Expert Witness Services

Expertise
Condominiums; townhomes; common interest subdivisions; expert testimony on budgets; reserves management; standards of care.

Cases: Expert Witness Experience, Chronological, Beginning 1991 as of December 14, 2004

Retained by plaintiff through Glenn Youngling of Feingold & Youngling, a San Rafael law firm. Case entitled Shorebird Homeowners Association vs. Shorebird Solar, Inc., et. al. 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. One deposition was taken, the case settled prior to trial.

Retained by plaintiff through the law firm of Ann Rankin, an Oakland law firm. Case entitled Lauriedale Homeowners Association vs. Woodmont Development Company, et. al. 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. Two depositions were taken, the case settled prior to trial.

Retained by two management companies insurance carriers as cross defendants through the law firms of McGlynn, McCorg & McDowell (Ms. Michelle Perussina) of San Francisco and the law firm of York, Buresh & Kaplan (Fred Feller) of Berkeley. Case entitled Cheda Knolls vs. Garbarino, et. al. My assignment was to create an opinion about whether the management companies were responsible for lack of maintenance as alleged by developer defendant. The case settled prior to trial, no depositions were taken.

Retained by plaintiff’s insurance carrier, through Jeffrey Nevin of Nevin, Greenberg & Nelson, a San Francisco law firm. Case entitled Peninsula Plaza Homeowners Association vs. Talden Investment Company, et. al. 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, no depositions were taken.

Retained by plaintiff’s insurance carrier, through Jeffrey Nevin of Nevin, Greenberg & Nelson, a San Francisco law firm. Case entitled Santa Clara Hampton Place vs. Citation Builders, et. al. 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, no depositions were taken.

Retained by plaintiff through Jim Lucier of the Anolik Law Offices of San Francisco. Case entitled Cote D' Azure Homeowners Association vs. Venture Corporation, et. al. U.S. District Court, Northern California. I prepared an opinion regarding the adequacy of the original developer budget. One deposition was taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through John O'Hara of Newmeyer and Dillion, a Newport Beach law firm. Case entitled Crosspointe Village Homeowners Association vs. Lyon Corporation, et. al. I prepared an opinion as to whether or not the Association and its management companies' maintenance practices, contributed to construction defects. One deposition was taken, the case settled prior to trial.

Retained by two cross-defendant, management companies' insurance carrier through Ann Kaplan of Buresh, Kaplan, Jang, Feller & Austin, a Berkeley law firm. Case entitled Shadow Pines vs. M.E.L. Enterprises, et. al. My assignment was to prepare an opinion about whether a management company was responsible for lack of maintenance as alleged by the developer defendant. No depositions were taken, the case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Jeffrey Nevin of Nevin & Hall, an Oakland law firm. Case entitled Park Place Homeowners Association vs. Young America Homes, Inc. My scope of work is to opine upon the adequacy of the defendant developer's initial Association Operating Budget and Reserve Analysis. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Matt Levy of Martin, Ryan & Andrada, an Oakland law firm. Case entitled Meadow Oaks HOA vs. Barratt, et al. My scope of work is to opine upon the adequacy of the defendant developer's initial Operating Budget and Reserve Analysis. No depositions have been taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through R. Dewey Wheeler of McNamara, Houston, Dodge, McClure and Ney, a Walnut Creek law firm. Case entitled Victorian Village vs. Coast Savings, et al. My scope of work is to opine upon the adequacy of the defendants developer's initial Operating Budget and Reserve Analysis. No depositions were taken, the case settled prior to trial.

Retained by plaintiff through William A. Gillis of the law office of William A. Gillis, a Santa Rosa law firm. Case entitled Solar Park Condominium Homeowners Association vs. Grumley, et. al. My scope of work was to prepare an opinion on the adequacy of the developer's initial Operating Budget and Reserve Analysis. No depositions were taken, the case settled prior to trial.

Retained by plaintiff through James Childers of the law office of Childers, Christiansen & Murray, an Sacramento law firm. Case entitled Garcia vs. Independent Planning, et al. 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. No depositions were taken, the case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant, through Shahab E. Fotouhi of Bledsoe Cathcart, Diestel, Livingston & Pedersen, a San Francisco law firm. Case entitled Clark vs. Fried, et al. My scope of work is to review the Association's overall management practices, including budget and reserve preparation. One deposition has been taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant, through Ellen H. Nolting of McNamara, Houston, Dodge, McClure and Ney, a Walnut Creek law firm. Case entitled Sears vs. Orindawoods Association. My scope of work is to prepare an opinion regarding the appropriateness of the Association's Reserve Study. No depositions have been taken. The case has settled.

Retained by plaintiff, through Edward Nemetz, Esq., of the Law Offices of Ann Rankin, an Oakland firm. Case entitled Refugio Valley Maintenance Association vs. Standard Pacific of Northern California, et al. My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on the adequacy of the developer's initial operating budget and reserve analysis, with particular emphasis on landscape costs. One deposition was taken. The case has settled.

Retained by plaintiff, through Eric P. Norland Esq., of Norland and Kays, a San Jose law firm. Case entitled Marie Grant vs. St. Francis Square Apartments. 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. One deposition was taken. The case has settled.

Retained by plaintiff, through Michael Blumenfeld, Esq., of the law firm of Sher & Blumenfeld, an Oakland firm. Case entitled Peachtree Community Association Services, Inc. vs. Charles Mitchell dba Community Care Property Management. Superior Court, County of Alameda. My scope of work is to prepare an opinion regarding unfair competition, proprietary and confidential trade secrets, within the common interest subdivision management field. No depositions were taken. The case has settled.

Retained by defendant, through Jeffrey Nevin of Nevin & Hall, an Oakland law firm, and David S. Henningsen of Robinson & Wood, a San Jose law firm. Case entitled The Oaks of Del Rey vs. Del Rey Oaks Associates. My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on the standard of care for the developer controlled Board of Directors and the adequacy of the developers initial Association budgets. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by plaintiff, through Robert D. De Long of The Law Offices of Robert D. De Long. Case entitled William Scott Ferry vs. Jim Gardiner. Superior Court, County of Alameda. The scope of work included preparing an opinion on the standard of care for the developer controlled Board of Directors, the Management Company and the Homeowners Association. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

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. Case entitled Murthi vs. Bernal Grove Homeowners Association. 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. One deposition was taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant, through David S. Henningsen of Robinson & Wood, a San Jose law firm. Case entitled Stewart vs. Transaction Equity. Superior Court, County of San Mateo. My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on the standard of care of a developer representative that served on a homeowners association Board of Directors during the original sales. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant, through Donald Fornasier of Archer, McComas, Breslin, McMahon & Chritton, a Walnut Creek law firm. Case entitled Plaza Camino Real HOA vs. Matteson Investment Corporation. Superior Court, San Mateo County. My scope of work is to prepare an opinion regarding the standard of care for the management company of this homeowners association. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant, through Jonathan Terry of Songstad, Randall & Ulich, an Irvine law firm. Case entitled Chandon vs. Taylor Woodrow. 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. One deposition was taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant, through Roy Girard of Wagner, Kirkman & Blaine, a Sacramento law firm. Case entitled Marbro vs. Sacramento Sutter. 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. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through David Miller of Nevin & Hall, an Oakland law firm. Case entitled Stonehedge Community Association vs. Leisure Capitol '85, et al. 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. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Jeffrey R. Vincent of Clapp, Moroney, Bellagamba, Davis and Vucinich, a Pleasanton law firm. Case entitled Ventimiglia vs. Dame’ Construction Company, Inc., et al. The case involves a property line and retaining wall dispute arising from the original development of the subdivision. My scope of work is to opine on the creation of common interest developments and their long term management. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Greg Siehl of Pedersen & Siehl, a San Jose law firm. Case entitled Heagney vs. Altamar at the Ridge HOA. The case involves a slip and fall on association property during developer control of the association. My scope of work is to opine on the operation of a developer controlled condominium project. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Kelly Levy of Nevin & Hall, an Oakland law firm. Case entitled Hamlett vs. Sunpointe HOA. My scope of work is to opine on rules enforcement at a condominium association. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through William Taylor of Allman & Nielson, a San Francisco law firm. Case entitled Cupertino Creekside HOA vs. Saratoga Garden Associates. Santa Clara County Superior Court. My scope of work is to opine upon the adequacy of the projects original budget and reserve study. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by plaintiff through Glenn Youngling of Feingold & Youngling, a San Rafael law firm. Case entitled Monterossa at Tiburan HOA vs. Southwest Diversified/Coscan Partners. Marin County Superior Court. My scope of work is to opine upon the adequacy of the projects original reserve study. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Ann Kaplan of Buresh, Kaplan, Jang & Feller, a Berkeley law firm. Case entitled Day vs. Mark Twain HOA. The case involves questions of the adequacy of the Association’s maintenance programs. I have been asked to opine on that subject. One deposition was taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by plaintiff through Stanley Feingold of Feingold & Youngling, a San Rafael law firm. Case entitled Madison Village Townhouses vs. City of Petaluma. 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. One disposition was taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Jeff Vincent of the law firm of Snyder, Cornelius & Hunter in Pleasant Hill. Case entitled Jim Nixon vs. Zeka Group, et. al. My scope of work includes issues regarding the standard of care of a developer/director on a condominium board of directors. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through David Miller of the law firm of Nevin & Gruen, an Oakland law firm. Case entitled Spring Court HOA vs. J. Drim, Inc. et al. Alameda County Superior Court. My scope of work is to opine upon the adequacy of the projects original reserve study. The case settled prior to trial. No depositions were taken.

Retained by defendant through Jan Gruen of Nevin & Gruen, an Oakland law firm. Case entitled Quailbrook II Homes vs. Patman III, et al. San Joaquin County Superior Court. My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on the standard of care of a developer representative who served on the association Board of Directors. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through David Miller of the Oakland law firm Nevin & Gruen. Case entitled Portobello H.O.A. vs. Bay City Investors, et al. Alameda County Superior Court. My scope of work is to prepare an opinion regarding the standard of care for the management company of the Association. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Palmer Swanson of Goldsberry, Freeman & Swanson, an Sacramento law firm. Case entitled Izett vs. Cirby Hills Homeowners Association. 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. No depositions were taken.

Retained by plaintiff through Andrew Wiener of Haas & Najarian, a San Francisco law firm. Case entitled Morgan Heights HOA vs. Bridge Housing, et al. Superior Court, County of San Francisco. My scope of work was to prepare an opinion on the adequacy of the Developer's initial Operating Budget and Reserve Analysis and whether or not the first management company performed their duties within the standard of care. The case settled prior to trial. No depositions were taken.

Retained by defendant through Peter Geckeler of Hancock Rothert & Bunshoft, a San Francisco law firm. Case entitled Bay Pointe at Refugio Valley Ranch HOA vs. Shea Homes, et al. 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. One deposition was taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Donald L. Sullivan of Clapp, Moroney, Bellagamba, Davis & Vucinich, a Daly City law firm. Case entitled Camp Capitola vs. Anderson, et al. Superior Court, County of Santa Cruz. My scope of work was to analyze the management, maintenance and financial forecasting of the previous Boards of Directors of this Association. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by plaintiff through Lee E. Poel of Poel & Foster, a San Jose law firm. Case entitled Farias/Sandoval vs. Riviera at Silver Creek Valley Country Club HOA, et al. 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. One deposition was taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Nannette Souhrada of Campbell, Souhrada & Volk, a San Diego law firm. Case entitled Quiet Harbor Homeowners Association vs. Centex Real Estate Corp. My scope of work was to prepare an opinion on the adequacy of the developers initial budget and reserve study and to opine on the Association and management companies maintenance programs and practices. One deposition was taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Bennett Chin of Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold, a San Francisco law firm. Case entitled Bay Pointe at Ardenwood Homeowners Association vs. Shea Homes et al. 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. No depositions were taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Jeffery Nevin of Nevin Levy LLP, a Walnut Creek law firm. Case entitled Nancy Mattingly vs. 39 Dashiell Hammett HOA. 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. One deposition was taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Glenn Youngling of the Law Offices of Glenn Youngling, a San Rafael law firm. Case entitled Bockley vs. Rancho Santa Margarita HOA. Superior Court, County of Marin. My scope of work was to prepare an opinion regarding an assessment formula for road maintenance. One deposition was taken and there was testimony given at trial. The Court ruled in favor of the defendant.

Retained by defendant through Karl Torke of Morgenstein & Jubelirer, a San Francisco law firm. Case entitled Wildwood at Five Canyons vs. Centex. Superior Court, County of Alameda. My scope of work was to prepare an opinion on the adequacy of the developer’s initial budget and reserve study. One deposition was taken. The case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through Karl Torke of Morgenstein & Jubelirer, a San Francisco law firm. Case entitled Clearpointe Duet Owners Association v. Centex Homes, et al. 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. No deposition was taken. Case settled prior to trial.

Retained by defendant through David Feingold of Ragghianti, Freitas, a San Rafael law firm. Case entitled Cummings v. Newport North Homeowners Association, et al. 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. One deposition has been taken.

Retained by plaintiff through Larry Russell of Russell & Mallett, a Walnut Creek law firm. Case entitled MacArthur Heights v. Transaction. Superior Court, County of Alameda. My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on the adequacy of the developer’s initial budget and reserve study and on certain developer disclosure requirements. One deposition has been taken.

Retained by defendant through Jeffery Nevin, a San Francisco attorney. Case entitled Robert Hartwick v. Woodside Association, County of Sacramento. My scope of work encompasses the relationship between a Board of Directors, it’s management company, and the management company’s employees, as well as certain aspects of maintenance responsibilities.