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

    Using the Prevention Doctrine

    Additional Dismissals of COVID Business Interruption, Civil Authority Claims

    Update: New VOSH Maximum Penalties as of July 1

    GRSM Multi-Office Team Secures Dismissal of Claims for Global Paint and Coatings Manufacturer Under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act

    The End of Eroding Limits Policies in Nevada is Just the Beginning

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Fires up a Case-By-Case Analysis for Landlord-Tenant, Implied Co-Insured Questions

    Musk’s Cousins Battle Utilities to Make Solar Rooftops Cheap

    New Pedestrian, Utility Bridge Takes Shape on Everett Waterfront

    Some Construction Contract Basics- Necessities and Pitfalls

    Read the Property Insurance Policy to be Sure You are Complying with Post Loss Obligations

    Insurance for Large Construction Equipment Such as a Crane

    Water Seepage, Ensuing Mold Damage Covered by Homeowner's Policy

    Alleged Serious Defects at Hanford Nuclear Waste Treatment Plant

    Indemnity Provision Prevails Over "Other Insurance" Clause

    New Executive Orders Expedite the Need for Contractors to Go Green

    Year in Review: Top Insurance Cases of 2024

    Encinitas Office Obtains Complete Defense Verdict Including Attorney Fees and Costs After Ten Day Construction Arbitration

    New Notary Language For Mechanics Lien Releases and Stop Payment Notice Releases

    NYT Points to Foreign Minister and Carlos Slim for Collapse of Mexico City Metro

    St. Petersburg Florida’s Tallest Condo Tower Allegedly Riddled with Construction Defects

    Home-Rentals Wall Street Made Say Grow or Go: Real Estate

    Applying Mighty Midgets, NY Court Awards Legal Expenses to Insureds Which Defeated Insurer’s Coverage Claims

    New Rule Prohibits Use of Funds For Certain DoD Construction and Infrastructure Programs and Projects

    No Duty to Indemnify When Discovery Shows Faulty Workmanship Damages Insured’s Own Work

    Developer Pre-Conditions in CC&Rs Limiting Ability of HOA to Make Construction Defect Claims, Found Unenforceable

    New York Condominium Association Files Construction Defect Suit

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Rules General Contractors Can Contractually Subordinate Mechanics Lien Rights

    Contractors Must Register with the L&I Prior to Offering or Performing Work, or Risk Having their Breach of Contract Case Dismissed

    Legal Battle Kicks Off to Minimize Baltimore Bridge Liabilities

    District Court Allows DBE False Claims Act Case to Proceed

    UK Construction Defect Suit Lost over One Word

    Fine Art Losses – “Canvas” the Subrogation Landscape

    Taking Advantage of New Tax Credits and Prevailing Wage Bonuses Under the Inflation Reduction Act for Clean Energy Construction Projects

    Bank Sues over Defective Windows

    Duty to Defend Triggered by Damage to Other Non-Defective Property

    Flood-Threat Assessment Finds Danger Goes Far Beyond U.S. Homes

    Contractor Entitled to Defense in Suit Filed by Performance Bond Carrier

    No Bad Faith Despite Insurer’s Appraisal Award Exceeding Initial Payment

    Beyond Inverse Condemnation in Wildfire Litigation: An Oregon Jury Finds Utility Liable for Negligence, Trespass and Nuisance

    Designing the Process to Deliver Zero-Carbon Construction – Computational Design in Practice

    Shifting Fees and Costs in Nevada Construction Defect Cases

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

    Florida Governor Signs Construction Defect Amendments into Law

    Cross-Office Team Secures Summary Judgment for Clients in Construction Loan Fraud Case

    New York Appellate Division: Second Department Contradicts First Department, Denying Insurer's Recoupment of Defense Costs for Uncovered Claims

    Newark Trial Team Defends “No Cause” With Appellate Affirmance Of 2023 Jury Verdict

    Nuclear Energy Gets a Much-Needed Boost

    Repair of Fractured Girders Complete at Shuttered Salesforce Transit Center

    Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion on Business Risk Exclusions Fails

    The Buck Stops Over There: Have Indemnitors Become the Insurers of First and Last Resort?
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Through over 4500 construction defect and claims related expert designations, the Anaheim, California Construction Expert Directory delivers a streamlined multi-disciplinary expert retention and support solution to legal professionals and construction practice groups concerned with the effective resolution of construction defect and claims litigation. BHA provides construction claims investigation and expert services to the industry's most recognized construction attorneys, Fortune 500 builders, CGL carriers, owners, as well as a variety of public entities. Utilizing in house resources which include licensed architects, civil engineers, building envelope experts, general and specialty contractors focused on the evaluation of construction claims, the firm brings specialized expertise and local capabilities to the Anaheim region.

    Anaheim California window expert witnessAnaheim California structural engineering expert witnessesAnaheim California defective construction expertAnaheim California stucco expert witnessAnaheim California ada design expert witnessAnaheim California contractor expert witnessAnaheim California engineering consultant
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Arbitration in Construction Disputes: Process and Best Practices

    July 27, 2026 —
    Arbitration in construction disputes is a private process where owners, contractors, subcontractors, designers or suppliers present claims to one or more neutral arbitrators instead of taking the dispute through court. The arbitrator reviews evidence, hears testimony and issues a decision that is usually binding. Construction arbitration is common because project disputes are technical, document-heavy and time-sensitive. Claims may involve schedule delays, disputed change orders, defective work, differing site conditions, payment, termination, indemnity, surety issues or professional liability. Arbitration can be faster and more specialized than litigation, but speed is not guaranteed. Poor contract language, broad discovery, weak records and unclear damages can make arbitration expensive. Reprinted courtesy of Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Risks of Using an AI Chatbot for Legal Advice: Lessons from United States v. Heppner

    April 08, 2026 —
    Imagine that you are an executive (who is not a lawyer) and are concerned about what your company plans to do is legal. You could call your lawyer who might bill you for the call. Or, you can ask your AI chatbot, such as Claude or ChatGPT, about the legal risk. The chatbot will likely compliment you on the incisive question, provide you with highly confident answer (that may or may not be right) and will not bill you on an hourly basis. That is essentially what financial services executive Bradley Heppner did. It did not end well. A federal court recently ruled that Heppner’s chats with the AI tool Claude were not protected by attorney-client privilege or the work-product doctrine. That means that the other side (in this case, the federal government) could get access to his chatbot prompts, uploads and responses, and learn a great deal about, for example, whether Heppner knew what he was doing was illegal. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Payne & Fears LLP

    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

    EPA, Maryland Sue DC Water Over Massive Potomac River Sewage Spill

    May 14, 2026 —
    The state of Maryland and the federal government have filed separate lawsuits against the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority (DC Water), both alleging that the agency’s failure to address longstanding deterioration in the Potomac Interceptor contributed to a weeklong release of more than 240 million gallons of raw sewage into the Potomac River this past January. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com

    New York Enacts First-in-the-Nation Statewide Data Center Moratorium

    August 03, 2026 —
    As of May 2026, nearly 12 gigawatts of data center load requests were in the New York Independent System Operator interconnection queue, with more than two-thirds of capacity requests entering the queue in 2025 alone. On July 14, 2026, in response to concerns over this rapid growth, Governor Kathy Hochul issued Executive Order No. 62 (the “Order”) imposing a temporary moratorium on data centers in New York State. Among the concerns cited in the Order are the cost burden on ratepayers associated with transmission upgrades required to accommodate large loads, potential environmental impacts, and large-scale water use. The moratorium is intended to halt activities while the state government develops a comprehensive legal framework for data center development. While dozens of municipal and county-level moratoriums are in place throughout the U.S., and while the legislatures of several states, including Maine, have proposed moratoriums, the Order is the first statewide moratorium to be enacted nationally. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joshua L. Sturtevant, Sheppard
    Mr. Sturtevant may be contacted at jsturtevant@sheppard.com

    SDNY Ruling Highlights Privilege Risks in Client Use of Generative AI

    March 03, 2026 —
    Artificial intelligence is quickly becoming a go‑to tool for aggregating and summarizing large volumes of data, formulating and testing arguments, and even sketching litigation strategies. But a recent ruling from the Southern District of New York serves as a stark warning: when clients turn to generative AI for legal strategy, they may be unknowingly turning privileged information over to a third party and then creating documents that may later be discoverable in litigation. In a closely watched bench decision, Judge Rakoff ruled that AI‑generated documents created by the target of a criminal investigation using Anthropic’s Claude were not privileged despite being generated with information learned from his attorneys to support his potential legal defense and then shared with his counsel. The decision highlights the unresolved and increasingly consequential intersection of AI, privilege, and discovery. Facts Bradley Heppner received a grand jury subpoena and hired attorneys at Quinn Emanuel to represent him. After learning he was a target of the investigation, but before he was arrested, he created 31 documents with Claude using information from his attorneys to outline a potential defense strategy. He was later arrested on charges of securities and wire fraud, and federal agents seized his electronic devices, which contained the 31 documents that had been provided to his attorneys. Mr. Heppner argued that the documents were created to prepare his potential defense strategy in anticipation of an indictment, but he conceded that he made the decision to prepare the reports on his own, i.e., not at the direction of counsel. He nevertheless claimed the documents were protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine; the government moved to overrule the objections. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher J. Olsen, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., Freddy X. Muñoz, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Gary M. Stein, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Olsen may be contacted at colsen@pecklaw.com Mr. Muñoz may be contacted at fmunoz@pecklaw.com Mr. Stein may be contacted at gstein@pecklaw.com Read the full story...

    Massachusetts Construction Industry Continues to Wait While Prompt Payment Law Is Put to the Test

    March 31, 2026 —
    Earlier this month, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) heard argument in J.C. Cannistraro, LLC v. Columbia Construction Co. et al., a dispute concerning the state’s Prompt Payment Act (PPA). Although a decision has yet to be issued, it could potentially pose widespread implications for high-value private construction projects moving forward – and perhaps backwards. The PPA, G. L. c. 149, § 29E, enacted by the Massachusetts Legislature in 2010, has become a keystone in the construction industry. It was enacted to address, in part, downstream cash flow issues that tend to pervade construction projects by mandating a series of strict guidelines for submitting, and responding to, payment applications for private projects valued over $3,000,000. Amongst these requirements are set timeframes to respond to an application, as well as what must be contained in an application rejection. Critically, if an owner or upper-tier contractor fails to fully comply with all the statutory requirements in response to a proper payment application, the application is automatically “deemed to be approved” and payable. Significantly, however, this is not always the end of the line. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Catherine Maronski, Robinson Cole
    Ms. Maronski may be contacted at cmaronski@rc.com

    Settlement Agreements and Contracts Require a Meeting of the Minds

    July 20, 2026 —
    A settlement agreement does not need to be executed for it to be enforceable as long as there was a MEETING OF THE MINDS. The same rings true for any contract regardless of whether the contract is signed – THERE NEEDS TO BE A MEETING OF THE MINDS. In a recent case dealing with the settlement agreement on a construction lien, the essential settlement terms (money and mutual release) were memorialized in an e-mail exchange between the parties (owner and subcontractor). The settlement required the owner to pay the principal amount plus some attorney’s fees and then a mutual general release would be prepared. In response to the confirmatory email, the owner sent a check, which the subcontractor deposited, but the owner refused to sign the release signed and sent by the subcontractor. The owner further claimed it doesn’t need to pay the attorney’s fees because the lien amount was paid in full. The subcontractor sued arguing the owner breached the terms of the settlement. The appellate court agreed. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com