Expert Witness Services - Standard of Care:

3. Board of Directors – Maintenance Responsibilities

Case: Murthi vs. Bernal Grove Homeowners Association.

Retained by defendant jointly through Ralph Mendell of Campbell, Warburton, Fitzsimmons, Smith, Mendell & Pastore and David Rollo of Glaspy & Glaspy, both San Jose law firms.
Superior Court, County of Santa Clara The scope of work includes preparing an opinion on the standard of care of the Board of the Directors and the management company, regarding maintenance and financial issues.
My deposition was taken once. The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Day vs. Mark Twain HOA

Retained by defendant through Ann Kaplan of Buresh, Kaplan, Jang & Feller, a Berkeley law firm.
The case involves questions of the adequacy of the Association’s maintenance programs. I was asked to opine on that subject.
My deposition was taken once. The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Cummings v. Newport North Homeowners Association, et al.

Retained by defendant through David Feingold of Ragghianti, Freitas, a San Rafael law firm.
Superior Court, County of Marin
My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on certain maintenance practices and fiduciary duties of the Association and certain property management services practices.
My deposition was taken once.

Case: Peninsula Plaza Homeowners Association vs. Talden Investment
Company, et. al.

Retained by plaintiff’s insurance carrier, through Jeffrey Nevin of Nevin, Greenberg & Nelson, a San Francisco law firm.
This case was a cross complaint by developer defendant alleging that lack of maintenance by the Association caused construction defects.
My assignment was to create an opinion on this issue. The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Santa Clara Hampton Place vs. Citation Builders, et. al.

Retained by plaintiff’s insurance carrier, through Jeffrey Nevin of Nevin, Greenberg & Nelson, a San Francisco law firm.
This case was a cross complaint by developer defendant alleging that lack of maintenance by the Association caused construction defects.
My assignment was to create an opinion on this issue. The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Marie Grant vs. St. Francis Square Apartments

Retained by plaintiff, through Eric P. Norland Esq., of Norland and Kays, a San Jose law firm.
Superior Court, County of San Francisco.
My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on the standard of care of the Associations maintenance responsibilities.
My deposition was taken once. The case has settled.

Case: Thrash v. Winston Square HOA, County of San Mateo.

Retained by plaintiff through Terence Mayo of Mayo & Rogers, a San Francisco law firm.
My scope of work was to opine on the Association’s maintenance programs.
The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Martinez-Mont vs. Pacific Point HOA, County of San Mateo.

Retained by plaintiff through Joseph M. Breall of Breall & Breall, a San Francisco law firm.
My scope of work was to prepare an opinion regarding the Association’s reserve funding program and its maintenance programs.
The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Sowa v. Kimberly Oaks Maintenance Association, County of Contra Costa

Retained by plaintiff through Mark J. Wleklinski of the Law Offices of Mark J. Wleklinski, a Walnut Creek law firm.
My scope of work was to prepare an opinion regarding the Association’s maintenance responsibilities and maintenance programs.
The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Izett vs. Cirby Hills Homeowners Association.

Retained by defendant through Palmer Swanson of Goldsberry, Freeman & Swanson, a Sacramento law firm
Placer County Superior Court
My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on the standard of care of a management company and a Board of Directors, for maintenance responsibilities, during construction defects litigation.
The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Bay Pointe at Refugio Valley Ranch HOA vs. Shea Homes, et al.

Retained by defendant through Peter Geckeler of Hancock Rothert & Bunshoft, a San Francisco law firm.
Superior Court, County of Contra Costa.
My scope of work was to prepare an opinion on the adequacy of the developer’s initial budget and reserve study and to opine on the Association and management company maintenance programs and practices.
My deposition was taken once. The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Quiet Harbor Homeowners Association vs. Centex Real Estate Corp.

Retained by defendant through Nannette Souhrada of Campbell, Souhrada & Volk, a San Diego law firm
My scope of work was to prepare an opinion on the adequacy of the developer’s initial budget and reserve study and to opine on the Association and management company’s maintenance programs and practices.
My deposition was taken once. The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Bay Pointe at Ardenwood Homeowners Association vs. Shea Homes et al.

Retained by defendant through Bennett Chin of Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold, a San Francisco law firm.
My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on the adequacy of the developer’s initial budget and reserve study and to opine on the Association and management company’s maintenance programs and practices.
The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Nancy Mattingly vs. 39 Dashiell Hammett HOA.

Retained by defendant through Jeffery Nevin of Nevin Levy LLP, a Walnut Creek law firm.
Superior Court, County of San Francisco
My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on the Association’s overall operational practices and in particular their maintenance procedures.
My deposition was taken once. The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Clearpointe Duet Owners Association v. Centex Homes, et al.

Retained by defendant through Karl Torke of Morgenstein & Jubelirer, a San Francisco law firm.
Superior Court, County of Solano
My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on the adequacy of the developer’s initial budget and reserve study and the Association’s maintenance programs.
Case settled prior to trial.

Case: Campana v. The Gardens HOA, County of San Mateo

Retained by defendant through Mark Himelstein of counsel with Jon York & Associates, a Berkeley law firm.
My scope of work was to prepare an opinion regarding the Association’s reserve funding program and its maintenance programs.
The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Korobow vs. 81 Lansing Street Owners Association, County of San Francisco

Retained by defendant through Heidi C. Quan of Murchison & Cumming, a Walnut Creek law firm.
My scope of work is to prepare an opinion regarding the Association’s maintenance responsibilities and maintenance programs.

Case: Hillside Gardens Homeowners Association v. BMRA Vallejo, LTD, County of Solano

Retained by defendant through L. Jay Pedersen of Bledsoe, Cathcart, Diestel & Pedersen, a San Francisco law firm.
My scope of work was to prepare an opinion on the standard of care for a developer controlled Board of Directors, the adequacy of the developer’s initial Association budgets and the Association’s maintenance programs.
The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Fuery v. Conley, County of San Francisco

Retained by defendant through L. Jay Pedersen of Bledsoe, Cathcart, Diestel & Perdersen, a San Francisco law firm
My scope of work was to an opinion regarding the Association’s maintenance responsibilities and maintenance programs.
The case settled prior to trial.