BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio custom homes building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio production housing building expert Columbus Ohio low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio construction expert witness public projectsColumbus Ohio expert witness roofingColumbus Ohio architectural engineering expert witnessColumbus Ohio delay claim expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction defect expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction scheduling expert witnessColumbus Ohio expert witness structural engineer
    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


    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Preserves Possibility of Coverage

    Three Reasons Late Payments Persist in the Construction Industry

    Blackstone Suffers Court Setback in Irish Real Estate Drama

    The Connecticut Appellate Court Decides That Construction Contractor Was Not Obligated To Continue Accelerated Schedule to Mitigate Its Damages Following Late Delivery of Materials by Supplier

    Philadelphia Court Rejects Expert Methodology for Detecting Asbestos

    How VR and AR Will Help in Remote Expert Assistance

    John O’Meara is Selected as America’s Top 100 Civil Defense Litigators

    How Machine Learning Can Help with Urban Development

    Is it the End of the Lease-Leaseback Shootouts? Maybe.

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa M. Rolle and Vito John Marzano Secure Dismissal of Indemnification and Breach of Contract Claims Asserted against Subcontractor

    While You Were Getting Worked Up Over Oil Prices, This Just Happened to Solar

    Sellers' Alleged Misrepresentation Does Not Amount To An Occurrence

    No Coverage for Additional Insured for Construction Defect Claim

    Power & Energy - Emerging Insurance Coverage Cases of Interest

    New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Coverage Gap Dispute

    Contractors Can No Longer Make Roof Repairs Following Their Own Inspections

    A Court-Side Seat: Environmental Developments on the Ninth Circuit

    Replacement of Defective Gym Construction Exceeds Original Cost

    Changes to Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act in New York Introduced

    Contractor Succeeds At the Supreme Court Against Public Owner – Obtaining Fee Award and Determination The City Acted In Bad Faith

    Economic Loss Doctrine Bars Negligence Claim Against Building Company Owner, Individually

    Conflicts of Laws, Deficiency Actions, and Statutes of Limitations – Oh My!

    Seattle’s Newest Residential Developer

    Insurance Litigation Roundup: “Post No Bills!”

    Nation’s Top Court Limits EPA's Authority in Clean Air Case

    Hybrid Contracts for The Sale of Goods and Services and the Predominant Factor Test

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    Power Point Presentation on Nautilus v. Lexington Case

    Emerging Trends in Shortened Statutes of Limitations and Statutes of Repose

    NY Attorney General to Propose Bill Requiring Climate Adaptation for Utilities

    Application of Set-Off When Determining Prevailing Party for Purposes of Attorney’s Fees

    Experts: Best Bet in $300M Osage Nation Wind Farm Dispute Is Negotiation

    No Occurrence Found for Damage to Home Caused by Settling

    Is the Construction Industry Actually a Technology Hotbed?

    Sixth Circuit Affirms Liability Insurer's Broad Duty to Defend and Binds Insurer to Judgment Against Landlord

    Be Proactive, Not Reactive, To Preserve Force Majeure Rights Regarding The Coronavirus

    Attorney's Erroneous Conclusion that Limitations Period Had Not Expired Was Not Grounds For Relief Under C.C.P. § 473(b)

    Colorado’s Workers’ Compensation Act and the Construction Industry

    Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP Expands into Georgia

    No Coverage for Construction Defect Claim Only Impacting Insured's Work

    New Nafta Could Settle Canada-U.S. Lumber War, Resolute CEO Says

    Quick Note: Expert Testimony – Back to the Frye Test in Florida

    A Closer Look at an HOA Board Member’s Duty to Homeowners

    Connecting IoT Data to BIM

    In Pennsylvania, Contractors Can Be Liable to Third Parties for Obvious Defects in Completed Work

    Florida’s Fourth District Appeals Court Clarifies What Actions Satisfy Florida’s Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    NJ Supreme Court Declines to Review Decision that Exxon Has No Duty to Indemnify Insurers for Environmental Liability Under Prior Settlement Agreement

    I’m Sorry, So Sorry: Legal Implications of Apologies and Admissions of Fault for Delaware Healthcare Professionals

    Incorrect Information Provided on Insurance Application Defeats Claim for Coverage

    Welcome to SubTropolis: The Massive Business Complex Buried Under Kansas City
    Corporate Profile

    COLUMBUS OHIO BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Columbus, Ohio Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Columbus' most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Columbus, Ohio

    Federal Energy Regulator Approves Rule to Speed Clean Energy Grid Links

    August 28, 2023 —
    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission unanimously passed a sweeping rule at its July 27 open meeting meant to eliminate U.S. transmission system bottlenecks for new power generation and storage. But stakeholders worry that more needs to be done to add needed and viable clean energy projects to the grid. Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, Engineering News-Record and Debra K. Rubin, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Ms. Rubin may be contacted at rubind@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Dangerous Condition, Dangerous Precedent: California Supreme Court Expands Scope of Dangerous Condition Liability Involving Third Party Negligent/Criminal Conduct

    August 19, 2015 —
    In Cordova v. City of Los Angeles (filed 8/13/15, Case No. S208130), the California Supreme Court held a government entity is not categorically immune from liability where the plaintiff alleges a dangerous condition of public property caused the plaintiff’s injury, but did not cause the third party conduct which precipitated the accident. The case arises out of a traffic collision by which the negligent driving of a third party motorist caused another car to careen into a tree planted in the center median owned and maintained by the City of Los Angeles (“City”). Of the four occupants in the car that collided with the tree, three died and the fourth was badly injured. The parents of two of the occupants sued the City for a dangerous condition of public property under Government Code Section 835. The plaintiffs alleged the roadway was in a dangerous condition because the trees in the median were too close to the traveling portion of the road, posing an unreasonable risk of harm to motorists who might lose control of their vehicles. The City successfully moved for summary judgment, which plaintiffs appealed. On review, the Court of Appeal affirmed holding the tree was not a dangerous condition as a matter of law because there was no evidence that the tree had contributed to the criminally negligent driving of the third party motorist. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys R. Bryan Martin, Laura C. Williams and Lawrence S. Zucker II Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com Ms. Williams may be contacted at lwilliams@hbblaw.com And Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Creeping Incrementalism in Downstream Insurance: Carriers are Stretching Standard CGL Concepts to Untenable Limits

    October 17, 2023 —
    In the construction sector, the importance of closely vetting downstream parties’ insurance has never been more critical. The markets have been hardening with no seeming end in sight and carriers are looking for any way to get an edge. Owners and general contractors need to be on the lookout for ever broader carrier-specific expansions of standard insurance provisions that are perilous for risk transfer. We are seeing more and more terms that go against the intent of ISO standard which is what is almost universally required in construction contracts. One area where carriers are deviating from standard concepts is within pre-existing injury or damage exclusions in Commercial General Liability (“CGL”) policies. It is almost a universal requirement that downstream parties provide additional insured coverage to owners and general contractors on ISO form CG 00 01. Generally, ISO standard language provides coverage for sums the insured becomes legally obligated to pay as damages because of bodily injury or property damage. One of the few main requirements to trigger coverage is that the injury or damage must occur during the policy period. Over the years, ISO standard language has evolved to exclude injury or damage if an insured or certain persons knew that it had occurred before the policy period. Additionally, injury or damage is deemed to have been known to have occurred under certain circumstances. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eric M. Clarkson, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Mr. Clarkson may be contacted at EClarkson@sdvlaw.com

    Connecticut Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C" Grade

    October 10, 2022 —
    WATERBURY, CT. — The Connecticut Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) released the 2022 Report Card for Connecticut's Infrastructure today, with five categories of infrastructure receiving an overall grade of a 'C'. That means Connecticut's infrastructure is in mediocre condition, an improvement over the 'C-' grade issued in the 2018 report card. The bump is thanks in large part to improved condition of assets across several categories and additional funding allocated for roads, bridges and rail. Connecticut is also set to receive more than $5 billion from the federal bipartisan infrastructure bill, which was passed in late 2021. However, these improvements are threatened by Connecticut's aging infrastructure – one of the oldest infrastructure networks in the U.S. – and the recent suspension of the state's already-insufficient gas tax. Civil engineers graded bridges (C), drinking water (C), rail (B), roads (D+), and wastewater (C-). "This Infrastructure Report Card shows that while Connecticut has made great progress, much more needs to be done to rebuild our state's roads and bridges and deliver essential services like clean drinking water," said U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal. "President Biden's historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is expected to invest more than $5 billion in Connecticut's infrastructure and create thousands of good paying jobs for the workforce. These federal funds, along with critically increased job training resources, will help address the challenges outlined in the Report Card. I thank the Connecticut Society of Civil Engineers for their commitment to designing and building our infrastructure, as well as all of the workers who innovate and advance the systems and structures we rely on every day." To view the report card and all five categories, visit https://infrastructurereportcard.org/state-item/connecticut/. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 150,000 civil engineers worldwide and is America's oldest national engineering society. ASCE works to raise awareness of the need to maintain and modernize the nation's infrastructure using sustainable and resilient practices, advocates for increasing and optimizing investment in infrastructure, and improve engineering knowledge and competency. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Claims Made Insurance Policies

    November 04, 2019 —
    “Claims-made policies are common in the professional liability insurance market. They “differ from traditional ‘occurrence’-based policies primarily based upon the scope of the risk against which they insure.” With claims-made policies, coverage is provided only where the act giving rise to coverage “is discovered and brought to the attention of the insurance company during the period of the policy.” In contrast, coverage is provided under an occurrence-based policy if the act giving rise to coverage “occurred during the period of the policy, regardless of the date a claim is actually made against the insured.” “The essence, then, of a claims-made policy is notice to the carrier within the policy period.” Crowely Maritime Corp. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, 2019 WL 3294003 (11thCir. 2019) The recent Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal opinion in Crowely Maritime Corp. discussed the distinction between a claims-made insurance policy and an occurrence-based insurance policy. Professional liability policies are generally claims-made policies whereas commercial general liability policies are generally occurrence-based policies. While this opinion does not involve a construction matter, the case did concern the definition of a “claim” in a claims-made policy and whether such claim was timely reported to the insurer within the discovery period / extended reporting period. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    5 Ways Equipment Financing is Empowering Small Construction Businesses

    August 24, 2017 —
    Small construction businesses can often get 100% equipment financing, eliminating the down payment, and freeing up cash, according to the Equipment Leasing and Finance Association (ELFA). Most small businesses need equipment in order to operate and grow, and each business must decide on an acquisition strategy that is right for it. But, a majority of businesses turn to equipment leasing and financing so they can take advantage of a range of benefits. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Duane Craig, Construction Informer
    Mr. Craig may be contacted at dtcraig@constructioninformer.com

    Construction Contract Clauses That May or May Not Have Your Vote – Part 3

    November 23, 2016 —
    Scope, time and cost provisions may be the most important clauses in your construction contract but they’re not the only ones which can impact your bottom line. The third in a multi-part series, here are some other important construction contract clauses that may determine whether you come out a winner.
      Provision: Supervisory Personnel, Employees, and Authority to Bind Provisions
    • Typical Provision: ”At all times during performance of the Work, Subcontractor shall have at the job site a competent supervisor approved by Owner. Subcontractor’s supervisor shall be deemed a representative of Subcontractor and all communications given to Subcontractor’s supervisor shall be as binding as if such communications were given to Subcontractor. Should Contractor object to Subcontractor’s supervisor’s presence at the job site, or the presence at the job site, or the presence at the job site of any other employee or agent of Subcontractor or any employee or agent of Subcontractor of Subcontractor, Subcontractor shall cause such persons to be replaced immediately as directed by Contractor.”
    • What it Means: Higher-tiered parties have a legitimate interest in ensuring that only competent individuals are allowed to perform work on a project and in ensuring that there are peaceable relations at a job site. Higher-tiered parties also have an interest in ensuring that directives and agreements made and reached in the field are followed. However, it is unreasonable for higher-tiered party or to require that such personnel be able to bind that lower-tiered party to agreements best decided by others.
    • What You Can Do: Lower-tiered parties should seek to include language which provides that only “reasonable” changes to personnel are allowed and, as necessary, limit by category or issue the types of items on-site personnel can bind the lower-tiered party to.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Are Proprietary Specifications Illegal?

    April 11, 2018 —
    A friend came to me with a question regarding a case he was working: “can a public owner require that bidders use a specific brand name product?” “Of course not,” I said “proprietary specifications are illegal.” Or, at least that’s what I assumed. To my surprise, the law in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is not as clear as it is in other jurisdictions. What is a proprietary specification? A proprietary specification lists a product by brand name, make, model and/model that a contractor must (shall) utilize in construction. A basic example of a proprietary specification would state:
    “Air Handlers shall be “Turbo Max” as manufactured by Chiller Corp.”
    There are two problems with a proprietary specification (other than potentially being illegal): (a) they limit competition, and (b) invite steered contract awards. They limit competition because it limits the type of material that can be used on the project. In the example above, there could be equivalent air handlers available at a better price but the contractor could not use that lower priced product in its bid. Thus, the taxpayers end up paying more for tile. Also, contractors may not be able to secure a certain brand name product because of exclusive distribution agreements. Again, using the example above, contractor A’s competitor may have the exclusive distribution agreement with Chiller Corp. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com