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

    Wisconsin “property damage” caused by an “occurrence.”

    Homeowner may pursue negligence claim for construction defect, Oregon Supreme Court holds

    JDi Data Introduces Mobile App for Litigation Cost Allocation

    Guilty Pleas Draw Renewed Interest In Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws

    Supreme Court of New York Denies Motion in all but One Cause of Action in Kikirov v. 355 Realty Assoc., et al.

    Bound by Group Builders, Federal District Court Finds No Occurrence

    Defective Shingle Claims Valid Despite Bankruptcy

    Increased Expenditure on Injuries for New York City School Construction

    Orange County Home Builder Dead at 93

    Firm Sued For Construction Defects in Parking Garage

    Judge Kobayashi Determines No Coverage for Construction Defect Claim

    Mark Van Wonterghem To Serve as Senior Forensic Consultant in the Sacramento Offices of Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc.

    Court Voids Settlement Agreement in Construction Defect Case

    Nebraska Man Sentenced for Insurance Fraud in Construction Projects

    United States District Court Confirms That Insurers Can Be Held Liable Under The CCPA.

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    Appropriation Bill Cuts Military Construction Spending

    Bill Seeks to Protect Legitimate Contractors

    Texas Law Bars Coverage under Homeowner’s Policy for Mold Damage

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition of Seattle’s 25-story McGuire Apartments Building

    West Coast Casualty Promises Exciting Line Up at the Nineteenth Annual Conference

    Construction Defect Not a RICO Case, Says Court

    Coverage Rejected Under Owned Property and Alienated Property Exclusions

    Oregon agreement to procure insurance, anti-indemnity statute, and self-insured retention

    Ohio subcontractor work exception to the “your work” exclusion

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    Virginia Homebuilding Slumps After Last Year’s Gain

    After $15 Million Settlement, Association Gets $7.7 Million From Additional Subcontractor

    Largest Per Unit Settlement Ever in California Construction Defect Case?

    South Carolina Legislature Defines "Occurrence" To Include Property Damage Arising From Faulty Workmanship

    Former New York Governor to Head Construction Monitoring Firm

    Texas Construction Firm Files for Bankruptcy

    Public Relations Battle over Harmon Tower

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    Contractor Burns Down Home, Insurer Refuses Coverage

    Minnesota Starts Wide-Ranging Registration of Contractors

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    Building Inspector Jailed for Taking Bribes

    All Risk Policy Only Covers Repair to Portion of Dock That Sustains Damage

    Save A Legal Fee? Sometimes You Better Talk With Your Construction Attorney

    Boston’s Tunnel Project Plagued by Water

    Nevada Court Adopts Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    Construction Defect Lawsuits? There’s an App for That

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

    Surveyors Statute Trumps Construction Defect Claim in Tennessee

    Colorado “occurrence”

    Plaintiffs In Construction Defect Cases to Recover For Emotional Damages?

    Contractor Liable for Soils Settlement in Construction Defect Suit

    Australian Developer Denies Building Problems Due to Construction Defects

    Safe Harbors- not just for Sailors anymore (or, why advance planning can prevent claims of defective plans & specs) (law note)

    Texas covered versus uncovered allocation and “legally obligated to pay.”

    After Breaching its Duty to Defend, Insurer Must Indemnify

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    San Diego Construction Defect Claim Settled for $2.3 Million

    Courts Are Conflicted As To Whether "Good Faith" Settlement Determinations Can Be Reviewed Via Writ Petition Or Appeal

    Background Owner of Property Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate Construction Defects

    Broker Not Liable for Failure to Reveal Insurer's Insolvency After Policy Issued

    Conspirators Bilked Homeowners in Nevada Construction Defect Claims

    Court Consolidates Cases and Fees in Soil Construction Defect Case

    Couple Sues Attorney over Construction Defect Case, Loses

    Colorado Court of Appeals Rejects Retroactive Application of C.R.S. § 13-20-808.

    Colorado statutory “property damage” caused by an “occurrence”

    No Duty to Indemnify When Discovery Shows Faulty Workmanship Damages Insured’s Own Work

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    “Details Matter” is the Foundation in a Texas Construction Defect Suit

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act May be Extended to 2016

    Colorado Senate Bill 12-181: 2012’s Version of a Prompt Pay Bill

    There is No Non-Delegable Duty on the Part of Residential Builders in Colorado

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

    California Lawyer Gives How-To on Pursuing a Construction Defect Claim

    Subcontractor Not Liable for Defending Contractor in Construction Defect Case

    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Nevada Supreme Court Reverses Decision against Grader in Drainage Case

    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    Housing Market on Way to Recovery

    Homeowners Must Comply with Arbitration over Construction Defects

    New Jersey Court Rules on Statue of Repose Case

    Water Drainage Case Lacks Standing

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Florida County Suspends Impact Fees to Spur Development

    Ensuing Losses From Faulty Workmanship Must be Covered

    Appeals Court Upholds Decision by Referee in Trial Court for Antagan v Shea Homes

    Construction Law Client Alert: Hirer Beware - When Exercising Control Over a Job Site’s Safety Conditions, You May be Held Directly Liable for an Independent Contractor’s Injury

    Lockton Expands Construction and Design Team

    Construction Defect Destroys Home, Forty Years Later

    In Colorado, Repair Vendors Can Bring First-Party Bad Faith Actions For Amounts Owed From an Insurer

    Damron Agreement Questioned in Colorado Casualty Insurance v Safety Control Company, et al.

    Seller Cannot Compel Arbitration for Its Role in Construction Defect Case<

    Harmon Tower Construction Defects Update: Who’s To Blame?
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Anaheim, 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 this considerable body of 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
    Anaheim, California

    Plans Go High Tech

    April 25, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    One construction executive described it as “the wave of the future.” What is it? Accessing building plans on an iPad. According to an article in MacWorld, several companies are now offering solutions to distribute and update construction plans on iPads. Changes to plans and notes can be distributed quickly through cloud computing.

    Alan Dillon, a senior superintendent at DPR Construction told MacWorld, “I can take my iPad into the field and have my whole set of drawings.” He described a set of drawings for a large construction project as “five or six inches thick.” Danielle Douthet, of Level 10 Construction said it “can help everyone be on the same page more quickly, and make sure that everybody is working off the most current set of documents.”

    And it’s not just building plans. Other firms offer building management applications designed to be taken into the field on mobile devices.

    Read the full story…


    Contractor Liable for Soils Settlement in Construction Defect Suit

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The California Court of Appeals ruled on January 9 in Burrow v. JTL Dev. Corp., a construction defect case in which houses suffered damage due to improperly compacted soil, upholding the decision of the lower court.

    Turf Construction entered into a deal with JTL to develop a parcel they acquired. A third firm, Griffin Homes, withdrew from the agreement “when a geotechnical and soils engineering firm reported significant problems with soil stability on 14 of the lots.” Turf Construction then took over compacting and grading the lots. Turf “had never compacted or graded a residential tract before.” Robert Taylor, the owner of Turf, “testified he knew there was a significant problem with unstable soils.”

    After homes were built, the plaintiffs bought homes on the site. Shortly thereafter, the homes suffered damage from soil settlement “and the damage progressively worsened.” They separately filed complaints which the court consolidated.

    During trial, the plaintiff’s expert said that there had been an inch and a half in both homes and three to five inches in the backyard and pool areas. “He also testified that there would be four to eight inches of future settlement in the next fifteen to twenty years.” The expert for Turf and JTL “testified that soil consolidation was complete and there would be no further settlement.”

    Turf and JTL objected to projections made by the plaintiffs’ soil expert, William LaChappelle. Further, they called into question whether it was permissible for him to rely on work by a non-testifying expert, Mark Russell. The court upheld this noting that LaChappelle “said that they arrived at the opinion together, through a cycle of ‘back and forth’ and peer review, and that the opinion that the soil would settle four to eight inches in fifteen to twenty years was his own.”

    Turf and JTL contended that the court relied on speculative damage. The appeals court disagreed, stating that the lower court based its award “on evidence of reasonably certain damage.”

    Turf also that it was not strictly liable, since it did not own or sell the properties. The court wrote that they “disagree because Turf’s grading activities rendered it strictly liable as a manufacturer of the lots.” The court concluded that “Turf is strictly liable as a manufacturer of the lots.”

    Judge Coffee upheld the decision of the lower court with Judges Yegan and Perren concurring.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    February 10, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The insurer unsuccessfully moved for summary judgment, contending it had no obligation to defend two related underlying construction defect cases. Amerisure Ins. Co. v. R.L.Lantana Boatyard, Ltd., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2466 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 9, 2012).

    An engineering report noted design construction defects and deficiencies in visible, physical improvements at The Moorings at Lantana Condominium. In two lawsuits, The Moorings sued the developer, R.L. Lantana Boatyard ("RLLB"), and the contractor, Current Builders of Florida.

    Current Builders was insured by Amerisure. RLLB was named as an additional insured under the Amerisure policy.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com


    Continuous Trigger of Coverage Adopted for Loss Under First Party Policy

    August 2, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The Seventh Circuit predicted that the Wisconsin Supreme Court would adopt the continuous injury trigger for first party property loss that extends over several policy periods. Miller v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 12940 (7th Cir. June 25, 2012).

    A home inspection report performed before the Millers purchased their home showed a soft spot on the roof. The stucco's finish color was also uneven and stained. Further, some water damage was found in the study and skylights above the kitchen sink. But the report advised that the exterior walls, chimney, grass roof, flashings, floor joists/beams and columns, garage walls and floor appeared serviceable. A roof specialist determined the soft spot was not significant and could be repaired for $1,500.

    The Millers purchased a homeowner's policy from Safeco on June 30, 2005. The policy went into effect the next day when the Millers closed on the property. But the Millers did not see the policy's terms until Safeco mailed them a copy of the policy at the end of July.

    Before receiving the policy, the Millers discovered severe inner wall water leaks and significant water infiltration on three of the home's exterior walls.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com


    California Bill Would Notify Homeowners on Construction Defect Options

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The California Building Industry Association supported Assembly Bill 1892, but its goals of informing homeowners of their rights under SB800 have been accomplished through the administrative process. The Department of Consumer Affairs has now posted text on its web site noting that “prior to pursuing legal action or responding to a construction defect solicitation, you must first contact your home builder.” The text goes on to note that “if the homebuilder fails to follow any of the procedures, the homeowner is entitled to proceed with the filing of an action.”

    Read the full story…


    Workers Hurt in Casino Floor Collapse

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    More than a dozen construction workers fell about thirty feet when a floor collapsed in a Cincinnati casino. The workers were pouring cement on the second-floor level when the accident happened. The area in question will be the gaming area in the completed casino. Scott Allen, OSHA’s regional spokesperson, said their investigation of the accident would probably take about a month to complete.

    The cause of the collapse is still undetermined. Although the weather has been wet in the area, experts thought it unlikely to be the cause. A construction forensics professor at Ohio State University said that “concrete pouring is very common” and that “you cannot go wrong unless something happens with the connection.” Engineering experts said it was more likely an issue with the metal decking.

    Read the full story…


    Homebuilding Still on the Rise

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The National Association of Home Builders reports that spending on private homes was up three percent in October 2012, bringing it to a four-year high. This was part of a trend in which fourteen of the last fifteen months have seen increases in spending on residential construction. Likewise, multifamily residences have seen thirteen months of increased spending, putting it 82% higher than its low, two years ago. ¬?In addition to new homes, remodeling is also up, reaching its highest point in five years.

    Read the full story…


    Construction on the Rise in Washington Town

    June 16, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Kitsap Sun reports that Gig Harbor, a town in the area near Tacoma, Washington, has had a 60% increase in building permit applications as compared to 2010. May, 2011 had as many permits issued for single-family residences in Gig Harbor as were issued for all of 2010. Additionally, a Safeway shopping center on Point Fosdick is described by Dick Bower, Gig Harbor Building and Fire Safety Director, as “a huge project and it’s going to bring in quite a bit of revenue.” He called the increase in building “economic recovery at the grassroots level.”

    Bower said that the building officials in other towns have also seen upswings in construction. He anticipates more activity in the future.

    Read the full story…


    Gilroy Homeowners Sue over Leaky Homes

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Two years into a lawsuit against Shapell Homes, the builder of a subdivision called Eagle Ridge in Gilroy, California, homeowners have joined or left the lawsuit. About fifty homeowners are still in the suit, which contends that construction defects have lead to water intrusion in their homes. The lawyer for the homeowners contends that more than a hundred homes have construction defects.

    One homeowner said that soon after he joined the suit, Sharpell sent workers to his home who repaired problems to his satisfaction. “They came in within two weeks and fixed everything,” said Frank Lowry. Another homeowner, Wilson Haddow, said that he was “quite happy” after Shapell repaired problems.

    Others weren’t quite so happy. Greg Yancey said that problems had “been a nightmare” and that “it just doesn’t feel like home.” He said that his “house is possessed,” with problems that include walls that bow out and a balcony that drips rainwater to the front door. His home is currently worth far less than the $700,000 he paid in 2007.

    Read the full story…


    Discovery Ordered in Nevada Construction Defect Lawsuit

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Gemstone LVS was sued by the Manhattan Homeowners Association in Las Vegas, after which Chartis Specialty Insurance informed Gemstone that they “had no duty to defend or indemnify Gemstone under the Commercial Umbrella Liability Policy.” Gemstone “asserts that at the time the Policy was purchased, it was understood that Chartis would provide insurance coverage for a construction defect lawsuit” and now seeks discovery “to prove Chartis’ bad faith purpose in drafting an illusory Policy.”

    The opinion notes that “the Court conducted a preliminary peek at the pending motion for partial summary judgment and finds that Chartis has not made the strong showing necessary to support the requested stay.” Further, the court notes that “when ambiguity in the language of a policy exists, the court may consider not only the language of the policy but also the ‘intent of the parties, the subject matter of the policy, and the circumstances surrounding its issuance.’” The court concludes that “this type of discovery is relevant to understanding the intent of the parties, more specifically, whether it was understood that Chartis would provide insurance coverage given the construction defect lawsuit.”

    Accordingly, the court denied Chartis’ motion for stay of discovery and established a schedule for discovery, expert designations, rebuttal expert designations, and other matters related to the trial.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Condominium Communities Must Complete Construction Defect Repairs, Says FHA

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Laura K. Sanchez of HindmanSanchez writes that the FHA “will not approve or recertify” any condominium community “where there are any pending or incomplete repairs within the community which are a result of a construction defect claim, regardless of whether the litigation has been resolved and regardless of whether there are funds in the bank paid by the developer to pay for the repairs.” The FHA notes that failure to complete or fund repairs could “put FHA insured loans at risk.” Communities must disclose all maintenance and repair issues to the FHA. Sanchez notes that the FHA has stated that incomplete repairs could put FHA-insured loans at risk.

    Read the full story…


    Insurer Able to Refuse Coverage for Failed Retaining Wall

    October 28, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Eleventh District of the US Court of Appeals has ruled in the case of Nix v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Company. In this case, the Nixes filed a claim after a portion of the retaining wall in their home collapsed and their basement flooded. State Farm denied the claim “on the ground that the policy excluded coverage for collapses caused by defects in construction and for damage caused by groundwater.”

    The court reviewed the Nixes’ policy and found that State Farm’s statement did specifically exclude both of these items. In reviewing the lower court’s ruling, the appeals court noted that State Farm’s expert witness, Mark Voll, determined that the retaining wall “lacked reinforcing steel, as required by a local building code, and could not withstand the pressure created by groundwater that had accumulated during a heavy rainfall.” Additionally, a french drain had been covered with clay soil and so had failed to disperse the groundwater.

    The Nixes argued that the flooding was due to a main line water pipe, but their opinions were those of Terry Nix and the contractor who made temporary repairs to the wall. “Those opinions were not admissible as lay testimony. Neither Nix nor the contractor witnessed the wall collapse or had personal knowledge about the construction of the Nixes’ home.”

    The lower court granted a summary judgment to State Farm which has been upheld by the appeals court.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Judge Rejects Extrapolation, Harmon Tower to Remain Standing

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    CityCenter has filed an emergency motion asking the Nevada Supreme Court to intervene in Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez’ order that the building’s defects cannot be extrapolated from those tested. CityCenter’s structural engineering expert “evaluated 397 of the Harmon’s critical structural elements and found all but one defective,” according to the article on Vegas.Inc. Judge Gonzalez would not permit this to be extrapolated to the untested 1,072, as the locations tested were not random.

    Judge Gonzalez also ruled that if CityCenter does additional testing, they may not appeal her order that ruled the extrapolation inadmissible. CityCenter argued to the Nevada Supreme Court that “the notion that CityCenter should be forced to incur additional millions of dollars in testing costs and sanctions ?Äì on the condition that it waive its right to appeal this ruling ?Äì just to be permitted to present its own damages evidence, shocks the conscience.”

    Gonzalez gave the okay to CityCenter to demolish the building, but its demolition would make any further testing impossible. Under Gonzalez’ ruling, the untested structural elements cannot b assumed to be defective.

    Read the full story…


    Pennsylvania Court Extends Construction Defect Protections to Subsequent Buyers

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Pennsylvania courts have long held that there is an implied warranty of habitability for the initial purchaser of a home. Now, as some defects may not immediately show up, the court has extended that implied warranty to second and subsequent purchasers. As Marc D. Brookman, David I. Haas, and Christopher Bender of Duane Morris note, “this judicially created doctrine shifts the risk of a latent defect in the construction of a new home from the purchaser to the builder-vendor.”

    The Pennsylvania Supreme Court concluded that a contractual relationship is not needed for an implied warranty of habitability. The court’s concern was inequalities would result when a home was sold while other homes were protected by being within the statute of repose.

    Read the full story…


    Construction Spending Dropped in July

    September 13, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Bloomberg News reports that after four months of gains in construction spending, July saw a drop of 0.9 percent, wiping out June’s gain of 0.4 percent. Despite the overall decline in spending, there was an increase of 1.5 percent in expenditure on building new single-family homes and 2.8 percent on multifamily residential construction.

    Read the full story…


    Cabinetmaker Exceeds Expectations as Conditions Improve

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    American Woodmark, the manufacturer of several national brands of cabinets and vanities, saw greater than anticipated earnings in its most recent quarter. Their revenue was $148.3 million, an increase of 13% over the same quarter a year prior. They saw a 40% increase in sales. As a result, their per-share earnings were 7 cents, instead of the projected loss of 3 cents per share. Forbes reports that the share price for American Woodmark has been rising in August 2012.

    Read the full story…


    There is No Non-Delegable Duty on the Part of Residential Builders in Colorado

    August 2, 2012 — Brady Iandiorio, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC

    Recently, in the Arapahoe District Court, the Honorable Michael Spear, issued an order holding that builders do not owe a non-delegable duty to homeowners. In Marx and Corken v. Alpert Custom Homes, Inc., et al., Judge Spear’s order came in response to plaintiffs’ motion for determination of question of law seeking a finding that the defendants owed a non-delegable duty to the plaintiffs and thus, to strike defendants’ designation of nonparties at fault. After being fully briefed, Judge Spear, found that such a non-delegable duty does not exist.

    The case arises from the construction of a single-family residence in Aurora, Colorado. Through the construction and interaction with Alpert Custom Homes, Inc. and Scott and Sally Alpert, the defendants, Paul Marx and Kay Corken, the plaintiffs claimed they suffered various damages and losses, and brought claims for breach of contract-warranty, breach of contract, violation of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, breaches of the implied covenant of good faith, promissory estoppel, willful breach of contract, and quantum meruit. During litigation, the defendants filed a designation of nonparties at fault, which named several parties which were at fault for the alleged construction defects at issue in the case. The pertinent nonparties named were subcontractors of defendant Alpert Custom Homes, Inc. during the construction of the residence.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Brady Iandiorio, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. Iandiorio can be contacted at iandiorio@hhmrlaw.com


    DA’s Office Checking Workers Comp Compliance

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The San Bernardino office of the California District Attorney is partnering with the California Contractor’s State License Board to check if subcontractors are holding the required workers compensation insurance. The High Desert Daily Press reports that the process of checking at sites has been going on for several months.

    Investigators visit sites and ask supervisors to provide a list of subcontractors which the state then checks for compliance. One worker was quoted that insurance inspections were so rare that he had never seen one before, despite 20 years in construction.

    On one day, investigators in two teams visited fourteen construction sites and reviewed the insurance status of twenty-two firms. Three were found out of compliance and stop work orders were issued.

    Read the full story…