BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio multi family housing building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio custom homes building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio architect expert witnessColumbus Ohio architectural engineering expert witnessColumbus Ohio architectural expert witnessColumbus Ohio soil failure expert witnessColumbus Ohio building envelope expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction expert witness consultantColumbus Ohio building 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


    Fifth Circuit: Primary Insurer Relieved of Duty to Defend Without Release of Liability of Insured

    Foreclosing Junior Lienholders and Recording A Lis Pendens

    House Passes Bill to Delay EPA Ozone Rule

    The Prompt Payment Act Obligation is Not Triggered When the Owner Holds Less Retention from the General Contractor

    Behavioral Science Meets Construction: Insights from Whistle Rewards

    Legislative Update – The CSLB’s Study Under SB465

    Washington Court of Appeals Divisions Clash Over Interpretations of the Statute of Repose

    Maria Latest Threat to Puerto Rico After $1 Billion Irma Hit

    The Dog Ate My Exclusion! – Georgia Federal Court: No Reformation to Add Pollution Exclusion

    More Fun with Indemnity and Construction Contracts!

    "Is the Defective Work Covered by Insurance?"

    This Company Wants to Cut Emissions to Zero in the Dirty Cement Business

    John Paulson’s $1 Billion Caribbean Empire Faces Betrayal

    Property Insurance Exclusion for Constant or Repeated Leakage of Water

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: J. PAUL ALLEN

    Indemnity Clauses That Conflict with Oregon Indemnity Statute Can Remain Partially Valid and Enforceable

    Hurry Up and Wait! Cal/OSHA Hits Pause on Emergency Temporary Standards for COVID-19 Prevention

    NAHB Speaks Out Against the Clean Water Act Expansion

    Changes to Va. Code Section 43-13: Another Arrow in a Subcontractor’s Quiver

    Endorsements Preclude Coverage for Alleged Faulty Workmanship

    Skanska Will Work With Florida on Barge-Caused Damage to Pensacola Bay Bridge

    Assignment of Insured's Policy Ineffective

    “Families First Coronavirus Response Act”: Emergency Paid Leave for Construction Employers with Fewer Than 500 Employees

    Excess Must Defend After Primary Improperly Refuses to Do So

    Appellate Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Order Compelling Appraisal

    Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review Regarding Necessary Parties in Lien Foreclosure Actions

    The Evolution of Construction Defect Trends at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    A Few Things You Might Consider Doing Instead of Binging on Netflix

    Miller Law Firm Helped HOA Recover for Construction Defects without Filing a Lawsuit

    The 2017 ASCDC and CDCMA Construction Defect Seminar and Holiday Reception

    An Uncharted Frontier: Nevada First State to Prohibit Defense-Within-Limits Provisions

    Everyone’s Working From Home Due to the Coronavirus – Is There Insurance Coverage for a Data Breach?

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

    Your “Independent Contractor” Clause Just Got a Little Less Relevant

    Court Finds That Limitation on Conditional Use Permit Results in Covered Property Damage Due to Loss of Use

    Colorado “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    4 Lessons Contractors Can Learn From The COVID-19 Crisis

    Wildfire Risk Harms California Home Values, San Francisco Fed Study Finds

    Patriarch Partners Decision Confirms Government Subpoenas May Constitute a “Claim” Under D&O Policy; Warns Policyholders to Think Broadly When Representing Facts and Circumstances to Insurers

    How Many New Home Starts are from Teardowns?

    Insurer Could Not Rely on Extrinsic Evidence to Circumvent Its Duty to Defend

    The Double-Breasted Dilemma

    Edinburg School Inspections Uncovered Structural Construction Defects

    New Plan Submitted for Explosive Demolition of Old Tappan Zee Bridge

    Electrical Subcontractor Sues over Termination

    Waive It Goodbye: Despite Evidence to the Contrary, Delaware Upholds an AIA Waiver of Subrogation Clause

    Bankrupt Canada Contractor Execs Ordered to Repay $26 Million

    Does a Broker Forfeit His or Her Commission for Technical Non-Compliance with Department of Real Estate Statutory Requirements?

    What to Expect From the New Self-Retracting Devices Standard

    A Court-Side Seat: Appeals and Agency Developments at the Close of 2020
    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

    Mortgage Battle Flares as U.K. Homebuying Loses Allure

    January 28, 2015 —
    U.K. banks, which spent six years repairing their balance sheets after the 2008 property crash, want to advance more credit to homebuyers. Borrowers aren’t as enthusiastic. Cheap funding costs and low default rates have made homebuyers attractive to lenders in recent years, boosting returns for companies such as Nationwide Building Society and Lloyds Banking Group Plc. (LLOY) Now, with demand for property cooling, they’re having to fight harder for business. Interest rates on the most popular mortgages fell to record lows in December, according to the Bank of England. Mr. Callanan may be contacted at ncallanan@bloomberg.net; Mr. Partington may be contacted at rpartington@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Neil Callanan and Richard Partington, Bloomberg

    Second Circuit Affirms Win for General Contractor on No Damages for Delay Provision

    September 02, 2024 —
    In NASDI, LLC v. Skanska Koch Inc. Kiewit Infrastructure Co. (JV), 2024 WL 1270188 (2d Cir. Mar. 26, 2024), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the District Court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing a subcontractor’s delay claim against a general contractor on a public project in New York state. The Court enforced a typical no-damages-for-delay provision to bar the subcontractor’s breach of contract claim. The no-damages-for-delay provision in the subcontract at issue provided:
    NO DAMAGE FOR DELAY. Except as otherwise provided …, Subcontractor agrees that it shall have no Claim against Contractor for any loss or damage it may sustain through delay, disruption, suspension, stoppage, interference, interruption, compression, or acceleration of Subcontractor’s Work (‘Delay Damages’) caused or directed by Contractor for any reason, and that all such Claims shall be fully compensated for by Contractor’s granting Subcontractor such time extensions as it is entitled to as a result of any of the foregoing.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bill Wilson, Robinson & Cole LLP
    Mr. Wilson may be contacted at wwilson@rc.com

    US Supreme Court Backs Panama Canal Owner in Dispute with Builders

    May 20, 2024 —
    A long-running legal battle over the concrete used in construction of the Panama Canal's third lane expansion locks has reached its end in U.S. courts—with the U.S. Supreme Court on March 26 upholding a $271.8-million award to the project owner, the Panama Canal Authority, against its contractor group, Grupo Unidos por el Canal. Reprinted courtesy of C.J. Schexnayder, Engineering News-Record Mr. Schexnayder may be contacted at schexnayderc@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    What You Need to Know About Notices of Completion, Cessation and Non-Responsibility

    June 30, 2016 —
    We talk a lot about contractors on the California Construction Law Blog. Owners? Not so much. So this one’s for you. Why are Notices of Completion, Cessation and Non-Responsibility Important to Owners? California recognizes three types of statutory notices on construction projects available to owners:
    • Notices of completion;
    • Notices of cessation; and
    • Notices of non-responsibility.
    • Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
      Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

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

      December 20, 2017 —
      Seattle Washington is experiencing a shortage of in-city condos. Of the 27,000 units of new housing being built in downtown Seattle, 94 percent will be rentals. As housing prices are rising in the US’s fastest-growing large city, the median home price is $660,000. Dean Jones of the Seattle Magazine reports on why consumers consider condos, but home developers don’t in his article “The Condo Conundrum: 10 Reasons Why There's a 'For Sale' Shortage in Seattle.” Reason 1, condominiums don’t always offer high returns and can be riskier for the home developer. Reason 2, the Washington State Condo Act “overprotects” buyers of condos with over-the-top warranties that makes everyone in the industry afraid to work with condos. Reason 3, the cost of condo building is increased because of the risk of defect litigation. Reason 4, condo presale buyers are not required to deposit a percentage to invest in a new development and before closing could decide to walk away. Reason 5, there is a lot of interest in apartment buildings from investment groups. Reason 6, investors whose goal is to own “trophy” assets in rising markets can’t wait the years it takes developers to plan and construct a new multistory community. Reason 7, since rent prices have risen 50 percent on average in the last 7 years, it’s profitable to be a landlord. Reason 8, the millennials who live and work in this tech oriented region prefer to rent because of living through the rise and fall of the housing market. Reason 9, the costs is rising each year to deliver new projects. Reason 10, high-rise zoning was adopted 2 years before the recession, so just as condo development was gearing up, apartment building took over. Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of

      Differing Site Conditions: What to Expect from the Court When You Encounter the Unexpected

      September 05, 2022 —
      [1]Seattle Tunnel Partners (“STP”), a joint venture of Dragados USA and Tutor Perini, entered into a $1.4 billion contract with the Washington State Department of Transportation (“WSDOT”) to replace the Highway 99 viaduct. In December 2013, a tunnel boring machine (“TBM”) bearing the moniker “Bertha,” then the largest TBM ever built, measuring 425 feet long and 57 feet in diameter, struck an underground pipe. Shortly after the impact, Bertha overheated and eventually could no longer make forward progress. A massive repair effort ensued causing a 2.5-year delay in reaching substantial completion. WSDOT sued STP for the delay, seeking liquidated damages of $57 million. In response, STP argued its delay was excusable because it was caused by Bertha’s impact with the pipe, and the steel well casing was a Differing Site Condition (DSC) undisclosed in the contract documents. STP asserted counterclaims against WSDOT, alleging breach of contract and seeking $300 million in damages. Ultimately, a jury found that the steel well casing on the pipe was not a DSC, foreclosing STP’s excusable delay defense and counterclaims, and resulting in a $57 million verdict, plus interest, in favor of WSDOT. Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of Margarita Kutsin, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight
      Ms. Kutsin may be contacted at margarita.kutsin@acslawyers.com

      After Breaching its Duty to Defend, Insurer Must Indemnify

      August 11, 2011 —

      In a brief decision analyzing Oregon law, the Ninth Circuit determined that once an insurer breaches its duty to defend, it must indemnify. See Desrosiers v. Hudson Speciality Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 12591 (9th CIr. June 21, 2011).

      The victim secured a judgment against the insured after he was beaten by another patron outside the insured's bar. Hudson Speciality Insurance refused to defend the insured, claiming the injury arose from an assault and battery, which excluded coverage.

      Read the full story…

      Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

      Applying Mighty Midgets, NY Court Awards Legal Expenses to Insureds Which Defeated Insurer’s Coverage Claims

      February 10, 2020 —
      Is an insured (or putative insured) entitled to recover its legal expenses if it is successful in coverage litigation? In some states, no. In many other states, yes – based on either a statute or the common law. In New York, an insured may recover such expenses if it was “cast in a defensive posture by the legal steps an insurer takes in an effort to free itself from its policy obligations,” and, while forced into that posture, the insured defeats the insurer’s claim. Mighty Midgets, Inc. v. Centennial Ins. Co., 389 N.E.2d 1080, 1085 (N.Y. 1979). As a corollary to that rule, the insured is not entitled to its expenses “in an affirmative action brought by [the insured] to settle its rights. . . .” Id. at 1085. Earlier this week, the New York federal court in United Specialty Ins. Co. v. Lux Maint. & Ren. Corp., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 201805 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 20, 2019) became the latest to apply the Mighty Midgets rule, awarding several insureds their legal expenses after defeating the insurer’s declaratory judgment action. In Lux, the CGL insurer of a façade-renovation contractor sued the contractor (its named insured) and several owners of a hospital (putative additional insureds) at which the façade-renovation work took place, claiming that the insurer did not owe a defense or indemnity to any of those companies in connection with an underlying bodily injury action brought by an employee of the contractor who was injured while performing the work. The insurer and the putative additional insureds filed cross-motions for summary judgment on the coverage issues, with the putative additional insureds also seeking to recover their legal expenses for defending against the insurer’s action. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York concluded that, based on the contractor’s agreement to provide coverage for the hospital owners, and a comparison between the underlying allegations and the policy, the insurer owed the hospital owners coverage as additional insureds to the contractor’s policy; the court also concluded that the insurer owed coverage for the contractor’s contractual defense and indemnity obligations to the hospital owners. After concluding that the insurer’s claim that it did not owe coverage lacked merit, the court turned to the additional insureds’ request for their legal expenses. The court examined the “well settled” rule under New York law “that an insured cannot recover his legal expenditure in a dispute with an insurer over coverage, even if the insurer loses and is obligated to provide coverage,” but also New York’s “limited exception” to that rule, “under which an insured who is ‘cast in a defensive posture by the legal steps an insurer takes in an effort to free itself from its policy obligations, and who prevails on the merits, may recover attorneys’ fees incurred in defending against the insurer’s action.’ ” Lux, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 201805, at *18 (quoting Mighty Midgets, 389 N.E.2d at 1085). Reprinted courtesy of Anthony L. Miscioscia, White and Williams and Timothy A. Carroll, White and Williams Mr. Miscioscia may be contacted at misciosciaa@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Carroll may be contacted at carrollt@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of