BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio custom homes building expert Columbus Ohio low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio multi family housing building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio production housing building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio construction expertsColumbus Ohio structural engineering expert witnessesColumbus Ohio construction claims expert witnessColumbus Ohio civil engineer expert witnessColumbus Ohio contractor expert witnessColumbus Ohio stucco expert witnessColumbus Ohio consulting architect 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


    Wall Failure Due to Construction Defect Says Insurer

    E-Commerce Logistics Test Limits of Tilt-Up Construction

    Independent Contractor v. Employee. The “ABC Test” Does Not Include a Threshold Hiring Entity Test

    More on the VCPA and Construction

    A Tuesday With Lisa Colon

    Contractor Gets Benched After Failing to Pay Jury Fees

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 38 White and Williams Lawyers

    Disputed Facts on Cause of Collapse Results in Denied Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment

    Florida Self-Insured Retention Satisfaction and Made Whole Doctrine

    20 Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2020 Top Lawyers!

    The Condo Conundrum: 10 Reasons Why There's a 'For Sale' Shortage in Seattle

    Partner Denis Moriarty and Of Counsel William Baumgaertner Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2017

    Structural Problems May Cause Year-Long Delay Opening New Orleans School

    Ownership is Not a Conclusive Factor for Ongoing Operations Additional Insured Coverage

    Wearable Ways to Work in Extreme Heat

    Surviving the Construction Law Backlog: Nontraditional Approaches to Resolution

    9th Circuit Plumbs Through the Federal and State False Claims Acts

    Housing Starts Plunge by the Most in Four Years

    Making Construction Innovation Stick

    Construction Defect Disputes: Know Your Measure of Damages!!!!!

    Builders Can’t Rely on SB800

    How Artificial Intelligence Can Transform Construction

    Don’t Sign a Contract that Doesn’t Address Covid-19 (Or Pandemics and Epidemics)

    Lessons Learned from Implementing Infrastructure BIM in Helsinki

    Five New Laws to Know Before They Take Effect On Jan. 1, 2022

    Ninth Circuit Resolves Federal-State Court Split Regarding Whether 'Latent' Defects Discovered After Duration of Warranty Period are Actionable under California's Lemon Law Statute

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/22/24) – Federal Infrastructure Money, Hotel Development Pipelines, and Lab Space Construction

    Bought a New Vacation Home? I’m So Sorry

    Japan Quake Triggers Landslides, Knocks Power Plant Offline

    Yellen Has Scant Power to Relieve U.S. Housing Slowdown

    Will European Insurers’ Positive Response to COVID-19 Claims Influence US Insurers?

    Transplants Send Nashville Home Market Upwards

    Chinese Telecommunications Ban to Expand to Federally Funded Contracts Effective November 12, 2020

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Los Angeles Office on Another Successful MSJ!

    California Court of Appeals Says, “We Like Eich(leay)!”

    Congratulations to Wilke Fleury’s 2024 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!!

    PCL Sues Big Bank for $30M in Claimed NJ Mall Unpaid Work

    Competent, Substantial Evidence Carries Day in Bench Trial

    Court of Appeals Finds Arbitration Provision Incorporated by Reference Unenforceable

    Finding an "Occurrence," Appellate Court Rules Insurer Must Defend

    Proposed Bill Provides a New Federal Tax Credit for the Conversion of Office Buildings

    House Passes $25B Water Resources Development Bill

    California Clarifies Its Inverse Condemnation Standard

    Massachusetts Judge Holds That Insurer Breached Its Duty To Defend Lawsuit After Chemical Spill

    The Top 10 Changes to the AIA A201: What You Need to Know

    PSA: Pay If Paid Ban Goes into Effect on January 1, 2023

    First Trump Agenda Nuggets Hit Construction

    California Subcontractor Gets a Kick in the Rear (or Perhaps the Front) for Prematurely Recorded Mechanics Lien

    Does a Landlord’s Violation of the Arizona Residential Landlord-Tenant Act Constitute Negligence Per Se?

    You Are Not A “Liar” Simply Because You Amend Your Complaint
    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

    Colorado Senate Committee Approves Construction Defect Bill

    March 19, 2015 —
    Late last night, the Colorado Senate Business, Labor, and Technology Committee voted to refer SB 15-177 to the committee of the whole. The vote followed nearly seven hours of testimony from those in favor of construction defect legislation and those opposed. As I have previously discussed, the bill sponsors have argued that their measure will encourage the construction of more affordable housing by giving builders de facto immunity for claims of defective workmanship and property damage in common interest communities. The bill achieves this by establishing difficult voting and disclosure requirements for homeowner associations and requiring costly, private arbitration of any disputes that can overcome the procedural hurdles. During the recent hearing, proponents echoed these statements and testified that insulating homebuilders from claims would lower home prices and rents by increasing the supply of cheaply-built condominiums. Opponents questioned whether the bill contained any provisions that would actually help the affordable housing market. They also argued that it was improper for the legislature to shift the cost of fixing construction defects onto those homeowners who can least afford to pay for necessary repairs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jesse Howard Witt, The Witt Law Firm
    Mr. Witt welcomes comments at www.acerbicwitt.com

    The Double-Breasted Dilemma

    July 18, 2022 —
    What Is A Double-Breasted Operation? A double-breasted operation is when a firm has two entities, and one entity performs work under collective bargaining agreements and the other does not. While this type of operation is not outright prohibited, it is often subject to a variety of challenges and scrutiny. To legally run a double-breasted operation, the two companies must remain separate and distinct. If the companies are not sufficiently separate and distinct from one another, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) or a court may find that the two companies are operating as a single entity or that the non-union company, or also known as the open shop, is merely an alter ego of the union company and, therefore, bound by the terms of the collective bargaining agreement. In order to determine whether the companies are sufficiently separate and distinct, the two entities must pass either the single employer test or the alter ego test depending on the nature of the double-breasted operation. Typically, the single employer test is used when the two entities run parallel operations, and the alter ego test is used when the open shop replaces the union company. Under the single employer test, the NLRB or courts will generally consider four factors: (1) the interrelation of operations; (2) common management; (3) common control of labor relations; and (4) common ownership. The alter ego test does not require a finding that the companies are a single bargaining unit, but analyzes to what extent the two entities have substantially identical management, business operation and purpose, business equipment, customers, and ownership. While common ownership is a factor considered under both the single employer and alter ego tests, common ownership alone is not dispositive of whether the companies are sufficiently separate and distinct. In other words, the NLRB and courts do not simply look for common ownership to determine whether the double-breasted operation is lawful. It is merely one of many factors to consider. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lauren E. Rankins, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald, LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Ms. Rankins may be contacted at lrankins@watttieder.com

    Another Guilty Plea in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    December 20, 2012 —
    A twenty-eighth person has plead guilty in the ongoing Las Vegas HOA scandal. Dax Louderman, who had been a construction company manager had acknowledged that he stole more than $495,000 from his former employers, Alpha 1 Construction and the Stone Canyon Homeowners Association, and further that he did not report this improper income on his tax returns. He has agreed to work with prosecutors and to pay $134,860 to the IRS. His actual sentencing will happen on June 24. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurance Law Client Alert: California Appeals Court Refuses to Apply Professional Services Exclusion to Products-Completed Operations Loss

    March 19, 2014 —
    In North Counties Engineering v. State Farm (No. A133713, filed 3/13/14), State Farm insured an engineering company under CGL insurance that had a professional services exclusion and included products-completed operations (PCO) coverage. The owner of the engineering company, NCE, contracted with a winery to construct a dam and associated works. Also on the project was the owner's son, who had his own construction company, NCD. There were multiple contracts, both oral and written, variously naming one company or the other. The evidence later showed that the father performed hands-on work for the project. After completion, the winery was sued over sediment and erosion caused by the dam. State Farm denied coverage on the ground that the professional services exclusion applied, as well as a mistaken belief that the policy had no PCO coverage. State Farm then changed its position and agreed to defend, but only going forward. The insured sued State Farm over past defense fees, alleging breach of contract and bad faith. The case went to trial and after testimony detailing State Farm's claim handling, the trial judge granted a nonsuit, finding that the professional services exclusion barred all coverage: "[I]f you look at the pleadings, the legal pleadings and the contracts, the NCE role is, as the engineering company, the support company, and that company was overseeing the [sic] NCD to make sure that whatever they did was done right.... NCE is the expert on the job, the professional providing professional services, design and construction, and also overseeing the work of NCD, the son’s business, which is doing more of the physical activity.... That takes professional expertise and I think all of what Mr. Akerstrom did was professional.... It was this professional work, and not 'something incidental to their professional involvement' that gave rise to the underlying actions. In this situation, it’s not a malpractice or E and O policy. It’s a business policy, which has good benefits, but is subject to the professional services exclusion." Reprinted courtesy of Valerie A. Moore and Chris Kendrick of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com; Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Why A Jury Found That Contractor 'Retaliated' Against Undocumented Craft Worker

    August 22, 2022 —
    On May 10, 2017, a Boston wall taper who had broken his leg in a fall from a ladder during work six weeks earlier took his two-year-old son to an office of a West Bridgewater, Mass.-based contractor, on the invitation of the CEO who asked him to come and gave the worker $500 to help him get by while recovering. Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ensuring Arbitration in Construction Defect Claims

    February 04, 2013 —
    Jared E. Berg and John W. Mill of Sherman & Howard note that developers and general contractors would prefer that construction defect claims against them go to arbitration, instead of ending up in front of a jury. They say “there is a way to do this.” For the developer and general contractor, arbitration is “typically less costly and time consuming than litigation.” On the other side, home owner associations “tend to prefer litigation because the up-front costs of arbitration are greater and they would rather have their cases tried to a jury than a panel of arbitrators in the belief juries offer greater potential for high damage awards. In order to avoid arbitration, “HOAs have taken advantage of their statutory rights to amend declarations by instructing their members to approve amendments removing arbitration clauses. However, in a recent Colorado case, the developer had taken a precaution of including in the arbitration clauses that “they could not be removed from the declarations by amendment with the developer’s and general contractor’s consent.” The homeowners association had voted to remove these clauses, but the judge found that they could not do so. Berg and Mill give the advice to “include in the declaration’s arbitration clause a provision making your consent required to amend or nullify the arbitration provision,” adding that “courts will enforce this kind of consent provision.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Supreme Court Addresses Newly Amended Statute of Repose for Construction Claims

    June 26, 2023 —
    We have been following the protracted legal battle concerning Southern States Chemical, Inc. v. Tampa Tank & Welding, Inc. This case had been litigated at the Supreme Court and resulted in legislation. In the latest round, the Supreme Court answered whether Georgia’s statute of repose for construction claims applies to claims arising or brought before the statute was amendment in 2020. What is a Georgia’s statute of repose? Under the statute, “[n]o action to recover damages: (1) For any deficiency in the survey or plat, planning, design, specifications, supervision or observation of construction, or construction of an improvement to real property; (2) For injury to property, real or personal, arising out of any such deficiency; or (3) For injury to the person or for wrongful death arising out of any such deficiency shall be brought against any person performing or furnishing the survey or plat, design, planning, supervision or observation of construction, or construction of such an improvement more than eight years after substantial completion of such an improvement.” The case began ten years ago when Southern States suited Tampa Tank and Corrosion Control for alleged defects in renovating a 24-foot tall, 130-foot wide storage tank. The tank renovation was completed in 2002, and in 2011, the tank was found to leak sulfuric acid. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook Jr., Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    How to Protect a Construction-Related Invention

    May 10, 2021 —
    They say necessity is mother of invention. That was surely true for Johan Vaaler, who in 1899 decided he was tired of having to sew pages together to keep them organized. Voila, enter the paper clip. This wasn’t the case for Percy Spencer. He was a radar tube designer working at Raytheon who, while working in front of an active radar set, noticed the candy bar in his pocket started to melt. Exploring the phenomenon further, he placed corn kernels in front of the radar and behold, he ended up with the world’s first microwaved popcorn. He patented the microwave oven in 1945. Whether by necessity or by accident, what should contractors do if they develop a unique tool to accomplish some portion of their work faster, easier or less expensively? How do they protect it from misappropriation by competitors, or by an errant employee? We are all familiar with the fact that in today’s internet-driven market, it has become very easy to reverse engineer and knock off an innovative product. The best way to safeguard an invention is, of course, to register it with the appropriate government agency:the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Generally done with the assistance of a patent lawyer, the process is neither inexpensive or abbreviated. It could cost several thousand dollars and take 12 to 18 months. But, more importantly, this is not sufficient. Inventors must regularly monitor their patents to police possible infringers. Many folks think the USPTO does this, but it does not. Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Barthet, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Barthet may be contacted at pbarthet@barthet.com