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

    California Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: SB800 (codified as Civil Code §§895, et seq) is the most far-reaching, complex law regulating construction defect litigation, right to repair, warranty obligations and maintenance requirements transference in the country. In essence, to afford protection against frivolous lawsuits, builders shall do all the following:A homeowner is obligated to follow all reasonable maintenance obligations and schedules communicated in writing to the homeowner by the builder and product manufacturers, as well as commonly accepted maintenance practices. A failure by a homeowner to follow these obligations, schedules, and practices may subject the homeowner to the affirmative defenses.A builder, under the principles of comparative fault pertaining to affirmative defenses, may be excused, in whole or in part, from any obligation, damage, loss, or liability if the builder can demonstrate any of the following affirmative defenses in response to a claimed violation:


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Anaheim California

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Building Industry Association Southern California - Desert Chapter
    Local # 0532
    77570 Springfield Ln Ste E
    Palm Desert, CA 92211
    http://www.desertchapter.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Riverside County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    3891 11th St Ste 312
    Riverside, CA 92501


    Building Industry Association Southern California
    Local # 0532
    17744 Sky Park Circle Suite 170
    Irvine, CA 92614
    http://www.biasc.org

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Orange County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    17744 Skypark Cir Ste 170
    Irvine, CA 92614
    http://www.biaoc.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Baldy View Chapter
    Local # 0532
    8711 Monroe Ct Ste B
    Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
    http://www.biabuild.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - LA/Ventura Chapter
    Local # 0532
    28460 Ave Stanford Ste 240
    Santa Clarita, CA 91355


    Building Industry Association Southern California - Building Industry Association of S Ca Antelope Valley
    Local # 0532
    44404 16th St W Suite 107
    Lancaster, CA 93535



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Anaheim California

    Federal Contractors – Double Check the Terms of Your Contract Before Performing Ordered Changes

    Filling Out the Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    Florida Accuses Pool Contractor of Violating Laws

    Insurer Entitled to Reimbursement of Defense Costs Under Unjust Enrichment Theory

    English v. RKK- There is Even More to the Story

    Recent Statutory Changes Cap Retainage on Applicable Construction Projects

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “This Is Sufficient for Your Purposes …”

    California to Require Disclosure of Construction Defect Claims

    Effectively Managing Project Closeout: It Ends Where It Begins

    Are Proprietary Specifications Illegal?

    Making the Construction Dispute Resolution Process More Efficient and Less Expensive, Part 2

    CEB’s Mechanics Liens and Related Remedies – 2014 Update

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Where Underlying Claim is Strictly Breach of Contract

    Musk Backs Off Plan for Tunnel in Tony Los Angelenos' Backyard

    WA Supreme Court Allows Property Owner to Sue Engineering Firm for Lost Profits

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

    #6 CDJ Topic: Construction Defect Legislative Developments

    More Clear, But Not Yet Crystal: Virginia Amends its Prompt Payment Law and Legislation Banning “Pay-If-Paid Clauses in Construction Contracts Effective July 1, 2023

    Timely Written Notice to Insurer and Cooperating with Insurer

    New Utah & Colorado Homebuilder Announced: Jack Fisher Homes

    Zurich American Insurance Company v. Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company

    Construction Site Blamed for Flooding

    Zoning Hearing Notice Addressed by Georgia Appeals Court

    Best Practices for ESI Collection in Construction Litigation

    Home Prices Beat Estimates With 0.8% Gain in November

    Green Construction Trends Contractors Can Expect in 2019

    Construction Spending Drops in March

    Insurer Must Defend Claims of Negligence and Private Nuisance

    Homeowner's Mold Claim Denied Due to Spoilation

    Nine ACS Lawyers Recognized as Super Lawyers

    David M. McLain to Speak at the CLM Claims College - School of Construction - Scholarships Available

    Damages to Property That is Not the Insured's Work Product Are Covered

    Read Before You Sign: Claim Waivers in Project Documents

    With an Eye Already in the Sky, Crane Camera Goes Big Data

    Arizona Is Smart About Water. It Should Stay That Way.

    Insurance Firm Defends against $22 Million Claim

    Inverse Condemnation and Roadwork

    Oregon Supreme Court Confirms Broad Duty to Defend

    The Importance of Retrofitting Existing Construction to Meet Sustainability Standards

    Georgia Update: Automatic Renewals in Consumer Service Contracts

    Four White and Williams Lawyers Recognized as "Lawyer of the Year" by Best Lawyers®

    "Your Work" Exclusion Bars Coverage for Contractor's Faulty Workmanship

    Nevada Bill Would Bring Changes to Construction Defects

    California Ballot Initiative Seeks to Repeal Infrastructure Funding Bill

    Maine Case Demonstrates High Risk for Buying Home “As Is”

    Cold Weather Causes Power Blackouts, Disruptions on Jobsites

    Precedent-Setting ‘Green’ Apartments in Kansas City

    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

    Double-Wide World Cup Seats Available to 6-Foot, 221-Pound Fans

    2019 Promotions - New Partners at Haight
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from approximately 5000 building and claims related expert witness designations, the Anaheim, California Construction Expert Directory provides a streamlined multi-disciplinary expert retention and support solution to developers, risk managers, and construction claims professionals concerned with construction defect, scheduling, and delay claims. BHA provides building related litigation support and expert witness 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. Utilizing captive assets which comprise construction delay claims experts, registered design professionals, professional engineers, and credentailed construction consultants, the firm brings national experience and local capabilities to Anaheim region.

    Anaheim California engineering expert witnessAnaheim California engineering consultantAnaheim California window expert witnessAnaheim California expert witness windowsAnaheim California construction claims expert witnessAnaheim California roofing construction expertAnaheim California architecture expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Partner John Toohey is Nominated for West Coast Casualty’s Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence!

    March 11, 2024 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is honored to share that Newport Beach Partner John Toohey is nominated for West Coast Casualty’s 2024 Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence! Every year, West Coast Casualty recognizes an individual who is committed, trustworthy, and has contributed years to the betterment of the construction defect community. The award is named after the late Judge Jerrold S. Oliver who is considered a “founding father” in the alternate resolution process in construction claims and litigation. Each year, members of the construction community are asked to nominate individuals who invoke the same spirit as Judge Oliver. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Aarow Equipment v. Travelers- An Update

    January 16, 2024 —
    Previously here at Musings, I discussed the application of pay if paid clauses and the Miller Act. The case that prompted the discussion was the Aarow Equipment & Services, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Co. case in which the Eastern District of Virginia Federal Court determined that a “pay if paid” clause coupled with a proper termination could defeat a Miller Act bond claim. However, as I found out a couple of weeks ago at the VSB’s Construction Law and Public Contracts section meeting, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded this case in an unpublished opinion (Aarow Equipment & Services, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Co.) In it’s opinion, the 4th Circuit looked at some of the more “interesting” aspects of this case. One of these circumstances was that Syska (the general contractor) directed Aarow to construct sedimentary ponds and other water management measures around the project (the “pond work”), which both agreed was outside of the scope of the work defined in their subcontract. Syska asked that the government agree to a modification of the prime contract and asked Aarow to wait to submit its invoice for the pond work until after the government issued a modification to the prime contract and Syska issued a change order to the subcontract. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Don’t Spoil Me: Oklahoma District Court Rules Against Spoliation Sanctions

    January 08, 2024 —
    In Okla. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Omega Flex, Inc., No. CIV-22-18-D, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 197755, the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma (the District Court) determined spoliation sanctions were not warranted after a home was demolished for repair following a joint scene examination. The insurer, Oklahoma Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company (Insurer) provided a policy of insurance to Michael and Sondra Diel (the Diels). On July 11, 2020, the Diels’ home was struck by lightning and their attic caught fire. Following the loss, Insurer retained both counsel and fire origin and cause experts to inspect the Diels’ property. Insurer’s counsel informed in-house counsel for Omega Flex, Inc. (Omega Flex) via a letter dated July 14, 2020, that a preliminary investigation indicated the fire may have been caused by an Omega Flex product—specifically, TracPipe Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST). Insurer’s counsel invited Omega Flex to inspect the property, noting: “It is anticipated that the loss will exceed $300,000” and stating that any inspection “must be completed during the next two weeks. At that time, the homeowner will proceed with demolition to rebuild.” (Emphasis added). Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kyle Rice, White and Williams
    Mr. Rice may be contacted at ricek@whiteandwilliams.com

    Balancing Risk and Reward: The Complexities of Stadium Construction Projects

    April 15, 2024 —
    From grand designs to opening day, stadium construction projects present a captivating blend of high-profile opportunities and significant challenges and risks. Navigating this complex landscape is not easy, but when managed properly, the potential rewards, both in terms of reputation and finances, can make it a gamble worth taking. While each stadium project is different, some of the more common risks include:
    1. Securing adequate labor, materials and equipment based on the size of the project;
    2. Logistical concerns regarding the concurrent performance of multiple trade scopes on a single site;
    3. Protection of work in place from weather due to the large footprint of the stadium project;
    4. Cash flow issues caused by protracted change order processing, conflicting and/or onerous payment requirements from project financing entities, and reimbursement of considerable monthly general condition costs; and
    5. Meeting the schedule requirements for the project.
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gregory A. Eichorn, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Eichorn may be contacted at geichorn@pecklaw.com

    Risky Business: Contractual Versus Equitable Rights of Subrogation

    December 16, 2023 —
    In Zurich Am. Ins. Co. v. Infrastructure Eng’g. Inc., 2023 Ill. App. LEXIS 383, the insurer, Zurich American Insurance Company (Insurer) proceeded as subrogee of Community College District No. 508 d/b/a City Colleges of Chicago and CMO, a Joint Venture. The Appellate Court of Illinois, First District (Appellate Court) addressed whether Insurer – who issued a builder’s risk policy to insure a building during construction – could subrogate on behalf of the building owner, City Colleges of Chicago (City Colleges), who was part of the joint venture and an additional named insured, but who had not been directly paid for the underlying loss. The Appellate Court determined that the policy language established that the carrier was contractually permitted to subrogate on behalf of all additional named insureds on the policy, including the building owner. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kyle Rice, White and Williams
    Mr. Rice may be contacted at ricek@whiteandwilliams.com

    The Word “Estimate” in a Contract Matters as to a Completion Date

    February 12, 2024 —
    Language in a contract matters. The word “estimates” or “estimated” matters particularly when it comes to a date certain such as a substantial completion or completion date. Remember this. Here is an example. In Parque Towers Developers, LLC v. Pilac Management, Ltd., 49 Fla.L.Weekly D190a (Fla. 3d DCA 2024), a trial court held that the developer did not complete the construction of five condominium units by the date in the purchase agreements. The developer appealed because “[t]he agreements contain no date certain for the completion of the units, but rather include a clause that ‘Seller estimates it will substantially complete construction of the Unit, in the manner specified in this Agreement, by December 31, 2017, subject to extensions resulting from ‘Force Majeure (the ‘Outside Date’).’” Parque Towers, supra. Another provision in the purchase agreements stated, “[w]henver this Agreement requires Seller to complete or substantially complete any item of construction, that item will be understood to be complete or substantially complete when so completed or substantially completed in Seller’s opinion. Id. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Action Needed: HB24-1230 Spells Trouble for Colorado Construction Industry and its Insurers

    March 25, 2024 —
    In an apparent gift to plaintiffs’ construction defect lawyers, Representatives Parenti and Bacon introduced House Bill 24-1230 on February 12, 2024. The bill was assigned to the House Judiciary Committee and is scheduled for hearing on March 6th, during the afternoon session beginning at 1:30 pm. To date, the bill does not have any senate sponsors, perhaps because the senators are more interested in serving their constituents’ needs for attainable housing than in lining the pockets of their plaintiffs’ construction defect attorney friends. According to the bill’s summary, HB 24-1230 contains the following provisions: Current law declares void any express waivers of or limitations on the legal rights or remedies provided by the “Construction Defect Action Reform Act” or the “Colorado Consumer Protection Act.” Sections 1 and 4 make it a violation of the “Colorado Consumer Protection Act” to obtain or attempt to obtain a waiver or limitation that violates the aforementioned current law. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Newport Beach Team on Obtaining a Defense Verdict in Favor of their Subcontractor Client!

    April 02, 2024 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara’s Newport Beach Partner Morgan Stiefel and Associate Brandon Cook obtained a defense verdict after years-long litigation in favor of their subcontractor client. This lawsuit stemmed from a claim made by Plaintiff for eye injuries arising out of claimed negligence and strict liability associated with our client’s performance of a sandblasting job at a construction site adjacent to Plaintiff’s home. Plaintiff alleges that while she was in her backyard, sand hit her in the eyes at a high velocity speed, resulting in permanent damage to her eyes. We argued our clients took all necessary safety precautions in the performance of this job, and Plaintiff’s eye irritation symptoms could not have been caused by our client. All of her alleged injuries were either pre-existing or could be explained by circumstances other than our client’s actions. Through expert testimony and our arguments, we were able to show the jury that Plaintiff lied about the sand entering her eyes at a high velocity and her symptoms being caused by our clients’ performance of the sandblasting job. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP