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

    Millennials Skip the Ring and Mortgage

    Calling the Shots

    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    Standard Lifetime Shingle Warranties Aren’t Forever

    Mediating Contract Claims and Disputes at the ASBCA

    Cogently Written Opinion Finds Coverage for Loss Caused By Defective Concrete

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    Kahana & Feld P.C. Enhances Client Offerings, Expands Litigation Firm Leadership

    Hawaiian Electric Finalizes $2 Billion Maui Fire Settlement

    Another Defect Found on the Bay Bridge: Water Leakage

    Seven Trends That Impact Commercial Construction Litigation in 2021

    El Paso Increases Surety Bond Requirement on Contractors

    Nevada Governor Signs Construction Defect Reform Bill

    New Case Alert: Oregon Supreme Court Prohibits Insurer’s Attempt to Relitigate Insured’s Liability

    Pennsylvania Reconstruction Project Beset by Problems

    The Importance of Providing Notice to a Surety

    Limitation on Coverage for Payment of Damages Creates Ambiguity

    Federal Arbitration Act Preempts Pennsylvania Payment Act

    Florida extends the Distressed Condominium Relief Act

    Trump’s Infrastructure Weak

    Builders Arrested after Building Collapses in India

    Renters Who Bought Cannot Sue for Construction Defects

    A Court-Side Seat: Guam’s CERCLA Claim Allowed, a “Roundup” Verdict Upheld, and Judicial Process Privilege Lost

    Hundreds Celebrated the Grand Opening of the Associated Builders and Contractors of Southern California Riverside Construction Training Center

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

    Recycling Our Cities, One Building at a Time

    Ex-Engineered Products Firm Executive Convicted of Bid Rigging

    House Passes Bill to Delay EPA Ozone Rule

    Contractor Beware: Design-Build Firms Must Review Washington’s Licensing Requirements

    How to Remove a Mechanics Lien from Your Property

    Will Superusers Future-Proof the AEC Industry?

    More (and Simpler) Options Under New Oregon Retention Law

    Insurers May Not Be Required to Defend Contractors In a Florida §558 Proceeding

    Five Reasons to Hire Older Workers—and How to Keep Them

    Winning Attorney Fees in Litigation as a California Construction Contractor or Subcontractor

    Colorado Court of Appeals’ Ruling Highlights Dangers of Excessive Public Works Claims

    Bad Faith Claim For Independent Contractor's Reduced Loss Assessment Survives Motion to Dismiss

    White House Explores Opening Antitrust Probe on Homebuilders

    Bright-Line Changes: Prompt Payment Act Trends

    Federal Circuit Clarifies Limits of Design Liability in GSA Contract Dispute

    North Dakota Supreme Court Clarifies Breadth of Contractual Liability Coverage

    #4 CDJ Topic: Vita Planning and Landscape Architecture, Inc. v. HKS Architects, Inc.

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (04/26/23) – The Energy Transition and a Bit of Brick-and-Mortar Blues

    3D Printing: A New Era in Concrete Construction

    Green Buildings Could Lead to Liabilities

    Dallas Home Being Built of Shipping Containers

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Causing Property Damage to Insured's Product Only

    Application of Frye Test to Determine Admissibility of Expert

    Wall Street Is Buying Starter Homes to Quietly Become America’s Landlord

    New York’s 2022 Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act: Significant Amendments to the C.P.L.R.
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Drawing from more than 4500 construction, architectural, and engineering related expert designations, the Anaheim, California Construction Expert Directory provides a wide range of trial support and construction consulting services to builders, risk managers, and construction practice groups seeking effective resolution of construction defect, scheduling, and delay claims. BHA provides construction 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 include construction cost and scheduling experts, registered design professionals, forensic engineers, certified professional estimators, the firm brings a wealth of experience and local capabilities to Anaheim and the surrounding areas.

    Anaheim California construction expert testimonyAnaheim California construction forensic expert witnessAnaheim California reconstruction expert witnessAnaheim California building code compliance expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architectAnaheim California structural concrete expertAnaheim California testifying construction expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Appraisal Award Upheld Despite Insurer’s Contention that Causation was Considered

    February 23, 2026 —
    The federal district court in Tennessee granted the insured’s motion for summary judgment finding the appraisal award was properly determined despite the insurer’s argument that the appraisal panel considered causation of the loss. Nashville Communications, Inc. v. Auto-Owners (Mutual) Ins. Co., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 223455 (M.D. Tenn. Nov. 13, 2025) A windstorm struck and damaged the building owned and insured by Nashville Communications (NashComm). A claim was submitted to the insurer, Auto-Owners, for damage to the roof and interior water leakage. Auto-Owners acknowledged that there was some amount of wind damage to the building from the wind event. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    U.S. Supreme Court Decision Alters Course of $745M Louisiana Coastal Damage Judgment

    June 15, 2026 —
    The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a unanimous decision allowing oil and gas companies to move Louisiana coastal erosion lawsuits from state court to federal court under the federal officer removal statute. While the ruling is procedural, it carries significant implications for environmental- and energy-related risks. The case, Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, Slip Op. 24-813 (April 17, 2026), addressed a threshold jurisdictional question but has broader significance for environmental and climate related litigation. State courts are often viewed as more favorable forums for plaintiffs asserting environmental damage claims, particularly those brought by governmental entities. The opinion issued on April 17, 2026 is the latest development in long-running Louisiana coastal litigation that began more than a decade ago. Starting in 2013, Louisiana parishes filed 42 lawsuits against oil and gas companies alleging environmental damage related to historic oil field operations. The parishes alleged that oil and gas companies violated state coastal management laws by failing to properly restore impacted areas. Chevron sought to remove the cases from state court under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1), known as federal officer removal, which provides federal jurisdiction over “any person acting under [an] officer” of the United States "for or relating to any act under color of such office." The Fifth Circuit rejected the argument and remanded the case, and others like it, to state court. Trial began in March 2025 in Point à la Hache, Louisiana. On April 4, 2025, the jury awarded a total of $745 million to compensate for land loss, contamination and abandoned equipment. On June 16, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the question of whether a federal contractor can remove to federal court when sued for oil-production activities undertaken to fulfill a federal oil-refinement contract. Reprinted courtesy of Jennifer Kretschmann, Lewis Brisbois and Jennifer E. Michel, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Kretschmann may be contacted at Jennifer.Kretschmann@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Michel may be contacted at Jenny.Michel@lewisbrisbois.com Read the full story...

    Court Compels Appraisal Although Coverage Issues Exist

    February 17, 2026 —
    The California federal district court granted the insured’s motion to compel appraisal despite the existence of outstanding coverage issues. K4 Dev. LLC v. ACE Am. Ins. Co., et al., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211337 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 6. 2025). The insured owned hotel property. It was insured by ACE while the hotel was under construction. During construction, the hotel suffered rainwater damage due to incomplete roofing systems. The water damaged the interior finishes and furnishings from the 6th floor down to the basement, including 32 guestrooms. The insured’s experts determined that the covered water losses delayed the hotel’s opening by 144 days. The insured submitted a claim for the water damage, covered claim expenses, and delay in opening losses. ACE denied the claim for delay in opening losses, stating that its expert determined the Water Events did not delay the hotel’s opening. ACE, however, did pay for the repair damage caused by the Water Events. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    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

    The AI Knows Too Much: When Employees Feed Trade Secrets into Generative AI Tools

    April 14, 2026 —
    Every time an employee pastes proprietary source code, a customer list, or a confidential business strategy into ChatGPT, Claude, or Google Gemini, they may be quietly dismantling the legal protections that make those secrets worth protecting. Courts and regulators are only beginning to grapple with this problem, and right now, the burden of preventing it falls squarely on employers. The Legal Stakes Under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) and the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“UTSA”) as adopted across most states, a trade secret plaintiff must show that the information at issue was subject to reasonable measures to maintain its secrecy. Courts have historically credited measures like confidentiality agreements, physical access controls, and employee training—but those safeguards were designed for a world of thumb drives and disgruntled employees. They were not built for a world where a well-meaning engineer can, in seconds, transmit an entire corpus of proprietary data to a third-party AI platform operating under terms of service that may permit the provider to use inputs for model training. Reprinted courtesy of Kazim A. Naqvi, Sheppard and John V. Mysliwiec, Sheppard Mr. Naqvi may be contacted at knaqvi@sheppard.com Mr. Mysliwiec may be contacted at jmysliwiec@sheppard.com Read the full story...

    Soot Constitutes Property Damage

    March 17, 2026 —
    Applying Missouri law, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the jury verdict awarding damages for the presence of soot after a fire. Maxus Metropolitan, LLC v. Travelers Property Cas. Co. of Am., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 29921 (8th Cir. Nov, 17, 2025). A fire destroyed Phase 6 of a multi-building apartment complex known as the Metropolitan. At the time of the fire, all six phases of the Metropolitan were at various stages of completion, including some of which were occupied by tenants. Phase 6 was still under construction. The fire caused severe damage to Phase 5. The interiors of Phases 1-4 were unaffected by the fire. Maxus Metropolitan, the owner of the complex, had a policy with Travelers which covered up to $35 million in “direct physical loss, . . or damage.” The policy also provided coverage for up to $5 million in lost business income. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Contract Disputes Act and Jurisdictional Requirements

    March 17, 2026 —
    When dealing with a claim on a federal construction project, there are a couple of key background jurisdictional points. These points were briefly highlighted in the recent appeal, Mega Star Logistics Service Co. v. Department of State, CBCA 8232, 2026 WL 253738 (CBCA 2026). Here are the two points. FIRST, when it comes to jurisdiction, for a board of contract appeals “to exercise jurisdiction over a claim, the CDA [Contract Disputes Act] requires the contractor to submit a written claim to the contracting officer for a COFD [contracting officer final decision], with a subsequent appeal of the COFD or deemed denial if the CO [contracting officer] does not issue a COFD.” Thus, you need to submit a formal claim under the Contract Disputes Act to the contracting officer to get a final decision from the contracting officer (or the contracting officer waiving the final decision by not timely furnishing one). Mega Star Logistics, supra. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    At the Intersection of Indemnity and Prevailing Wages

    March 17, 2026 —
    In a case that I’m frankly surprised I don’t see more of, the 2nd District Court of Appeal of California examined an indemnity claim by a subcontractor against a general contractor and public entity who mistakenly believed that a construction project did not require the payment of prevailing wages. The Nabors Case In Nabors Corporate Services, Inc. v. City of Long Beach, 108 Cal.App 540 (2025), subcontractor Nabors Corporate Services, Inc. sued general contractor Tidelands Oil Production Company and the City of Long Beach after it was found liable in a class action lawsuit for failing to pay prevailing wages to its employees. Nabors’ contract with Tidelands did not require the payment of prevailing wages and neither Tidelands nor the City believed that the project, which involved “oil well plug and abandonment” work, required the payment of prevailing wages. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com