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

    President Trump’s Infrastructure Plan Requires a Viable Statutory Framework (PPP Statutes)[i]

    Congratulations 2016 DE, NJ, and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Investigators Explain Focus on Pre-Collapse Cracking in Florida Bridge

    On to Year Thirteen for Blog

    California Indemnity and Defense Construction Law Changes for 2013

    Contractor Sues Yelp Reviewer for Defamation

    Flag on the Play! Expired Contractor’s License!

    Motion to Dismiss Denied Regarding Insureds' Claim For Collapse

    Goldman Veteran Said to Buy Mortgages After Big Short

    Bankruptcy on a Construction Project: Coronavirus Edition

    California Contractor License Bonds to Increase in 2016

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives First Tier Ranking by U.S. News and World Reports

    United States Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in EEOC Subpoena Case

    Contractor’s Coverage For Additional Insured Established by Unilateral Contract

    Surge in Home Completions Tamps Down Inflation as Fed Meets

    South Carolina Legislature Defines "Occurrence" To Include Property Damage Arising From Faulty Workmanship

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

    Canada's Ex-Attorney General Set to Testify About SNC-Lavalin Scandal

    Insurance Law Alert: Incorporation of Defective Work Does Not Result in Covered Property Damage in California Construction Claims

    Form Contracts are Great, but. . .

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorney Alan Packer Selected to the 2017 Northern California Super Lawyers List

    New California Construction Laws for 2020

    First Railroad Bridge Between Russia and China Set to Open

    Developer Africa Israel Wins a Round in New York Condominium Battle

    School Board Settles Construction Defect Suit

    Colorado General Assembly Sets Forth Prerequisites for an Insurance Company to Use Failure to Cooperate as a Defense to a Claim for First Party Insurance Benefits

    South Carolina’s New Insurance Data Security Act: Pebbles Before a Landslide?

    Colorado Abandons the “Completed and Accepted Rule” in Favor of the “Foreseeability Rule” in Determining a Contractor’s Duty to a Third Party After Work Has Been Completed

    Time Limits on Hidden Construction Defects

    Philadelphia Revises Realty Transfer Tax Treatment of Acquired Real Estate Companies

    Arbitration: For Whom the Statute of Limitations Does Not Toll in Pennsylvania

    U.K. Broadens Crackdown on Archaic Property Leasehold System

    The Utility of Arbitration Agreements in the Construction Industry

    Coverage Under Builder's Risk Policy Properly Excluded for Damage to Existing Structure Only

    White House’s New Draft Guidance Limiting NEPA Review of Greenhouse Gas Impacts Is Not So New or Limiting

    Negligent Misrepresentation in Sale of Building Altered without Permits

    Anthony Garasi, Jared Christensen and August Hotchkin are Recognized as Nevada Legal Elite

    Largest US Dam Removal Stirs Debate Over Coveted West Water

    No Collapse Coverage Where Policy's Collapse Provisions Deleted

    Virginia Allows Condominium Association’s Insurer to Subrogate Against a Condominium Tenant

    Turmoil Slows Rebuilding of Puerto Rico's Power Grid

    Flood Coverage Denied Based on Failure to Submit Proof of Loss

    Get Your Contracts Lean- Its Better than Dieting

    Is Arbitration Okay Under the Miller Act? It Is if You Don’t Object

    Senate Committee Approves Military Construction Funds

    Midview Board of Education Lawsuit Over Construction Defect Repairs

    Housing Sales Hurt as Fewer Immigrants Chase Owner Dream

    Delaware State Court Holds that Defective Workmanship Claims do not Trigger Coverage by a Builder’s Commercial General Liability Policy

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives First Tier Ranking

    Allocating Covered and Uncovered Damages in Jury Verdict
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from approximately 5000 engineering, construction, and builders standard of care related expert designations, the Anaheim, California Construction Expert Directory provides a wide range of trial support and construction consulting services to attorneys and construction practice groups concerned with construction defect and claims matters. BHA provides building claims investigation, testimony, and support services to the nation's most recognized construction practice groups, Fortune 500 builders, CGL carriers, owners, as well as a variety of public entities. Utilizing in house resources which comprise construction cost, scheduling, and delay experts, professional engineers, ASPE certified professional estimators, and construction safety professionals, the organization brings national experience and local capabilities to Anaheim and the surrounding areas.

    Anaheim California expert witness windowsAnaheim California OSHA expert witness constructionAnaheim California building code expert witnessAnaheim California stucco expert witnessAnaheim California building expertAnaheim California structural engineering expert witnessesAnaheim California construction scheduling expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Famed NYC Bridge’s Armor Is Focus of Suit Against French Company

    January 18, 2021 —
    French construction giant Vinci SA faces allegations it’s partly to blame for the degradation of the armor installed on New York City’s Kosciuszko Bridge to protect against terrorist attacks and accidents. Hardwire LLC, a Baltimore company that bid unsuccessfully on the project, previously sued one of its former executives for allegedly stealing its proprietary technology for bridge armor so he could win the contract. On Tuesday, Hardwire sought permission to add two units of Vinci to the suit, which claims damages of more than $40 million. The armor is “splitting, delaminating, and is in danger of falling off,” causing a “clear and present danger,” according to the proposed revised complaint filed in federal court in Maryland. The separation “leaves significant vulnerabilities for the bridge cable.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joel Rosenblatt, Bloomberg

    Wall Street’s Favorite Suburban Housing Bet Is Getting Crowded

    February 15, 2021 —
    Wall Street’s zest for a corner of suburban real estate long left to small landlords is reaching new heights, attracting institutional investors, homebuilders and apartment managers during a pandemic that has ignited demand for larger homes. The pension manager for the Canadian Mounties is the latest investor in single-family rentals, joining JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s asset-management arm and Nuveen Real Estate in a bet that there are lots of Americans who want spare bedrooms and backyards, but don’t have cash for down payments. “It’s really an inflection point in SFR,” said Michael Carey, a senior director for Altus Group, an advisory firm. “It used to be an alternative asset class. Now people look at it as a solution.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Clark, Bloomberg

    Thank You for 14 Consecutive Years of Legal Elite Elections

    December 29, 2020 —
    Thanks to the Virginia legal community that has continued to elect me to the Virginia Business Legal Elite in the Construction Law Category for 14 years running. The 14 consecutive years of election to the Legal Elite in the Construction Category spans my time as a solo construction attorney. The fact that you all have continued to elect “100%” of the lawyers at The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC for the last 10 years is most gratifying and only confirms that my decision to “go solo” over 10 years ago was a good one. To be included in this list of top construction attorneys is both humbling and gratifying. For the complete list of the Virginia construction lawyers that were elected along with me, see the 2020 Virginia Business Legal Elite in Construction Law. Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Virtual Mediation – How Do I Make It Work for Me?

    December 21, 2020 —
    Mediation took the construction industry by storm in the late 1980’s and has become a staple for resolving construction claims. Today, most construction contracts, including the ConsensusDocs, require mediation as a condition precedent to binding dispute resolution, whether it be arbitration or litigation. As a result, many construction executives have spent long hours sitting in conference rooms trying to reach resolution with their counterpart through mediation in order to avoid the alternative – costly arbitration or litigation that often produces an unsatisfactory result. While many businesses have foreclosed the possibility of meeting in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the contractual requirements for mediation remain. Thus, in most cases, in-person or live mediation is no longer an option; however, attorneys and mediators have developed a virtual process to replace the live process. With a new process comes many questions: Does the virtual process work? What are the best practices and pitfalls for virtual mediation? Will virtual mediation continue when COVID-19 fades away? How do I make virtual mediation work for me? The answers to these questions and more are discussed below. Reprinted courtesy of Adrian L. Bastianelli, III, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Jennifer Harris, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Bastianelli may be contacted at abastianelli@pecklaw.com Ms. Harris may be contacted at jharris@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Implied Warranty Claims–Not Just a Seller’s Risk: Builders Beware!

    May 10, 2021 —
    One of the thorns in the side of every construction defect defense litigator is the implied warranty claim. The “implied warranty” is a promise that Colorado law is “implied” into every contract for a sale of a new home that the home was built in a workmanlike manner and is suitable for habitation. Defense attorneys dislike the implied warranty claim because it is akin to a strict liability standard. All that is required to provide the claim is that an aspect of construction is found to be defective — i.e., inconsistent with the building code or manufacturer’s installation instructions — regardless of whether the work was performed to the standard of care. The implied warranty claim is therefore easier to prove than a negligence claim, where a claimant must prove that a construction professional’s work fell below a standard of reasonable care. Additionally, it is not a defense to an implied warranty claim that the homeowners or the HOA are, themselves, partially liable for the defects where damage is due in part to insufficient or deferred maintenance, as it is for negligence claims. The only redeeming aspect to the implied warranty claim was that, until recently, it was believed that it could only be asserted by a first purchaser against the seller of an improvement, because the implied warranty arises out of the sale contract. Recently, the Colorado Court of Appeals opinion in Brooktree Village Homeowners Association v. Brooktree Village, LLC, 19CA1635, decided on November 19, 2020, extended the reach of the implied warranty — though just how far remains to be seen. Specifically, a division of the Court of Appeals held that an HOA can assert implied warranty claims on behalf of its members for defects in common areas, even where there is no direct contractual relationship between the parties to base the warranty upon. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Carin Ramirez, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Ramirez may be contacted at ramirez@hhmrlaw.com

    New Addition To New Jersey Court Rules Impacts More Than Trial Practice

    November 16, 2020 —
    On September 1, 2020, New Jersey adopted a brand-new rule of procedure, Rule 4:25-8, which properly defines motions in limine. On its face, the new rule prohibits, broadly, filing motions in limine that may have a dispositive effect on the case. Most notably, the rule expressly eliminates the ability to move, on motion in limine, to bar expert testimony in matters in which such experts are required to sustain a party’s burden of proof. This effectively makes the summary judgment phase of litigation the last chance to bar experts from a jury trial or take any other dispositive action The new rule comes at a time in which the evidentiary standard for experts is shifting in New Jersey. In October 2018, the New Jersey Supreme Court reconciled the framework for analyzing the reliability of expert testimony under N.J.R.E. 702 and 703 in In re: Accutane Litigation. Significantly, New Jersey, a traditional Frye jurisdiction, incorporated certain federal Daubert factors for expert “use by our courts” but, overall, fell short of adopting the Daubert standard as a whole. In applying the relevant Daubert factors, the trial court in Accutane held that the subject experts’ methodologies were unsound due to the failure to apply fundamentals of the scientific method of the medical-evidence hierarchy. The decision resulted in the dismissal of over 3,000 claims. Reprinted courtesy of Thomas Regan, Lewis Brisbois and Karley Kamaris, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Regan may be contacted at Thomas.Regan@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Kamaris may be contacted at Karley.Kamaris@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Washington Trial Court Narrows Definition of First Party Claimant, Clarifies Available Causes of Action in Commercial Property Loss Context

    January 04, 2021 —
    The law in the State of Washington, albeit clear on issues regarding first party claimants, was recently challenged in the matter of Eye Associates Northwest, P.C. v. Sedgwick et. al. However, despite this challenge of first impression, the court limited the application of the term “first party claimant” (a term of art akin to “insured”) based upon the wording of a loss payee clause, as well as taking into consideration and harmonizing the wording of the leases, other provisions in the policy regarding tenant improvements, and the simple fact that Eye Associates was not named in the policy whatsoever. In Eye Associates, the plaintiff leased office space in a high-rise medical office building, insured by three separate insurance companies. A water loss caused damage to the plaintiff’s leased space, and the plaintiff brought suit against the owner of the building, its insurers, the property manager, a third-party administrator (TPA), and two individual adjusters assigned to inspect and adjust the water loss claim. Reprinted courtesy of Kathleen A. Nelson, Lewis Brisbois and Jonathan R. Missen, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Nelson may be contacted at Kathleen.Nelson@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Missen may be contacted at Jonathan.Missen@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York Court Finds No Coverage Owed for Asbestos Losses Because Insured Failed to Prove Material Terms

    February 15, 2021 —
    In the long-tail insurance context, it is not unusual to have issues arise addressing “lost” or “missing” policies. In an opinion issued on January 22, 2021, a New York court ruled that an insurer did not owe coverage to its insured for underlying asbestos claims because the insured had failed to establish the material terms of a “lost” policy under which it sought coverage for the underlying claims. The lawsuit, Cosmopolitan Shipping Company, Inc. v. Continental Insurance Company,[1] arose out of a coverage dispute between Plaintiff Cosmopolitan Shipping Co., Inc. (Cosmopolitan) and its insurance carrier, Continental Insurance Company (CIC), in connection with bodily injury claims arising out of asbestos exposure. The case provides a good analysis of what an insured must do to establish coverage under a “lost” or “missing” policy. During and after World War II, Cosmopolitan chartered and operated a number of shipping vessels on behalf of United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA). In the 1980s, seamen who had worked on board Cosmopolitan’s vessels between 1946 and 1948 filed lawsuits against Cosmopolitan seeking damages for injuries arising out of alleged exposure to asbestos on Cosmopolitan’s vessels. Cosmopolitan sought coverage from CIC for the claims, alleging that CIC had insured Cosmopolitan’s vessels during the relevant time period under a protection and indemnity policy issued to the UNRAA (the P&I Policy). Reprinted courtesy of Gregory S. Capps, White and Williams LLP and Marianne E. Bradley, White and Williams LLP Mr. Capps may be contacted at cappsg@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Bradley may be contacted at bradleym@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of