• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction expert witness St Augustine Florida hospital construction expert witness St Augustine Florida Medical building expert witness St Augustine Florida mid-rise construction expert witness St Augustine Florida production housing expert witness St Augustine Florida multi family housing expert witness St Augustine Florida landscaping construction expert witness St Augustine Florida custom homes expert witness St Augustine Florida condominium expert witness St Augustine Florida low-income housing expert witness St Augustine Florida industrial building expert witness St Augustine Florida structural steel construction expert witness St Augustine Florida casino resort expert witness St Augustine Florida custom home expert witness St Augustine Florida condominiums expert witness St Augustine Florida high-rise construction expert witness St Augustine Florida housing expert witness St Augustine Florida concrete tilt-up expert witness St Augustine Florida Subterranean parking expert witness St Augustine Florida office building expert witness St Augustine Florida parking structure expert witness St Augustine Florida retail construction expert witness St Augustine Florida
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    St Augustine, 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 St Augustine 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 St Augustine Florida

    The Future of Construction Tech Is Decision Tech

    Housing Inflation Begins to Rise

    Home-Rentals Wall Street Made Say Grow or Go: Real Estate

    Policy Lanuage Expressly Prohibits Replacement of Undamaged Material to Match Damaged Material

    U.S. Construction Spending Rose in 2017 by Least in Six Years

    With No Evidence of COVID-19 Being Present, DC Trial Court Finds No Claim for Business Interruption

    Mortgage Battle Flares as U.K. Homebuying Loses Allure

    UPDATE - McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court

    America’s Infrastructure Gets a C-. It’s an Improvement Though

    New Zealand Using Plywood Banned Elsewhere

    Harmon Towers Case to Last into 2014

    Nicholas A. Thede Joins Ball Janik LLP

    Beam Fracture on Closed Mississippi River Bridge Is at Least Two Years Old

    The EPA’s Renovation, Repair, and Painting Rule: Are Contractors Aware of It?

    Commonwealth Court Strikes Blow to Philly Window and Door Ordinance

    A Lot of Cheap Housing Is About to Get Very Expensive

    How Tech Is Transforming the Construction Industry in 2019

    2017 Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure

    Nevada’s Construction Defect Law

    Builder and County Tussle over Unfinished Homes

    Insured's Testimony On Expectation of Coverage Deemed Harmless

    Court Says No to Additional Lawyer in Las Vegas Fraud Case

    Building in the Age of Technology: Improving Profitability and Jobsite Safety

    Jury Awards Aluminum Company 35 Million in Time Element Losses

    Florida Federal Court Reinforces Principle That Precise Policy Language Is Required Before An Insurer Can Deny Coverage Based On An Exclusion

    Colorado Senate Bill 15-177: This Year’s Attempt at Reasonable Construction Defect Reform

    The One New Year’s Resolution You’ll Want to Keep if You’re Involved in Public Works Projects

    Sept. 11 Victims Rejected by U.S. High Court on Lawsuit

    It’s a Bird, It’s a Plane . . . No, It’s a Drone. Long Awaited FAA Drone Regulations Finally Take Flight

    Top 10 Lessons Learned from a Construction Attorney

    Contractors with Ties to Trustees Reaped Benefits from LA Community College Modernization Program

    Property Owner Entitled to Rely on Zoning Administrator Advice

    The Five-Step Protocol to Reopening a Business

    Building Permits Hit Five-Year High

    Project Team Upgrades Va. General Assembly

    #6 CDJ Topic: Construction Defect Legislative Developments

    No Coverage for Negligent Misrepresentation without Allegations of “Bodily Injury” or “Property Damage”

    Poor Pleading Leads to Loss of Claim for Trespass Due to Relation-Back Doctrine, Statute of Limitations

    Hunton Insurance Partner Syed Ahmad Serves as Chair of the ABA Minority Trial Lawyer Committee’s Programming Subcommittee

    Major Change to Residential Landlord Tenant Law

    Congratulations Bryan Stofferahn, August Hotchkin, and Eileen Gaisford on Their Promotion to Partner!

    Oregon Construction Firm Sued for Construction Defects

    Building Inspector Refuses to State Why Apartments Condemned

    Homebuilder Predictions for Tallahassee

    Builders Beware: Smart Homes Under Attack by “Hide ‘N Seek” Botnet

    Zillow Seen Dominating U.S. Home Searches with Trulia

    Georgia Appellate Court Supports County Claim Against Surety Company’s Failure to Pay

    Lucky No. 7: Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Issues Pro-Policyholder Decision Regarding Additional Insured Coverage for Upstream Parties

    That’s What I have Insurance For, Right?

    Poor Record Keeping = Going to the Poor House (or, why project documentation matters)
    Corporate Profile


    Leveraging from more than 4500 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the St Augustine, Florida Construction Expert Directory provides a streamlined multi-disciplinary expert retention and support solution to builders, risk managers, and construction practice groups concerned with construction defect, scheduling, and delay claims. BHA provides construction claims and trial support services to the industry'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 comprise construction cost and scheduling experts, registered design professionals, forensic engineers, certified professional estimators, the firm brings national experience and local capabilities to St Augustine region.

    St Augustine Florida architect expert witnessSt Augustine Florida civil engineering expert witnessSt Augustine Florida construction code expert witnessSt Augustine Florida construction project management expert witnessesSt Augustine Florida construction project management expert witnessSt Augustine Florida construction defect expert witnessSt Augustine Florida expert witness commercial buildings
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    St Augustine, Florida

    Bert Hummel Appointed Vice Chair of State Bar of Georgia Bench & Bar Committee

    October 24, 2021 —
    Atlanta, Ga. (October 4, 2021) – Atlanta Partner Bert Hummel was recently named Vice Chair of the State Bar of Georgia's Bench & Bar Committee for the 2021-2022 year. The Bench & Bar Committee identifies and facilitates solutions to issues of mutual interest between State judges and Georgia lawyers for the benefit of the bench, the bar and the public. It also oversees the annual Justice Thomas O. Marshall Professionalism Award, which honors one lawyer and one judge who have demonstrated the highest professional conduct and paramount reputation for professionalism. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bert Hummel, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Hummel may be contacted at

    New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ Bill

    May 31, 2021 —
    The New York State Assembly is considering A07285, which creates a private right of action for bad faith “if the insurer unreasonably refuses to pay or unreasonably delays payment without substantial justification.” The bill was first introduced in 2013 but was reintroduced on May 3, 2021 and has received some recent attention. According to the bill, an insurer acts unreasonably when it (among other things):
    1. Fails to provide the claimant with accurate information regarding policy provisions relating to the coverage at issue; or
    2. Fails to effectuate in good faith a prompt, fair, and equitable settlement of a claim or portion of a claim and where the insurer failed to reasonably accord at least equal or more favorable consideration to its insured's interests as it did to its own interests, and thereby exposed the insured to a judgment in excess of the policy limits or caused other damage to a claimant; or
    3. Fails to provide a timely written denial of a claimant's claim, or portion thereof, with a full and complete explanation of such denial, including references to specific policy provisions wherever possible; or
    4. Fails to act in good faith by compelling such claimant to initiate a lawsuit to recover under the policy by offering substantially less than the amounts ultimately recovered in such suit; or
    5. Fails to timely provide, on request of the policy holder or the policy holder's representative, all reports or other documentation arising from the investigation of a claim; or
    6. Refuses to pay a claim without conducting a reasonable investigation prior to such refusal.
    Reprinted courtesy of Copernicus T. Gaza, Traub Lieberman, Robert S. Nobel, Traub Lieberman, Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman and Eric D. Suben, Traub Lieberman Mr. Gaza may be contacted at Mr. Nobel may be contacted at Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at Mr. Suben may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Comply with your Insurance Policy's Conditions Precedent (Post-Loss Obligations)

    May 31, 2021 —
    I am of the opinion that if your property insurer requests a sworn proof of loss, furnish one with the assistance of counsel (preferably). Ignoring the insurer’s request or refusing to comply with insurer’s request is NOT value-added; it is simply placing you at a disadvantage based on the insurer’s argument that you, as the insured, materially breached the policy. I generally find no value having to confront this expected argument. Instead, I find value making an effort to comply with post-loss obligations including the insurer’s request to submit a sworn proof of loss. Working with counsel can help you comply with post-loss obligations (conditions precedent) while not weakening the value or merits of your claim. By way of example, in Edwards v. Safepoint Ins. Co., 46 Fla. L. Weekly D1086a (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), the insured did not provide its property insurer with the requested sworn proof of loss. The insurer moved for summary judgment that the insured’s failure to submit the sworn proof of loss was a material breach of the policy that rendered the policy ineffective. The trial court agreed and granted summary judgment. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed explaining “[a] total failure to comply with policy provisions made a prerequisite to suit under the policy may constitute a breach precluding recovery from the insurer as a matter of law. If, however, the insured cooperates to some degree or provides an explanation for its noncompliance, a fact question is presented for resolution by a jury.” Edwards, supra, quoting Haiman v. Federal Ins. Co., 798 So.2d 811, 812 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    Engineer Probing Champlain Towers Debacle Eyes Possibility of Three Successive Collapses

    July 05, 2021 —
    Though the trigger may remain a mystery for some time, by the end of the week, the structural engineer probing the partial progressive collapse of a 40-year-old Surfside, Fla., residential condominium expects to complete a computer model of the unstable, 12-story remains of the building. The computer model of the still-standing wing of Champlain Towers South will initially be used to alert the search and rescue team to suspend operations if a hurricane is coming. Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record Ms. Post may be contacted at Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ninth Circuit Court Weighs In On Insurance Coverage For COVID-19 Business Interruption Losses

    October 11, 2021 —
    On October 1, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on a trio of cases involving COVID-19 business interruption losses, in a series of written opinions with results favoring the insurers. Despite the slate of wins for insurers in this round of cases, these rulings are limited to cases where policyholders either did not allege the presence of COVID-19 on their premises causing “physical alteration” of the property itself, or had a virus exclusion in their policy, or both. This leaves room for future cases potentially ruling in favor of coverage where the insureds allege the presence of coronavirus on the premises, and that there was a detrimental physical alteration of the property as a result. To date, the Ninth Circuit has not ruled on such a situation. RULING 1: Mudpie v. Travelers Casualty Insurance Co. of America The Ninth Circuit first considered a proposed class action brought by a children’s store operator, Mudpie. Mudpie sought business income and extra expense coverage from Travelers after California and local authorities issued shutdown orders impacting Mudpie’s operations due to COVID-19. (Mudpie, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty Insurance Company of America, Case No. 20-16858, --- F.4th --- (9th Cir. Oct. 1, 2021).) Travelers denied coverage, asserting that the claim did not involve “direct physical loss of or damage to” property “caused by or resulting from a covered Cause of Loss.” Travelers also denied coverage under language excluding “loss or damage caused by or resulting from any virus…that induces…physical distress, illness or disease.” Applying California law, the trial court agreed with Travelers on both accounts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rondi J. Walsh, Newmeyer Dillion
    Ms. Walsh may be contacted at

    Conn. Appellate Court Overturns Jury Verdict, Holding Plaintiff’s Sole Remedy for Injuries Arising From Open Manhole Was State’s Highway Defect Statute

    June 14, 2021 —
    Section 13a-149 of the Connecticut General Statutes, commonly known as Connecticut’s highway defect statute, provides that claims arising from injuries or damages to people or property resulting from a defective road or bridge can be asserted against a party responsible for maintaining that road or bridge. Conn. Gen. Stat. §13a-149. The statute also extends to sidewalks and further provides that written notice of an alleged injury must be given to a defendant municipality within ninety days of the injury. Recently, in Dobie v. City of New Haven, 2021 Conn. App. LEXIS 162 (App. Ct. May 1, 2021), the Connecticut Appellate Court overturned the trial court’s denial of a municipal defendant’s post-trial motion to dismiss. The court held that even though the plaintiff attempted to assert allegations of negligence against the defendant municipality, Connecticut’s highway defect statute was the plaintiff’s exclusive remedy. Since the plaintiff failed to meet the requisite notice requirements, pursuant to the statute, the Appellate Court held that the trial court erred in denying the municipality’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Underlying Case In February of 2013, Plaintiff William Dobie filed suit against the City of New Haven alleging injuries and damages as a result of the negligence of a City of New Haven snowplow operator. Dobie’s claims arose from an incident that occurred on January 21, 2011, in which he was driving behind the City snowplow driver, who was in the process of plowing snow from a municipal street located in New Haven, Connecticut. As the defendant employee was operating his snowplow, he knocked off a manhole cover, causing Dobie’s vehicle to drive over the open manhole. Dobie claimed personal injuries as a result of his vehicle dropping into the open manhole, including injuries to his jaw. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christy Jachimowski, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Jachimowski may be contacted at

    “But it’s 2021!” Service of Motion to Vacate Via Email Found Insufficient by the Eleventh Circuit

    June 21, 2021 —
    While we are all getting used to the “new normal” of working remotely and relying on emails for almost all communications, a recent decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit provides arbitration practitioners with a stark reminder – the “notice” requirements of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) will be strictly enforced and providing notice of a motion to vacate via email may not qualify as proper service. In O'Neal Constructors, LLC v. DRT Am., LLC, 991 F.3d 1376 (11th Cir. 2021), O’Neal Constructors, LLC (O’Neal) and DRT America (DRT) entered into a contract containing an arbitration provision. Following a dispute, the parties went to arbitration and, on January 7, 2019, the panel issued an award requiring DRT to pay O’Neal a total of $1,415,193. The amount awarded to O’Neal consisted of two parts: $765,102 for the underlying contract dispute and $650,090 for reimbursement of O’Neal’s attorneys’ fees. While DRT paid O’Neal the first portion of the award, DRT refused to pay the portion that related to O’Neal’s attorneys’ fees. On April 4, 2019, as a result of DRT’s refusal to pay O’Neal’s attorneys’ fees, O’Neal filed a motion to confirm the award in Georgia state court (which was subsequently removed to the Northern District of Georgia). The next day, in a separate action, DRT filed a motion to vacate the attorneys’ fees portion of the award and, that same night, DRT’s counsel emailed O’Neal’s counsel a “courtesy copy” of DRT’s memorandum in support of the motion to vacate. A few weeks later, on April 30, 2019 (i.e., more than three months after the award was issued), DRT served O’Neal (via U.S. Marshall) with a copy of the motion to vacate. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Justin Fortescue, White and Williams
    Mr. Fortescue may be contacted at

    Wilke Fleury Attorney Featured in 2022 Best Lawyers in America and Best Lawyers: Ones To Watch!

    September 13, 2021 —
    Wilke Fleury congratulates attorneys David Frenznick, Adriana Cervantes, Matthew Powell and Dan Egan on their inclusion in the 2022 Edition of Best Lawyers in America! Since it was first published in 1983, Best Lawyers® has become universally regarded as the definitive guide to legal excellence. Best Lawyers lists are compiled based on an exhaustive peer-review evaluation. Almost 108,000 industry-leading lawyers are eligible to vote (from around the world), and they have received over 13 million evaluations on the legal abilities of other lawyers based on their specific practice areas around the world. For the 2021 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America©, 9.4 million votes were analyzed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wilke Fleury LLP