BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio production housing building expert Columbus Ohio landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio multi family housing building expert Columbus Ohio custom homes building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio construction scheduling expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction expert witnessColumbus Ohio soil failure expert witnessColumbus Ohio architect expert witnessColumbus Ohio civil engineer expert witnessColumbus Ohio expert witness commercial buildingsColumbus Ohio expert witness roofing
    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


    U.S. Home Lending Set to Bounce Back in 2015 After Slump

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Another Setback for the New Staten Island Courthouse

    Insurance Coverage for COVID-19? Two N.J. Courts Allow Litigation to Proceed

    Quick Note: Do Your Homework When it Comes to Selecting Your Arbitrator

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “A Fastball Right to the Bean!”

    New York Team Secures Appellate Win on Behalf of National Home Improvement Chain

    Washington State May Allow Common Negligence Claims against Construction Professionals

    Chicago Criticized for Not Maintaining Elevator Inspections

    Mind Over Matter: Court Finds Expert Opinion Based on NFPA 921 Reliable Despite Absence of Physical Testing

    Environmental Regulatory Provisions Embedded in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    The Road to Hell is Paved with Good Intentions: A.B. 1701’s Requirement that General Contractors Pay Subcontractor Employee Wages Will Do More Harm Than Good

    Design-Build Contracting: Is the Shine Off the Apple?

    Construction of New U.S. Homes Declines on Plunge in South

    Construction Halted in Wisconsin Due to Alleged Bid Issues

    Builders Arrested after Building Collapses in India

    South African Building Industry in Line for More State Support

    Firm Sued for Stopping Construction in Indiana Wants Case Tried in Germany

    Policy Lanuage Expressly Prohibits Replacement of Undamaged Material to Match Damaged Material

    Gibbs Giden is Pleased to Announce Four New Partners and Two New Associates

    ACS Recognized by Construction Executive Magazine in the Top 50 Construction Law Firms of 2021

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    Lump Sum Subcontract? Perhaps Not.

    What Do I Do With This Stuff? Dealing With Abandoned Property After Foreclosure

    Real Estate Trends: Looking Ahead to 2021

    Montana Federal Court Upholds Application of Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause

    Engineer and CNA Dispute Claim Over Dual 2014 Bridge Failures

    Condo Association Settles with Pulte Homes over Construction Defect Claims

    Unwrapped Pipes Lead to Flooding and Construction Defect Lawsuit

    How To Lock Disputes Out Of Your Project In Construction

    Remembering Joseph H. Foster

    Brazil Builder Bondholders Burned by Bribery Allegations

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Denies Bad Faith Claim in HO Policy Dispute

    An Increase of US Metro Areas’ with Normal Housing & Economic Health

    No Coverage for Hurricane Sandy Damage

    Do Hurricane-Prone Coastal States Need to Update their Building Codes?

    Citigroup Pays Record $697 Million for Hong Kong Office Tower

    Court of Appeal: Privette Doctrine Does Not Apply to Landlord-Tenant Relationships

    Lorelie S. Masters Nominated for Best in Insurance & Reinsurance for the Women in Business Law Awards 2021

    Alleged Serious Defects at Hanford Nuclear Waste Treatment Plant

    Five Issues to Consider in Government Contracting (Or Any Contracting!)

    From Both Sides Now: Looking at Contracts Through a Post-Pandemic Lens

    Atlantic City Faces Downward Spiral With Revel’s Demise

    To Ease Housing Crunch, Theme Parks Are Becoming Homebuilders

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 6: Ensuring Availability of Insurance and State Regulations

    Insured's Remand of Bad Faith Action Granted

    ASCE Statement on Senate Passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/06/22

    Sometimes it Depends on “Whose” Hand is in the Cookie Jar

    Nader Eghtesad v. State Farm General Insurance Company
    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

    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

    Auburn Woods Homeowners Association v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    January 11, 2021 —
    In Auburn Woods HOA v. State Farm Gen. Ins. Co., 56 Cal.App.5th 717 (October 28,2020) (certified for partial publication), the California Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s entry of judgment in favor of State Farm General Insurance Company (“State Farm”) regarding a lawsuit for breach of contract and bad faith brought by Auburn Woods Homeowners Association (“HOA”) and property manager, Frei Real Estate Services (“FRES”) against State Farm and the HOA’s broker, Frank Lewis. The parties’ dispute arose out of the tender of two different lawsuits filed against the HOA and FRES by Marva Beadle (“Beadle”). The first lawsuit was filed by Beadle as the owner of a condominium unit against the HOA and FRES for declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and an accounting related to amounts allegedly owed by Beadle to the HOA as association fees. The second lawsuit filed by Beadle was for the purpose of setting aside a foreclosure sale, cancelling the trustee’s deed and quieting title, and for an accounting and injunctive relief against an unlawful detainer action filed by Sutter Group, LP against Beadle. The complaint filed in the second lawsuit alleged that Allied Trustee Services caused Beadle’s property to be sold at auction and that Sutter Capital Group, LP purchased the unit and obtained a trustee’s deed upon sale. Beadle claimed the assessments against her were improper and the trustee’s deed upon sale was wrongfully executed. Beadle sought an order restoring possession of her unit and damages. The HOA and FRES tendered both lawsuits to State Farm. As respects the first lawsuit, State Farm denied coverage of the lawsuit based on the absence of alleged “damages” covered by the policy issued to the HOA affording liability and directors and officers (“D&O”) coverages. State Farm agreed to defend the HOA under the D&O coverage in the second lawsuit. However, State Farm denied coverage of FRES in both lawsuits as it did not qualify as an insured under the State Farm policy issued to the HOA. Subsequently, the HOA and FRES filed an action against State Farm arguing that a duty to defend was triggered under its policy for the first lawsuit and a duty to defend FRES was also owed under the D&O policy for the second lawsuit. After a bench trial, the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of State Farm based on the failure of the first lawsuit to allege damages covered by the State Farm policy under the liability and D&O coverages afforded by the policy. As respects the second lawsuit, the trial court held that FRES did not qualify as an insured and State Farm did not act in bad faith by refusing to pay the HOA’s alleged defense costs in the second lawsuit before it agreed to defend the HOA against such lawsuit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Velladao, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Velladao may be contacted at Michael.Velladao@lewisbrisbois.com

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 38 White and Williams Lawyers

    September 13, 2021 —
    White and Williams is proud to announce that 30 lawyers were recognized in the 2022 edition of The Best Lawyers in America® 2022 and eight were recognized as “Ones to Watch.” Inclusion in Best Lawyers® is based entirely on peer-review. The methodology is designed to capture, as accurately as possible, the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical area and legal practice area. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Georgia Supreme Court Addresses Anti-Indemnity Statute

    October 21, 2019 —
    In prior blog posts, we addressed Georgia’s anti-indemnity statute. One of the posts addressed the statute in the context of an electric utility easement near an airport. That case made its way to the Supreme Court Georgia, which provided some additional clarity to the statute. Milliken & Co. v. Georgia Power Co., — Ga. –, 829 S.E.2d 111 (2019). When a plane crashed and several passengers and crew died or were injured, their representatives sued several defendants, including a nearby plant owner, Milliken & Company (“Milliken”), based on claims that transmission lines on Milliken’s property were too close to the runways, were too high, and encroached on the airport easements. Milliken cross claimed against Georgia Power Company (“GPC”). Milliken’s claim was based on an easement it granted to GPC, which required GPC to indemnify it for any claims arising out of GPC’s construction or maintenance of the transmission lines. On appeal, the Supreme Court considered whether the clause was unenforceable under O.C.G.A. § 13-8-2(b). In general, “a party may contract away liability to the other party for the consequences of his own negligence without contravening public policy, except when such agreement it prohibited by statute.” Id. at 113 citing Lanier at McEver v. Planners & Eng’rs Collaborative, 284 Ga. 204, 205 (2008). As one such statute, O.C.G.A. § 13-8-2(b) applies when an indemnification provision (i) “relates in some way to a contract for construction, alteration, repair, or maintenance of certain property” and (ii) “promises to indemnify a party for damages arising from that own party’s sole negligence.” Id. at 114 (internal punctuation omitted). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook, Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    CC&Rs Not the Place for Arbitration Agreement, Court Rules

    May 24, 2011 —

    In January, the California Court of Appeals ruled that an arbitration clause inserted in a development’s CC&Rs by the developer could not be enforced. The case, Villa Vicenza Homeowners Association v. Noble Court Development, involved a case in which, according to the opinion, “following the first sale Nobel controlled the board of directors of the Association and because the initial condominium buyers noticed defects in common areas and common facilities and did not believe Nobel had provided a reserve fund sufficient to repair the defects, the condominium owners brought a derivative action on behalf of the Association against Nobel.”

    The court concluded, “The use of CC&R's as a means of providing contractual rights to parties with no interest in or responsibility for a common interest development is also problematic from the standpoint of determining what if any consideration would support such third-party agreements. By their terms the CC&R's bind all successors, even those with whom a third party such as Nobel has never had any contractual relationship and to whom Nobel has not provided any consideration.” The court determined that “the trial court did not err in denying Nobel's motion to compel arbitration.”

    Read the court’s decision

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

    Tender the Defense of a Lawsuit to your Liability Carrier

    January 19, 2017 —
    Sometimes you come across a head scratcher. This would be a decision that does not seem to make a whole lot of sense. For instance, if you are sued and you maintain liability insurance that would potentially provide you a defense and indemnification, not notifying your insurance carrier is a head scratcher. You pay substantial dollars towards the premium of that policy. So, not then notifying your carrier about a lawsuit is a head scratcher, and I mean a head scratcher!! If you are sued, not only should the carrier be notified, but the defense of that lawsuit should be tendered to your liability carrier. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Umbrella Policy Must Drop Down to Assist with Defense

    May 12, 2016 —
    The court determined that an umbrella carrier was obligated to assist the general liability insurer in defending the insured. Am. States Ins. Co. v. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, 2016 U.S. Dist LEXIS 38128 (E.D. Cal. March 23, 2016). Sierra Pacific Industries obtained rights to timber harvesting operation on a parcel of land in northern California. Sierra hired Howell's Forest Harvesting to perform certain timber harvest operations under the terms of a logging agreement. The logging agreement required Howell to obtain a CGL policy and to name Sierra as an additional insured. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Building in the Age of Technology: Improving Profitability and Jobsite Safety

    June 10, 2019 —
    New virtual design and construction (VDC) technologies are quickly shifting how the AEC industry is designing, documenting and building. From the use of new software, apps and laser scanners, to the deployment of drones and robots, many early adopters are benefitting from fully integrating these solutions into their workflows. Virtual and Augmented Reality In an industry where collaboration is becoming increasingly important, regardless of the firm size, VR is enabling stakeholders to “see” and “walk” through a building before ground is broken. In other words, teams can foresee issues, ask questions and provide feedback in the preconstruction phase. The inclusion of AR and VR in the daily workflows of AEC firms signifies expedited decision-making, reduced rework and real-time collaboration, which in turn translates to a reduction of unexpected costs. Reprinted courtesy of Maria Laguarda-Mallo, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Ms. Laguarda-Mayllo may be contacted at maria.laguarda-mallo@viatechnik.com