and substantial property damage, but it also led to the cancellation or postponement of major events, resulting in considerable economic losses for affected companies. For instance, Hurricane Dorian forced the cancellation of one of the Rolling Stones’ concerts at Hard Rock Stadium in Miami, as well as the cancellation of R&B singer Chris Brown’s concert in Fort Lauderdale. Dorian also affected the college football game between Florida State University and Boise State University in Jacksonville. Having sold 45,000 tickets to the game, officials were forced to move the game inland to Tallahassee at great expense and effort. The planners, headliners, teams and fans of these and similar events were not the only ones affected by the cancellations and schedule changes. Hotels, restaurants and businesses relying on tourism also were severely impacted by the schedule changes resulting from Hurricane Dorian over Labor Day weekend. Other programming that may have been affected includes conventions and meetings, fairs and festivals, trade shows and exhibitions, or any other corporate events planned to take place outdoors, requiring travel or with ticket-paying audiences. Reprinted courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth attorneys Sergio F. Oehninger, Andrea DeField and Daniel Hentschel Mr. Oehninger may be contacted at soehninger@HuntonAK.com Ms. DeField may be contacted at adefield@HuntonAK.com Mr. Hentschel may be contacted at dhentschel@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Dave McLain named Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants for 2019

    January 20, 2020 —
    The attorneys and staff at Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell are proud to announce that Law Week Colorado named Founding Member Dave McLain as the 2019 People’s Choice for Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants. According to the publication:
    Law Week Colorado asked its readership to weigh in on the best attorneys in just about every practice area we could think of. We received hundreds of responses and sifted through the votes for each category to determine the “People’s Choice” winner – the top attorney in each practice area according to other attorneys. And then we handed it to the “Barrister” (the hive mind of Law Week staff, supplemented by public votes and a healthy dose of additional research) to determine the Barrister’s Choice.
    In recognizing Mr. McLain this year, Law Week Colorado stated:
    Previously appearing in Law Week’s 2015 Barrister’s Best issue [in which he was recognized as the Barrister’s Choice as Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants], David McLain participates in numerous speaking engagements on construction defects claims and is seen as a leader in the field. His extensive experience over the last two decades of practice speaks for itself.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Partner Jonathan R. Harwood Obtained Summary Judgment in a Case Involving a Wedding Guest Injured in a Fall

    December 30, 2019 —
    On September 30, 2019, Traub Lieberman partner Jonathan Harwood obtained summary judgment in an action involving a guest injured in a fall at a wedding. Traub Lieberman’s client owned the property where the fall occurred. Plaintiff fell while exiting a row of seats after the bridal party had recessed down the aisle. Plaintiff claimed that she tripped over the raised side of a paper runner that had been placed in the aisle at the property. Plaintiff brought an action against Traub Lieberman’s client (the owner of the building) and the florist that had provided the runner. The owner had provided the bridal party with access to the property but did not assist in the set up for the wedding or have any employees present during the ceremony. The florist had supplied the runner for the wedding. The florist commenced a third-party action against the bride, whose wedding party had actually placed the runner in the aisle. Plaintiff asserted that the runner had become bunched and crumpled during the ceremony, creating a dangerous condition. She further asserted that the owner was responsible for her injuries since the dangerous condition existed on its property and it should have an employee present to insure no dangerous conditions existed. During the course of discovery, Mr. Harwood established that no one representing the owner was present during the wedding, had any involvement in the placement of the runner or had received any complaints about the runner. In support of the motion for summary judgment Mr. Harwood introduced pictures showing, in conjunction with deposition testimony, that there were no problems with the runner minutes before plaintiff’s fall. Mr. Harwood also argued that the alleged defect did not involve the property itself, absolving the owner of any obligation to plaintiff. In granting the motion for summary judgment, the court held that evidence and testimony showed that the owner neither created the condition nor had actual or constructive notice that any dangerous condition existed. The court also held that there the owner did not have any duty to have a representative present during the wedding since the property itself was not dangerous or defective. Finally, the court held that the condition of the runner was open and obvious and not inherently dangerous. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jonathan R. Harwood, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Harwood may be contacted at jharwood@tlsslaw.com

    Breaking the Impasse by Understanding Blame

    January 13, 2020 —
    For this week’s Guest Post Friday (on a Thursday) here at Construction Law Musings, Victoria Pynchon (@vickiepynchon) joins us for the 4th time. Victoria is an attorney-mediator with ADR Services, Inc. in Century City; an arbitrator with the American Arbitration Association in Los Angeles, California; and, a negotiation consultant and trainer world-wide. Victoria co-founded She Negotiates Training and Consulting in 2010 and writes for ForbesWoman at its She Negotiates blog. She is the author of one of my favorite books on conflict resolution, A is for A*@!#, the Grownups’ ABC’s of Conflict Resolution reviewed at Musings here. First Let’s Talk About Anger Please raise your hand if your clients — corporate clients — are angry about the burdens of litigation. Irritated with the document “demands” and interrogatories. Frustrated about the e-discovery. Ticked off at the way opposing counsel asks them questions as if they’re lying. Hot under the collar about the mounting attorneys’ fees and the distance between the day suit was filed and the probable day on which a trial might eventually be scheduled. Simmering about the time the litigation consumes, time they’d prefer to be spending doing their actual jobs — planning for and implementing business strategies for a profitable future instead of fighting about the unprofitable past. And we’re not even talking about your clients’ anger at the defendant who has stolen their intellectual property or stopped worked at the construction site or refused to release the remaining funds in the construction loan account. And if you believe that powerful people in highly successful and profitable businesses do not fear that litigation might hurt their careers, think again. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com