top of page

CASE CATEGORIES

Developer – Budgets & Reserves
Standard of Care

Developer on Board of Directors
Standard of Care

Board of Directors
Maintenance Responsibilities
Standard of Care

Board of Directors
Standard of Care

Management Company
Standard of Care

Reserve Study
Standard of Care

Other

Expert Witness Services

AVAILABLE IN OREGON, WASHINGTON & CALIFORNIA

​

Bicksler and Associates, LLC 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.

​

Following is a categorized portfolio of Gene Bicksler's expert witness case experience
since 1991.

CASE CATEGORY:
DEVELOPER – BUDGETS & RESERVES – STANDARD OF CARE

  • Retained by defendant through Ryan Manning of Newmeyer & Dillion a Newport Beach law firm. Case titled The Courtyards at Dublin Ranch Villages HOA v Toll-Dublin LLC, County of Contra Costa. My scope of work was to prepare an opinion on the adequacy of the original Operating Budget and Reserve Study and on the actions of developer representatives on the Board of Directors. My deposition was taken once. The case settled prior to trial.

​

  • Retained by defendant through Wakako Uritani of Lober, Greenfield & Polito a San Francisco law firm. Case titled Warm Springs OA v. KB HOME South Bay Inc, County of Alameda. My scope of work was to prepare an opinion on the adequacy of the original Operating Budget and Reserve Study and on the actions of developer representatives on the Board of Directors. The case settled prior to trial.

Vertical1.jpg
Developer – Budgets & Reserves – Standard of Care
Developer on Board of Directors – Standard of Care
CASE CATEGORY:
DEVELOPER ON BOARD OF DIRECTORS – STANDARD OF CARE

  • Retained by defendant through Ryan M. Tarter of Wood Smith Henning Berman, Portland Oregon office. Case titled Quatama Park Association vs. Scott McFerran, Laura Wilson, Daron Anderson et al. United States District Court, Portland Division. My scope of work was to prepare an opinion on certain actions of developer representatives on the Board of Directors. The case settled before my testimony.

​

  • 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.  My deposition was taken once, the case settled prior to trial.​

Board of Directors – Maintenance Responsibilities – Standard of Care
CASE CATEGORY:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS – MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES – STANDARD OF CARE

  • Retained by plaintiff through D.K. Yoshida of Yoshida Law Firm, Seattle, Washington. Case titled Everett vs. Yarrow Hill Homeowners Association, County of King. My scope of work was to prepare an opinion on whether the Association acted within the standard of care when responding to the plaintiff’s maintenance requests. The 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. My deposition was taken once.

​

Board of Directors – Standard of Care
CASE CATEGORY:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS – STANDARD OF CARE

  • 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.  My deposition was taken once.  The case settled prior to trial.

​

  • Retained by defendant through Kimberly A. Shields of Murphy Pearson Bradley & Feeney a San Francisco law firm. Case entitled Chen vs. Summitpointe Homeowners Association. County of Santa Clara. My scope of work was to prepare an opinion on the standard of care of the management company and a Board of Directors on a variety of operational issues. My deposition was taken once. The case settled prior to trial.

​

Management Company – Standard of Care
CASE CATEGORY:
MANAGEMENT COMPANY – STANDARD OF CARE

  • 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.

​

  • Retained by plaintiff through Michael W. Thomas of Thomas & Associates a Roseville law firm. Case entitled Verdera Community Association v. Riverside Management, et al., County of Placer. My scope of work was to prepare an opinion on professional management practices. My deposition was taken once. The case settled prior to trial.

​

Reserve Study – Standard of Care
CASE CATEGORY:
RESERVE STUDY – STANDARD OF CARE

  • 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.  The case settled prior to trial.

​

  • Retained by defendant through Mark Himelstein of counsel with Jon York & Associates, a Berkeley law firm. Case entitled Campana v. The Gardens HOA, County of San Mateo. 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.

Other
CASE CATEGORY:
OTHER

  • 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.  My disposition was taken once.  The case settled prior to trial.

​

  • Retained by defendant through Peggy Chang of Beckman, Feller & Chang a Berkeley law firm. Case entitled Castaneda, Hunt and Nguyen vs. Windsor Palms Plaza II Building 600 et al., County of Sonoma. My scope of work is to prepare an opinion on Declarant’s rights and architectural control matters. My deposition has been taken once. I also testified at the bench trial. 

bottom of page