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

    Official Tried to Influence Judge against Shortchanged Subcontractor

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2017

    Mediating is Eye Opening

    Design Professional Liens: A Blueprint

    Lawmakers Strike Deal on New $38B WRDA

    Green Energy Can Complicate Real Estate Foreclosures

    Contractor Sues Yelp Reviewer for Defamation

    Federal Shutdown Idles Most OSHA Activity, Raising Safety and Compliance Concerns

    OSHA Advisory Committee, Assemble!

    David M. McLain, Esq. to Speak at the 2014 CLM Claims College

    New Utah & Colorado Homebuilder Announced: Jack Fisher Homes

    Is Construction in Arizona Back to Normal?

    City Wonders Who’s to Blame for Defective Wall

    Brian Newberry Accepted into ABOTA

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Recognized in “The Best Lawyers in America” & “Best Lawyers: One’s to Watch” 2024 Editions

    Third Circuit Court of Appeals Concludes “Soup to Nuts” Policy Does Not Include Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    Court Provides Guidance on ‘Pay-When-Paid’ Provisions in Construction Subcontracts

    Mitsui Fudosan Said to Consider Rebuilding Tilted Apartments

    Congratulations to Associate Madeline Arcellana on Her Selection as a Top Rank Attorney in Southern Nevada!

    From Waste to Wealth: Texas Supreme Court Ruling in Cactus Water Defines Produced Water Ownership, Sets Stage for Clarity on Critical Mineral Markets in Texas

    The Difference Between Seasonal Adverse Weather and Unusually Severe Weather (and How Contractors Can Protect Against Both)

    Prefatory Contract Language Cannot Be Used to Create an Ambiguity with Operative Provisions

    Jury Instruction That Fails to Utilize Concurrent Cause for Property Loss is Erroneous

    New York City Council’s Carbon Emissions Regulation Opposed by Real Estate Board

    Last Call: Tokyo Iconic Okura Hotel Meets the Wrecking Ball

    ABC Chapter President Comments on Miami Condo Collapse

    Discussion of History of Construction Defect Litigation in California

    Disjointed Proof of Loss Sufficient

    Expansion of Statutes of Limitations and Repose in K-12 and Municipal Construction Contracts

    Nevada Construction Defect Lawyers Dead in Possible Suicides

    Examining Best Practices for Fire Protection of Critical Systems in Buildings

    Illinois Appellate Court Holds Causation Can be Addressed in Appraisal Process

    Ex-Detroit Demolition Official Sentenced for Taking Bribes

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

    Consumer Fraud Claim against Insured is Not an "Occurrence"

    Navigating Complex Preliminary Notice Requirements

    California Supreme Court Confirms the Right to Repair Act as the Exclusive Remedy for Seeking Relief for Defects in New Residential Construction

    Super Lawyers Recognized Five Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

    Weyerhaeuser Leaving Home Building Business

    Hudson River PCB Cleanup Lands Back in Court

    Court of Appeal Shines Light on Collusive Settlement Agreements

    The Evolution of Construction Jobsite Safety: Lessons From the Field

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Prevents Coverage for Collapse

    Does the Miller Act Trump Subcontract Dispute Provisions?

    Association Insurance Company v. Carbondale Glen Lot E-8, LLC: Federal Court Reaffirms That There Is No Duty to Defend or Indemnify A Builder For Defective Construction Work

    In Appellate Division First, New York Appellate Team Successfully Invokes “Party Finality” Doctrine to Obtain Dismissal of Appeal for Commercial Guarantors

    Construction Attorneys Get an AI Assist in Document Crunch

    How Helsinki Airport Uses BIM to Create the Best Customer Experience

    A Survey of Trends and Perspectives in Construction Defect Decisions

    Perez Broke Records … But Should He Have Settled Earlier?
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Through more than four thousand engineering, construction, and builders standard of care related expert designations, the Anaheim, California Construction Expert Directory offers a wide range of trial support and construction consulting services to construction claims professionals concerned with construction defect and claims litigation. BHA provides construction claims investigation and expert services to the industry'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. Employing in house resources which include construction cost, scheduling, and delay experts, professional engineers, ASPE certified professional estimators, and construction safety professionals, the firm brings national experience and local capabilities to Anaheim region.

    Anaheim California civil engineering expert witnessAnaheim California structural engineering expert witnessesAnaheim California building code compliance expert witnessAnaheim California construction expert witnessAnaheim California defective construction expertAnaheim California architecture expert witnessAnaheim California structural concrete expert
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Appeals Court Upholds Skanska, Granite Win in ‘I-4 Ultimate’ JV Dispute

    June 15, 2026 —
    A federal appeals court has upheld a lower court’s decision requiring The Lane Construction Corp. to pay roughly $79 million in damages, plus interest, to joint venture partners Skanska USA Civil Southeast and Granite Construction for work on Florida’s I-4 Ultimate highway megaproject in Orlando, which was completed in 2022. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bryan Gottlieb, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Gottlieb may be contacted at gottliebb@enr.com

    UPDATED: No Easy Fix for Potomac River Sewage Spill, Now Estimated at $20M

    April 08, 2026 —
    One month after a collapsed pipeline north of Washington, D.C., spilled about 240 million gallons of raw sewage into the Potomac River and possibly between 300 and 400 million—which could be the largest wastewater spill in U.S. history—efforts are progressing to clear the damaged section and begin repairs despite weather and other impacts. Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, Engineering News-Record and Debra K. Rubin, Engineering News-Record Ms. Rubin may be contacted at rubind@enr.com Read the full story...

    Ball Janik LLP Welcomes Construction Defect Attorney and U.S. Air Force Veteran Jake Scott to its Fort Lauderdale Office

    June 02, 2026 —
    Ball Janik LLP, a leading construction defect and insurance recovery law firm, has welcomed Jake Scott as an associate in its Fort Lauderdale office. Scott joins the Construction Defect Practice Group, bringing experience across construction litigation that includes construction defect, contract dispute, and negligence matters, along with a track record of representing construction professionals through depositions, court appearances, and trial preparation to support the firm's steady growth and client service statewide. "We're excited to welcome Jake Scott to our Fort Lauderdale office and Construction Defect Practice Group," said James C. Prichard, Managing Partner at Ball Janik LLP. "We look forward to the fresh perspectives and legal solutions he will provide for community associations across South Florida." Scott is a results-driven attorney dedicated to providing strategic counsel for complex legal challenges. He has experience managing all phases of a case, from early investigation and discovery through trial preparation and settlement negotiations. Prior to joining Ball Janik, Scott served as an associate attorney in Fort Lauderdale, where he represented clients in construction litigation matters, handled depositions and court appearances, conducted legal research, and drafted pleadings, motions, and briefs. He also worked as an attorney in Tampa, where he represented contractors, subcontractors, and construction firms in defending claims involving construction defects, contractual disputes, and negligence, and worked closely with expert witnesses, engineers, and consultants to develop and present technical evidence. Scott's experience representing the development and building sides of construction disputes provides a valuable, contrast-driven perspective that supports the strategic evaluation of claims and practical approaches to resolution for Ball Janik's clients. A proud veteran, Scott served in the United States Air Force for eight years, including roles as an Airspace Control Officer and in Space Systems Operations, supporting safe space flight operations and satellite communications. Carrying the discipline of airborne operations, Scott worked in the aerospace sector as a Satellite Engineer and Orbital Analyst. He also held a role in the housing sector, supporting marketing and business development initiatives. Scott received his law degree from Stetson University College of Law. He attended American Military University, where he earned degrees in marketing, business management, and related support services. 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 50-plus attorneys and paralegals in 5 offices in Florida, with centuries of combined experience and capabilities. The firm has been recognized by Chambers USA, U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers®, The Best Lawyers in America©, and Corporate International. Read more here: https://www.balljanik.com.

    GRSM Partner Debra Ellwood Meppen Recognized as 2026 Legal Visionary by Los Angeles Times

    June 02, 2026 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani proudly congratulates Partner Debra Ellwood Meppen on being named a 2026 Legal Visionary by the Los Angeles Times. The LA Times Studios 2026 Legal Visionaries List recognizes lawyers in Southern California who “exemplify a forward-thinking approach to the law, elevating both their profession and the people who depend on it.” Meppen is recognized for helping shape the future of the legal profession through her leadership, professionalism, and integrity. Published as part of the May 2026 issue highlighting Southern California’s leading law firms and attorneys, the Legal Visionaries section honors attorneys making a significant impact on the legal industry and the broader business community. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    Potential Gap in Workers Compensation Immunity Statutory Framework

    June 02, 2026 —
    Workers compensation insurance is important. As an owner, you want to ensure the contractors you hire have workers compensation insurance. Assuming you hire a contractor that is statutorily exempt from workers compensation, you want to make sure, no exception, that any subcontractor that is hired has workers compensation insurance. (Regardless, you always want subcontractors to have workers compensation insurance.). In construction, the prime contractor serves as the “statutory employer” for purposes of workers compensation insurance. With workers compensation comes workers compensation immunity. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Insureds’ Altering Dates for Hailstorm Damage Justifies Denial of Claim

    June 02, 2026 —
    The Firth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the insurer due to the insureds’ failure to establish the date of loss after a hailstorm. Cutchall v. Chubb Lloyds Ins. Co. of Texas, 2026 WL 625633 (5th Cir. March 5, 2026). In September 2021, the Cutchalls made a claim on their policy for interior water damage due to a hailstorm that breached their roof. Chubb retained two engineers to inspect the home, but neither found evidence that a hailstorm caused the damage. Instead, the engineers concluded a variety of other causes, such as poor ventilation and as-built defects, caused the damage. Because Chubb concluded that some of these other causes were covered by the policy, it paid only for the covered portions. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Turnover Traps for Community Associations: Investigate First, Release Claims Later

    April 14, 2026 —
    Turnover of a community association from developer control to owner control is a uniquely vulnerable moment. Developers are increasingly presenting Florida condominium and homeowners’ associations with “standard” settlement or release agreements at turnover, often being framed as routine steps to finalize the transition of control. In reality, these agreements can have sweeping consequences, including the release of construction-defect claims before the association has conducted any meaningful independent evaluation. The developer has years of project knowledge and access to plans, subcontractors, and internal records. The newly elected board is just beginning to organize, obtain documents, and understand the property’s condition. Many defects, especially those involving roofing, waterproofing, windows, or structural components, are latent and not yet visible. Signing a release at this stage means the association is making a binding decision under conditions of uncertainty, without full information, to release all future potential claims. Over the last few years, there has been a rise in reports of developers offering a packaged deal: they agree to complete certain repairs, often minor punch-list or cosmetic items, and to “forgive” an alleged financial deficit (often around $50,000) supposedly owed by the association from the developer-control period. In exchange, the association is asked to sign a broad release covering all claims, including known and unknown construction defects. To a new HOA board that received their community with limited operating and reserve funds, they are left with a difficult decision to either accept the developer’s offer or assess their owners to pay this alleged debt. These agreements are occasionally presented through community management companies, which may describe them as “standard” or "routine.” Whether due to misunderstanding or influence from the developer, management companies can unintentionally reinforce the idea that signing is expected. Any recommendation provided to HOAs about whether to sign these releases could open community management to liability down the road. The best practice for both associations and community managers is to refer any agreements to be reviewed by general counsel for the association. The following two case studies illustrate the real-world consequences: Case Study One: A newly transitioned board relies on its management company to negotiate with the developer-builder to resolve irrigation issues, pond concerns, and signage deficiencies, along with forgiving an asserted financial shortfall. In exchange, the board signs a broad release covering all claims, including latent defects. Within a year, several punch-list items remain incomplete, and more serious issues arise. When the association demands completion, the developer delays, prompting the association to seek advice on how to enforce the settlement agreement. The association hires counsel to hold the developer responsible for both the previously agreed-upon items and newly identified construction defects. However, when the association brings claims against the developer, the developer points to the release of all potential construction defects in the community. Thus, the only remaining remedy is limited to enforcement of the specific punch-list terms. The community, still relatively new, has no viable claims against the developer-builder for the construction defects. With warranties expired and the release, the association must fund repairs through special assessments, despite defects that would otherwise have been actionable. Case Study Two: A community is presented with a similar agreement as above. The management company encourages execution, suggesting it is standard and even telling the board to “name your price.” The developer also pressures the newly elected board to sign. Instead of signing, the board consults with their attorney. Counsel advises the board not to sign the release and recommends further investigation. Engineers are retained and identify early indicators of broader issues, including stucco cracking, water intrusion, and irrigation deficiencies. Based on this information, the association declines to sign the release. Subsequent evaluation reveals potentially significant construction-defect claims, allowing the community to pursue recovery that would have been lost under the proposed agreement. These scenarios underscore a fundamental point: signing a release at turnover is not an administrative formality—it is a major legal decision. Board members act in a fiduciary capacity on behalf of their community, and their decisions can bind all current and future owners. At turnover, an association’s right is to investigate and pursue claims. Preserving that right until a full and independent evaluation is completed is not adversarial—it is responsible governance. Accordingly, associations should retain independent evaluations of the property and consult qualified legal counsel before signing any “standard” agreements, especially ones involving a release of future claims. Nicholas B. Vargo is a partner in Ball Janik LLP’s Construction Practice Group. He may be reached at nvargo@balljanik.com.

    Federal Bid Protest Standard of Review and Disparate Treatment with Ratings

    August 16, 2026 —
    A recent decision out of the Federal Claims Court explains the post-award bid protest standard of review. In Massman Construction Co. v. U.S., 2026 WL 1971985 (Fed.Cl. 2026), a protestor brought a post-award bid protest after the Army Corps of Engineers awarded the contract to another contractor. The protestor argued that the Army Corps (government) acted irrational in its evaluation through disparate treatment. The Court of Federal Claims agreed and remanded for the Army Corps to “either justify this disparity or explain why [awardee’s] lower-priced, but technically inferior proposal provides the best value to the government.” Massman Construction, supra at *1. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com