BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home expert witness Anaheim California multi family housing expert witness Anaheim California condominium expert witness Anaheim California custom home expert witness Anaheim California parking structure expert witness Anaheim California office building expert witness Anaheim California housing expert witness Anaheim California Medical building expert witness Anaheim California high-rise construction expert witness Anaheim California custom homes expert witness Anaheim California hospital construction expert witness Anaheim California mid-rise construction expert witness Anaheim California concrete tilt-up expert witness Anaheim California structural steel construction expert witness Anaheim California retail construction expert witness Anaheim California townhome construction expert witness Anaheim California institutional building expert witness Anaheim California production housing expert witness Anaheim California landscaping construction expert witness Anaheim California industrial building expert witness Anaheim California low-income housing expert witness Anaheim California casino resort expert witness Anaheim California
    Anaheim California construction expert witness consultantAnaheim California window expert witnessAnaheim California expert witness roofingAnaheim California testifying construction expert witnessAnaheim California construction expert witness public projectsAnaheim California construction code expert witnessAnaheim California delay claim expert witness
    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

    Anaheim California Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

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

    Anaheim California Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Anaheim California Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Anaheim California Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

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


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Anaheim California


    Should Post Contract Award Tariffs be Reimbursable? Why Public Works Contractors Deserve Clarity

    Former NYC Condo Empire Executive Arrested for Larceny, Tax Fraud

    Effective July 1, 2022, Contractors Will be Liable for their Subcontractor’s Failure to Pay its Employees’ Wages and Benefits

    EPA Seeks Comment on Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification Rule

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twenty White and Williams Lawyers

    Nevada Bill Would Bring Changes to Construction Defects

    Ahlers Distinguished As Top Super Lawyer In Washington And Nine Firm Members Recognized As Super Lawyers Or Rising Stars

    EPA Rejects Most of N.Y.’s $511 Million Tappan Zee Loan

    Insurer Prohibited from Bringing Separate Contribution Action in Subrogation to Rights of Suspended Insured

    Automated Weather Insurance Could Offer Help in an Increasingly Hot World

    Thank You for 17 Years of Legal Elite in Construction Law

    Congratulations Devin Brunson on His Promotion to Partner!

    Determining Occurrence for Injury Under Commercial General Liability Policy Without Applying “Trigger Theory”

    California Supreme Court Protects California Policyholders for Intentional Acts of Employees

    Design Professionals Owe a Duty of Care to Homeowners

    Surveys: Hundreds of Design Professionals See Big COVID-19 Business Impacts

    Construction Up in United States

    Surviving the Construction Law Backlog: Nontraditional Approaches to Resolution

    Municipalities Owe a Duty to Pedestrians Regardless of Whether a Sidewalk Presents an “Open and Obvious” Hazardous Condition. (WA)

    KY Mining Accident Not a Covered Occurrence Under Commercial General Liability Policy

    No Duty to Defend Suit That Is Threatened Under Strict Liability Statute

    Where There’s Smoke, Is There Coverage? A Closer Look at Bottega, LLC v. National Surety and Gharibian v. Wawanesa

    Los Angeles Is Building a Future Where Water Won’t Run Out

    Providing Notice of Claims Under Your Construction Contract

    Seven Kahana Feld Attorneys Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® 2026

    Why Builders Should Reconsider Arbitration Clauses in Construction Contracts

    U.S. Supreme Court Weighs in on Construction Case

    Partners Nicole Whyte and Karen Baytosh are Selected for Inclusion in Best Lawyers 2021 and Nicole Nuzzo is Selected for Inclusion in Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch

    Tenants Who Negligently Cause Fires in Florida Beware: You May Be Liable to the Landlord’s Insurer

    OSHA Announces Expansion of “Severe Violator Enforcement Program”

    NTSB Cites Design Errors in Fatal Bridge Collapse

    Reservation of Rights Letter Merely Citing Policy Provisions Inadequate

    Nevada Governor Signs Construction Defect Reform Bill

    A Homeowner’s Subsequent Action is Barred as a Matter of Law by way of a Prior “Right to Repair Act” Claim Resolved by Cash Settlement for Waiver of all Known or Unknown Claims

    Haight’s Sacramento Office Has Moved

    Steps to Defending against Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2026 Illinois Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    Builder Survey Focuses on Green Practices of Top 200 Builders

    No Damage for Delay? No Problem: Exceptions to the Enforceability of No Damage for Delay Clauses

    Georgia Court Rules that Separate Settlements Are Not the End of the Matter

    New Mexico Holds One-Sided Dispute Resolution Provisions Are Unenforceable

    Illinois Joins the Pack on Defective Construction as an Occurrence

    Suing a Local Government in Land Use Cases – Part 2 – Procedural Due Process

    Corps Spells Out Billions in Infrastructure Act Allocations

    Back to Basics – Differing Site Conditions

    "Your Work" Exclusion Bars Coverage for Contractor's Faulty Workmanship

    From Shale to Salt: Texas Supreme Court Applies Uniform Rule for Ownership of Subsurface Caverns

    Update: Supreme Court Issues Opinion in West Virginia v. EPA

    It Pays to Review the ‘Review the Contract Documents’ Clause Before You Sign the Contract

    OSHA Updates: You May Be Affected
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Anaheim, California Construction Expert Witness 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. Leveraging 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.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Differing Site Conditions Claim Requires a Misrepresentation

    May 14, 2026 —
    If you are entertaining a differing site conditions claim, consider this Third District Court of Appeals case from the mid-90s. In Hendry Corp. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 648 So.2d 140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), a contractor was hired by Dade County to demolish the old Rickenbacker Causeway in Miami. The original 1941 plans of the causeway were made available to contractors. The lowest bidding contractor that was awarded the project based its bid “on its conclusion that the pilings supporting the old bridge were made of concrete.” Hendry, supra at 141. The contractor based this conclusion on the original plans, its visual observation, and experience. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Sixth Circuit Revives Builder’s Risk Coverage, Refusing to Let Insurer Escape on a Technicality

    July 27, 2026 —
    In 3371 Reading, LLC v. Liberty Mutual Group, the Sixth Circuit did something courts do not always do in coverage disputes: it refused to let an insurer avoid liability based on a technical policy condition that could never actually be satisfied. The decision is a straightforward reminder of two core principles. First, policies must be interpreted from the standpoint of a reasonably prudent insured. Second, hyper-technical conditions cannot be used to deny coverage where compliance is never possible. Reprinted courtesy of Kevin V. Small, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP and Adriana A. Perez, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP Mr. Small may be contacted at ksmall@hunton.com Ms. Perez may be contacted at pereza@hunton.com Read the full story...

    White and Williams LLP Secures Trio of Cyber Coverage Wins

    May 12, 2026 —
    Three weeks, three jurisdictions, three cyber wins. White and Williams picked up the first victory on March 9, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, where the court granted summary judgment to their client enforcing a Cyber Crime Loss sublimit. See Perry & Perry Builders, Inc. v. Cowbell Cyber and Obsidian Specialty Ins. Co., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49409 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 9, 2026). In Perry, the insured was deceived into transferring money intended for a vendor to an unintended third party. The insurer acknowledged that the loss was covered and paid the insured the policy’s Cyber Crime Loss sublimit. Discontent with a single sublimit, the insured argued that because it wired the money to the fraudster in separate transfers, it was entitled to a second Cyber Crime Loss sublimit. Reprinted courtesy of Gabriel Darwick, White and Williams LLP and Sean Elman, White and Williams LLP Mr. Darwick may be contacted at darwickg@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Elman may be contacted at elmans@whiteandwilliams.com Read the full story...

    Idaho Contractor Registration: Lessons from the Ward v. Bishop Decision

    April 20, 2026 —
    The Idaho Supreme Court’s recent decision in Ward v. Bishop Constr., Ltd. Liab. Co., No. 51118, 2025 Ida. LEXIS 143 (Dec. 31, 2025) offers valuable guidance for contractors and construction attorneys navigating the Idaho Contractor Registration Act (ICRA). The December 2025 ruling clarifies critical questions about when and how defendants may raise contractor registration defenses, the weight of pretrial stipulations, and the consequences of procedural missteps in construction litigation. This article examines the key takeaways from the decision and offers practical actions for consideration by those working in Idaho’s construction industry. The Facts Behind the Dispute The case arose from a long-standing working relationship between cousins Joel Ward and Ren Bishop dating to the 1990s. Ward performed general construction work for Bishop Construction, LLC, including building, plumbing, electrical, framing, roofing, and siding work on projects in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. Bishop agreed to pay Ward $10 per hour, later increased to $12 per hour, plus one-way travel expenses. Between 2017 and 2019, Ward worked over 1,100 hours but was never paid, totaling $12,443.54 in claimed damages. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tara Martens Miller, Snell & Wilmer
    Ms. Miller may be contacted at tmmiller@swlaw.com

    Four Kahana Feld Attorneys Selected to 2027 Southern California Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars Lists

    August 16, 2026 —
    IRVINE, CA – Aug. 3, 2026 – Kahana Feld is pleased to announce that partners Jason Feld, Amir Kahana, and Sharon Oh-Kubisch were selected to the 2027 Southern California Super Lawyers list, and attorney Hannah Ellenhorn Bloom was selected to the 2027 Southern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars list. Jason Feld was recognized in the area of Construction Litigation. He is a founding partner of Kahana Feld and focuses his practice on the defense of homebuilders, contractors, developers, and real estate professionals primarily in construction defect, general liability, insurance defense, construction accident, and real estate matters. He also represents government entities handling construction, premises liability, general liability, and environmental claims. He serves as panel counsel for many prominent insurance carriers, as well as personal counsel to several national and regional homebuilders, developers, and general contractors. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kahana Feld

    Insurer’s Federal Suit Dismissed in Favor of Insured’s State Suit

    April 14, 2026 —
    The federal district court granted the insured’s motion to dismiss the insurer’s federal suit for declaratory judgment because the insured filed a more complete action in state court. Church Mut. Ins. Co. v. Elmwood Baptist Church, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 259762 (S.D. W.V. Dec. 16, 2025). Elmwood purchased a property policy from Church Mutual Insurance Company. After the roof of Elmwood’s property collapsed, the parties disputed the amount Church Mutual owed to Elmwood. Church Mutual filed suit in federal district court asking for a declaration that the policy was “void ab initio,’ or, alternatively, that Church had fully compensated Elmwood for its loss. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Newmeyer Dillion Partner Jeff Masters Recognized by Chambers USA for Representation of Insurance Policyholders

    June 08, 2026 —
    NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. – June 4, 2026 – Newmeyer Dillion is proud to announce that litigation partner Jeffrey D. Masters has been ranked among a select group of California lawyers representing insurance policyholders in the 2026 edition of Chambers USA. This marks two consecutive years of recognition for Masters by this prestigious international attorney rating resource. "This recognition by Chambers and Partners is a testament to Jeff’s dedication to our clients," said Managing Partner, Paul Tetzloff. "We are thrilled to see his hard work acknowledged and the level of passion and care that he delivers to clients fully recognized." Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Newmeyer Dillion

    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...