BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home expert witness Capitola California retail construction expert witness Capitola California hospital construction expert witness Capitola California custom homes expert witness Capitola California production housing expert witness Capitola California townhome construction expert witness Capitola California Medical building expert witness Capitola California mid-rise construction expert witness Capitola California low-income housing expert witness Capitola California condominium expert witness Capitola California office building expert witness Capitola California structural steel construction expert witness Capitola California industrial building expert witness Capitola California concrete tilt-up expert witness Capitola California Subterranean parking expert witness Capitola California tract home expert witness Capitola California condominiums expert witness Capitola California institutional building expert witness Capitola California casino resort expert witness Capitola California housing expert witness Capitola California high-rise construction expert witness Capitola California landscaping construction expert witness Capitola California
    Capitola California architectural engineering expert witnessCapitola California building code compliance expert witnessCapitola California construction code expert witnessCapitola California construction claims expert witnessCapitola California fenestration expert witnessCapitola California concrete expert witnessCapitola California building expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Capitola, 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 Capitola California

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Building Industry Association of Fresno/Madera Counties
    Local # 0516
    1530 E. Shaw Ave #113
    Fresno, CA 93710

    Capitola California Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of Fresno/Madera Counties - Madera Chapter
    Local # 0516
    1530 E. Shaw Ave Ste 113
    Fresno, CA 93710

    Capitola California Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of the Bay Area - Southern Division
    Local # 0538
    675 N 1st St Suite 620
    San Jose, CA 95112
    Capitola California Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Tulare/Kings Ctys
    Local # 0505
    PO Box 3930
    Visalia, CA 93278

    Capitola California Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of Central California
    Local # 0536
    900 H St Ste E2
    Modesto, CA 95354

    Capitola California Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of the Bay Area - Eastern Division
    Local # 0538
    PO Box 5160
    San Ramon, CA 94583
    Capitola California Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of the Bay Area
    Local # 0538
    101 Ygnacio Valley Rd # 210
    Walnut Creek, CA 94596

    Capitola California Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Capitola California

    Corporate Profile

    CAPITOLA CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Capitola, California Construction Expert Witness Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Capitola, California

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Prevents Coverage for Collapse

    April 27, 2026 —
    The appellate court affirmed the decision of the trial court granting summary judgment to the insurer after agreeing that the policy’s anti-concurrent causation clause barred coverage. Lido Hospitality, Inc. v. AIX Specialty Ins. Co., 2026 Iii. App. Unpub. LEXIS 133 (Ill. Ct. App. Jan. 27, 2026). One of the brick veneer walls of the Lido Motel collapsed during a windstorm. Lido reported the loss it its insurer, AIX. AIX investigated and determined that the brick veneer collapsed due to pervasive wear and tear and corrosion of the underlying infrastructure that secured the veneer- specifically the components that anchored or tied the masonry veneer to the underlying wooden substrate. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    A Permitting Base Checklist for Data Centers and Power Plants

    June 02, 2026 —
    There is a lot of talk these days about “license to operate” for data centers, meaning management of the relationships with stakeholders and broader communities concerning both the benefits and adverse consequences of locating a facility in a particular locale. Here, we are speaking of “license to operate” more literally—namely, the legal and regulatory permitting and approval requirements for a privately owned data center whether by itself or colocated with a power generating plant. Our Base Checklist includes generally and potentially applicable permitting requirements for development and operation, using California as an example. (Taking legal authority Frank Sinatra out of context, “If you can make it there, you can make it anywhere.”) The actual requirements for a given facility would depend, in part, on local law, including planning and zoning laws and plans, and the environment of the site. Just as examples, additional permitting and mitigation requirements might apply if sensitive receptors are located nearby (e.g., noise mitigation for residential dwellings), if sensitive and protected biological resources (e.g., jurisdictional waters and/or protected species) would be impacted, or if the present or former land uses require additional measures (e.g., hazardous materials remediation, mitigation for conversion of prime farmland, or protection of cultural resources). The scope of permit requirements would ultimately be determined by the applicable regulatory agencies and by the lead and responsible agencies under the applicable state environmental land use regime—in our reference case here, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. McDonough, Pillsbury, Stephen J. Humes, Pillsbury and Stacey C. Wright, Pillsbury Mr. McDonough may be contacted at michael.mcdonough@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Humes may be contacted at stephen.humes@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Wright may be contacted at stephen.humes@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

    Pulling the Plug, Preserving the Product: Protecting Rights to a Modular Subcontractor’s Work Post-Termination

    June 08, 2026 —
    Volumetric Modular Construction (VMC) is a building method where a structure is divided into large components or modules, fabricated in an offsite factory and then transported to a construction site for assembly.[1] Proponents of VMC hail it as a cost-efficient alternative to traditional building methods that leads to more consistent quality and shorter construction duration.[2] Due to a growing labor shortage, high demand for compressed project schedules, and stagnant construction productivity rates, the construction industry is embracing VMC.[3] A recent report on the market size of prefabricated construction estimates that from 2026 to 2031, VMC will grow at a compound annual growth rate of 7.16% and become a 413.11-billion-dollar industry.[4] As VMC becomes more prevalent, owners, general contractors, and subcontractors must consider how to effectively contract for modular construction. One important consideration, which this article focuses on, is navigating termination of a modular subcontractor. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Paul Williamson, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Williamson may be contacted at pwilliamson@pecklaw.com

    Data Center Construction and the AEC Partner of the Future

    April 14, 2026 —
    During my involvement in designing mobile phone production facilities, the speed of design and construction was critical. Any delay could directly translate into lost revenue. That same logic now applies to data centers, though the stakes are much higher. Instead of optimizing physical production lines, we are constructing infrastructure for digital production. The global data center capacity is expected to nearly double by 2030, and with this level of demand, the traditional project-by-project delivery model begins to show its limitations. Data centers are no longer isolated projects in the traditional sense. They are evolving into repeatable, scalable production systems, making them ideal environments for AEC process and business model innovation. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Miller Act Payment Bond Claim “No Nos!”

    October 06, 2026 —
    A recent federal district court opinion, Sauer Construction, LLC v. United Structures of Georgia, LLC, 2026 WL 2522849 (M.D.Fla. 2026), addressed two worthy considerations when it comes to a Miller Act payment bond claim. And, when I am talking about considerations, I am really talking about “no-nos.” These are things you don’t do. First, don’t file an untimely Miller Act payment bond lawsuit. Make sure, as a claimant, you file that lawsuit within one year from your final furnishing. In this case, the subcontractor claimant did not and tried to argue around the statute of limitations with an equitable tolling argument, i.e., that the statute of limitations should be equitably tolled to accommodate the late filing of the lawsuit. Guess what? The subcontractor was not successful. You are fighting an uphill (losing) battle when arguing equitable tolling because “traditional equitable tolling principles require that the claimant demonstrate extraordinary circumstances, such as fraud, misinformation, or deliberate concealment.” Sauer Construction, supra. This means you need ultra-persuasive evidence to support such equitable tolling principles. Actually, having this evidence is doubtful. Thus, timely file the Miller Act payment bond lawsuit. There is no legitimate reason not to. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    What Is the Independent Tort Doctrine? New Case Explains…

    August 24, 2026 —
    Florida’s Sixth District Court of Appeals in Atout v. HHM Land Trust Dated October 29, 2013, 51 Fla.L.Weekly D1569a (Fla. 6th DCA 2026) recently included an extensive discussion on Florida’s independent tort doctrine. The independent tort doctrine is an important legal doctrine, particularly when parties are in contractual privity. This doctrine stands for the proposition that tort claims must be independent of any breach of contract. See Atout, supra. The Sixth District’s extensive discussion analyzed the indicators to determine this “independence,” which may arise from the source of the duty, the asserted conduct, the damages sought, or even public policy: Unlike claims that rely on contractual relationships, an “independent” tort is often characterized by a duty imposed by law rather than by agreement. As to this consideration, United States District Court Judge Steven Merryday has explained that the independent tort doctrine honors the same divide as the economic loss rule, but rather than looking at the nature of the loss, it focuses on the source of the duty allegedly breached. “If a contract imposes a duty, and the defendant breaches that duty, the plaintiff must sue for breach of contract. If society imposes the duty, the plaintiff must sue in tort.” Following this reasoning, courts should consider whether the alleged breach of a duty in tort coincides or overlaps with a duty imposed by a contract. If the duty at issue is within the scope of a contract, and the relationship of the parties that led to the creation of that duty stems from a contract, then that duty’s source is from contract and any alleged tort claims based on a breach of those duties may not be “independent.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Prefatory Contract Language Cannot Be Used to Create an Ambiguity with Operative Provisions

    May 12, 2026 —
    Contract drafting and interpretation matters. A case dealt with the potential conflict with prefatory language in an agreement compared with operative provisions in the agreement. The trial court held that the operative provisions control. I discussed this case here where the appellate court reversed based on the prefatory language. But, through a motion for rehearing, the appellate court reconsidered its position and affirmed the trial court based on the operative provisions, mainly that the prefatory language cannot be used to create an ambiguity with operative provisions. Consider this explanation in affirming the trial court:
    Because the trial court correctly found that the initial language in the contract was prefatory and could not be used to create an ambiguity in the remainder of the contract, we affirm the final judgment.
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Limitations of Liability Provisions in Construction Contracts: A Means to Manage Risk and Limit Financial Exposure

    June 23, 2026 —
    Taking a cue from architects and engineers, construction contractors have started inserting limitation of liability clauses in their construction contracts to manage risk and limit financial exposure. This article will address the specific risks that can be limited through an LOL, tips for negotiating the LOL terms with reluctant owners to cover those specific risks, how to limit unintended consequences of an LOL (such as relieving an insurer of its obligations to cover certain losses), and approaches to set
    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twelve White and Williams Lawyers

    Fifth Circuit Affirms District Court's Grant of Summary Judgment to Insurer on Property Loss Claim

    Navigating Abandonment of a Construction Project

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment to Dispose of Hail Damage Claim Fails

    Is Your Business Insured for the Coronavirus?

    President Trump Repeals Contractor “Blacklisting” Rule

    Tariffs, Supply Snarls Spur Search for Factories Closer
    Florida Issues Emergency Fraud Prevention Rule to Protect Policyholders in Wake of Catastrophic Storms

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 05/04/22

    Boston-area Asbestos-Abatement Firms Face Wage and Safety Complaints

    Ben L. Aderholt Joins Coats Rose Construction Litigation Group

    Toll Brothers Faces Construction Defect Lawsuit in New Jersey

    Coverage Denied for Condominium Managing Agent

    Congratulations to Reno Partner Karen Baytosh for Securing a Complete Dismissal via a Motion for Summary Judgment

    The Importance of the Recent Amendment to Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence

    Be Strategic When Suing a Manufacturer Under a Warranty with an Arbitration Provision

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    Colorado Court of Appeals holds that insurance companies owe duty of prompt and effective communication to claimants and repair subcontractors

    Property Damage Caused By Construction Next Door Covered as Ensuing Loss

    Residential Interior Decorator Was Entitled to Lien and Was Not Engaging in Unlicensed Contracting

    Construction Defect Claim Not Timely Filed

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

    CSLB Releases New Forms and Announces New Fees!

    Corrective Action Protest Grounds for GSA Schedule Federal Construction Contractors

    Is New York Heading for a Construction Defect Boom?

    Commercial Real Estate Brokerages in an Uncertain Russian Market

    DOJ to Prosecute Philadelphia Roofing Company for Worker’s Death

    Another (Insurer) Bites The Dust: Virginia District Court Rejects Narrow Reading of Pollution Exclusion

    Misread of Other Insurance Clause Becomes Costly for Insurer

    Corporate Transparency Act’s Impact on Real Estate: Reporting Companies, Exemptions and Beneficial Ownership Reporting (webinar)

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

    Contractor Sentenced to 7 Years for “Hail Damage” Fraud

    Hyundai to Pay 47M to Settle Construction Equipment's Alleged Clean Air Violations

    Just How Climate-Friendly Are Timber Buildings? It’s Complicated

    Breach of a Construction Contract & An Equitable Remedy?

    Beyond the COI: The Importance of an Owner's or Facilities Manager's Downstream Insurance Review Program

    Ensuing Loss Provision Salvages Coverage for Water Damage Claim

    California Subcontractor Gets a Kick in the Rear (or Perhaps the Front) for Prematurely Recorded Mechanics Lien

    Forcible Entry and Detainer Actions: Courts May Not Consider Tenant’s Hardship

    Arctic Fires Are Melting Permafrost That Keeps Carbon Underground

    DOI Aims to Modernize its “Inefficient and Inflexible” Type A Natural Resource Damages Assessment Regulations

    Congratulations to Walnut Creek Partner Bryan Stofferahn and Associate Jeffrey Schilling for Winning a Motion for Summary Judgment on Behalf of Their Client, a Regional Grocery Store!

    Cybersecurity "Flash" Warning for Construction and Manufacturing Businesses

    Fort Lauderdale Team Secures Defense Verdict for Client in Premises Liability Lawsuit

    Unfair Risk Allocation on Design-Build Projects

    Workplace Safety–the Unpreventable Employee Misconduct Defense

    SB800 Is Now Optional to the Homeowner?

    Contractor Owed a Defense

    At Lake Powell, Engineering Is Outpacing Colorado River Policy

    Athens, Ohio, Sues to Recover Nearly $722,000 After Cyber Attack

    Your Work Exclusion Applies to Damage to Tradesman's Property, Not Damage to Other Property

    Is It Time to Get Rid of Retainage?

    Sick Leave, Paid Time Off, and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act

    Construction Defects and Warranties in Maryland

    Duke Energy Appeals N.C. Order to Excavate Nine Coal Ash Pits

    A Contract Is a Contract: Releases and Change Orders / Bilateral Modifications Are Construed as Contracts