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

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

    The Rubber Hits the Ramp: A Maryland Personal Injury Case

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2022 New York – Metro Super Lawyers®

    Social Engineering Scams Are On the Rise – Do I Have Insurance Coverage for That?

    City in Ohio Sues Over Alleged Roof Defects

    Construction and Contract Issues Blamed for Problems at Anchorage Port

    Nevada Construction Defect Lawyers Dead in Possible Suicides

    Will Claims By Contractors on Big Design-Build Projects Ever End?

    Texas School District Accepts Settlement Agreement in Construction Defect Case

    Surplus Lines Carrier Can Force Arbitration in Louisiana Despite Statute Limiting Arbitration

    Insurers' Communications Through Brokers Not Privileged

    “Since You Asked. . .”

    Contractor Sues Supplier over Defective Products

    Michigan Supreme Court Finds Faulty Subcontractor Work That Damages Insured’s Work Product May Constitute an “Occurrence” Under CGL Policy

    CA Supreme Court Permits Insurers to Bring Direct Actions Seeking Reimbursement of Excessive Fees Against Cumis Counsel Under Limited Circumstances

    CFTC Establishes Climate-Risk Unit, Echoing Other Biden Administration Agency Themes

    Las Vegas Student Housing Developer Will Name Replacement Contractor

    Colorado’s Housing Crisis: How S.B. 25-131 Could Be a Step in the Right Direction

    Attorneys Fees Under California’s Prompt Payment Statutes. Contractor’s “Win” Fails the Sniff Test

    Illinois Lawmakers Approve Carpenters Union's Legislation to Help Ensure Workers Are Paid What They're Owed

    Repairs Commencing on Defect-Ridden House from Failed State Supreme Court Case

    Taking Service Network Planning to the Next Level

    Cold Stress Safety and Protection

    AB 1701 Has Passed – Developers and General Contractors Are Now Required to Double Pay for Labor Due to Their Subcontractors’ Failure to Pay

    Fifth Circuit Holds Insurer Owes Duty to Defend Latent Condition Claim That Caused Fire Damage to Property Years After Construction Work

    What California’s COVID-19 Reopening Means for the Construction Industry

    ABA’s Fundamentals of Construction Law, 3rd Edition

    Sellers of South Florida Mansion Failed to Disclose Construction Defects

    New York's Highest Court Says Asbestos Causation Requires Evidence Of Sufficient Exposure To Sustain Liability

    The Devil is in the Details: The Texas Construction Trust Fund Pitfalls Residential Remodelers (and General Contractors) Should Avoid

    Ex-Construction Firm That Bought a $75m Michelangelo to Delist

    Building in Arizona’s Data Center Boom: How Federal Executive Orders, State Regulation, and National-Security Policy Are Reshaping the Rules for Developers

    EPA Threatens Cut in California's Federal Highway Funds

    On-Site Supersensing and the Future of Construction Automation – Discussion with Aviad Almagor

    Crews Tested By Rocky Ground, Utility Challenges

    The Future of Pandemic Coverage for Real Estate Owners and Developers

    Coverage for Named Windstorm Removed by Insured, Terminating Such Coverage

    Colorado House Bill 19-1170: Undefined Levels of Mold or Dampness Can Make a Leased Residential Premises Uninhabitable

    Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Holds that Nearly All Project Labor Agreements are Illegal

    Failure to Strictly Adhere to Limitations for Flood Claim Leads to Denial

    As California Faces Mandatory Water Use Reductions How Will the Construction Industry be Impacted?

    Congratulations to Las Vegas Partner Jeffrey W. Saab and Associate Shanna B. Carter on Obtaining Another Defense Award at Arbitration!

    Traub Lieberman Partner Rina Clemens Selected as a 2023 Florida Super Lawyers® Rising Star

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    Landlords Challenge U.S. Eviction Ban and Continue to Oust Renters

    The 2025 Legal Horizon for U.S. Offshore Wind

    Illinois Insureds are Contesting One Carrier's Universal Denial to Covid-19 Losses

    Understand Agreements in Hold Harmless and Indemnity Provisions

    Jersey Shore Town Trying Not to Lose the Man vs. Nature Fight on its Eroded Beaches

    New Jersey Court Adopts Continuous Trigger for Construction Defect Claims
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Through over four thousand construction and design related expert witness designations, the Anaheim, California Construction Expert Directory delivers a wide range of trial support and consulting services to developers, risk managers, and construction claims professionals concerned with construction defect, scheduling, and delay claims. BHA provides construction related litigation support and expert witness services to the building industry's most recognized companies, Fortune 500 builders, CGL carriers, risk managers, and a variety of municipalities. Employing in house assets which include construction cost and scheduling experts, registered design professionals, forensic engineers, certified professional estimators, the firm brings national experience and local capabilities to Anaheim and the surrounding areas.

    Anaheim California expert witness roofingAnaheim California building expertAnaheim California construction cost estimating expert witnessAnaheim California construction code expert witnessAnaheim California expert witness commercial buildingsAnaheim California building envelope expert witnessAnaheim California expert witness structural engineer
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Ayushi Neogi Published in ADC Defense Comment on Arbitration in Evolving Plaintiff-Friendly Landscape

    May 12, 2026 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Senior Counsel Ayushi Neogi has authored an article in the Association of Defense Counsel of Northern California and Nevada’s Defense Comment magazine examining the shifting landscape of arbitration following the Ending Forced Arbitration Act. Titled “Compelling Arbitration in a Post-Ending Forced Arbitration Act, Plaintiff-Friendly Landscape,” the article analyzes how recent legislative changes are reshaping arbitration strategy, particularly as employees gain greater ability to bypass arbitration in certain claims. Neogi provides practical insight into how courts are responding and what this means for defense counsel navigating increasingly complex and plaintiff-friendly environments. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    That’s a Wrap! Pennsylvania Court Holds Arbitration Clause in Online Agreement Unenforceable

    May 14, 2026 —
    In Duffy v. Tatum, 2026 Pa. Super. LEXIS 112, 2026 PA Super 41, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania (Superior Court) considered whether an arbitration provision contained in the online Terms of Service on the defendant’s website were enforceable. The plaintiff, Daniel Duffy (Duffy), visited the website of defendant, Dolly, Inc. (Dolly), to purchase moving services. Duffy selected the number of movers, items to be moved and the type of vehicle needed. To complete the booking, the website required Duffy to checkmark a box labeled “By checking this box I accept the Dolly Terms of Service.” Duffy did not have to open the link or scroll to the bottom of the agreement before being able to click on the checkmark box. The Terms of Service included an arbitration provision requiring that any dispute related to the moving services to be resolved by arbitration in accordance with the American Arbitration Association. The Terms of Service did not include any statement that the user was waiving the right to a jury trial. The Superior Court found the internet Terms of Service unenforceable. During the moving process, an accident occurred and injured Duffy. In May 2024, Duffy and his wife sued Dolly and other related entities alleging negligence and loss of consortium. Dolly filed preliminary objections alleging that the parties agreed to alternative dispute resolution. The lower court overruled the preliminary objections, finding that Dolly’s website did not provide reasonably obvious notice of its Terms of Service to Duffy and, as such, Duffy never agreed to waive his constructional right to a jury trial. Dolly filed an appeal to the Superior Court. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    End of an (Endangerment) Era

    February 23, 2026 —
    On February 12, 2026, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the repeal of the 2009 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Endangerment Finding and the elimination of all federal GHG emission standards for motor vehicles and engines.1 The EPA characterized the action as the “single largest deregulatory action in U.S. history.”2 This development marks a fundamental shift in federal climate policy under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and is expected to trigger immediate and extensive litigation. In Massachusetts v. EPA, the U.S. Supreme Court held that GHGs qualify as “air pollutants” under the CAA and that the EPA must determine whether emissions from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare under CAA Section 202(a).3 Following this decision, on December 7, 2009, the EPA issued two findings. First, the EPA classified six different GHGs as threatening public health and welfare. Second, the EPA determined that emissions from new motor vehicles contribute to that endangerment.4 Although the findings themselves imposed no direct regulatory requirements, they served as the legal predicate for GHG emission standards for light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles, and later for other CAA programs affecting statutory sources. In 2012, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld the Endangerment Finding and related regulations.5 Reprinted courtesy of Sukhmani K. Singh, Snell & Wilmer, Christopher P. Colyer, Snell & Wilmer and Sean M. Sherlock, Snell & Wilmer Ms. Singh may be contacted at ssingh@swlaw.com Mr. Colyer may be contacted at ccolyer@swlaw.com Mr. Sherlock may be contacted at ssherlock@swlaw.com Read the full story...

    Reminder: FOLLOW Your Well Drafted Contract Provisions

    February 17, 2026 —
    I have early and very often stated that your contract is the basis for everything relating to your construction project. Everything from “no damages for delay” clauses to attorney fees to indemnity are found in those documents. A well drafted construction contract sets the expectations for the project clearly and, aside from just making it easier on everyone for a successful project, will ease things should there be any dispute later. However, all of the great drafting and pre-construction negotiation in the world won’t do you a bit of good if you don’t follow those provisions. I can’t count the number of times that a contractor or subcontractor has read and even understood the construction documents but then put the contract in the drawer and didn’t look at it again. Your experienced construction attorney, while helpful at the drafting and negotiation stages and beyond, cannot help do the work. Your lawyer can help you negotiate and highlight the notice provisions of the contract but cannot provide that notice to the Owner or General Contractor when you have a claim. In short, the best contract in the world is only as good as those that are following it. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Reducing Rework on Construction Projects Benefits Budget, Schedule and Financial Loss

    February 10, 2026 —
    The costs of not building it right the first time is statistically staggering—some research suggests up to 20% of the total project costs. This article highlights the costs of re-work, provides a financial worksheet to track the costs of re-work, and a trusted tool to help reduce the impact of re-work. Typically, when discussing rework, one thinks of the labor and material costs, but there are other costs associated with rework that are less easily quantified:
    • Liquidated damages and related legal costs
    • Potential for increasing safety incidents associated with rework
    • Morale loss due to performing rework
    • Loss of previously trained workers due to delays caused by rework
    • Reputational loss and the inability to bid on future work
    • Challenges of future work to be performed due to schedule delays on a current project
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Clarke, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Clarke may be contacted at brianclarke1121@aol.com Read the full story...

    FTC Issues Warning Letters to Property Management Software Providers on Price Transparency

    January 26, 2026 —
    Atlanta, Ga. (December 23, 2025) - On December 8, 2025 the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) sent what it is describing as a “Warning Letter” to companies that provide property management software to landlords (“Software Providers”). While the letter does not speak specifically to landlords, landlords can still use the information contained in the letter to adopt best practices to avoid potential enforcement action. The Warning Letter references two high profile civil enforcement actions the FTC has undertaken in the last two years: FTC v. Invitation Homes, and FTC v. Greystar Real Estate Partners, LLC, et al., two cases in which the FTC targeted landlords for what it deemed unfair or deceptive advertising practices. Citing those cases, the FTC warns software providers that they must provide platforms on which landlords can accurately advertise the total monthly cost of a rental property rather than simply advertising the monthly rental payment. The FTC then warns that failure to create platforms that share the total monthly payments may result in enforcement action. Reprinted courtesy of Christine Tenley, Lewis Brisbois, Patrick A. Garcia, Lewis Brisbois and Michael Hettig, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Tenley may be contacted at Christine.Tenley@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Garcia may be contacted at Patrick.Garcia@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Hettig may be contacted at Michael.Hettig@lewisbrisbois.com Read the full story...

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in Hudson Valley Magazine’s 2026 Top Lawyers List

    March 24, 2026 —
    Traub Lieberman is pleased to announce that six Partners from the White Plains, NY office have been included in the 2026 edition of the Hudson Valley Magazine’s Top Lawyers in the Hudson Valley list. This annual guide recognizes more than 270 of the region's leading attorneys. Insurance:
    • Copernicus Gaza
    • Jonathan Harwood
    • Lisa Rolle
    • Lisa Shrewsberry
    Reprinted courtesy of Copernicus T. Gaza, Traub Lieberman, Jonathan R. Harwood, Traub Lieberman, Lisa M. Rolle, Traub Lieberman, Lisa L. Shrewsberry, Traub Lieberman, Christopher Russo, Traub Lieberman and Hillary J. Raimondi, Traub Lieberman Mr. Gaza may be contacted at cgaza@tlsslaw.com Mr. Harwood may be contacted at jharwood@tlsslaw.com Ms. Rolle may be contacted at lrolle@tlsslaw.com Ms. Shrewsberry may be contacted at lshrewsberry@tlsslaw.com Mr. Russo may be contacted at crusso@tlsslaw.com Ms. Raimondi may be contacted at hraimondi@tlsslaw.com Read the full story...

    Seventh Circuit, With an Assist From the Illinois Supreme Court, Finds That “Pollution Exclusion” Bars Coverage For Emissions Allowed Under Regulatory Permit

    April 20, 2026 —
    In Griffith Foods Int’l Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, 24-1217 & 24-1223 (7th Cir. Mar. 13, 2026), the Seventh Circuit addressed the meaning and scope of a pollution exclusion in a standard-form commercial general liability insurance policy for underlying injuries caused by ethylene oxide (EtO) emissions. The insurance dispute arose out of underlying tort litigation involving bodily injury claims, including cancer, allegedly caused by emissions of ethylene oxide over a 35-year period from 1984 through 2019 by Griffith Foods International and later Sterigenics U.S. The pollution exclusion at issue generally barred coverage for “bodily injury” arising out of the discharge, dispersal, release or escape of smoke, vapors, soot, fumes, acids, alkalis, toxic chemicals, or other irritants, contaminants or pollutants. Interpreting similar exclusions, the Illinois Supreme Court has previously held that the standard CGL pollution exclusion bars coverage for bodily injuries caused by traditional environmental pollution (essentially industrial emissions of pollutants), but not by more commonplace emissions (such as carbon monoxide from a residential furnace or excess chlorine in a backyard swimming pool). See American States Insurance Co. v. Koloms, 177 Ill. 2d 473 (Ill. 1997). In Griffith Foods, the District Court initially concluded that the pollution exclusion did not apply because the companies emitted EtO pursuant to a permit issued by the IEPA. The District Court reached this latter conclusion by applying Erie Insurance Exchange v. Imperial Marble Corp., 957 N.E.2d 1214 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011), an Illinois intermediate appellate court decision finding it ambiguous whether a CGL policy’s pollution exclusion barred coverage for emissions authorized by regulatory permit. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com