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

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Highlands County Builders Association
    Local # 1022
    PO Box 7546
    Sebring, FL 33872


    Home Builders Association of Manatee - Sarasota County
    Local # 1041
    8131 Lakewood Main St Ste 207
    Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202
    http://hbamanatee-sarasota.org/

    Treasure Coast Builders Association
    Local # 1030
    6560 South Federal Highway
    Port Saint Lucie, FL 34952
    http://www.treasurecoastba.com

    Tampa Bay Builders Association
    Local # 1036
    11242 Winthrop Main St
    Riverview, FL 33578
    http://www.tbba.net

    Polk County Builders Association
    Local # 1028
    2232 Heritage Dr
    Lakeland, FL 33801
    http://www.pcba.com

    Charlotte-DeSoto Building Industry Association
    Local # 1002
    17984 Toledo Blade Blvd
    Port Charlotte, FL 33948
    http://www.cdbia.com

    Home Builders & CA of Brevard
    Local # 1012
    1500 W Eau Gallie Blvd Ste A
    Melbourne, FL 32935
    http://www.hbca-brevard.org


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Hardee County Florida

    The Cheap and Easy Climate Fix That Can Cool the Planet Fast

    New FAR Rule Mandates the Use of PLAs on Large Construction Projects

    Michigan Court of Appeals Remands Construction Defect Case

    MTA Debarment Update

    Rancosky Adopts Terletsky: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Sets Standard for Statutory Bad Faith Claims

    Five "Boilerplate" Terms to Negotiate in Your Next Subcontract

    Timely Legal Trends and Developments for Construction

    Strategic Investigation and Thorough Advocacy Leads to Dismissal and Fee Recovery for National Builder

    Local Government’s Claims on Developer Bonds Dismissed for Failure to Pursue Administrative Remedies

    Black & Veatch Appeals After Judge Upholds Jury's Surprise $1 Damage Award From Boldt

    Immigrants, Accidents and Lawsuit Loans: Does NY Need New Rules?

    Quick Note: Termination for Convenience Provisions Give a Party Broad Discretion to End a Contractual Relationship

    Third Circuit Holds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Despite Insured’s Expectations

    New Jersey Appellate Court Reinstates Asbestos Action

    Floating Crane on Job in NYC's East River Has a Storied Past of Cold War Intrigue

    So a Lawsuit Is on the Horizon…

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

    Power & Energy - Emerging Insurance Coverage Cases of Interest

    Construction Companies Can Be Liable for “Secondary Exposure” of Asbestos to Household Members

    Hawaii Federal District Court Rejects Bad Faith Claim

    Texas “your work” exclusion

    The Evolution of Construction Jobsite Safety: Lessons From the Field

    GRSM Named Among 2026 “Best Law Firms” by Best Lawyers®

    History of Defects Leads to Punitive Damages for Bankrupt Developer

    Smart Contracts Poised to Impact the Future of Construction

    Duty to Defend For Accident Exists, But Not Duty to Indeminfy

    EPA Grants Arizona Lead Over Underground Injection Control Program

    Modernist Houses Galore! [visual candy for architects]

    Tenth Circuit Reverses District Court's Ruling that Contractor Entitled to a Defense

    Asbestos Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Hotel Claims Construction Defect Could Have Caused Collapse

    South Carolina Clarifies the Accrual Date for Its Statute of Repose

    Federal Public Works Construction Collection Remedies: The Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    Court of Appeal Confirms Privette Doctrine as Applied to Passive Conduct of Property Owner

    Being deposed—not just for dictators! Depositions in the construction lawsuit (Law & Order: Hard Hat files Part 5)

    Remodel Leaves Guitarist’s Home Leaky and Moldy

    Hirers Must Affirmatively Exercise Retained Control to be Liable Under Hooker Exception to Privette Doctrine

    Construction Defect Claim Survives Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion Due to Lack of Evidence

    “Positive Limiting Barriers” Are An Open and Obvious Condition, Relieving Owner of Duty to Warn

    Georgia Court of Appeals Holds That Policyholder Can “Stack” the Limits of Each Primary Policy After Asbestos Claim

    Construction Defects #10 On DBJ’s Top News Stories of 2015

    Just When You Thought General Contractors Were Necessary Parties. . .

    Indiana Court of Appeals Rules Against Contractor and Performance Bond Surety on Contractor's Differing Site Conditions Claim

    New Jersey/New York “Occurrence”

    Hunton Partner Michael Levine Appointed to Law360’s 2024 Insurance Authority Property Editorial Advisory Board

    The Roads to Justice: Building New Bridges

    Seattle’s Tallest Tower Said Readying to Go On the Market

    Is Arbitration Final and Binding?

    Connecticut District Court to Review Proposed Class Action in Defective Concrete Suit

    Hunton Insurance Recovery Partner Michael Levine Quoted on Why Courts Must Consider the Science of COVID-19
    Corporate Profile

    HARDEE COUNTY FLORIDA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    With over four thousand engineering, construction, and builders standard of care related expert designations, the Hardee County, Florida Construction Expert Directory delivers a comprehensive construction and design expert 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 nation's leading construction practice groups, Fortune 500 builders, general liability carriers, owners, as well as a variety of public entities. Utilizing in house resources which include construction cost, scheduling, and delay experts, professional engineers, ASPE certified professional estimators, and construction safety professionals, the construction experts group brings specialized experience and local capabilities to Hardee County and the surrounding areas.

    Hardee County Florida construction forensic expert witnessHardee County Florida construction expert witnessHardee County Florida construction expert witness public projectsHardee County Florida construction claims expert witnessHardee County Florida multi family design expert witnessHardee County Florida slope failure expert witnessHardee County Florida window expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Hardee County, Florida

    Angela Zanin Featured in LACBA List of Women’s History Month Honorees

    March 17, 2026 —
    Los Angeles Partner Angela Zanin was recently honored for her leadership and diversity initiatives in the California legal community by the Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA) as part of the organization’s Women’s History Month initiative. LACBA highlighted Ms. Zanin’s efforts in the community. After serving as President of the Italian American Lawyers Association (IALA) in 2023, she co-founded the Los Angeles County Unity Bar (LACUB), an alliance of bar associations dedicated to promoting diversity in the judiciary. Consisting of ten member organizations, the LACUB takes pride in its endorsement of over 40 candidates appointed to the California Court of Appeal, U.S. District Courts, Los Angeles Superior Court, and Orange County Superior Court. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    U.S. Supreme Court Decision May Negate State Law Requirement to File a Certificate of Merit with the Complaint in a Federal Action Against a Design Professional

    April 27, 2026 —
    To deter frivolous and unfounded claims against design professionals, states throughout the country have enacted statutes which generally require litigants to furnish a formal certification of merit (“COM”) from a qualified expert or face potential dismissal of their lawsuit. These COM statutes can impose a significant front-end burden on claimants who must pay an expert to review project records, interview the project team, and prepare a formal report before the lawsuit can be filed—often regardless of the amount in controversy. However, in light of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in a medical malpractice case, most, if not all of these statutes, may no longer be enforceable in federal court. This article examines the recent decision in Berk v. Choy, 146 S. Ct. 546 (2026), the decisions thus far which have applied Berk to invalidate COM statutes, and other categories of statutes applicable to the construction industry which may face a similar fate. The U.S. Supreme Court Decision (Berk v. Choy) In Berk, the plaintiff, Harold Berk, sued a doctor for medical malpractice under Delaware law in Delaware federal court. 146 S. Ct. at 551. Under Del. Code, Tit. 18, § 6853(a)(1), an affidavit of merit (like a COM) must accompany a complaint alleging medical malpractice. Id. Berk failed to include an affidavit of merit with his complaint. Id. at 552. Applying Delaware state law, the federal court dismissed Berk’s medical malpractice claim. Berk appealed to the Third Circuit, arguing that the affidavit of merit required by § 6853(a)(1) is unenforceable in federal court because it is more onerous than the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Third Circuit affirmed the District Court’s ruling, finding § 6853(a)(1) enforceable in federal court. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Olsen, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Phillip Boldt, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Olsen may be contacted at colsen@pecklaw.com Mr. Boldt may be contacted at pboldt@pecklaw.com Read the full story...

    Builders Oppose Senate Housing Bill Over Investor Ban Provision

    March 24, 2026 —
    A powerful group representing the nation’s home builders is coming out against the most significant housing legislation in more than a decade over a provision negotiated by the White House that would restrict institutional investors from purchasing single-family homes. The builders’ objection could imperil the bill’s chances of becoming law, even as leaders of both parties are desperate to show they are doing something to alleviate voters’ cost-of-living concerns. The Senate voted 90-8 to clear a procedural hurdle for the bill on Wednesday, with a vote on final passage expected early next week. The inclusion of the investor ban in a broader housing bill was key to getting the White House on board, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott, a Republican from South Carolina, told reporters Tuesday. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Katy O'Donnell, Bloomberg

    Seventh Circuit Finds “Additional Insured” Requirements Met Where Non-Party Subcontractor Was Proximate Cause of Underlying Injuries

    February 23, 2026 —
    In Atlanta Gas Light Company et al v. Navigators Ins. Co., Nos. 24-2888 & 24-2889 (7th Cir. Jan. 22, 2026), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals assessed whether an upstream contractor was an “additional insured” under an umbrella policy issued to its subcontractor. Atlanta Gas and Southern Company Gas (“AGL”) hired United States Infrastructure Corporation (“USIC”) to locate and mark gas lines that AGL owned throughout Georgia. In 2018, USIC failed to mark a gas line in Homerville, Georgia, and a boring company struck it, leading to an explosion that severely injured three women. The victims settled their claims with USIC but did not come to terms with AGL. AGL eventually did settle with the victims, but only after they sued AGL in Georgia state court (the “Underlying Suits”). AGL’s service agreement with USIC required USIC to obtain primary and excess liability insurance coverage that included AGL as an additional insured. Because USIC’s settlement with the victims exhausted its primary policy, AGL tendered the defense and indemnification of the Underlying Suits to USIC’s excess insurer, Navigators. Navigators denied the request on the ground that AGL was not an “additional insured” under the policy. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com

    Contract Interpretation – Determining What the Contract Requires

    March 24, 2026 —
    A good ole dispute on contract interpretation in government contracting. Contract interpretation disputes happen all the time in every jurisdiction under the sun. Think about that. Now, what’s the best way to avoid a contract interpretation dispute? Naturally, invest in the contract language and fully understand the scope of work. Make all of this clear. But, of course, this isn’t foolproof meaning you could still be doing this and you could still find yourself in a contract interpretation dispute. Although, if you are doing this, and being proactive, the contract interpretation disputes should be minimal and more streamlined. In Liberty Technical Services, LLC v. Department of Veterans Affairs, CBCA 8385, 2026 WL 407656 (CBCA 2026), the dispute centered on whether the government owed the contractor for certain, necessary equipment (largely controllers, but also tanks and pumps) not specified in the contract. The government countered that this should be a non-issue because the contractor always acknowledged it was responsible for furnishing the unspecified, necessary equipment, and the contractor did actually provide the equipment without direction from the government. Each party claimed the contract was unambiguous when construed in context. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    New York Moves to Tighten Third-Party Practice: Key Changes to CPLR 1007

    March 31, 2026 —
    Effective April 18, 2026, the New York Legislature enacted the Avoiding Vexatious Overuse of Impleading to Delay (“AVOID”) Act, amending CPLR 1007—the statute that governs third-party practice. The amendment sharply limits when and how defendants can commence third-party actions, curbing the expansive discretion they previously enjoyed and targeting the late-stage impleaders that often upend case schedules. What Changes Before the AVOID Act was signed into law on December 19, 2025 (and subsequently modified by Chapter Amendments A9502 and S8809, signed by Governor Hochul on February 13, 2026[1]), CPLR 1007 gave defendants broad latitude to implead “any person who is or may be liable” for all or part of the plaintiff’s claim. CPLR 1007 specified no outside time limit for the initiation of a third-party claim; courts assessed only whether a defendant’s delay was undue—such as impleading months after the note of issue—and whether the plaintiff would suffer prejudice if the third-party action were not severed. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sophia L. Cahill, Sheppard
    Ms. Cahill may be contacted at scahill@sheppard.com

    CEO: Power Isn’t the Only Electrical Challenge for AI Data Centers

    April 14, 2026 —
    Everyone knows that data centers are voracious consumers of electricity. In fact, the U.S. is currently scrambling to meet unprecedented levels of power demand not seen since the early days of electrification and the widespread adoption of air conditioning. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Francesco "Frio" Iorio, Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com

    Celebrating 29 Years – Thank You for Your Continued Trust!

    April 20, 2026 —
    For 29 years, Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP has grown alongside the clients and communities we proudly serve. What began as a single office in Orange County has evolved into a multi-state firm with 11 locations across five states. Today, we are proud to be supported by a dedicated team of more than 200 attorneys and over 400 employees who work every day to deliver exceptional service and results. This milestone is not just about where we started; it’s about the people who have helped shape who we are today. Our continued growth reflects the strength of our relationships, the trust of our clients and partners, and the commitment of our team. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP