BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio production housing building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio expert witness concrete failureColumbus Ohio construction expertsColumbus Ohio construction scheduling expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction expert testimonyColumbus Ohio structural concrete expertColumbus Ohio construction project management expert witnessColumbus 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


    Failing to Pay Prevailing Wages May Have Just Cost You More Than You Thought

    Owners Should Serve Request for Sworn Statement of Account on Lienor

    BWB&O ranks as a 2025 Best Law Firm by Best Lawyers®

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Stuck on You”

    City Drops Impact Fees to Encourage Commercial Development

    Colorado Legislature Kills SB 20-138 – A Bill to Extend Colorado’s Statute of Repose

    Courts Generally Favor the Enforcement of Arbitration Provisions

    Commentary: How to Limit COVID-19 Related Legal Claims

    Fire Raging North of Los Angeles Is Getting Fuel From Dry Winds

    New Jersey Traffic Circle to be Eliminated after 12 Years of Discussion

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increase at Slower Pace

    Firm Claims Construction Defects in Hawaiian Homes

    Jason Poore Receives 2018 Joseph H. Foster Young Lawyer Award

    Employee Handbooks—Your First Line of Defense

    Charlotte, NC Homebuilder Accused of Bilking Money from Buyers

    The Argument for Solar Power

    Fix for Settling Millennium Tower May Start This Fall

    Big Changes and Trends in the Real Estate Industry

    Another (Insurer) Bites The Dust: Virginia District Court Rejects Narrow Reading of Pollution Exclusion

    Nobody Knows What Lies Beneath New York City

    California Court of Appeal Clarifies Intent of Faulty Workmanship Exclusions

    Condo Collapse Spurs Hometown House Member to Demand U.S. Rules

    Home Prices on the Rise

    Strategy for Enforcement of Dispute Resolution Rights

    South Carolina Supreme Court Requires Transparency by Rejecting an Insurer’s “Cut-and-Paste” Reservation of Rights

    Florida Extends Filing Time for Claims Subject to the Statute of Repose

    Cincinnati Goes Green

    New ANSI Requirements for Fireplace Screens

    California Supreme Court Clarifies Deadline to File Anti-SLAPP Motions in Light of Amended Pleadings

    No Prejudicial Error in Refusing to Give Jury Instruction on Predominant Cause

    Environmental Roundup – May 2019

    Project Completion Determines Mechanics Lien Recording Deadline

    Building Safety Month Just Around the Corner

    KF-103 v. American Family Mutual Insurance: Tenth Circuit Upholds the “Complaint Rule”

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (09/12/23) – Airbnb’s Future in New York City, MGM Resorts Suffer Cybersecurity Incident, and Insurance Costs Hitting Commercial Real Estate

    Court of Appeal Shines Light on Collusive Settlement Agreements

    Ohio: Are Construction Defects Covered in Insurance Policies?

    ASCE Releases New Report on Benefits and Burdens of Infrastructure Investment in Disadvantaged Communities

    Limitations: There is a Point of No Return

    Latin America’s Biggest Corporate Crime Gets a Worthy Epic

    L.A.’s Modest Solution to the ‘Missing Middle’ Housing Problem

    ASCE Report Calls for Sweeping Changes to Texas Grid Infrastructure

    Designers “Airpocalyspe” Creations

    Occurrence-Based Insurance Policies and Claims-Made Insurance Policies – There’s a Crucial Difference

    California Restricts Principles of “General” Personal Jurisdiction

    Seattle Crane Strike Heads Into Labor Day Weekend After Some Contractors Sign Agreements

    2023 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    The Death of Retail and Legal Issues

    Arkansas Federal Court Fans the Product Liability Flames Utilizing the Malfunction Theory

    Connecticut Crumbling Concrete Cases Not Covered Under "Collapse" Provision in Homeowner's Policy
    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. Leveraging 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

    China Construction Bank Sued in US Over Reinsurance Fraud Losses

    June 21, 2024 —
    China Construction Bank Corp., the nation’s third-largest commercial lender, was accused in a US lawsuit of enabling a massive fraud in the reinsurance industry that left companies with “monumental losses” and sinking stock prices. The bank allowed employees to conspire with Israeli insurance startup Vesttoo Ltd. to sell reinsurance policies that weren’t real, according to a complaint filed late Thursday by the Porch Group in Manhattan federal court. Vesttoo filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in August after it was accused of using some $2 billion of fraudulent letters of credit. The Porch Group said that its unit Homeowners of America Insurance Co. lost tens of millions of dollars when its purported $300 million letter of credit proved worthless. “Not only did HOA incur colossal losses, but news of its exposure to the fraud perpetrated by Vesttoo and CCB shocked the market and imposed severe losses on Porch Group’s shareholders as its stock price plummeted,” according to the suit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert Burnson, Bloomberg

    Underpowered AC Not a Construction Defect

    November 07, 2012 —
    After buying a home in Louisiana, Mike Gines determined that the home’s air conditioning unit was insufficient to maintain an appropriate temperature. He contacted the home builder, D.R. Horton, Inc., which worked with the air conditioning installer, Reliant Heating & Air Conditioning, in order to repair the system. When the problems persisted, Gines filed a class action petition against Horton and Reliant in state court. Horton and Reliant moved the case to the federal courts, whereupon Gines asserted the defendants were in violation of the Louisiana New Home Warranty Act (NHWA). Horton stated that the claim under the NHWA was invalid, because Gines had not alleged actual physical damage to his home. The district court granted Horton’s motion to dismiss. Gines sought a reversal from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and sought to have two questions of state law addressed by the Louisiana Supreme Court. The district court ruled that the NHWA was the “sole remedy under Louisiana law for a purchaser of a new home with construction defects. Gines argued that court erred in this, but also conceded that this was the conclusion of the Louisiana Supreme Court. Further, Gines argued that a provision in the NHWA that allows the inclusion of construction defects that do not cause damage was satisfied by paragraph 6 of the contract. The court noted that Gines did not attach a copy of the contract to either the original or amended complaint, and so the court does not need to address these claims. However, the court cautioned that if a copy had been included, they still would have rejected the claim, as “the cited language does not indicate a waiver of the physical damage requirement.” They also note that “paragraph 13 of the contract shows that Gines was aware to the absence of any such waiver in the contract.” The court concludes that “the moral of this story is that in order to avoid the harsh result that has obtained here, the buyer of a newly constructed home in Louisiana should seek to obtain in the contract of sale an express waiver of the actual damage requirement of the NHWA.” The appeals court affirmed the decision of the circuit court and denied the application to certify questions to the Louisiana Supreme Court. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractual Fee-Shifting in Litigation: Who Pays the Price?

    December 31, 2024 —
    When disputes on a construction project escalate to litigation, general contractors may find themselves entangled in a costly and time-consuming legal battle. One important concept to understand is contractual fee-shifting under a “prevailing party” provision, which can significantly impact damages recovered in litigation. The general rule, known as the “American Rule,” requires each party to pay its own legal costs, including attorney’s fees, expert witness expenses, and other court-related costs. This differs from other legal systems where the losing party typically pays the winning party’s fees. One exception to the American Rule is contractual fee-shifting, specifically through “prevailing party” provisions, which allows for the award of attorney’s fees and costs when explicitly provided for in a contract. This article explores this exception to the American Rule, delves into the challenges posed by prevailing party provisions, and shares tips to consider for drafting these clauses to improve clarity and minimize uncertainty in the face of litigation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Caitlin Kicklighter, Jones Walker LLP
    Ms. Kicklighter may be contacted at ckicklighter@joneswalker.com

    Boston Building Boom Seems Sustainable

    November 20, 2013 —
    According to the analytics and advisory firm PPR, the Boston-area market is “ungodly tight.” So even with all the building planned for the area, it’s likely to make the market normal and not lead to a glut. PPR predicts that the building boom may cool off in 2016, with the next mayoral administration. Some of the condo real estate has been fetching multi-million prices. Sue Hawkes, president and CEO of The Collaborative Cos. Points out that there are about 1,500 units in Boston priced in excess of $2 million. She wonders about future buyers in the luxury market. “Where are all these people going to come from?” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Congratulations to Nicole Whyte, Keith Bremer, John Toohey, and Tyler Offenhauser for Being Recognized as 2022 Super Lawyers!

    February 07, 2022 —
    BWB&O is proud to announce that Partners Nicole Whyte, Keith Bremer, John Toohey, and Tyler Offenhauser have been named as 2022 Southern California’s Super Lawyers! We are also honored to share that Nicole Whyte is included in two of the top lists, Top 50 Women Lawyers in Southern California and Top 50 Lawyers in Orange County! Super Lawyers is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The patented selection process includes independent research, peer nominations, and peer evaluations. Each candidate is evaluated on 12 indicators of peer recognition and professional achievement. During the final selection process, only lawyers in the top 5% of the total lawyers in the state are selected to the Super Lawyers list. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Connecticut Supreme Court to Review Several Issues in Asbestos Coverage Case

    November 08, 2017 —
    On October 18, 2017, in R.T. Vanderbilt Company v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, the Connecticut Supreme Court certified four issues for appeal, which relate to trigger, allocation, pollution exclusions, and the occupational disease exclusion in the context of asbestos bodily injury claims. This post identifies the issues the Connecticut Supreme Court will decide on appeal and sets forth the Appellate Court’s ruling on each issue. Issue 1: Whether a “continuous trigger” theory of coverage applies to asbestos-related disease claims and whether expert medical testimony on the timing of injury should be precluded The Appellate Court applied a continuous trigger, and found that the trial court properly excluded testimony from medical experts the insurers had proffered to prove that the asbestos disease process did not support a continuous trigger. Reprinted courtesy of Ciaran Way, White and Williams LLP and Robert Walsh, White and Williams LLP Ms. Way may be contacted at wayc@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Walsh may be contacted at walshr@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Online Meetings & Privacy in Today’s WFH Environment

    May 25, 2020 —
    As a result of the COVID-19 (commonly referred to as the Coronavirus) pandemic, remote working arrangements have become the new norm. For those working from home (WFH), the software program “Zoom Meetings,” has found a substantial increase in demand and popularity as a means to facilitate meetings online rather than meeting in person. There are also a number of other similar platforms available for online meetings such as Skype and Teams (from Microsoft), Go to Meeting (from LogMeIn) and WebEx Meetings (Cisco). Best Practices for Businesses - Privacy and Security Protocols With these platforms becoming a necessity for businesses, there are a number of best practices that should be considered to safely conduct online meetings and teleconferences as well as protect information. These include the following:
    1. Upgrade to the most recent version of the program or application;
    2. Use passwords, especially with recurring meetings;
    3. Protect all passwords as well as personal meeting identifiers used in Zoom and other platforms;
    4. Carefully moderate meetings and ask meeting attendees to identify themselves at the beginning of a meeting;
    5. Consider allowing only authenticated users to participate in meetings;
    6. Use the Waiting Rooms feature in Zoom; and
    7. Enable features available only to meeting hosts.
    Reprinted courtesy of Heather Whitehead, Newmeyer Dillion and Joshua Anderson, Newmeyer Dillion Ms. Whitehead may be contacted at heather.whitehead@ndlf.com Mr. Anderson may be contacted at joshua.anderson@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer Granted Summary Judgment on Denial of Construction Defect Claim

    January 27, 2020 —
    The court granted the insurer's motion for summary judgment, confirming there was no duty to defend or indemnify a construction defect claim against the insured. Fontaine Bros. v. Acadia Ins. Co., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148056 (D. Mass. Aug. 29, 2019). The City of Worcester contracted with Fontaine Brothers, Inc. to install a new ice refrigeration system at the City's indoor ice rink. After construction, the condensers in two chiller units eroded and stopped operating. The City sued Fontaine for the costs of leasing temporary chillers and installing new ones. The City alleged that Fontaine installed condensers with carbon steel tubes instead of contractually required stainless stell tubes.Further, Fontaine and its subcontractors did not adequately maintain the condensers, in breach of the contract. Fontaine's insurer, Acadia Insurance Company, denied coverage. Fontaine sued Acadia. The court noted that the City's complaint plainly alleged faulty workmanship by Fontaine. However, the City's complaint did not allege that Fontaine intended the condensers to corrode and left open the possibility that Fontaine was unaware of any potential problem or did not foresee the corrosion likely to result from the use of carbon steel components or the maintenance work being done by its subcontractor. Therefore, the Cit's complaint did not foreclose the possibility that the corrosion resulting from Fontaine's alleged faulty workmanship and maintenance might be shown to be an unforeseen or unintended consequence of reckless or negligent conduct. Accordingly, it was possible that there was an occurrence under the policy language. 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