• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing expert witness Cedar Grove Florida mid-rise construction expert witness Cedar Grove Florida hospital construction expert witness Cedar Grove Florida housing expert witness Cedar Grove Florida low-income housing expert witness Cedar Grove Florida custom homes expert witness Cedar Grove Florida industrial building expert witness Cedar Grove Florida custom home expert witness Cedar Grove Florida multi family housing expert witness Cedar Grove Florida tract home expert witness Cedar Grove Florida condominiums expert witness Cedar Grove Florida parking structure expert witness Cedar Grove Florida casino resort expert witness Cedar Grove Florida Subterranean parking expert witness Cedar Grove Florida structural steel construction expert witness Cedar Grove Florida landscaping construction expert witness Cedar Grove Florida concrete tilt-up expert witness Cedar Grove Florida Medical building expert witness Cedar Grove Florida high-rise construction expert witness Cedar Grove Florida institutional building expert witness Cedar Grove Florida condominium expert witness Cedar Grove Florida townhome construction expert witness Cedar Grove Florida
    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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Cedar Grove Florida

    Construction Spending Highest Since April 2009

    Are COVID-19 Claims Covered by Builders Risk Insurance Policies?

    Is it the End of the Story for Redevelopment in California?

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rise Most Since February 2006

    New Hampshire Asbestos Abatement Firm Pleads Guilty in Federal Fraud Case

    Apple to Open Steve Jobs-Inspired Ring-Shaped Campus in April

    Manhattan Vacancies Rise in Epicenter Shift: Real Estate

    Vincent Alexander Named to Florida Trend’s Legal Elite

    Prevailing Parties Entitled to Contractual Attorneys’ Fees Under California CCP §1717 Notwithstanding Declaration That Contract is Void Under California Government Code §1090

    Employees Versus Independent Contractors

    Saudi Arabia Awards Contracts for Megacity Neom’s Worker Housing

    Florida High-Rise for Sale, Construction Defects Possibly Included

    Failure to Consider Safety Element in Design Does Not Preclude Public Entity’s Discretionary Authority Under Design Immunity Defense

    North Carolina Soil & Groundwater Case to be Heard by U.S. Supreme Court

    Five "Boilerplate" Terms to Negotiate in Your Next Subcontract

    Happenings in and around the 2016 West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Insurer's Attempt to Strike Experts in Collapse Case Fails

    Pending Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Rise Most in Four Years

    California’s Prompt Payment Laws: Just Because an Owner Has Changed Course Doesn’t Mean It’s Changed Course on Previous Payments

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

    Housing Starts Plunge by the Most in Four Years

    Claims for Bad Faith and Punitive Damages Survive Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    No Duty to Defend Under Renter's Policy

    Ivanhoe Cambridge Plans Toronto Office Towers, Terminal

    Big League Dreams a Nightmare for Town

    Useful Life: A Valuable Theory for Reducing Damages

    Force Majeure and COVID-19 in Construction Contracts – What You Need to Know

    Homeowners Sued for Failing to Disclose Defects

    Framework, Tallest Mass Timber Project in the U.S., Is On Hold

    New York Court Rules on Architect's Duty Under Contract and Tort Principles

    No Coverage for Building's First Collapse, But Disputed Facts on Second Collapse

    Coverage Issues: When You Need Your Own Lawyer in a Construction Defect Suit

    Contractors: Revisit your Force Majeure Provisions to Account for Hurricanes

    Newmeyer Dillion Named 2020 Best Law Firm in Multiple Practice Areas by U.S. News-Best Lawyers

    Trump, Infrastructure and the Construction Industry

    New York Bridge to Be Largest Infrastructure Project in North America

    President Trump Issued Two New EOs on Energy Infrastructure and Federal Energy Policy

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    Improperly Installed Flanges Are Impaired Property

    Indemnity Payment to Insured Satisfies SIR

    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    Best Practices for ESI Collection in Construction Litigation

    Summary Findings of the Fourth National Climate Assessment

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

    Courts Take Another Swipe at the Implied Warranty of the Plans and Specifications

    Denver Court Rules that Condo Owners Must Follow Arbitration Agreement

    Harmon Towers Case to Last into 2014

    You’re Only as Good as Those with Whom You Contract

    NY Appeals Court Ruled Builders not Responsible in Terrorism Cases

    Broker Not Liable for Failure to Reveal Insurer's Insolvency After Policy Issued
    Corporate Profile


    Through over four thousand building and claims related expert witness designations, the Cedar Grove, Florida Construction Expert Directory offers a wide range of trial support and construction consulting services to construction claims professionals seeking effective resolution of construction defect and claims matters. BHA provides construction claims investigation, testimony, and support services to the nation's leading construction practice groups, Fortune 500 builders, real estate investment trusts, risk managers, owners, as well as a variety of municipalities and government offices. Employing in house resources which include construction standard of care consultants, registered architects, professional engineers, and credentialed building envelope experts, the organization brings national experience and local capabilities to Cedar Grove and the surrounding areas.

    Cedar Grove Florida construction defect expert witnessCedar Grove Florida building consultant expertCedar Grove Florida consulting general contractorCedar Grove Florida building code expert witnessCedar Grove Florida construction project management expert witnessesCedar Grove Florida stucco expert witnessCedar Grove Florida civil engineer expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Cedar Grove, Florida

    The Difference Between Routine Document Destruction and Spoliation

    October 18, 2021 —
    In today’s world, there is a tendency to believe that everything must be preserved forever. The common belief is that documents, emails, text messages, etc. cannot be deleted because doing so may be viewed as spoliation (i.e., intentionally destroying relevant evidence). A party guilty of spoliation can be sanctioned, which can include an adverse inference that the lost information would have helped the other side. But that does not mean that contractors have to preserve every conceivable piece of information or data under all circumstances. There are key differences between routine document destruction (when done before receiving notice of potential claims or litigation) and spoliation. The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals decision in Appeal of Sungjee Constr. Co., Ltd., ASBCA Nos. 62002 and 62170 (Mar. 23, 2021) provides a good reminder. There, Sungjee challenged its default termination under a construction contract at Osan Air Base in South Korea. Sungjee argued that the government denied it access to the site for 352 days (out of a 450-day performance period) by refusing to issue passes that were needed to access the base. The government argued that it had issued the passes, but it could not produce them to Sungjee in discovery because they had been destroyed as part of a routine document destruction policy. The base security force issued hard copy passes and entered the information in a biometric system. The government was able to produce the biometric system data but not the hard copy passes because they were destroyed each year. Sungjee argued the government was guilty of spoliation and moved for sanctions. It asked the Board to draw an adverse inference that the passes would have shown that the government had not issued proper passes on a timely basis, which delayed Sungjee’s performance. The Board denied Sungjee’s motion for several reasons. Reprinted courtesy of Steven A. Neeley, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Neeley may be contacted at

    Broken Buildings: Legal Rights and Remedies in the Wake of a Collapse

    October 11, 2021 —
    A tragedy transpired on June 24 in Surfside, Florida, when the Champlain Towers South suddenly fell, becoming one of the country’s most deadly unintentional building collapses. It is imperative that construction industry professionals be aware of the legal issues that are raised by such ill-fated events. Who Is Held Responsible? Who can be held responsible for such disasters lies among several possible parties:
    • The building’s design professionals, particularly its architects and structural engineers. They are charged with ensuring that the building’s design is safe. They must take many factors into account, including, but not limited to, the materials that are used, the foundation, the weight and the height.
    • General contractors and the subcontractors. General contractors implement the design created by the architects and engineers and are responsible for appropriate materials. The general contractor also supervises the subcontractors aiding with multiple areas of the building’s construction and which also share the responsibility of executing the design and maintaining the building’s structural integrity.
    Reprinted courtesy of David J. Pfeffer, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Pfeffer may be contacted at

    In Review: SCOTUS Environmental and Administrative Decisions in the 2020 Term

    August 10, 2021 —
    Several decisions of interest were issued in the 2020 term, which stretched from October 2020 until early July 2021. This review will concentrate on environmental and administrative law cases. Texas v. New Mexico On December 14, 2020, the Court issued its ruling in an Original Action. Water is precious in the Pecos River Valley, and the distribution of water is governed by the Pecos River Compact. Here, Texas complained that New Mexico illegally was seeking delivery credits for evaporated water credits but the Court agreed that New Mexico was entitled to these credits under the provisions of the River Master’s Manual. Florida v. Georgia On April 1, 2021, in another waters right ruling on an Original Action filed in the Supreme Court, the Court rejected Florida’s claims that Georgia’s use of interstate waters harmed Florida’s businesses. Florida had to satisfy a heavy burden of proof, which it failed to do. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at

    Mediation Clause Can Stay a Miller Act Claim, Just Not Forever

    July 11, 2021 —
    It seems to be Miller Act time here at Construction Law Musings, not to mention in the Federal District Courts here in Virginia. Last week I discussed what sort of work can form the basis for a Miller Act claim. This week I am discussing the effect of a mandatory mediation contract clause on the same type of claim. I have discussed both the benefits and the possible negative consequences of the inclusion of such a clause in your construction contract. The recent case out of the Norfolk, Virginia Federal District Court recently explored the related question of whether such a clause can be enforced in the context of a Miller Act claim. In United States of America, for the use of Precision Air Conditioning of Brevard Inc. v. Cincinnati Insurance Company, the Court was confronted with a possible conflict between the legal requirement that any waiver of the right to pursue a Miller Act claim must be explicitly waived in writing and the clear contractual language between the general contractor and the plaintiff stating that mediation was a condition precedent to suit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at

    Google Advances Green Goal With AES Deal for Carbon-Free Power

    May 17, 2021 —
    Google’s moving forward with its goal of becoming carbon-free by the end of the decade after AES Corp. agreed to supply the tech giant with renewable energy to power its data centers in Virginia. AES, an international electricity company and power-plant developer, said the deal will result in the construction of 500 megawatts of solar, wind, small-scale hydroelectric and battery storage projects and supply will begin later this year, according to a statement Tuesday. AES and third-party developers will own the facilities. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mark Chediak, Bloomberg

    Fifth Circuit Certifies Eight-Corners Duty to Defend Issue to Texas Supreme Court

    June 21, 2021 —
    In the recent case of Bitco Gen. Ins. Corp. v. Monroe Guar. Ins. Co., No. 19-51012, 2021 WL 955155 (5th Cir. Mar. 12, 2021), certified question accepted (Mar. 19, 2021), the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals certified to the Texas Supreme Court the question of whether a court can consider extrinsic evidence when determining an insurer’s duty to defend. The underlying lawsuit stems from a construction contract in which J&B Farms of Texas hired 5D, a construction company, to drill a commercial irrigation well through the Edwards Aquifer. Two years after beginning the project, J&B Farms sued 5D and its President for breach of contract and negligence. J&B Farms alleged that while drilling, 5D “stuck the drilling bit in the bore hole, rendering the well practically useless for its intended/contracted for purpose.” 5D then “failed and refused to plug the well, retrieve the drill bit, and drill a new well.” J&B Farms asserted that 5D drilled the well “with unacceptable deviation” and then “abandon[ed] the well.” 5D notified its insurers, BITCO and Monroe, of the lawsuit and demanded a defense from both. BITCO agreed to provide a defense to 5D, but Monroe refused arguing that the alleged property damage fell outside the relevant policy period, and therefore, it had no duty to defend 5D. BITCO then filed a declaratory judgment action seeking a finding that Monroe owed 5D a duty to defend. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy S. Macklin, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Macklin may be contacted at

    Can an App Renovate a Neighborhood?

    August 10, 2021 —
    On a sleepy stretch of West Jefferson Boulevard not far from downtown Los Angeles, cars typically speed past blocks of old warehouses and blank retail facades for destinations elsewhere. But slow down, hit the sidewalk and peek into and around a few buildings, and you’ll see the telltale signs of renovation: sandblasted walls, new windows, work crews and exposed wood beams. In an expansive brick building that once housed a child-care center before reverting to a warehouse, an inside-out renovation for a future food hall has stripped the wooden ceiling down to gorgeous bow trusses, sunlight filtering through the gaps and lighting up a floor of dirt filled with tracks from heavy machinery. This string of commercial development, 20 buildings in total, isn’t a typical project, nor does it rely on traditional sources of financing. A clue can be found on the white and orange signs above a handful of buildings between La Brea Avenue and Crenshaw Boulevard, beckoning potential tenants to call Fundrise for leasing opportunities for built-to-suit office/retail. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Sisson, Bloomberg

    Certificates as Evidence of Additional Insured Coverage Are All the Rage, But You Deserve Better

    August 30, 2021 —
    Consider the following scenario: the construction project is ready to proceed. The deal is done. The agreements have all been carefully crafted, with detailed provisions on insurance dedicated to reducing risk. Those provisions require the downstream trade contractors to furnish certificates of insurance listing the owner and prime contractor as additional insureds on the downstream contractor’s policies of insurance. A provision in the prime contract further requires the prime contractor to provide the owner with a certificate of insurance showing the owner as an additional insured on the prime contractor’s policies. At the ceremonial ground-breaking and right before work commences, the downstream contractors deliver their insurance certificates to the prime contractor and the prime contractor delivers its certificate plus the downstream certificates to the owner. From there, each insurance certificate will begin its final destination to the project file (either electronic or physical) where, with any luck, it will serve the regular stint before being discarded after the project’s successful conclusion. Otherwise, it will be retrieved under much stress and heavy scrutiny. The acceptance of insurance certificates is often viewed as standard industry practice, but should it be? The answer is a resounding “no.” There are many form development and construction agreements in circulation that deem insurance certificates to be acceptable evidence of insurance. But, a certificate of insurance should not be relied upon because it does not mean that insurance has been placed. You deserve real evidence that the requisite additional insured coverage is in place (in the form of a policy endorsement), and here is why. Reprinted courtesy of Joseph L. Cohen, Fox Rothschild, W. Mason, Fox Rothschild and Sean Milani-nia, Fox Rothschild Mr. Cohen may be contacted at Mr. Mason may be contacted at Mr. Milani-nia may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of