BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio multi family housing building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio production housing building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio engineering expert witnessColumbus Ohio civil engineer expert witnessColumbus Ohio eifs expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction expert witnessColumbus Ohio window expert witnessColumbus Ohio building envelope expert witnessColumbus Ohio building consultant expert
    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


    Will Millennial’s Desire for Efficient Spaces Kill the McMansion?

    Is Solar the Next Focus of Construction Defect Suits?

    California Supreme Court Finds that the Notice-Prejudice Rule Applicable to Insurance is a Fundamental Public Policy of the State

    Don’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public Project.

    Nevada Update: Nevada Commissioner of Insurance Updates Burning Limits Statute with Emergency Regulation

    Jarred Reed Named to the National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List for Second Consecutive Year

    California Insurance Commissioner Lacks Authority to Regulate Formula for Estimating Replacement Cost Value

    Business Interruption Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    Georgia House Bill Addresses Construction Statute of Repose

    The Three L’s of Real Estate Have New, Urgent Meaning

    Design Professional Liens: A Blueprint

    Significant Issues Test Applies to Fraudulent Claims to Determine Attorney’s Fees

    Manufacturer of Asbestos-Free Product May Still Be Liable for Asbestos Related Injuries

    Recording a Lis Pendens Is Crucial

    America’s Bridges and the Need for Bridge Infrastructure Investment

    Court Dismisses Cross Claims Against Utility Based on Construction Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Courts Will Not Second-Guess Public Entities When it Comes to Design Immunity

    Connecticut Supreme Court Rules Matching of Materials Decided by Appraisers

    The U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Rules on Greystone

    Take Advantage of AI and Data Intelligence in Construction

    Hydrogen—A Key Element in the EU’s Green Planning

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa Rolle Wins Summary Judgment on Behalf of Contract Utility Company in Personal Injury Action

    The Hunton Policyholder’s Guide to Artificial Intelligence: SEC’s Recent AI-Washing Claims Present D&O Risks, Potential Coverage Challenges

    Michigan Court of Appeals Remands Construction Defect Case

    4 Steps to Take When a Worker Is Injured on Your Construction Site

    Extrinsic Evidence, or Eight Corners? Texas Court Sheds Light on Determining the Duty to Defend

    CRH to Buy Building-Products Firm Laurence for $1.3 Billion

    Settlement Conference May Not Be the End in Construction Defect Case

    “Based On”… What Exactly? NJ Appellate Division Examines Phrase and Estops Insurer From Disclaiming Coverage for 20-Month Delay

    Michigan Claims Engineers’ Errors Prolonged Corrosion

    Third Circuit Vacates Judgment for Insurer on Alleged Construction Defect Claim

    Alleging Property Damage in Construction Defect Lawsuit

    More Details Emerge in Fatal Charlotte, NC, Scaffold Collapse

    Construction Jobs Expected to Rise in Post-Hurricane Rebuilding

    Coverage, Bad Faith Upheld In Construction Defect Case

    ASCE Statement on EPA Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan

    How to Remove a Mechanics Lien from Your Property

    Chinese Lead $92 Billion of U.S. Home Sales to Foreigners

    Don’t Fall in Trap of Buying the Cheapest Insurance Policy as it May be Bad for Your Business Risks and Needs

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Lets Broad General Release Stand in SB 800 Case

    Renee Mortimer Recognized as "Defense Lawyer of the Year" by DTCI

    The Law of Patent v Latent Defects

    Understanding the Details: Suing Architects and Engineers Can Get Technical

    Lumber Liquidators’ Home-Testing Methods Get EPA Scrutiny

    Thanks for Four Years of Recognition from JD Supra’s Readers’ Choice Awards

    Climate Change a Factor in 'Unprecedented' South Asia Floods

    After Restoring Power in North Carolina, Contractor Faces Many Claims

    U.K. Puts Tax on Developers to Fund Safer Apartment Blocks

    Antidiscrimination Clause Required in Public Works and Goods and Services Contracts­ –Effective January 1, 2024

    Reminder: Your Accounting and Other Records Matter
    Corporate Profile

    COLUMBUS OHIO BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Columbus, Ohio Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Columbus, Ohio

    Sierra Pacific v. Bradbury Goes Unchallenged: Colorado’s Six-Year Statute of Repose Begins When a Subcontractor’s Scope of Work Ends

    November 03, 2016 —
    It’s official: the October 20, 2016 deadline to petition for certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals on its decision in Sierra Pacific Industries, Inc. v. Bradbury has passed, so it appears that decision will stand. In Sierra Pacific, the Court of Appeals held as a matter of first impression that the statute of repose for a general contractor to sue a subcontractor begins to run when a subcontractor’s scope of work is substantially complete, regardless of the status of the overall project. Sierra Pac. Indus., Inc. v. Bradbury, 2016 COA 132, ¶ 28, ___ P.3d ___. The Court of Appeals interpreted the statute of repose in C.R.S. section 13-80-104, which requires that “all actions against any architect, contractor, builder or builder vendor, engineer, or inspector performing or furnishing the design, planning, supervision, inspection, construction, or observation of any improvement to real property” must be brought within six years of substantial completion of that improvement. C.R.S. § 13-80-104(1)(a). Recognizing that “an improvement may be [to] a discrete component of an entire project” under Shaw Construction, LLC v. United Builder Services, Inc., 296 P.3d 145 (Colo. App. 2012), the Court of Appeals determined that “a subcontractor has substantially completed its role in the improvement at issue when it finishes working on the improvement.” Sierra Pac., 2016 COA at ¶¶ 20, 28. In doing so, it rejected Sierra Pacific’s argument that the statute could be tolled under the repair doctrine “while others worked to repair [the subcontractor’s] ‘improper installation work and flawed repair work.’” Id. at ¶ 29. Because six years had undisputedly passed since the subcontractor completed its scope of work when Sierra Pacific filed suit against it, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s order granting the subcontractor’s motion for summary judgment under Section 13-80-104(1)(a). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer Real Estate Litigation Blog
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    Brazil Builder Bondholders Burned by Bribery Allegations

    October 22, 2014 —
    Brazil’s biggest construction companies are leaving bondholders with losses in the wake of allegations they bribed Petroleo Brasileiro SA to win contracts. Queiroz Galvao SA’s $700 million of notes due 2019 have dropped 2.5 percent since Oct. 9, when the Department of Justice made available video in which former Petrobras head of refining Paulo Roberto Costa alleged that builders formed a cartel to overcharge for projects and divert money to politicians. OAS SA’s $875 million of 2019 notes have slumped 1.9 percent in that span, versus a 0.1 percent loss for emerging markets. Ms. Sambo may be contacted at psambo@bloomberg.net; Ms. Valle may be contacted at svalle@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Paula Sambo and Sabrina Valle, Bloomberg

    Reminder: Just Being Incorporated Isn’t Enough

    June 29, 2020 —
    I have discussed why contractors need to incorporate previously here at Construction Law Musings. Among the many reasons to incorporate are possible tax benefits and the protection of personal assets (like your house and your dog) from judgement and collection actions. This latter reason is key in the construction world in which Murphy can look like an optimist and projects have so many moving parts that something is likely to go wrong. The reason incorporation works as at least a partial shield is that the company and the owners are separate “people” or entities from a legal perspective and a contract with one “person” cannot be enforced against another. This same logic applies in the context of corporate versus individual actions, i. e. the actions of one person cannot be legally attributed to another person. By extension the assets of an individual cannot be collected to satisfy a purely corporate debt or judgment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

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

    October 10, 2013 —
    An issue that has plagued builders in Colorado construction defect litigation is the difficulty of getting additional insured carriers to fully participate in the builder’s defense, oftentimes leaving the builder to fund its own defense during the course of the litigation. Many additional insurers offer a variety of positions regarding why they will not pay for fees and costs during the course of a lawsuit. Some insurers argue that, until after trial, it is impossible to determine its proper share of the defense, and therefore cannot make any payments until the liability is determined as to all of the potentially contributing policies. (This is often referred to as the “defense follows indemnity” approach.) Others may make an opening contribution to defense fees and costs, but fall silent as fees and costs accumulate. In such an event, the builder may be forced to fund all or part of its own defense, while the uncooperative additional insured carrier waits for the end of the lawsuit or is faced with other legal action before it makes other contributions. Recent orders in two, currently ongoing, U.S. District Court cases provide clarity on the duty to defend in Colorado, holding that multiple insurers’ duty to defend is joint and several. The insured does not have to go without a defense while the various insurers argue amongst themselves as to which insurer pays what share. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bret Cogdill
    Bret Cogdill can be contacted at cogdill@hhmrlaw.com

    White and Williams Announces the Election of Five Lawyers to the Partnership and the Promotion of Five Associates to Counsel

    February 16, 2016 —
    White and Williams is proud to announce that Meredith Bieber, Eric Hermanson, Timothy Martin, Brian Tetro and Debra Weinrich have been elected to the partnership. The firm has also promoted Alan Charkey, Michael DiFebbo, William Doerler, Justin Fortescue and Stephen Milewski from associate to counsel. The newly elected partners and promoted counsel represent the wide array of practices that White and Williams offers its clients, including construction, finance, healthcare, insurance coverage, product liability, real estate, reinsurance, and subrogation. These accomplished lawyers have earned this elevation based on their contributions to the firm and their practices. “We are delighted to elect these five lawyers to the partnership and promote five exceptional associates to counsel. Those included in these promotions represent the breadth of services and the deep bench that we have to offer at White and Williams,” said Patti Santelle, Managing Partner of the firm. “The election of our new partners and promotion of our new counsel is a reflection of their success and dedication as well as the continued health of the firm.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    Updated Covid-19 Standards In The Workplace

    August 23, 2021 —
    With California reopening, many Californians will be heading back to the workplace soon and are wondering if employers may require their employees to get vaccinated. According to the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), an employer may require employees to receive an FDA-approved vaccination against COVID-19 infection so long as the employer (a) does not discriminate against nor harass employees on the basis of a protected characteristic, (b) provides reasonable accommodations related to disability or sincerely-held religious beliefs, and (c) does not retaliate against anyone for engaging in protected activity.[1] On June 15, 2021, California lifted its mask mandate across the state. The California Department of Public Health (“CDPH”) updated its guidance for the use of face coverings stating that masks are no longer required for fully vaccinated individuals.[2] However, masks are still required on public transit, indoors in k-12 schools, childcare, other youth settings, healthcare settings, long-term care facilities, correctional and detention facilities, and homeless shelters.[3] Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wilke Fleury LLP

    Wow! A Mechanic’s Lien Bill That Helps Subcontractors and Suppliers

    March 05, 2015 —
    You know how I’ve stated on many occasions that the contract is king here in Virginia? You know how that included contractual provisions waiving mechanic’s lien rights for subcontractors and suppliers? You know how I thought that the General Assembly would not do anything to make mechanic’s liens in Virginia easier to prosecute? Well, it seems, at least for waivers of mechanic’s lien rights by subcontractors and suppliers (more about general contractors later) I was wrong. This General Assembly session, the Senate introduced a bill, that has now passed both houses as of February 25, 2015, that adds language to Virginia Code Section 43-3 that effectively nullifies any contractual waiver of lien rights prior to any work having been performed by any tier of construction company aside from general contractors. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Attorneys’ Fees Are Available in Arizona Eviction Actions

    December 19, 2018 —
    The Arizona Court of Appeals recently held that any successful plaintiff in a forcible detainer action (i.e., an eviction action) may recover an award of its attorneys’ fees and costs incurred at trial under A.R.S. § 12-1178(A). See Bank of New York v. Dodev, 1 CA-CV 17-0652 (Ct. App. Nov. 20, 2018). Prior to this decision, caselaw held that fees were only awardable in actions arising out of the termination of a residential lease. RREEF Mgmt. Co. v. Camex Prods., Inc., 190 Ariz. 75, 945 P.2d 386 (Ct. App. 1997). Changes to the statute, however, rendered the prior caselaw obsolete. Although the holding in Dodev is important, the facts of the case are truly astonishing…and somewhat depressing. The Facts In Dodev, Ivaylo Dodev (Dodev) defaulted on his home loan in 2008. He nevertheless “succeeded in remaining on the [p]roperty by filing numerous legal actions that delayed the foreclosure and subsequent trustee’s sale” at least through the date of the opinion—a ten (10) year period. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ben Reeves, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Reeves may be contacted at breeves@swlaw.com