BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio production housing building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio custom homes building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio multi family housing building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio expert witness structural engineerColumbus Ohio roofing and waterproofing expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction project management expert witnessesColumbus Ohio building code compliance expert witnessColumbus Ohio architect expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction project management expert witnessColumbus Ohio testifying construction 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


    Toolbox Talk Series Recap – Arbitration Motion Practice

    Veterans Day – Thank You for Your Service

    ASCE Statement on Congress Passage of WRDA 2024

    Cybersecurity on Your Project: Why Not Follow National Security Strategy?

    Buy a House or Pay Off College? $1.2 Trillion Student Debt Heats Up in Capital

    Contrasting Expert Opinions Result in Denial of Cross Motions for Summary Judgment

    Judge Rejects Extrapolation, Harmon Tower to Remain Standing

    Builder’s Risk Coverage—Construction Defects

    When Business is Personal: Negligent and Intentional Interference Claims

    New York’s Second Department Holds That Carrier Must Pay Judgment Obtained by Plaintiff as Carrier Did Not Meet Burden to Prove Willful Non-Cooperation

    How You Plead Allegations to Trigger Liability Insurer’s Duties Is Critical

    President Obama Vetoes Keystone Pipeline Bill

    How California’s Construction Industry has dealt with the New Indemnity Law

    Thank You!

    Balancing Risk and Reward: The Complexities of Stadium Construction Projects

    New York Bars Developers from Selling Condos due to CD Fraud Case

    Breach of an Oral Contract and Unjust Enrichment and Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

    Empowering Success: The Advantages of Female Attorneys in Construction Defect Law

    PA Supreme Court to Rule on Scope of Judges' Credibility Determinations

    Short-Term Rental Legislation & Litigation On the Way!

    Brooklyn’s Hipster Economy Challenges Manhattan Supremacy

    Federal Courts Keep Chipping Away at the CDC Eviction Moratorium

    Reports of the Death of SB800 are Greatly Exaggerated – The Court of Appeal Revives Mandatory SB800 Procedures

    Florida Appellate Courts Holds Underwriting Manuals are Discoverable in Breach of Contract Case

    Construction Defects in Home a Breach of Contract

    Business Risk Exclusions Dismissed in Summary Judgment Motion

    Attorney-Client Privilege in the Age of Cyber Breaches

    Rhode Island District Court Dismisses Plaintiff’s Case for Spoliation Due to Potential Unfair Prejudice to Defendant

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

    Is A Miller Act Payment Bond Surety Bound by A Default or Default Judgment Against Its Principal?

    Construction Industry on the Comeback, But It Won’t Be the Same

    Construction Defect Litigation in Nevada Called "Out of Control"

    Appraisal Award for Damaged Roof Tiles Challenged

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    Restoring the USS Alabama: Surety Lessons From an 80-Year-Old Battleship

    New Jersey Construction Company Owner and Employees Arrested for Fraud

    How to Lose Your Contractor’s License in 90 Days (or Less): California and Louisiana

    Hong Kong Property Tycoon Makes $533 Million Bet on Solar

    Negligence of Property Appraiser

    Surplus Lines Carriers Cannot Compel Arbitration in Louisiana

    Buy American Under President Trump: What to Know and Where We’re Heading

    Toxic Drywall Not Covered Under Homeowner’s Policy

    Attorneys’ Fees and the American Arbitration Association Rule

    California Plant Would Convert Wood Waste Into Hydrogen Fuel

    Colorado Senate Bill 13-052: The “Transit-Oriented Development Claims Act of 2013.”

    Where Did That Punch List Term Come From Anyway?

    Does the New Jersey Right-To-Repair Law Omit Too Many Construction Defects?

    Farewell Capsule Tower, Tokyo’s Oddest Building

    Resulting Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage
    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

    Too Late for The Blame Game: Massachusetts Court Holds That the Statute of Repose Barred a Product Manufacturer from Seeking Contribution from a Product Installer

    March 21, 2022 —
    In State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Wangs Alliance Corp., No. 21-cv-10389-AK, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26712, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (District Court) considered whether a product manufacturer was barred by the Commonwealth’s six-year statute of repose for improvements to real property from joining the installer of the product as a third-party defendant. The court denied the defendant’s motion for leave to file a third-party complaint to join the installer, finding that the installer completed its work more than six years prior to the motion being filed. This case reminds us that Massachusetts’ six-year statute of repose for improvement to real property also bars a defendant’s contribution claims against third parties. The Wangs Alliance case involves a subrogation action filed by State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance (Insurer) against Wangs Alliance Corp. (Wangs), a manufacturer of rope lighting. Insurer insured the homeowners, who experienced a fire in their home in 2018. The home was originally built in 2002 by Wellen Construction (Wellen). As part of the original construction, Wellen installed rope lighting manufactured by Wangs in the house. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Construction Problems May Delay Bay Bridge

    May 10, 2013 —
    Faulty bolts could lead to a delay in the opening of the Bay Bridge. Caltrans noticed problems with bolts and found that the bolts had cracked. Of the 98 bolts already tightened, 30 have failed. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, workers will be tightening all 288 bolts and then testing them. According to Tony Anziano, Caltrans’s toll bridge program manager, repairs could take one or two months. Mr. Anziano noted that the manufacturer might be responsible for part of the expense, but that the budget for the bridge also has funds set aside for unanticipated repairs. The bolts were supplied by Dyson, an Ohio company, but it was clear whether Dyson manufactured the bolts or simply marketed them. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    July 31, 2013 —
    Defining words and phrases in the law can be a tricky proposition. In everyday life one would presume to know what the phrase “intended use” would mean, but when it comes to litigation, oftentimes the definitions become much more nuanced. On March 12, 2013, in the Bituminous Cas. Corp. v. Hartford Cas. Ins. Co. v. Canal Ins. Co., WL 950800 (D. Colo. 2013) case, Senior District Court Judge Wiley Y. Daniel denied Third-Party Defendant Canal Insurance Company’s (“Canal”) motion to dismiss Third-Party Plaintiff Hartford Casualty Insurance Company’s (“Hartford”) third-party complaint. The case arose out of a liability insurance coverage dispute related to an underlying construction defect lawsuit. In the construction defect suit, a plaintiff homeowner’s association brought a suit against a developer and a general contractor (“GC”) among others. While the underlying action was settled, a dispute remained between Bituminous Casualty Corporation, which insured the GC, and Hartford, which insured the developer. Hartford asserted third-party claims against Canal seeking a declaration of Canal’s obligations and contribution in the event Hartford owed any defense or indemnity obligations to the GC. Hartford’s claims are based on the premise that Canal owed a duty to defend and/or indemnify the GC in the underlying action. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brady Iandiorio
    Brady Iandiorio can be contacted at Iandiorio@hhmrlaw.com

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    July 18, 2011 —

    Coverage of the ongoing litigation concerning the Harmon Hotel continues to proliferate. Architectural Record and a number of other news outlets continue to provide additional details and coverage of the matter. Chief among the conditions alleged are improperly installed reinforcing steel inside link beams on 15 floors. MGM Claims that the conditions amount to hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, while Perini (the builder) indicated in a July 12th statement that the buildings problems are related to the design, and the they are “fixable.”

    There is significant speculation that MGM Resorts International isn’t interested in repairing the hotel due to a glut of hotel rooms attendant to the troubled economy. In a statement Tuesday Perini reportedly stated that “Repairing and opening the Harmon would only create a greater glut of unused hotel rooms for MGM,” “If market conditions were better and MGM found that demand existed for the Harmon hotel rooms, MGM would not be claiming that the Harmon is unstable.”

    MGM asserts that Perini failed to ”properly construct” the project. Clark County’s Department of Development Services has reportedly asked MGM to provide a plan to fix the project by August 15th.

    The Harmon is part of the $8.5 billion CityCenter project that opened in the fourth quarter of 2009 and is jointly owned by MGM Resorts and Dubai World.

    Prior reports indicated that the owner (MGM) had considered razing the entire project. The future of the project remains uncertain.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Other Colorado Cities Looking to Mirror Lakewood’s Construction Defect Ordinance

    October 22, 2014 —
    The Denver Post reported that some Colorado metro communities “say they are ready to take a hard look at modifying Colorado's law on builder defects, which they blame for hampering new condominium construction amid the buildout of the region's 122-mile commuter-rail system.” Lone Tree has “scheduled a study session for Tuesday to discuss drafting its own construction-defects ordinance while a city councilmember in Englewood has put in a request that the city take up the topic.” According to the Denver Post, “Brighton, Broomfield and Centennial…also want to give the issue more attention.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    U.S. Stocks Fall as Small Shares Tumble Amid Home Sales

    September 24, 2014 —
    U.S. stocks fell, led by a plunge among small companies, as sales of existing homes unexpectedly dropped and China’s finance minister damped stimulus hopes. The Russell 2000 Index of small-cap stocks sank 1.6 percent, the most since July. Yahoo! Inc. (YHOO) dropped 2.3 percent to lead the Dow Jones Internet Composite Index to a one-month low. Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. slid 2.1 percent after surging in its trading debut Sept. 19. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index dropped 0.7 percent to 1,997.37 at 11:24 a.m. in New York, after closing at a record Sept. 18. The benchmark gauge hasn’t had a four-day slide this year and hasn’t fallen 10 percent in three years. The Dow Jones Industrial Average slid 58.40 points, or 0.3 percent, to 17,221.34. Mr. Ciolli may be contacted at jciolli@bloomberg.net; Ms. Bost may be contacted at cbost2@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joseph Ciolli and Callie Bost, Bloomberg

    The Ups and Downs of Elevator Maintenance Contractor's Policy Limits

    October 03, 2022 —
    The December 2021 First Department decision in Nouveau Elevator Indus. v. New York Marine & General Ins. Co. is pushing some buttons in the elevator industry, given the significant implications it may have on the adequacy of policy limits for elevator service companies operating in New York state. The Court held in Nouveau that monthly elevator maintenance work performed under an ongoing service agreement is considered “completed operations” for purposes of applying policy limits. Specifically, the Court found that the per location policy limits are not implicated here, and instead held that the products-completed operations aggregate limit applies to completed work, which expressly includes “that part of the work done at a job site [that] has been put to its intended use.” Facts of the Case Nouveau provides elevator maintenance and service in the greater New York city region. Its work is done in multiple buildings and locations throughout the city. Nouveau purchased six commercial general liability (CGL) policies from New York Marine for consecutive one-year periods. Each of the CGL policies provides a liability limit of $1 million, with an aggregate limit of $2 million, per accident or occurrence. Reprinted courtesy of Richard W. Brown, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Sarah J. Markham, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Brown may be contacted at RBrown@sdvlaw.com Ms. Markham may be contacted at SMarkham@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Liability Coverage For Construction Claims May Turn On Narrow Factual Distinctions

    March 25, 2024 —
    In a recent trial court decision, a Montana federal court reminds us how fragile insurance coverage can be for construction-related insurance claims. Specifically, this case illustrates how seemingly small factual nuances can make or break coverage. The case turned on the application of policy provisions familiar to all who deal with these kinds of cases. (See Nautilus Ins. Co. v. Farrens, No. CV 22-193-M-DWM, 2024 WL 885109 (D. Mont. Mar. 1, 2024)) First, the court rebuffed the insurer’s argument that damage resulting from defective workmanship (in this case, the flawed design and installation of an elaborate floating-floor pool system) is not “caused by an occurrence.” The court correctly applied the test followed by most states: if either act causing injury is unintentional or the resulting injury is unexpected or unintended, the “occurrence” requirement is met. Fortunately, the court distinguished sloppy language from earlier Montana federal court decisions suggesting otherwise. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott S. Thomas, Payne & Fears
    Mr. Thomas may be contacted at sst@paynefears.com