Anaheim California Expert Witness Engineer Directory

Federal Shutdown Idles Most OSHA Activity, Raising Safety and Compliance Concerns

November 04, 2025 — Bryan Gottlieb - Engineering News-Record
When federal funding expired Oct. 1, the U.S. Dept. of Labor triggered its contingency plan, effectively halting most oversight functions at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Bryan Gottlieb, Engineering News-Record
Mr. Gottlieb may be contacted at gottliebb@enr.com

9204 Meet 8850. Public Works Claims Processes Now Apply to Private Works, With Some Differences

November 21, 2025 — Garret Murai - California Construction Law Blog
Contractors working on public works projects are likely familiar with the statutory claims resolution process under Public Contract Code section 9204. Section 9204, which went into effect in 2017, and which has been amended a couple of times since, provides a claims resolution process for public works projects with the goal of resolving claims before litigation. Section 9204, which currently expires on January 1, 2027 (it has been extended once so far), provides for a three-step process: (1) submission of a claim by the prime contractor and response by the public entity; (2) if the claim is rejected in whole or in part by the public entity, a meet and confer conference between the prime contractor and public entity; and (3) if the claim is not resolved at the meet and confer conference, mediation (or other non-binding dispute resolution process) between the prime contractor and public entity. A similar statutory claims resolution process has now been enacted that applies to most private works projects. The bill, Senate Bill 440, goes into effect on January 1, 2026, and is codified at new Civil Code section 8850. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

An “Agreement to Agree” Is Not a Binding Contract

January 13, 2026 — David Adelstein - Florida Construction Legal Updates
A driving issue in a recent dispute was whether a binding contract existed simply through the selection of a proposal in response to a solicitation. Or, was there nothing more than an “agreement to agree,” which does not create a binding contract. There is an important distinction between a binding contract an an “agreement to agree.” A Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) issued a Request for Proposals otherwise referred to as an RFP. The RFP specifically stated that the CRA and proposer will be contractually bound only if and when a written contract is executed between the parties. A proposer was notified that it was selected as the winning proposer however a written contract was never executed because the proposer was subsequently disqualified. The proposer filed a lawsuit claiming it was wrongfully disqualified and prevailed. The trial court found it was entitled to attorney’s fees pursuant to a contract that had been formed when the proposer’s proposal was originally accepted. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

Arbitration Provision Must Be Incorporated into a Bond for Surety to Elect Arbitration

March 03, 2026 — David Adelstein - Florida Construction Legal Updates
“Sureties cannot exercise unilateral election rights that are reserved for the principal of the underlying contract.” Anderson Service Corp. v. Old Republic Surety Company, 2026 WL 61436, *2 (Fla. 4th DCA 2026). This was the holding in a recent case dealing with arbitration. In this case, a subcontractor entered into a contract with a contractor that gave the contractor the right to elect arbitration in Pennsylvania. A dispute arose and the subcontractor recorded a construction lien. The contractor transferred the lien to a lien transfer bond under Florida law. (The contractor was the principal of the lien transfer bond.) The lien transfer bond surety then moved to compel the subcontractor to arbitration based on the underlying subcontract. The trial court agreed to compel arbitration but this was reversed on appeal. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

No Cross-Complaint Needed - Court of Appeal Clarifies Co-Defendants May Oppose Each Other’s Summary Judgment Motions Without a Cross-Complaint

October 27, 2025 — Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
On September 29, 2025, the Second District Court of Appeal issued an opinion in Bean v. City of Thousand Oaks (B338497), holding that a co-defendant with an adverse interest can oppose a motion for summary judgment without having filed a cross-complaint against the moving party. Plaintiff Bonnie Bean tripped and fell on a raised section of sidewalk in front of a Ventura County residence. She sued both the City of Thousand Oaks and Gina Goode, the owner of an adjacent property, alleging that tree roots from Goode’s yard caused a sidewalk defect. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

Maryland Enacts Climate-Cost Study Over Veto, New Jersey Advances Climate Superfund Proposal as Earlier State Laws Face Ongoing Court Challenges

January 21, 2026 — Amanda G. Halter, Ashleigh Myers & Jillian Marullo - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real Estate Law Blog
Maryland lawmakers have overridden the governor’s veto to enact legislation directing a statewide assessment of climate-related costs, while New Jersey lawmakers are preparing a January committee hearing for the State’s pending Climate Superfund Act. Together, these actions underscore continued state-level interest in both study-based and liability-focused climate-cost attribution frameworks, even as four separate lawsuits challenging state climate superfund statutes in New York and Vermont proceed in federal court. Maryland Legislature Overrides Veto to Advance Climate-Cost Assessment On December 16, the Maryland General Assembly voted to override Governor Wes Moore’s veto of S.B. 149 / H.B. 128, the “Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation – Total Assessed Cost of Greenhouse Gas Emissions – Study and Reports” Act. The vote followed the Governor’s announcement, just days earlier, that his administration would fully fund the study mandated by the bill, effectively reversing his prior veto. Reprinted courtesy of Amanda G. Halter, Pillsbury, Ashleigh Myers, Pillsbury and Jillian Marullo, Pillsbury Ms. Halter may be contacted at amanda.halter@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Myers may be contacted at ashleigh.myers@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Marullo may be contacted at jillian.marullo@pillsburylaw.com Read the full story...

California Court Affirms $1.8 Million Judgment Against HOA for Failing to Investigate and Remediate Water Intrusion

November 04, 2025 — Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
When an HOA ignores its duties under its covenants and restrictions, the consequences can be devastating. In Ridley v. Rancho Palma Grande Homeowners Association (Cal. Ct. App., Aug. 28, 2025, No. H052560), a Santa Clara couple secured a $1.8 million judgment after their condominium was rendered uninhabitable due to water intrusion, mold, and a sinkhole caused by an abandoned well beneath the property. The Court of Appeal upheld the judgment, finding that the HOA’s delay, deception, and failure to act breached its duties under the CC&Rs. What Went Wrong at Rancho Palma Grande HOA Retirees Doug Ridley and Sherry Shen owned a condominium in Santa Clara County. In 2018, their tenants discovered persistent water pooling in the crawlspace beneath the unit - part of the building’s common area under the HOA’s control. The issue worsened over time, culminating in severe water damage, mold growth, and ultimately, a sinkhole beneath the living room floor. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

GRSM Named Among 2026 “Best Law Firms” by Best Lawyers®

December 08, 2025 — Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani
Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani has been recognized in the 2026 “Best Law Firms” survey published by Best Lawyers®. To be eligible for a 2026 ranking, a law firm must have at least one lawyer recognized in the 2026 edition of the Best Lawyers in America® in a “Best Law Firms” practice area and geographic jurisdiction. GRSM announced earlier this year that 172 lawyers were recognized in the 2026 edition of Best Lawyers in America®, while 69 lawyers were named to the 2026 edition of Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch. Explore the full list of GRSM recognized attorneys. Read the full story...
Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES