Expert Witness Services

Bicksler and Associates has provided expert witness services in a mulitude of cases, including those concerning condominiums, townhomes, common interest subdivisions, expert testimony on budgets, reserves management and standards of care.

1. Developer – Budgets and Reserves – Standard of Care

Case: Shorebird Homeowners Association vs. Shorebird Solar, Inc., et. al.

Retained by plaintiff through Glenn Youngling of Feingold & Youngling, a San Rafael law firm.
I prepared an opinion regarding the adequacy of the original developer .budget and the standard of care of developer representatives on the Association's Board of Directors.
My deposition was taken once, the case settled prior to trial.

Case: Lauriedale Homeowners Association vs. Woodmont Development
Company, et. al.

Retained by plaintiff through the law firm of Ann Rankin, a Oakland law firm.
Scope of work included preparing an opinion on the standard of care for the developer controlled Board of Directors, the original management company and the adequacy of the developer’s initial Association budget.
My deposition was taken twice, 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.

For a full list of Developer – Budgets and Reserves – Standard of Care...

2. Developer on Board of Directors – Standard of Care

Case: Shorebird Homeowners Association vs. Shorebird Solar, Inc., et. al.

Retained by plaintiff through Glenn Youngling of Feingold & Youngling, a San Rafael law firm.
I prepared an opinion regarding the adequacy of the original developer. budget and the standard of care of developer representatives on the Association's Board of Directors.
My deposition was taken once, the case settled prior to trial.

Case: Lauriedale Homeowners Association vs. Woodmont Development
Company, et. al.

Retained by plaintiff through the law firm of Ann Rankin, an Oakland law firm.
Scope of work included preparing an opinion on the standard of care for the developer controlled Board of Directors, the original management company and the adequacy of the developer’s initial Association budget.
My deposition was taken twice, the case settled prior to trial.

Case: Chandon vs. Taylor Woodrow.

Retained by defendant, through Jonathan Terry of Songstad, Randall & Ulich, an Irvine law firm.
My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on the adequacy of the developer's initial Reserve Analysis and an opinion about the actions of developer representatives on the Association's Board of Directors.
My deposition was taken once. The case settled prior to trial.

For a full list of Developer on Board of Directors – Standard of Care...

3. Board of Directors – Maintenance Responsibilities
Standard of Care

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.

For full list of Board of Directors – Maintenance Responsibilities Standard of Care...

4. Board of Directors – Standard of Care

Case: Madison Village Townhouses vs. City of Petaluma.

Retained by plaintiff through Stanley Feingold of Feingold & Youngling, a San Rafael law firm.
My scope of work is to opine on the subject of the value of common area to the creating of a community in a homeowners association.
My disposition was taken once. The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Farias/Sandoval vs. Riviera at Silver Creek Valley Country Club HOA, et al.

Retained by plaintiff through Lee E. Poel of Poel & Foster, a San Jose law firm.
My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on the common area maintenance and safety practices of the association and its management and landscape maintenance companies.
My deposition was taken once. The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Clark vs. Fried, et al.

Retained by defendant, through Shahab E. Fotouhi of Bledsoe Cathcart, Diestel, Livingston & Pedersen, a San Francisco law firm.
My scope of work is to review the Association's overall management practices, including budget and reserve preparation.
My deposition was taken once. The case settled prior to trial.

For full list of Board of Directors – Standard of Care...

5. Management Company – Standard of Care

Case: Lauriedale Homeowners Association vs. Woodmont Development
Company, et. al.

Retained by plaintiff through the law firm of Ann Rankin, an Oakland law firm.
Scope of work included preparing an opinion on the standard of care for the developer controlled Board of Directors, the original management company and the adequacy of the developer’s initial Association budget.
My deposition was taken twice, the case settled prior to trial.

Case: Garcia vs. Independent Planning, et al.

Retained by plaintiff through James Childers of the law office of Childers, Christiansen & Murray, a Sacramento law firm.
Superior Court, County of Contra Costa.
My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on the standard of care for maintenance responsibilities of a management company for a condominium association.
The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Crosspointe Village Homeowners Association vs. Lyon Corporation, et. al.

Retained by defendant through John O'Hara of Newmeyer and Dillion, a Newport Beach law firm.
I prepared an opinion as to whether or not the Association and its management companies' maintenance practices, contributed to construction defects.
My deposition was taken once. The case settled prior to trial.

For full list of Management Company – Standard of Care...

6. Reserve Study – Standard of Care

Case: Stonehedge Community Association vs. Leisure Capitol '85, et al.

Retained by defendant through David Miller of Nevin & Hall, an Oakland law firm.
Superior Court, Sacramento.
My scope of work is to opine upon the adequacy of the defendant's Reserve Analysis and the standard of care of a condominium Board of Directors.
The case settled prior to trial.

Case: Sears vs. Orindawoods Association

Retained by defendant, through Ellen H. Nolting of McNamara, Houston, Dodge, McClure and Ney, a Walnut Creek law firm.
My scope of work is to prepare an opinion regarding the appropriateness of the Association's Reserve Study.
The case has settled.

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.

For full list of Reserve Study – Standard of Care...

.