BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio production housing building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio custom homes building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio consulting engineersColumbus Ohio ada design expert witnessColumbus Ohio building envelope expert witnessColumbus Ohio structural engineering expert witnessesColumbus Ohio construction expert witnessColumbus Ohio consulting general contractorColumbus Ohio contractor expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Columbus, Ohio

    Ohio Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: According to HB 175, Chptr 1312, for a homebuilder to qualify for right to repair protection, the contractor must notify consumers (in writing) of NOR laws at the time of sale; The law stipulates written notice of defects required itemizing and describing and including documentation prepared by inspector. A contractor has 21 days to respond in writing.


    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Columbus Ohio

    Licensing is done at the local level. Licenses required for plumbing, electrical, HVAC, heating, and hydronics trades.


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Buckeye Valley Building Industry Association
    Local # 3654
    12 W Main St
    Newark, OH 43055

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of Central Ohio
    Local # 3627
    495 Executive Campus Drive
    Westerville, OH 43082

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Miami County
    Local # 3682
    1200 Archer Dr
    Troy, OH 45373

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10

    Ohio Home Builders Association (State)
    Local # 3600
    17 S High Street Ste 700
    Columbus, OH 43215

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10

    Union County Chapter
    Local # 3684
    PO Box 525
    Marysville, OH 43040

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10

    Clark County Chapter
    Local # 3673
    PO Box 1047
    Springfield, OH 45501

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10

    Shelby County Builders Association
    Local # 3670
    PO Box 534
    Sidney, OH 45365

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Columbus Ohio


    New York Appellate Court Applies Broad Duty to Defend to Property Damage Case

    War-Torn Ukraine Looks to Europe’s Green Plans for Reconstruction Ideas

    Tarriffs, a Pandemic and War: Construction Contracts Must Withstand the Unforeseeable

    As Recovery Continues, Home Improvement Stores Make Sales

    California Limits Indemnification Obligations of Design Professionals

    Claims Litigated Under Government Claims Act Must “Fairly Reflect” Factual Claims Made in Underlying Government Claim

    Agree First or it May Cost You Later

    Courts Generally Favor the Enforcement of Arbitration Provisions

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2024 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Erasing Any Doubt: Arizona FED Actions Do Not Accrue Until Formal Demand for Possession is Tendered

    Seeking Better Peer Reviews After the FIU Bridge Collapse

    Suspend the Work, but Don’t Get Fired

    RDU Terminal 1: Going Green

    Economic Damages and the Right to Repair Act: You Can’t Have it Both Ways

    Expired Contract Not Revived Due to Sovereign Immunity and the Ex Contractu Clause

    Investigators Eye Fiber Optic Work in Deadly Wisconsin Explosion

    Newmeyer & Dillion Selected to 2017 OCBJ’s Best Places to Work List

    25 Years of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar

    Editorial: Qatar Is Champion of Safety Hypocrisy in Migrant Worker Deaths

    DC Metro Extension’s Precast Supplier Banned from Federal Contracts

    A Win for Policyholders: California Court of Appeals Applies Vertical Exhaustion for Continuous Injury Claims

    Structural Health Check-Ups Needed but Are Too Infrequent

    California Posts Nation’s Largest Gain in Construction Jobs

    Free Texas MCLE Seminar at BHA Houston June 13th

    Update: Lawyers Can Be Bound to Confidentiality Provision in Settlement Agreement

    Stair Collapse Points to Need for Structural Inspections

    Property Owner’s Defense Goes Up in Smoke in Careless Smoking Case

    Video: Contractors’ Update on New Regulations Governing Commercial Use of Drones

    Massachusetts High Court to Decide if Insurers Can Recoup Defense Costs

    Defending Against the Res Ipsa Loquitur Doctrine – Liability Considerations

    How to Prepare for Potential Construction Disputes Resulting From COVID-19

    Insurer's Failure to Settle Does Not Justify Multiple Damages under Unfair Claims Settlement Law

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: KATE GOLDEN

    Modification: Exceptions to Privette Doctrine Do Not Apply Where There is No Evidence a General Contractor Affirmatively Contributed to the Injuries of an Independent Contractor’s Employee

    Insurer Defends Denial in Property Coverage Dispute Involving Marijuana Growing Operations

    Consider the Risks Associated with an Exculpatory Clause

    20 Years of BHA at West Coast Casualty's CD Seminar: Chronicling BHA's Innovative Exhibits

    Get to Know BJ Siegel: Former Apple Executive and Co-Founder of Juno

    Subcontractor Not Estopped from Enforcing Lien Not Listed In Bankruptcy Petition

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    Summary Judgment for Insurer Reversed Based on Expert Opinion

    Former SNC-Lavalin CEO Now Set for Trial in Bribe Case

    Lien Actions Versus Lien Foreclosure Actions

    Car Crashes Through Restaurant Window. Result: Lesson in the History of Additional Insured Coverage

    Where Breach of Contract and Tortious Interference Collide

    Carbon Monoxide Injuries Caused by One Occurrence

    As California Faces Mandatory Water Use Reductions How Will the Construction Industry be Impacted?

    Contractor Gets Green Light to Fix Two Fractured Girders at Salesforce Transit Center

    Ninth Circuit Holds Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Applies Beyond All-Risk Policies

    Death of Subcontractor’s Unjust Enrichment Claim Against Project Owner
    Corporate Profile

    COLUMBUS OHIO BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Columbus, Ohio Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Drawing from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Columbus' most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Columbus, Ohio

    Connecticut Court Finds Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Enforceable

    March 19, 2015 —
    Canvassing both case law and scholarly authority, the court determined that the anti-concurrent cause (ACC) provision barred coverage for loss caused by Tropical Storm Irene. Lombardi v. Universal N. Am Ins. Co., 2015 Conn. Super. LEXIS 138 (Conn. Super. Ct. Jan. 21, 2015). Tropical Storm Irene caused the insured's home to shift and move from its concrete pier foundation. The house later had to be demolished. The insurer's expert concluded that the house was removed from the foundation by storm surge and not by wind. The damage caused by wind was limited to 24 feet of trim missing from the roof and about 70 square feet of shingles that were blown away. The insured's expert concluded the house was removed from its foundation due to a combination of wind and water forces. The insured's expert reported that "the water wave action most probably caused most damage to the dwelling support pilings, with wind conditions contributing to the wave action." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    The Argument for Solar Power

    July 09, 2014 —
    Jennifer Goodman in Big Builder provides eight reasons why buyers should opt for solar power. First on her list is “Codes.” Goodman pointed out that beginning in 2020, “California’s Title 24 will require all new residential construction to be net-zero energy, which means that they will need renewable energy systems in order to generate as much power as they consume.” Other reasons include incentives, aesthetics, appraisal/lending standards, payback, legislation, cost, and finally, “clean, quiet, and abundant power.” Goodman stated that the “technology generates no noise or off gassing and because solar power is generated from sunlight--not heat--even residents in the northern U.S. are able to take advantage of it.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Most Common OSHA Violations Highlight Ongoing Risks

    July 27, 2020 —
    In the 12 months from October 2018 through September 2019, the most recent period reported by OSHA,[1] the workplace safety agency cited the following standards[2] more than any other in the 28 states which do not have OSHA-approved state plans, including Colorado:
    1. 1926.501 – Duty to have fall protection – included in 459 citations, resulting in $2,475,596 in penalties ($5,393/citation);
    2. 1926.451 – General requirements for scaffolds – included in 265 citations, resulting in $834,324 in penalties ($3,148/citation);
    3. 1926.1053 – Requirements for ladders including job-made ladders – included in 164 citations, resulting in $354,853 in penalties ($2,163/citation);
    4. 1926.503 – Training requirements related to fall protection - included in 114 citations, resulting in $156,076 in penalties ($1,369/citation);
    5. 1926.405 - Wiring methods, components, and equipment for general use – included in 93 citations, resulting in $150,821 in penalties ($1,621/citation);
    6. 1926.20 - General safety and health provisions – included in 85 citations, resulting in $328,491 in penalties ($3,864/citation);
    7. 1926.1052 – Requirements for stairways – included in 79 citations, resulting in $155,651 in penalties ($1,970/citation);
    8. 1926.102 – Requirements for eye and face protection - included in 67 citations, resulting in $165,595 in penalties ($2,471/citation);
    9. 1926.403 – General requirements for electrical conductors and equipment – included in 63 citations, resulting in $146,050 in penalties ($2,318/citation), and;
    10. 1926.100 – Requirements for head protection – included in 55 citations, resulting in $127,274 in penalties ($2,314/citation).
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    California Supreme Court Finds Vertical Exhaustion Applies to First-Level Excess Policies

    August 26, 2024 —
    Addressing issues left open in its seminal decision in Montrose, the California Supreme Court found that the language in the first-level excess policies meant that the insured could access the policies upon exhaustion of the directly underlying policies purchased for the same policy period. Truck Ins. Exchange v. Kaiser Cement & Gypsum Corp., 2024 Cal. LEXIS 3271 (Cal. June 17, 2024). From 1944 through the 1970's, Kaiser manufactured asbestos-containing products at numerous different facilities. By 2004, more than 24,000 claimants had filed product liability claims against Kaiser alleging that they had suffered bodily injury as a result of exposure to Kaiser's asbestos products. Kaiser tendered these claims to Truck, one of several primary insurers that had issued CGL policies to Kaiser. In 2001, Truck initiated this coverage action to determine its indemnity and defense obligations to Kaiser. Truck later amended its complaint to add a cause of action for contribution against several of Kaiser's excess insurers. The issue presently before the court was whether Truck was entitled to contribution from various coinsurers that issued first-level excess policies to Kaiser during the period in question. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Substitute Materials — What Are Your Duties? What Are Your Risks? (Law Note)

    June 27, 2022 —
    In managing a project as the design professional, you are called upon to wear many hats. One of those hats is that of material specifier and, at times, substitute material approver. What are your duties in looking at substitute materials? As always, the legal answer is “it depends”. In part, it will depend on your role on the project and what, specifically, the contract says. However, at its most basic, you can be sued for accepting an out of spec substitute material. This is so even if you believed the spec met requirements based on information that the contractor gave you. So, tread carefully in this area. Do not assume any information that the contractor presents to you– take the time to research for yourself, call the manufacturer, and otherwise ensure that the product will work. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    Illinois Non-Profit Sues over Defective Roof

    November 27, 2013 —
    Coordinated Youth and Human Services (CYHS), a family services organization hired Honey-Do Home Repair to design and install a new roof for its building in Granite City, Illinois. Honey-Do removed portions of the roof for testing. A few day later during a rainstorm, a tarp failed, leading to water intrusion and damage to the building. The CYHS is suing the contractor for $400,000. It is claiming that repairing the damage cost the organization $200,000, and it seeks additional damage and court costs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Central Wins Authority to Take Land for High-Speed Rail System

    October 03, 2022 —
    Move over luxury bus lines and quick flights. Central Texans should be on the lookout for bulldozers and train stops. On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of Texas held that Texas Central Railroad & Infrastructure, Inc. and related entities (collectively “Texas Central”) have eminent domain authority to acquire property for a proposed high-speed rail system between Dallas and Houston.[1] Specifically, the Court held that the corporation qualifies as an “interurban electric railway company” under the Texas Transportation Code. This ruling grants Texas Central the broad condemnation authority to procure land for the project. Texas Central has Statutory Authority to Take Land The plaintiff in the matter, a farm owner with property south of Dallas along the proposed path of the bullet train, challenged the companies power to condemn land. The landowner’s declaratory judgment action challenged Texas Central’s eminent-domain authority. Under Texas law, condemnation power must be conferred by the legislature, either expressly or by necessary implication.[2] Here, Texas Central was created for the purpose of constructing, acquiring, maintaining, or operating lines of electric railway between Texas municipalities. The Court found that Texas Central is engaged in activities to further that purpose. Therefore, the Court concluded, that although legislators did not contemplate high-speed railways at the time of drafting the Transportation Code, Texas Central nonetheless qualified as “interurban electric railway companies” under the statute. Reprinted courtesy of Barclay Nicholson, Sheppard Mullin and Erica Gibbons, Sheppard Mullin Mr. Nicholson may be contacted at bnicholson@sheppardmullin.com Ms. Gibbons may be contacted at egibbons@sheppardmullin.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Short-Term Rental Legislation & Litigation On the Way!

    November 18, 2019 —
    The advent of the shared economy in the real estate context has provided homeowners and investors alike with expanded opportunities to generate revenue from the use of their real estate. Airbnb and VRBO are two of the most popular companies facilitating short-term rental availability. The rapid growth in this shared real estate economy has served as a disruptor of sorts to the traditional hotel and hospitality industry, causing that industry to revisit its own models in order to better compete. The popularity of short-term rental use, however, has created a whole new set of problems about which property owners, state and local governments, renters, and those impacted by the explosion of short-term rentals should be aware. Among other things, without more, most traditional homeowners’ policies will not cover the insured property’s use for commercial purposes – a problem similar to the early rideshare providers. Full and part-time resident owners who previously enjoyed a greater certainty with respect to their neighbors are today frustrated by the revolving door of vacationers, revelers, wedding attendees and similar nontraditional uses of neighborhood residential property. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick J. Paul, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Paul may be contacted at ppaul@swlaw.com