BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building expert witness Anaheim California parking structure expert witness Anaheim California multi family housing expert witness Anaheim California condominium expert witness Anaheim California casino resort expert witness Anaheim California custom home expert witness Anaheim California high-rise construction expert witness Anaheim California townhome construction expert witness Anaheim California mid-rise construction expert witness Anaheim California low-income housing expert witness Anaheim California industrial building expert witness Anaheim California production housing expert witness Anaheim California institutional building expert witness Anaheim California concrete tilt-up expert witness Anaheim California hospital construction expert witness Anaheim California office building expert witness Anaheim California retail construction expert witness Anaheim California landscaping construction expert witness Anaheim California condominiums expert witness Anaheim California Subterranean parking expert witness Anaheim California housing expert witness Anaheim California tract home expert witness Anaheim California
    Anaheim California construction expertsAnaheim California construction expert witnessAnaheim California construction expert testimonyAnaheim California reconstruction expert witnessAnaheim California construction claims expert witnessAnaheim California construction expert witness public projectsAnaheim California multi family design expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Expert Witness Engineer 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:


    Expert Witness Engineer Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Anaheim California

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Expert Witness Engineer Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Building Industry Association Southern California - Desert Chapter
    Local # 0532
    77570 Springfield Ln Ste E
    Palm Desert, CA 92211

    Anaheim California Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Riverside County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    3891 11th St Ste 312
    Riverside, CA 92501
    Anaheim California Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California
    Local # 0532
    17744 Sky Park Circle Suite 170
    Irvine, CA 92614

    Anaheim California Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Orange County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    17744 Skypark Cir Ste 170
    Irvine, CA 92614

    Anaheim California Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Baldy View Chapter
    Local # 0532
    8711 Monroe Ct Ste B
    Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730

    Anaheim California Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - LA/Ventura Chapter
    Local # 0532
    28460 Ave Stanford Ste 240
    Santa Clarita, CA 91355
    Anaheim California Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Building Industry Association of S Ca Antelope Valley
    Local # 0532
    44404 16th St W Suite 107
    Lancaster, CA 93535
    Anaheim California Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10


    Expert Witness Engineer News and Information
    For Anaheim California


    Tallest U.S. Skyscraper Dream Kept Alive by Irish Builder

    Water Backup Payment Satisfies Insurer's Obligation to Cover for Rain Damage

    Should I Pull the Pin? Contractor and Subcontractor Termination for Cause

    Subsequent Purchaser Can Assert Claims for Construction Defects

    Faulty Workmanship Causing Damage to Other Property Covered as Construction Defect

    Badly Constructed Masonry Walls Not an Occurrence in Arkansas Law

    Five Keys to Driving Digital Transformation in Engineering and Construction

    Georgia Update: Automatic Renewals in Consumer Service Contracts

    City of Sacramento Approves Kings NBA Financing Plan

    The Top 3 Trends That Will Impact the Construction Industry in 2024

    Tenth Circuit Reverses District Court's Ruling that Contractor Entitled to a Defense

    Just Because You Record a Mechanic’s Lien Doesn’t Mean You Get Notice of Foreclosure

    Insured's Collapse Claim Survives Summary Judgment

    #1 CDJ Topic: McMillin Albany LLC v Superior Court of California

    Insurer Must Defend Faulty Workmanship Claims

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

    Notes from the Nordic Smart Building Convention

    Instant Hotel Tower, But Is It Safe?

    Fixing the Problem – Not the Blame

    Saving Manhattan: Agencies, Consultants, Contractors Join Fight to Keep New York City Above Water

    If You Purchase a House at an HOA Lien Foreclosure, Are You Entitled to Excess Sale Proceeds?

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2020

    Repeated Use of Defective Fireplace Triggers Duty to Defend Even if Active Fire Does Not Break Out Until After End of Policy Period

    Tips for Drafting Construction Contracts

    Skanska Found Negligent for Damages From Breakaway Barges

    Indemnification Against Release/“Disposal” of Hazardous Materials

    Endorsements Preclude Coverage for Alleged Faulty Workmanship

    Just When You Thought General Contractors Were Necessary Parties. . .

    Ahlers & Cressman’s Top 10 Construction Industry Contract Provisions

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Denies Bad Faith Claim in HO Policy Dispute

    Statute of Limitations and Bad Faith Claims: Factors to Consider

    California Bullet Train Clears Federal Environmental Approval

    Court Strikes Expert Opinion That Surety Acted as a “De Facto Contractor”

    When is a “Willful” Violation Willful (or Not) Under California’s Contractor Enforcement Statutes?

    A New Perspective on Mapping Construction Sites with the Crane Camera System

    HB24-1014: A Warning Bell for Colorado Businesses Amid Potential Consumer Protection Changes

    Lewis Brisbois Listed as Top 10 Firm of 2022 on Leopard Solutions Law Firm Index

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (06/29/22)

    The Quiet War Between California’s Charter Cities and the State’s Prevailing Wage Law

    EPA Fines Ivory Homes for Storm Water Pollution

    Expert Excluded After Never Viewing Damaged Property

    Rhode Island Finds Pollution Exclusion Ambiguous, Orders Coverage for Home Heating Oil Leak

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/10/24) – Strong Construction Investment in Data Centers, Increase Use of Proptech in Hospitality and Effects of Remote-Work on Housing Market

    Analysis of the “owned property exclusion” under Panico v. State Farm

    The Peak of Hurricane Season Is Here: How to Manage Risks Before They Manage You

    Commentary: How to Limit COVID-19 Related Legal Claims

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    Bond Principal Necessary on a Mechanic’s Lien Claim

    2025 Construction Outlook: Growth, But Uneven in Certain Areas
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Anaheim, California Expert Witness Engineer Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Drawing from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Anaheim's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Expert Witness Engineer News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Insureds' Claim for Flood Damage is Time-Barred

    April 22, 2025 —
    The federal district court granted the insurer's motion to dismiss because the insureds' claim for damages under the Standard Flood Insurance Policy was submitted too late. Caruso v. First Protective Ins. Co., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23288 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 10, 2025). The insureds' property sustained flood damage during Hurricane Ian. The insureds submitted a claim for their damages. On March 3, 2023, the insurer sent a letter partially denying the claim. Several months later, on September 26, 2023, the insureds submitted a proof of loss, which the insurer denied on June 26, 2024. The insureds filed suit and the insurer moved to dismiss arguing that the claim was time-barred because suit was filed more than a year after its March 3, 2023 denial letter. The insureds argued that the March 2023 letter was not a proper denial to trigger the statute of limitations period. Rather, the argued it was June 26, 2024, denial letter that triggered the statute of limitations. Under the statute, a plaintiff had to institute an action within one year after the date of mailing of notice of disallowance or partial disallowance of the claim. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Beyond the Executive Orders: Legislative Proposals to Strengthen the U.S. Critical Minerals Supply Chain

    March 25, 2025 —
    Critical minerals are the backbone of modern technologies and national security, powering everything from advanced semiconductors and electric vehicle batteries to missile guidance systems and renewable energy infrastructure. As the global economy transitions to more diverse energy technologies, the demand for these essential materials has surged. Despite their vast importance and usefulness, the United States remains heavily dependent on foreign sources—particularly China—that dominate the global supply chain for critical minerals. This reliance threatens supply chain stability, leaving key American industries vulnerable to disruptions, price manipulations and political leverage. We have witnessed a multitude of actions from the White House in recent weeks ranging from new executive orders to the repeal of old ones. This includes the Trump administration’s Day One Executive Order entitled Unleashing American Energy, which directs U.S. government agencies to assess several trade and national-security-related actions (including stockpiling), prioritize geological mapping, and consider support for processing of critical minerals, among other things. That is not the entire federal government response, however. A number of congressional bills—many of them with bipartisan support—have been proposed in the 2025 legislative session in an effort to boost domestic extraction, refining and production of critical minerals. Reprinted courtesy of Ashleigh Myers, Pillsbury, Robert A. James, Pillsbury, Allan C. Van Vliet, Pillsbury, Amanda G. Halter, Pillsbury, Kelsey Parker, Pillsbury and Sahar J. Hafeez, Pillsbury Ms. Myers may be contacted at ashleigh.myers@pillsburylaw.com Mr. James may be contacted at rob.james@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Van Vliet may be contacted at allan.vanvliet@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Halter may be contacted at amanda.halter@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Parker may be contacted at kelsey.parker@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Hafeez may be contacted at sahar.hafeez@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

    How Not to Frustrate an Arbitrator: Common Mistakes Attorneys Should Avoid in Arbitration

    April 22, 2025 —
    A recent federal court ruling held that an arbitration award would be enforced under the facts of that case, regardless of whether the parties considered the award “good, bad or ugly.” See RSM Production Corp. v. Gaz du Cameroun, S.A., 117 F.4th 707, 714 (5th Cir. 2024). As explained below, we suggest that “good, bad or ugly” can describe other aspects of arbitration. In our combined 20-plus years of experience as arbitrators, we have been surprised and frustrated when “good” construction advocates engage in counterproductive conduct that may accurately be described as bad or even ugly. Optimistically, we offer the following suggestions to improve counsel’s performance in arbitration. Mind your ABCs. Always be credible. An arbitrator’s ability to rule on an issue depends, in part, on the credibility of the parties' communication of evidence and law. From initial filings to the last argument, attorneys must maintain consistent credibility. Reprinted courtesy of Patricia H. Thompson, JAMS and Hon. Nancy Holtz (Ret.), JAMS Read the full story...

    Congratulations to Partners Bryan Stofferahn and Jason DiGioia on Successfully Securing Nearly 12 Million Dollars in a Complex Construction Defect Case!

    May 23, 2025 —
    We are proud to announce a significant legal victory for BWB&O’s contractor client in a complex and hard-fought case involving alleged construction defects to the flooring system at a major hospital in the Bay Area. BWB&O partners Bryan Stofferahn and Jason DiGioia successfully secured nearly $12 million in recovery from multiple cross-defendants, including the architect, product manufacturers, and product suppliers of the materials installed by BWB&O’s client. The case arose from the catastrophic failure of a never-before-installed flooring system, which resulted in severe cracking and necessitated the replacement of the entire flooring system. BWB&O’s contractor client pursued recovery after settling with the hospital owner, navigating multiple legal and insurance coverage challenges along the way. Throughout the process, Bryan and Jason worked tirelessly, overcoming significant coverage issues and successfully triggering multiple insurance policies of the cross-defendants. After lengthy expert depositions, the case was globally settled. Bryan and Jason secured an 8-figure settlement, but more importantly, they also preserved the business operations of BWB&O’s client. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Construction Defect Disputes: Know Your Measure of Damages!!!!!

    January 21, 2025 —
    Remember this: know your measure of damages in a construction defect dispute. If you don’t, as shown below, the outcome can be unforgiving. The measure of damages is one of your most important elements of proof. You are filing suit for damages; thus, knowing what you can reasonably recovery is paramount. In a recent dispute, Bandklayder Development, LLC v. Sabga, 50 Fla.L.Weekly D91e (Fla. 3d DCA 2025), a residential developer sold a single-family house while it was under construction in an as-is purchase agreement. Post-closing, the purchasers claimed defects and served a Florida Statutes Chapter 558 notice of construction defects letter. The purchaser subsequently initiated a construction defect lawsuit. During the nonjury trial, the purchaser’s expert testified that the purchasers suffered damages approximating $323,000 calculated as of January 19, 2022 (which was the date of the expert’s report). The expert further testified that the cost to finish the incomplete/defective work increased by 35% at the date of the May 2023 trial. However, the expert never testified as to the amount of damages as of the date of the contractual breach, which at the latest, would have been in April 2018 when the notice of construction defects letter was sent (or, at its earliest, June 2017 when closing occurred). At trial, the judge entered judgment for the purchasers in the amount of about $425,0000. This was reversed on appeal with judgment to be entered in favor of the developer. Why? Because the purchasers employed the wrong measure of damages and the only thing that prevented them from introducing the right measure of damages was within their control. Harsh outcome for not applying the correct measure of damages! Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Start Spreading the News: Appellate Division Case Highlights How Policyholders Should Plead Claims Under New York’s Consumer Protection Statute

    March 18, 2025 —
    When a policyholder feels their insurance claim has been mishandled or denied unfairly, pursuing recovery for the insurer’s bad faith is often front of mind. While many states recognize a common law and/or statutory cause of action for bad faith, the circumstances that constitute bad faith vary amongst jurisdictions. As prescribed in The Rockefeller Univ. vs. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., et al.,[1] New York recognizes a claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing – otherwise known as bad faith – involving three elements of proof: (1) the facts establishing the insurer’s bad faith conduct must be separate from the facts giving rise to the breach of contract claim, (2) the damages sought as a result of the insurer’s bad faith must be distinct from the damages sought in the breach of contract claim, and (3) the facts must demonstrate that the insurer grossly disregarded its policyholder’s interests. Reprinted courtesy of Bethany L. Barrese, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Michael A. Amato, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Barrese may be contacted at BBarrese@sdvlaw.com Mr. Amato may be contacted at mamato@sdvlaw.com Read the full story...

    Georgia Gov. Kemp Signs Sweeping Tort Reform Legislation into Law

    May 19, 2025 —
    Atlanta, Ga. (May 6, 2025) - On April 22, 2025, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp signed into law Senate Bills 68 and 69 (collectively dubbed the “Comprehensive Tort Reform Legislation”), with the aim of curbing lawsuit abuse and the explosion of outsized nuclear verdicts in the state’s courts. This landmark legislation, which was widely supported by Georgia’s business community, makes a host of changes to Georgia law in the areas of civil practice, evidentiary matters, damages, and liability in tort actions. Below is a summary of key changes made by the law. Anchoring Plaintiffs’ attorneys can no longer arbitrarily argue the monetary value of non-economic damages (such as pain and suffering) during the closing arguments of a trial. Instead, the new law requires that their arguments concerning non-economic damages be related to actual evidence. Moreover, if the plaintiff's attorney suggests a number, they must do so in their initial closing and cannot change it in rebuttal closing. However, the law does not impose a cap on the total amount of damages a jury can award. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Materialmen’s Lien Against Condominium Name the Proper Parties

    February 19, 2025 —
    In a recent unpublished opinion, MDK General Construction, LLC v. Aspen Grove Owners Association Case No. 85704-5-I Division One of the Court of Appeals, appealed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Aspen Grove Owners Association (“the “Owners Association”) dismissing MDK’s materialmens’ lien against the Owners Association. MDK was hired as a subcontractor for extensive renovations at the Aspen Grove Condominium, a 96 unit condominium. Specifically, MDK was hired to “perform construction services in the form of exterior siding and related work.” The party to the contract was the Owners Association, and that entity was named in a lien foreclosure action. The lien foreclosure action was instituted because the General Contractor failed to pay MDK for its subcontract work on the exterior. The Owners Association asserted the defense that it was not the proper party because it was not an owner of any of the real property in question. The Court addressed the statutory provisions of both Chapter 64.34 RCW (the Condominium Act”) regarding the creation of a condominium and Chapter 60.04 RCW addressing materialmen’s liens. RCW 60.04.051 specifies the property subject to the lien as to “ the extent of the interest of the owner at whose instance, directly or through a common law or construction agent the labor, professional services, equipment, or materials were furnished.” (Emphasis added). Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lawrence S. Glosser, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Glosser may be contacted at larry.glosser@acslawyers.com