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

    In Review: SCOTUS Environmental and Administrative Decisions in the 2020 Term

    Texas Supreme Court Holds Anadarko’s $100M Deepwater Horizon Defense Costs Are Not Subject To Joint Venture Liability Limits

    Benford’s Law: A Seldom Used Weapon in Forensic Accounting

    New York Appellate Court Affirms 1966 Insurance Policy Continues to Cover WTC Asbestos Claims

    Best Lawyers Honors Hundreds of Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Names Four Partners ‘Lawyers of the Year’

    Avoiding Construction Defect “Nightmares” in Florida

    New Stormwater Climate Change Tool

    Construction Contract Clauses Which Go Bump in the Night – Part 1

    In One of the First Civil Jury Trials to Proceed Live in Los Angeles Superior Court During Covid, Aneta Freeman Successfully Prevailed on Behalf of our Client and Obtained a Directed Verdict and Non-Suit

    Supreme Court Finds Insurance Coverage for Intentional (and Despicable) Act of Contractor’s Employee

    $5 Million Construction Defect Lawsuit over Oregon Townhomes

    Nine Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Recognized as Southern California Super Lawyers

    Hidden Risks Behind Today’s Stadium Construction Boom

    Don’t Believe Everything You Hear: Liability of Asbestos Pipe Manufacturer Upheld Despite Exculpatory Testimony of Plaintiff

    Newmeyer Dillion Secures Victory For Crown Castle In Years-Long Litigation With City Council Of Piedmont Over Small Cell Wireless Telecommunications Sites

    Condo Building Increasing in Washington D.C.

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 7: How to Successfully Prepare, Submit and Negotiate the Claim

    “Freelance Isn’t Free” New Regulations Adopted in New York City Requiring Written Contracts with Independent Contractors

    Arbitration Clause Found Ambiguous in Construction Defect Case

    Thank You for 14 Consecutive Years of Legal Elite Elections

    OSHA Again Pushes Back Record-Keeping Rule Deadline

    Contract Not So Clear in South Carolina Construction Defect Case

    N.J. Appellate Court Applies Continuous Trigger Theory in Property Damage Case and Determines “Last Pull” for Coverage

    Virginia Decision Emphasizes Importance of Naming All Necessary Parties

    Contractor’s Claim for Interest on Subcontractor’s Defective Work Claim Gains Mixed Results

    You Can Pay Me Now, or . . .

    Contractor Owed a Defense

    New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ Bill

    CA Supreme Court Expands Scope of Lawyers’ Statute of Limitations to Non-Legal Malpractice Claims – Confusion Predicted for Law and Motion Judges

    Rattlesnake Bite Triggers Potential Liability for Walmart

    US Energy Dept. Withdraws Federal ‘Zero-Emissions Building’ Definition

    More In-Depth Details on the Davis-Bacon Act Overhaul

    Engineer at Flint Negligence Trial Details Government Water Errors

    Is Your Construction Business Feeling the Effects of the Final DBA Rule?

    NY Appellate Court Clarifies Hearsay Standards for Admission of Accident-Related Entries in Medical Records

    Utah’s Emerging Framework for Responsible Data Center Development

    Eleventh Circuit Vacates District Court Decision Finding No Duty to Defend Faulty Workmanship Claims

    Dear Engineer: Has your insurer issued a “Reservation of Rights” letter? (law note)

    Residential Mortgage Lenders and Servicers Beware of Changes to Rule 3002.1

    Bremer Whyte’s Newport Beach Team Prevails on a Motion for Summary Judgment in a Wrongful Death Case!

    Insurer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Earth Movement Exclusion Denied

    Formal Request for Time Extension Not Always Required to Support Constructive Acceleration

    Owner Taking Assignment of General Contractor’s Claims Against a Subcontractor(s)

    Insurer Cannot Abandon Defense Agreement on Underlying Asbestos Claims Against Insured

    Google Advances Green Goal With AES Deal for Carbon-Free Power

    Lien Law Change in Idaho

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured In Northern California Super Lawyers 2021!

    Not so Fast – Florida’s Legislature Overrules Gindel’s Pre-Suit Notice/Tolling Decision Related to the Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    "Ongoing Storm" Rules for the Northeast (Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York & Rhode Island)

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in “The Best Lawyers in America” & “Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch” 2025 Editions
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 4500 construction related expert witness designations, the Anaheim, California Construction Expert Directory delivers a comprehensive construction and design expert support solution to legal professionals and construction practice groups seeking meaningful resolution of construction defect and claims matters. BHA provides building related trial support and expert services to the nation's leading construction practice groups, Fortune 500 builders, general liability carriers, owners, as well as a variety of public entities. Employing in house assets which comprise construction standard of care consultants, registered architects, professional engineers, and credentialed building envelope experts, the firm brings regional experience and local capabilities to Anaheim and the surrounding areas.

    Anaheim California defective construction expertAnaheim California construction expert witness consultantAnaheim California consulting architect expert witnessAnaheim California building code compliance expert witnessAnaheim California roofing construction expertAnaheim California construction expert witness public projectsAnaheim California soil failure expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    White and Williams LLP Attorneys Recognized as PA and DE Super Lawyers

    July 06, 2026 —
    White and Williams LLP is proud to announce that eight attorneys in the firm’s Philadelphia office and one attorney in the firm's Delaware Office have been recognized on the 2026 Super Lawyers® and Rising Star lists. This recognition highlights our attorney's exceptional legal acumen and their commitment to client service excellence. Lawyers are selected for inclusion in Pennsylvania and Delaware Area Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars through a process that considers independent research, peer recognition and the professional achievements of attorneys from more than 70 practice areas. Approximately 2.5% of lawyers in each state are selected by the research team at Super Lawyers® to receive this honor. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    New York Construction: New Rules for Reporting and Cancellation Pay

    October 12, 2026 —
    Effective December 8, 2026, covered New York construction employers generally must provide up to four hours of reporting pay when an employee reports for a scheduled shift but receives no work, and two hours of pay when a scheduled shift is canceled with less than 12 hours’ notice. Separate requirements apply to certain prevailing-wage construction projects. Before the law takes effect, contractors should identify which projects and employees are covered and make sure their scheduling, payroll, labor, and contract practices are ready. What the New Law Requires New York’s Construction Reporting Pay Act introduces two principal compensation requirements for covered construction employees:
    • Reporting pay: An employee who reports for a scheduled shift but is not provided work generally must receive up to four hours of pay.
    • Shift-cancellation pay: An employee generally must receive two hours of pay when a scheduled shift is canceled with less than 12 hours’ notice.
    Reprinted courtesy of Meghan Douris, Seyfarth and Howard Wexler, Seyfarth Ms. Douris may be contacted at mdouris@seyfarth.com Mr. Wexler may be contacted at hwexler@seyfarth.com Read the full story...

    Fatalities Edge Down: New Data Reveals a Promising Decline

    April 27, 2026 —
    Construction fatalities in the United States declined slightly in 2024, according to new data released from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The sector recorded just over 1,000 worker deaths last year—a modest decrease from the previous year but still among the highest totals of any industry. Falls remained the leading cause of death, accounting for roughly one-third of all construction fatalities. Transportation incidents—including workers struck by vehicles or equipment—ranked second, followed by contact with objects or equipment and electrocutions. Reprinted courtesy of Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Motion for Summary Judgment Granted in Significant California Public Utilities Suit

    May 12, 2026 —
    Congratulations to Partner Mike D’Andrea and Associates Ruth Rasiah and Kaylah Abdullah in the Los Angeles office for obtaining a complete dismissal of their clients in a significant claim involving California’s Public Utilities regulations. After lengthy litigation, BWB&O’s Motion for Summary Judgment was granted against Claimant, Spectrum (Charter Communications), which resulted in a complete dismissal of the action against BWB&O’s clients. At issue was whether California’s Public Utilities Code shifted the common law duty to maintain certain utility equipment in residential areas within Southern California. After significant briefing, the Superior Court found that BWB&O correctly argued that the Public Utilities Code required utility companies, like Spectrum, to fully maintain utility equipment, and that private residents are not responsible for utility maintenance (even if the physical equipment is located on private property). Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Sometimes a General Damages Assessment is Enough. . .

    July 06, 2026 —
    It has been a while since I last posted here at Construction Law Musings. Life, law practice, and “blogger’s block” have taken their toll on the posting schedule. Hopefully this will be one of several upcoming posts now that the litigation schedule has lightened a bit over the summer. Today’s post is about damages. Specifically damage to a homeowner’s roof and her legal damages therefor. That last is of course a sentence that only a construction attorney (or other litigator) could possibly craft and have it make sense. Now, on with the case. . .In Hardesty Construction, Inc. v. Weedon, the facts are as follows: Ms. Weedon had hail damage to the roof of her home. She hired Hardesty Construction to repair and replace the roof. After the first roof was installed and failed inspection, a second roof was installed. The issue was that the first roof had a warranty and the second roof, installed similarly to the first (and allegedly with the same construction issues according to Ms. Weedon’s expert), was not provided with the promised warranty. As one may expect, Weedon sued Hardesty and Hardesty Construction for fraudulent inducement and breach of contract. At trial, Weedon testified, without objection, that her home was worth $40,000 less because of Hardesty Construction’s work, which was based partially on quotes Weedon received to fix the roof. The Circuit Court granted Hardesty Construction’s motion to strike Weedon’s fraudulent inducement claim, but not her other claims. A jury awarded Weedon $30,253.30 on her breach of contract claim. Hardesty Construction appealed, arguing the Circuit Court erred in (a) allowing the jury to consider Weedon’s valuation testimony because it was not based on her personal knowledge and (b) denying its motion to strike based on insufficient evidence as to damages. Weedon assigned cross-error in the Circuit Court’s decision to grant the motion to strike her fraudulent inducement claim against Samual Hardesty. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Trial-Tested Property Litigator Kimberlee Martin Joins Ball Janik LLP's Orlando Construction Defect Team

    October 06, 2026 —
    ORLANDO, FL, September 30, 2026 — Ball Janik LLP has added Kimberlee A. Martin to its Construction Defect Practice Group as an associate in the firm's Orlando office. For more than a decade, she has litigated matters in the fields of criminal defense, first-party property, and insurance disputes, taking cases and claims from inception through jury trial. It's the same path many of Ball Janik's clients face when construction goes wrong, and her arrival deepens the firm's trial bench in Central Florida. "Florida property owners are dealing with complex building problems and less time to act on them. That puts a premium on attorneys who can take a case the distance," said James C. Prichard, Managing Partner of Ball Janik LLP. "Kimberlee has carried property and insurance claims from pre-suit all the way through trial, working hand in hand with experts along the way. Community associations and commercial property owners need exactly that combination, and she brings it to our team on day one." Most recently, Kimberlee served as Litigation Director, where she oversaw homeowners' property claims in pre-suit and litigation, managed a substantial caseload, and guided associate attorneys on litigation strategy. Her civil work includes jury trials, summary judgment and dismissal motions, expert and witness depositions, mediations, and site inspections, along with close coordination with contractors, consultants, and other experts. That skill set maps directly onto construction defect and insurance recovery litigation, where cases often turn on site evidence, expert testimony, and a credible readiness to go to trial. "I've seen firsthand how much is at stake when a building has problems: owners' investments, residents' homes, and everyone's peace of mind," said Kimberlee. "Ball Janik is focused on exactly those clients, which made this a natural next step for my practice. I'm excited to join this team and help property owners hold the responsible parties accountable and get their buildings repaired." Kimberlee earned her J.D., cum laude, from Florida International University College of Law and her B.A. in political science, with a minor in legal studies, from the University of Central Florida. About Ball Janik LLP Ball Janik LLP is a Florida-based law firm offering construction defect, construction law, insurance recovery, and commercial litigation counsel, to its local and national clients. The firm was founded in 1982 and has expanded its capabilities, professionals, and geographic footprint. What started as a small firm focused on real property, land use, and litigation (known then as Ball Janik & Novack) has grown to a team of 70-plus attorneys and paralegals in five offices in Florida, with centuries of combined experience and capabilities. The firm has been recognized by Chambers USA, including for its construction law capabilities in Florida, U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers®, The Best Lawyers in America©, Super Lawyers, and Corporate International. Read more at www.balljanik.com.

    Citadel’s Miami HQ Construction on Hold After Accident, Report Says

    October 12, 2026 —
    Construction work on Citadel’s new headquarters in Miami has been paused following an accident on the site last week, the Wall Street Journal reported. The collapse of a rig on Monday prompted county authorities to issue a stop-work order pending an investigation, according to the newspaper, which cited a local building official. It’s unclear how long the stoppage will last or what caused the accident, the WSJ wrote on Sunday, adding that such probes can take up to six months. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Giulia Morpurgo, Bloomberg

    GRSM Defeats Class Certification in Precedent-Setting HOA Management Case

    September 15, 2026 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Partners Fletcher Alford and Kevin Liu and Associate Jigar Desai secured a favorable outcome on behalf of an HOA management company in a precedent-setting class action before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, obtaining denial of the plaintiff’s motion for class certification and dismissal without prejudice of the three claims at issue. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant received earnings credit payments from a bank in exchange for maintaining HOA deposit accounts and failed to disclose the arrangement to its HOA clients. The plaintiff sought more than $40 million in damages, asserting five claims: (1) breach of contract for failing to act in class members’ best interests by not disclosing the alleged earnings credit arrangement; (2) violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) based on alleged violations of California Civil Code §§ 5375, 5375.5, and 5380; (3) breach of fiduciary duty based on the alleged undisclosed arrangement; (4) violation of the UCL for unfair business practices arising from the alleged nondisclosure; and (5) unjust enrichment. The plaintiff sought class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2) and 23(b)(3) only as to its second, third, and fourth causes of action. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani