BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building expert witness Anaheim California concrete tilt-up expert witness Anaheim California casino resort expert witness Anaheim California structural steel construction expert witness Anaheim California Medical building expert witness Anaheim California industrial building expert witness Anaheim California parking structure expert witness Anaheim California hospital construction expert witness Anaheim California condominiums expert witness Anaheim California retail construction expert witness Anaheim California low-income housing expert witness Anaheim California office building expert witness Anaheim California landscaping construction expert witness Anaheim California mid-rise construction expert witness Anaheim California high-rise construction expert witness Anaheim California townhome construction expert witness Anaheim California housing expert witness Anaheim California production housing expert witness Anaheim California multi family housing expert witness Anaheim California Subterranean parking expert witness Anaheim California condominium expert witness Anaheim California tract home expert witness Anaheim California
    Anaheim California consulting architect expert witnessAnaheim California building consultant expertAnaheim California engineering consultantAnaheim California expert witness roofingAnaheim California expert witnesses fenestrationAnaheim California construction expert witness consultantAnaheim California concrete expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Roofing 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:


    Roofing Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Anaheim California

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Roofing 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 Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Anaheim California Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

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

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

    Anaheim California Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Anaheim California Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

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

    Anaheim California Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Roofing Expert Witness News and Information
    For Anaheim California


    Implications for Industry as Supreme Court Curbs EPA's Authority

    Facing Manslaughter Charges In Worker's 2021 Trench Collapse Death, Colorado Contractor Who Willfully Ignored Federal Law Surrenders To Police

    MDL for Claims Against Manufacturers and Distributors of PFAS-Containing AFFFs Focuses Attention on Key Issues

    Greg Dillion & Newmeyer Dillion Named 2019 Good Scout Award Recipient

    A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment in Pinellas County Circuit Court

    Illinois Court Determines Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims

    Tishman Construction Admits Cheating Trade Center Clients

    Jean Nouvel’s NYC ‘Vision Machine’ Sued Over Construction Defects

    New Standard Addresses Wind Turbine Construction Safety Requirements and Identifies Hazards

    U.S. Home Prices Rose More Than Estimated in February

    Update Your California Release Provisions to Include Amended Section 1542 Language

    Duty to Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Super Lawyers Selects Haight’s Melvin Marcia for Its 2023 Northern California Rising Stars List

    Fire Raging North of Los Angeles Is Getting Fuel From Dry Winds

    Franchisors Should Consider Signing a Conditional Lease Assignment Rather Than a Franchisee’s Lease

    Once Again: Contract Terms Matter

    A New Tariffs Twist: Aggressive Enforcement of False Claims Act Violations Could Potentially Trip Up Construction Companies

    Impossibility of Performance as Excuse to Failure to Achieve Performance Specification

    Recycling Our Cities, One Building at a Time

    CDJ’s #6 Topic of the Year: Does Colorado Need Construction Defect Legislation to Spur Affordable Home Development?

    Insurer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Earth Movement Exclusion Denied

    Japan Quake Triggers Landslides, Knocks Power Plant Offline

    Safeguarding History: Fire Risks in Renovating Historic Buildings

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

    Rulemaking to Modernize, Expand DOI’s “Type A” Natural Resource Damage Assessment Rules Expected Fall 2023

    Flushing Away Liability: What the Aqua Engineering Case Means for Contractors and Subcontractors

    N.J. Governor Fires Staff at Authority Roiled by Patronage Hires

    Understanding Insurance Disputes in Construction Defect Litigation: A Review of Acuity v. Kinsale

    Chambers USA Names Peckar & Abramson to Band 1 Level in Construction Law; 29 P&A Lawyers Recognized as Leading Attorneys; Six Regions and Government Contracts Practice Recognized

    Homebuilders Offer Hope for U.K. Economy

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

    Engineers Found ‘Hundreds’ of Cracks in California Bridge

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    NYC Hires Engineer LERA for Parking Garage Collapse Probe

    New Plan Submitted for Explosive Demolition of Old Tappan Zee Bridge

    AI in AEC 2026: Doing AI Right and Rethinking Your Business Model

    NY State Appellate Court Holds That Pollution Exclusions Bar Duty to Defend Under Liability Policies for Claims Alleging Exposure to PFAS

    A Quick Checklist for Subcontractors

    Texas Court Construes Breach of Contract Exclusion Narrowly in Duty-to-Defend Case

    Defective Panels Threatening Profit at China Solar Farms: Energy

    Is Performance Bond Liable for Delay Damages?

    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    Public Housing Takes Priority in Biden Spending Bill

    Bankrupt Canada Contractor Execs Ordered to Repay $26 Million

    Flying Solo: How it Helps My Construction Clients

    Yes, Indeedy. Competitive Bidding Not Required for School District Lease-Leasebacks

    ACEC Statement on Negotiated Bipartisan Debt Limit Compromise

    Alert: Fraudulent Notice of Nonpayment Defense Applies to Payment Bond Claims

    Nevada Supreme Court Clarifies the Litigation Waiver of the One-Action Rule
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA ROOFING EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Anaheim, California Roofing 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.

    Roofing Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Colorado Supreme Court Reverses Course on Public Project Liens: Key Takeaways From Wadsworth v. Regional Rail Partners

    July 27, 2026 —
    On April 6, 2026, the Colorado Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Ralph L. Wadsworth Construction Company, LLC v. Regional Rail Partners, 2026 CO 19, reversing the Colorado Court of Appeals and providing much-needed clarity regarding verified statements of claim (VSOCs) under the Colorado Public Works Act, C.R.S. §§ 38-26-101 et seq. The decision resolves two issues that have generated significant concern among construction industry professionals since the Court of Appeals issued its opinion on August 1, 2024. Under C.R.S. § 38-26-107(1), a subcontractor on a public works project may file a VSOC with the contracting public entity for amounts due and unpaid for “…furnished labor, materials, sustenance, or other supplies used or consumed by a contractor or his or her subcontractor in or about the performance of the work contracted to be done or that supplies laborers, rental machinery, tools, or equipment to the extent used in the prosecution of the work….” If a claimant files a VSOC for “an amount greater than the amount due” without a reasonable possibility that the amount is due and with knowledge that the claim is excessive, the claimant “shall forfeit all rights to the amount claimed” and becomes liable for the opposing party’s costs and attorneys’ fees. C.R.S. § 38-26-110. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Amanda E. McKinlay, Snell & Wilmer
    Ms. McKinlay may be contacted at amckinlay@swlaw.com

    Florida's Third DCA Reasserts the Teeth of Chapter 558 and the Future of Construction Defect Litigation

    February 23, 2026 —
    The case of Moss & Associates, LLC v. Daystar Peterson and Brickell Heights East Condominium Association, Inc. represents a quiet but significant correction in Florida construction law litigation. The Florida Third District Court of Appeal granted a petition for writ of certiorari and quashed a trial court order that denied a contractor's motion to stay litigation under Chapter 558, Florida Statutes. Though procedurally narrow, the ruling reflects an increasingly assertive appellate stance. Chapter 558's pre-suit notice and right-to-repair process is mandatory, jurisdictional in effect, and not subject to dilution by trial-level discretion. At its core, the opinion reinforces a foundational principle. Florida intends for construction defect disputes to be managed, investigated, and often resolved before they reach a courtroom. The Third DCA's insistence on strict statutory compliance signals to trial courts, and to the plaintiffs' bar, that procedural shortcuts will not be tolerated. Reprinted courtesy of Ryan C. Brooks, Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP and Keith G. Salhab, Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP Mr. Brooks may be contacted at rbrooks@wshblaw.com Mr. Salhab may be contacted at ksalhab@wshblaw.com Read the full story...

    Building in Arizona’s Data Center Boom: How Federal Executive Orders, State Regulation, and National-Security Policy Are Reshaping the Rules for Developers

    June 02, 2026 —
    Developers and practitioners evaluating data center projects in Arizona face a regulatory environment shifting on three fronts simultaneously. Federal executive orders are opening new land, streamlining permitting, and channeling financial incentives toward qualifying projects — but they are not preempting the state and local rules that most directly affect project economics. A carve-out in the December 2025 Artificial Intelligence (AI) Framework Executive Order preserves Arizona’s authority over data center infrastructure, meaning the Arizona Corporation Commission’s (ACC) rate-classification docket, municipal zoning restrictions, water-use ordinances, and pending grid cost-allocation legislation remain the binding constraints on project feasibility. Understanding where federal tailwinds end and state and local headwinds begin is essential for any developer sizing risk or selecting sites in the state. The Federal Landscape: An Interlocking Framework of Executive Orders Five interlocking executive orders are accelerating data center development nationally, but none overrides Arizona’s authority over siting energy, or infrastructure. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryan J. Regula, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Regula may be contacted at rregula@swlaw.com

    Anomaly in Adding a Third-Party Claimant to a Liability Insurance Coverage Dispute

    May 05, 2026 —
    In an insurance coverage lawsuit seeking declaratory relief, an insurer sued the third-party claimant. The insurer was seeking a declaration that there was no coverage, which naturally would impact the third-party claimant. The insured did not respond to the lawsuit and the insurer moved for a default judgment which was objected to by the third-party claimant. The trial court granted a final judgment in favor of the insurer, which prompted an appeal from the third-party claimant because the final judgment impacts its rights to coverage if it obtains a judgment against the insured. The appellate court reversed but please take a look at this Court’s discussion on the issue of an insurer adding a third-party claimant to a coverage lawsuit when then the third-party cannot pursue a direct claim against the insurer until it obtains a settlement or judgment against the insured. It presents an interesting argument and counter-point for a third-party claimant that is added to the coverage lawsuit which has implications if it obtains a judgment against the insured: This case involves an apparent anomaly in Florida law. It is well-established that third-party claimants injured by an insured’s negligence have a right as third-party beneficiaries to payment from the insured’s insurance proceeds. It is equally well-established that the third-party claimants’ rights in this regard do not accrue unless and until they obtain a verdict or settlement against the insured. A quick review of this law is helpful at this point. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    How AEC Firms Move AI Beyond the Pilot

    July 27, 2026 —
    Most AEC firms can run an AI pilot, but few can scale it. Enthusiasm for a first experiment rarely extends beyond the pilot team, leaving the pilot as an isolated win that never changes how the company works. In a recent AEC Business Podcast episode, Adeline Chan, CEO and co-founder of Hong Kong-based AAL Innovation, explained why that gap exists and what separates the firms that close it from those that stall. The Pilot Mindset that Holds Construction Back Adeline draws a sharp contrast between finance and construction. Banks cannot afford to fall behind their competitors, so they pilot constantly, sometimes running hundreds of proof-of-concept teams in parallel and letting them compete internally to identify the approach that works. The winning concept becomes the standard and scales across the organization, and the return on investment is measured in undeniable numbers. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    End of an (Endangerment) Era

    February 23, 2026 —
    On February 12, 2026, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the repeal of the 2009 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Endangerment Finding and the elimination of all federal GHG emission standards for motor vehicles and engines.1 The EPA characterized the action as the “single largest deregulatory action in U.S. history.”2 This development marks a fundamental shift in federal climate policy under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and is expected to trigger immediate and extensive litigation. In Massachusetts v. EPA, the U.S. Supreme Court held that GHGs qualify as “air pollutants” under the CAA and that the EPA must determine whether emissions from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare under CAA Section 202(a).3 Following this decision, on December 7, 2009, the EPA issued two findings. First, the EPA classified six different GHGs as threatening public health and welfare. Second, the EPA determined that emissions from new motor vehicles contribute to that endangerment.4 Although the findings themselves imposed no direct regulatory requirements, they served as the legal predicate for GHG emission standards for light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles, and later for other CAA programs affecting statutory sources. In 2012, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld the Endangerment Finding and related regulations.5 Reprinted courtesy of Sukhmani K. Singh, Snell & Wilmer, Christopher P. Colyer, Snell & Wilmer and Sean M. Sherlock, Snell & Wilmer Ms. Singh may be contacted at ssingh@swlaw.com Mr. Colyer may be contacted at ccolyer@swlaw.com Mr. Sherlock may be contacted at ssherlock@swlaw.com Read the full story...

    Construction Companies Are Nearly Seven Times Safer With These Best Practices

    June 15, 2026 —
    WASHINGTON, May 4—Associated Builders and Contractors released its 2026 Health and Safety Performance Report, an annual guide to health and safety best practices on construction jobsites. The 2026 report shows the positive effects of participating in ABC’s STEP® Health and Safety Management System, which enables top-performing ABC members to achieve incident rates 686% safer than the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics construction industry average, reducing total recordable incident rates by 85%. Established in 1989, STEP is a proven system that provides contractors and suppliers with a robust, no-cost framework for measuring health and safety data and benchmarking with peers in the industry. This self-assessment tool helps participants identify real opportunities for scalable growth in their health and safety programs to lower their total recordable incident rates and become an employer of choice in a competitive labor market. Reprinted courtesy of ABC, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    Lost in Translation: AEC Tech’s Missing Role

    May 12, 2026 —
    I once visited a construction site where the contractor’s headquarters had commissioned a tech company to build an on-site quality-inspection application. The developer had admitted to the site engineer that they had never set foot on a construction site before. The engineer showed me what he was actually using: his own phone camera and an Excel sheet. The new app did not map to how work actually happened on site. This is not an isolated story. The vendor builds something technically coherent but operationally disconnected. The client, somewhere up the chain, had fallen in love with the idea of the solution before anyone had built an honest business case for it. The result is a tool that gets demonstrated at a board meeting but isn’t used in the field. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi