• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing expert witness Zenda Kansas parking structure expert witness Zenda Kansas condominiums expert witness Zenda Kansas housing expert witness Zenda Kansas industrial building expert witness Zenda Kansas retail construction expert witness Zenda Kansas custom home expert witness Zenda Kansas hospital construction expert witness Zenda Kansas custom homes expert witness Zenda Kansas office building expert witness Zenda Kansas institutional building expert witness Zenda Kansas townhome construction expert witness Zenda Kansas structural steel construction expert witness Zenda Kansas condominium expert witness Zenda Kansas multi family housing expert witness Zenda Kansas low-income housing expert witness Zenda Kansas mid-rise construction expert witness Zenda Kansas Subterranean parking expert witness Zenda Kansas concrete tilt-up expert witness Zenda Kansas landscaping construction expert witness Zenda Kansas tract home expert witness Zenda Kansas high-rise construction expert witness Zenda Kansas
    Zenda Kansas eifs expert witnessZenda Kansas construction code expert witnessZenda Kansas hospital construction expert witnessZenda Kansas expert witness windowsZenda Kansas construction expert witnessZenda Kansas OSHA expert witness constructionZenda Kansas civil engineer expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Expert Witness Engineer Builders Information
    Zenda, Kansas

    Kansas Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB 2294 requires a claimant to serve a written notice of claim upon the contractor prior to filing a lawsuit. The law places deadlines on the contractor to serve notice on each subcontractor (15 days) and provide a written response to the claimant (30 days). It permits the claimant to file a lawsuit without further notice if the contractor disputes the claim, does not respond to the notice, does not complete work on the defect on a timely basis or does not make a payment in the time allowed.

    Expert Witness Engineer Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Zenda Kansas

    No state license for general contracting. All businesses must register with the Department of Revenue.

    Expert Witness Engineer Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Wichita Area Builders Association
    Local # 1780
    730 N Main St
    Wichita, KS 67203

    Zenda Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Hutchinson
    Local # 1720
    PO Box 2209
    Hutchinson, KS 67504

    Zenda Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    McPherson Area Contractors Association
    Local # 1735
    PO Box 38
    McPherson, KS 67460
    Zenda Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Salina
    Local # 1750
    2125 Crawford Place
    Salina, KS 67401

    Zenda Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Lawrence Home Builders Association
    Local # 1723
    PO Box 3490
    Lawrence, KS 66046

    Zenda Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Topeka Home Builders Association
    Local # 1765
    1505 SW Fairlawn Rd
    Topeka, KS 66604

    Zenda Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Kansas Home Builders Association
    Local # 1700
    212 SW 8th Ave Ste 201
    Topeka, KS 66603

    Zenda Kansas Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Expert Witness Engineer News and Information
    For Zenda Kansas

    Hamptons Home Up for Foreclosure That May Set Record

    Justice Didn’t Ensure Mortgage Fraud Was Priority, IG Says

    How Helsinki Airport Uses BIM to Create the Best Customer Experience

    Cuba: Construction Boom Potential for U.S. Construction Companies and Equipment Manufacturers?

    U.S. Home Lending Set to Bounce Back in 2015 After Slump

    Louisiana Couple Sues over Defects in Foreclosed Home

    Defend Trade Secret Act of 2016–-Federalizing Trade Secret Law

    AB5, Dynamex, the ABC Standard, and their Effects on the Construction Industry

    Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Shares Fall on Wind-Down Measure

    No Coverage for Construction Defects Under Arkansas Law

    Distressed Home Sales Shrinking

    State Farm Unsuccessful In Seeking Dismissal of Qui Tam Case

    Following My Own Advice

    Fannie-Freddie Propose Liquidity Rules for Mortgage Insurers

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    California Assembly Passes Expedited Dam Safety for Silicon Valley Act

    Brooklyn’s Industry City to Get $1 Billion Modernization

    Revel Closing Shows Gambling Is No Sure Thing for Renewal

    Congress Considers Pandemic Risk Insurance Act to Address COVID-19 Business Interruptions Losses

    Haight’s Sacramento Office Has Moved

    Microsoft Said to Weigh Multibillion-Dollar Headquarters Revamp

    U.S. District Court for Hawaii Again Determines Construction Defect Claims Do Not Arise From An Occurrence

    SNC-Lavalin’s Former Head of Construction Pleads Guilty to Bribery, Money Laundering

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Reaffirms Validity of Statutory Employer Defense

    COVID-19 Impacts on Subcontractor Default Insurance and Ripple Effects

    OSHA Again Pushes Back Record-Keeping Rule Deadline

    Court’s Ruling on SB800 “Surprising to Some”

    The Drought Is Sinking California

    West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar Announced for 2014

    NJ Condo Construction Defect Case Dismissed over Statute of Limitations

    The Most Expensive Travel Construction Flops

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

    Force Majeure, Construction Delays, Labor Shortages and COVID-19

    COVID-19 Response: Environmental Compliance Worries in the Time of Coronavirus

    Savera Sandhu Joins Newmeyer Dillion As Partner

    Quick Note: Subcontractor Payment Bond = Common Law Payment Bond

    After Sixty Years, Subcontractors are Back in the Driver’s Seat in Bidding on California Construction Projects

    Indiana Court Enforces Contract Provisions rather than Construction Drawing Markings

    This Is the Most Remote and Magical Hotel on Earth

    A Court-Side Seat: NWP 12 and the Dakota Access Pipeline Easement Get Forced Vacations, while a Potential Violation of the Eighth Amendment Isn’t Going Anywhere

    Navigating Complex Preliminary Notice Requirements

    Nebraska Court Ruling Backs Latest Keystone XL Pipeline Route

    Appeals Court Affirms Civil Engineer Owes No Duty of Care to General Contractor

    PSA: Performing Construction Work in Virginia Requires a Contractor’s License

    Apartment Construction Increasing in Colorado while Condo Construction Remains Slow

    Job Gains a Positive for Housing

    Wow! A Mechanic’s Lien Bill That Helps Subcontractors and Suppliers

    Less Than Perfectly Drafted Endorsement Bars Flood Coverage

    Construction Lien Needs to Be Recorded Within 90 Days from Lienor’s Final Furnishing

    Avoid Five Common Fraudulent Schemes Used in Construction
    Corporate Profile


    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Zenda, Kansas Expert Witness Engineer Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Zenda's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Expert Witness Engineer News & Info
    Zenda, Kansas

    California Court of Appeal Provides Clarity On What Triggers Supplemental Analysis Under California Environmental Quality Act

    July 20, 2020 —
    In a recent ruling, California’s Sixth District Court of Appeal clarified the need for supplemental environmental analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Willow Glen Trestle Conservancy v. City of San Jose (6th Dist., May 18, 2020). Specifically, the court held that seeking additional discretionary approvals, such as regulatory permits, does not constitute a “new discretionary approval for the project” under the California Public Resources Code Section 21166 and the California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15162 (the CEQA Guidelines). In 2014, the City of San Jose approved a project that included the demolition and replacement of a wooden railroad bridge known as the Willow Glen Trestle (the Project). CEQA review for the Project was conducted via mitigated negative declaration (MND). The Project was quickly challenged by a local group called Friends of the Willow Glen Trestle, alleging that the City should have prepared an Environmental Impact Report based on the allegation that the Willow Glen Trestle constituted an historic resource for CEQA purposes. Ultimately, the City prevailed in that litigation (See Friends of the Willow Glen Trestle v. City of San Jose, et al. (6th Dist., 2016), which remanded the case to the trial court for further review consistent with the Court of Appeal’s verdict) with the court eventually finding that the City correctly analyzed and answered the question of historic resource classification and significance in reference to the Willow Glen Trestle. Reprinted courtesy of Kelly Alhadeff-Black, Lewis Brisbois and Alexander N. Knaub, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Alhadeff-Black may be contacted at Mr. Knaub may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Social Distancing and the Impact on Service of Process Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic

    April 13, 2020 —
    Service of process usually requires person-to-person contact and is an essential part of civil procedure. It notifies the defendant of the legal proceedings against him/her and establishes jurisdiction. “Process” refers to the documents that must be served on a defendant. If service of process is not performed pursuant to the governing rules of civil procedure, a lawsuit cannot proceed. Service of Process in NJ and PA Personal service is required to be the first attempted means of service in New Jersey. If personal service is not successful, then service may be made by mailing a copy of the process via registered or certified mail with return receipt requested to the defendant’s usual place of abode or business/place of employment, or to an authorized agent. The party attempting to serve the defendant by mail can choose to mail the process by regular mail as well, and if the defendant refuses to accept or claim the registered or certified copy, and the regular mail copy is not returned, then service is considered effectuated. Pennsylvania allows for a defendant to be served via personal service by handing a copy to the defendant or by delivering a copy to an adult family household member at the defendant’s residence. Pennsylvania also permits service of process by mail. Process can be served by mail requiring a signature of the defendant. If the mail is unclaimed, alternative service must be attempted. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams attorneys Robert Devine, James Burger and Susan Zingone Mr. Devine may be contacted at Mr. Burger may be contacted at Ms. Zingone may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is Your Business Insured for the Coronavirus?

    March 16, 2020 —
    How bad will the pandemic get? How much will it spread in the United States? Will we develop a vaccine in time to do any good? As insurance lawyers, we have no idea. But we can help you figure out whether your business is insured for the coronavirus risks that keep business owners up at night. Risk 1: An outbreak forces my business to close until the outbreak ends. Are my financial business losses covered? Maybe. Many commercial property policies provide “business interruption coverage” which may apply. This coverage typically requires that: (i) Your business is shut down. If your business actually closes for a period of time, you may meet this requirement. However, you wouldn’t meet it if your business slows because half of your staff is home sick. (ii) The shutdown is necessary. “Necessary” means something different than “desirable” or “prudent.” Whether a shutdown is necessary depends on the facts. If it is physically or legally impossible to enter your building, then closure is necessary. But if the government issues a public advisory recommending that businesses close, and you voluntarily comply, that’s a different story. (iii) The shutdown is caused by physical damage to your property. Is a viral outbreak “damage” to your property? There’s not a clear answer. On the one hand, courts have found that hazardous contamination of a building constitutes property damage to the building. For example, asbestos incorporated into a building constitutes property damage to the building under a commercial general liability policy. Environmental contamination can also constitute property damage to the contaminated property. Policyholders whose businesses close during an outbreak will argue that property contaminated by the virus satisfies the “physical damage to property” requirement. On the other hand, insurers may argue that the real cause of the shutdown is not the contaminated building surfaces, but the need for social distancing in a neighborhood with many contagious people. Coverage will depend on the policy language and the details of the shutdown. Reprinted courtesy of J. Kelby Van Patten, Payne & Fears and Jared De Jong, Payne & Fears Mr. Van may be contacted at Mr. Jong may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Rent Increases During the Coronavirus Emergency Part II: Avoiding Violations Under California’s Anti-Price Gouging Statute

    April 06, 2020 —
    In my earlier article, Profiting From Fear: What You Need to Know About Price Gouging During the Coronavirus Emergency, I discuss price gouging and how the anti-price gouging statute, California Penal Code 396 (“CPC 396”), protects buyers of goods and services deemed vital and necessary for the health, safety and welfare of consumers. Part II of the article provides guidance to landlords on the parameters applicable to acceptable price increases and focuses attention on the application of CPC 396 to rental housing and related issues. California Penal Code 396 As it pertains to housing, defined as “any rental housing with an initial lease term of no longer than one year,” price gouging occurs when a landlord increases the rent of an existing or prospective tenant by more than 10 percent of the previously charged or advertised price following an emergency or disaster declaration for a period of 30 days.2 A residential landlord is only allowed to increase rent in excess of 10 percent if “the increase is directly attributable to additional costs for repairs or additions beyond normal maintenance that were amortized over the rental term that caused the rent to be increased greater than 10 percent or that an increase was contractually agreed to by the tenant prior to the proclamation or declaration” (CPC 396(e).) Further, landlords are prohibited from evicting a tenant and then re-renting the property at a rate that the landlord would have been prohibited from charging the evicted tenant under the statute (CPC 396(f).)3 Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dan Schneider, Newmeyer Dillion
    Mr. Schneider may be contacted at

    Savera Sandhu Joins Newmeyer Dillion As Partner

    March 23, 2020 —
    Prominent business and real estate law firm Newmeyer Dillion is pleased to announce that Savera Sandhu has joined the firm's Las Vegas office as a partner. Sandhu's addition formalizes Newmeyer Dillion's Healthcare practice group, which will draw on the firm's existing strengths and service offerings in the healthcare industry. "Newmeyer Dillion has been delivering services within the healthcare industry for many years, offering our premier legal services across a large range of sectors," said Office Managing Partner Nathan Owens. "We are excited to welcome Savera to our team, and believe her experience will help us to more broadly service the healthcare industry as we continue to work closely with companies in the Western region." The firm's Healthcare practice will comprise attorneys from the firm's business, litigation, employment law and real estate practice groups, who have extensive experience advising the healthcare industry in the areas of state and federal regulatory compliance, general business matters, medical malpractice and litigation defense. Newmeyer Dillion offers a range of key legal services to healthcare clients including entrepreneurs, technology companies, physicians, dentists and other healthcare professionals, suppliers, medical device manufacturers, hospitals, physician groups, out-patient and long-term care facilities. In addition to health care, Sandhu expands the firm's capabilities to service clients in the transportation, finance, entertainment and construction industries. For over a decade, Sandhu has worked intimately with the healthcare industry as their legal advocate, offering solution-oriented approaches to the business side of healthcare. As a partner with the firm, Sandhu counsels a wide range of corporate and healthcare clients on business and litigation matters throughout the state and nationwide. Embracing the firm's commitment to propel businesses forward, she combines a deep knowledge of commercial litigation with finely-honed experience as a trusted legal advisor to Fortune 100 companies. She also brings a broad perspective to her work with healthcare clients, based on her exceptional knowledge of corporate law, healthcare litigation, and state and federal regulatory matters. Sandhu believes that her effectiveness as legal counsel is enhanced by her strong commitment to both her profession and to the communities where she lives and works. Dedicated to the tenets of diversity and inclusion rooted in the firm's culture, she has held leadership roles as a long-time member of the Southern Nevada Association of Women Attorneys (SNAWA) and the South Asian Bar Association. Sandhu received her B.A. from the University of Washington and her J.D. from Seattle University School of Law. About Newmeyer Dillion For 35 years, Newmeyer Dillion has delivered creative and outstanding legal solutions and trial results that achieve client objectives in diverse industries. With over 70 attorneys working as a cohesive team to represent clients in all aspects of business, employment, real estate, environmental/land use, privacy & data security and insurance law, Newmeyer Dillion delivers holistic and integrated legal services tailored to propel each client's success and bottom line. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, with offices in Walnut Creek, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, Newmeyer Dillion attorneys are recognized by The Best Lawyers in America©, and Super Lawyers as top tier and some of the best lawyers in California and Nevada, and have been given Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review's AV Preeminent® highest rating. For additional information, call 949.854.7000 or visit Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    We've Surveyed Video Conferencing Models to See Who Fits the CCPA Bill: Here's What We Found

    August 10, 2020 —
    Worldwide closures as a result of COVID-19 have resulted in an extreme surge in video conferencing use. This spike in use has also resulted in increased concern about the privacy of these video conferencing applications, including a class action lawsuit against one of the applications: Zoom. Because of this, we took a deeper look into the privacy policies of six prominent video conferencing applications and created a chart showing each video conferencing application's compliance with the California Consumer Privacy Act. Reviewing these materials will provide an awareness of the deficiencies within the Privacy Policies, which can help you become more well-informed about your own rights, and more knowledgeable about any deficiencies in your own business' privacy policy. If these widely-used and widely-known companies can have deficiencies, it is an important way to re-examine and fix these issues in your own. To determine this, we reviewed the CCPA's twenty requirements for compliance, including: (1) the existence of a privacy policy, (2) required disclosures of information regarding the existence of rights under the CCPA, (3) instructions on how to exercise rights, and (4) providing contact information. Here are the top 5 discoveries from our review: 1) No videoconferencing applications address authorized agents. This makes sense, as the treatment of authorized agents were just laid out in the recently finalized regulations. This is a reminder to businesses to utilize these regulations when setting up compliance measures to ensure there is no risk in missing out on requirements like this, which will still be required and enforced by the Attorney General. 2) Three platforms (WebEx, Skype, and Teams) have separate tabs and pages detailing privacy policies, and don't necessarily have a single unified and simple policy. Because of the accessibility requirements, this means that the privacy policy may not be readily accessible on the business's website, and may open companies to arguments that the entirety of their policy is non-compliant if key portions are hidden or otherwise inaccessible. Therefore to eliminate this concern, keep your policy unified, simple and in one location for ease of viewing. 3) None of the platforms address information relating to minors under the age of 16, which is notable as some of these platforms have been used for online education. The final regulations outline different treatment for minors from ages 13 to 16, and for minors under the age of 13. As a result, privacy policies focused on compliance with the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) may be insufficient as it only applies to those under 13 years old. 4) While all of the platforms state that no sale of information occurs, two platforms (Zoom and GoToMeeting) go above and beyond to explain the right to opt-out of sales. This is especially great as the CCPA permits that no notice needs to be given if no sale occurs. By taking this extra step, Zoom and GoToMeeting explain to their users that they have additional rights, which may be necessary as these platforms are also used by other entities, which may collect or otherwise use information collected from a videoconference meeting. 5) Only one platform (Wire) does not give instructions on how to delete information. The CCPA regulations still require that information regarding instructions on how to delete information be given. The lack of instructions does not relieve Wire from its obligations, and similarly situated businesses may find themselves in a position where they will have to comply with a consumer request, in any form, as the regulations require that a business either comply, or list the proper instructions on how to make the request. Download the Full Breakdown To learn more about our findings and how the video conferencing companies stacked up against the CCPA, visit: We hope this serves as a reminder to everyone to read the privacy platforms for the services you use and update your company's privacy policies to comply with the most recent regulations, as none of these services are currently in complete compliance, and it is only a matter of time before enforcement begins. Shaia Araghi is an associate in the firm's Privacy & Data Security practice, and supports the team in advising clients on cyber-related matters, including compliance and prevention that can protect their day-to-day operations. For more information on how Shaia can help, contact her at Kyle Janecek is an associate in the firm's Privacy & Data Security practice, and supports the team in advising clients on cyber related matters, including policies and procedures that can protect their day-to-day operations. For more information on how Kyle can help, contact him at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is a Violation of a COVID-19 Order the Basis For Civil Liability?

    April 20, 2020 —
    Thinking about ignoring your state or local COVID-19 shutdown orders? Think again. Social-distance measures may create a new source of liability for businesses operating during the COVID-19 pandemic. Infection-based litigation is normally limited to businesses operating in the healthcare sector. But, social-distancing measures to stop the spread of infection may expand that litigation to other sectors. State and local governments across the country are taking extraordinary measures to combat the spread of COVID-19, a novel coronavirus that can cause life-threatening respiratory illness. Those measures encourage and even mandate “social distance” between people to limit physical transmission of the virus. Hard-hit states like New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and California have been aggressive in their responses, shuttering businesses, confining people to their homes, and requiring people to stay six feet apart. Common mandates include: quarantines, business and school closures, stay-home orders, curfews, travel restrictions, occupancy limits and physical-distance mandates, among other things. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams attorneys Robert Devine, James Burger and Douglas Weck Mr. Devine may be contacted at Mr. Burger may be contacted at Mr. Weck may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Another Reminder to ALWAYS Show up for Court

    July 20, 2020 —
    I have discussed the need to always respond to a lawsuit on multiple occasions here at Construction Law Musings. However, I keep reading cases where the defendant fails to appear either by pleading or in person. Such action is never a good idea as demonstrated once again in the case of Balfour Beatty Infrastructure, Inc. v. Precision Constr. & Mgmt. Group, LLC, a case out of the Eastern District of Virginia. The basic facts are not a surprise and are taken from the magistrates report that was adopted by the District Court. Balfour Beatty and Precision entered into a subcontract for some electrical work at a project located in Loudoun County. The subcontract included an attorney fees provision and provided for liquidated damages for late performance and the typical damages for default. The project began in July of 2016 with substantial completion July 5, 2018. Precision failed to supply sufficient manpower and sent a letter to Precision stating the same. After an agreement between the parties regarding supplementation by Balfour Beatty and to the accompanying back charge, Balfour Beatty informed Precision by letter that it would be liable for any liquidated damages. The Owner began assessing liquidated damages and Balfour Beatty subsequently terminated the subcontract and discovered defective work by Precision. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at