BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Columbus Ohio institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio production housing building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio hospital construction expert witnessColumbus Ohio building code expert witnessColumbus Ohio structural engineering expert witnessesColumbus Ohio expert witness commercial buildingsColumbus Ohio engineering expert witnessColumbus Ohio testifying construction expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction code 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


    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (4/17/24) – Travel & Tourism Reach All-Time High, President Biden Emphasizes Housing in SOTU Address, and State Transportation Projects Under Scrutiny

    Teaching An Old Dog New Tricks: The Spearin Doctrine and Design-Build Projects

    Edinburg School Inspections Uncovered Structural Construction Defects

    What’s in a Name? Trademarks and Construction

    Appeals Court Finds Manuscript Additional Insured Endorsements Ambiguous Regarding Completed Operations Coverage for Additional Insured

    Why Metro Atlanta Is the Poster Child for the US Housing Crisis

    Four Dead After Crane Collapses at Google’s Seattle Campus

    Prison Time and Restitution for Construction Fraud

    WA Supreme Court Allows Property Owner to Sue Engineering Firm for Lost Profits

    How Does Weather Impact a Foundation?

    Colorado HB 13-1090: Concerning Payment of Amounts Due Under a Construction Agreement

    More on the VCPA and Construction

    Impact of Lis Pendens on Unrecorded Interests / Liens

    Unjust Enrichment and Express Contract Don’t Mix

    California Fears El Nino's Dark Side Will Bring More Trouble

    James R. Lynch Appointed to the Washington State Capital Project Review Committee

    Do We Really Want Courts Deciding if Our Construction Contracts are Fair?

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions

    It’s Too Late, Lloyd’s: New York Federal Court Finds Insurer Waived Late Notice Defense

    Arctic Fires Are Melting Permafrost That Keeps Carbon Underground

    The Oregon Tort Claims Act (“OTCA”) Applies When a Duty Arises from Statute or Common Law and is Independent from The Terms of a Specific Contract. (OR)

    Conflicting Exclusions Result in Duty to Defend

    Construction Defect Not a RICO Case, Says Court

    The Housing Market Is Softening, But Home Depot and Lowe's Are Crushing It

    The Reptile Theory in Practice

    Lewis Brisbois’ Houston Office Selected as a 2020 Top Workplace by the Houston Chronicle

    COVID-19 Is Not Direct Physical Loss Or Damage

    Halliburton to Pay $1.1 Billion to Settle Spill Lawsuits

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

    Window Installer's Alleged Faulty Workmanship On Many Projects Constitutes Multiple Occurrences

    House Passes $25B Water Resources Development Bill

    Insurance Measures Passed by 2015 Hawaii Legislature

    'Perfect Storm' Caused Fractures at San Francisco Transit Hub

    Trump Administration Announces New Eviction Moratorium

    Texas Law Bars Coverage under Homeowner’s Policy for Mold Damage

    Recent Third Circuit OSHA Decision Sounds Alarm for Employers and Their Officers

    California Supreme Court Finds Negligent Supervision Claim Alleges An Occurrence

    Notice and Claims Provisions In Contracts Matter…A Lot

    M&A Representation and Warranty Insurance Considerations in the Wake of the Coronavirus Pandemic

    Colorado’s Workers’ Compensation Act and the Construction Industry

    Force Majeure Recommendations

    Vaccine Mandate Confusion Continues – CMS Vaccine Mandate Restored in Some (But Not All) US States

    SB 721 – California Multi-Family Buildings New Require Inspections of “EEEs”

    Court Affirms Duty to Defend Additional Insured Contractor

    California Supreme Court Rights the “Occurrence” Ship: Unintended Harm Resulting from Intentional Conduct Triggers Coverage Under Liability Insurance Policy

    Federal Government May Go to Different Green Building Standard

    The NAR asks FAA to Amend their Drone Rules for Real Estate Use

    Carroll Brock of Larchmont Homes Dies at Age 88

    Three Firm Members Are Top 100 Super Lawyers & Ten Are Recognized As Super Lawyers Or Rising Stars In 2018

    Property Damage to Insured's Own Work is Not Covered
    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

    A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

    April 01, 2015 —
    Remember all of my posts about how fraud and contract claims don’t usually play well in litigation? Well, as always with the law, there are exceptions. For instance, a well plead Virginia Consumer Protection Act claim will survive a dismissal challenge. A recent opinion out of the Alexandria division of the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia sets out another exception, namely so called fraudulent inducement. In XL Specialty Ins. Co. v. Truland et al, the Court considered the question of whether both a tort and contract claim can coexist in the same lawsuit when the tort claim is based upon the information provided to the plaintiff when that information proves false. As the courts of Virginia have held for years, only certain information and statements made pre-contract can be the basis for a fraud claim in the face of a contractual duty to perform. One type of statement that is not properly the subject of a fraud in the inducement type claim is sales talk or opinion. Such sales talk (for example claiming that your company is the best for the job) is not the subject of a fraud claim because it is not meant to be relied upon and that such talk is an opinion about future performance, not a false statement of present fact or intent. 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

    1 De Haro: A Case Study on Successful Cross-Laminated Timber Design and Construction in San Francisco

    November 06, 2023 —
    At the intersection of San Francisco’s SOMA, Potrero Hill and Showplace Square districts, a first-of-its-kind building offers an example of the potential widespread success of mass timber construction in the United States. 1 De Haro, a 134,000-square-foot, 4-story office and light industrial project built by Bay Area developer SKS Partners is not only the first cross-laminated timber (CLT) building in the San Francisco, it is also the first multistory mass timber building of its type to be fully executed in California and the first CLT project in the United States to be delivered via railways. We recently sat down with Yvonne Fisher and Lee Ishida of SKS to discuss the unique design process, marketing success and overall industry buzz surrounding one of their latest projects. Reprinted courtesy of Cait Horner, Pillsbury, Adam J. Weaver, Pillsbury and Allan C. Van Vliet, Pillsbury Ms. Horner may be contacted at cait.horner@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Weaver may be contacted at adam.weaver@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Van Vliet may be contacted at allan.vanvliet@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    SEC Approves New Securitization Risk Retention Rule with Broad Exception for Qualified Residential Mortgages

    November 26, 2014 —
    The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and five other federal agencies recently approved a joint rule (the “Risk Retention Rule”) mandating that sponsors of certain types of securitizations retain a minimum level of credit risk exposure in those transactions and prohibiting such sponsors from transferring or hedging against that retained credit risk.[i]The final Risk Retention Rule will be effective one year after its publication in the Federal Register for securitizations of residential mortgages, and two years after publication for securitizations of all other asset types. The SEC vote was 3-2, with sharp dissents from Commissioners Gallagher and Piwowar concluding that the adopting agencies had missed a prime opportunity to rein in risky mortgage lending practices that had precipitated the 2008 financial crisis. Background Following the meltdown of the securitization markets in 2007 (particularly subprime residential mortgage-backed securities), and the resulting global financial crisis, the Dodd-Frank Act mandated that the U.S. federal banking, securities and housing agencies adopt and implement rules to require sponsors of most new securitizations to retain not less than five percent of the credit risk of any assets that the securitizer, through the issuance of an asset-backed security, transfers, sells or conveys to a third party. It was thought that requiring securitization sponsors to keep “skin in the game” would align the interests of the sponsors with the interests of investors and thereby incentivize the sponsors to ensure the quality of the assets underlying the securitization through appropriate due diligence and underwriting procedures when selecting assets for securitization. Although the Dodd-Frank Act explicitly exempted securitizations of certain types of mortgage loans called “qualified residential mortgages” (or “QRMs”) from this risk retention requirement, it invited the rulemaking agencies to define that key term, provided that their definition could be no broader than the definition of “qualified mortgage”adopted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) pursuant to the Truth in Lending Act.[ii] In considering how to define QRM, the rulemaking agencies were directed by the Dodd-Frank Act to take into consideration “underwriting and product features that historical loan performance data indicate result in a lower risk of default.”[iii] Reprinted courtesy of Neil P. Casey, White and Williams LLP and Lori S. Smith, White and Williams LLP Mr. Casey may be contacted at caseyn@whiteandwilliams.com; Ms. Smith may be contacted at smithl@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Supreme Court Finds Vertical Exhaustion Applies to First-Level Excess Policies

    August 26, 2024 —
    Addressing issues left open in its seminal decision in Montrose, the California Supreme Court found that the language in the first-level excess policies meant that the insured could access the policies upon exhaustion of the directly underlying policies purchased for the same policy period. Truck Ins. Exchange v. Kaiser Cement & Gypsum Corp., 2024 Cal. LEXIS 3271 (Cal. June 17, 2024). From 1944 through the 1970's, Kaiser manufactured asbestos-containing products at numerous different facilities. By 2004, more than 24,000 claimants had filed product liability claims against Kaiser alleging that they had suffered bodily injury as a result of exposure to Kaiser's asbestos products. Kaiser tendered these claims to Truck, one of several primary insurers that had issued CGL policies to Kaiser. In 2001, Truck initiated this coverage action to determine its indemnity and defense obligations to Kaiser. Truck later amended its complaint to add a cause of action for contribution against several of Kaiser's excess insurers. The issue presently before the court was whether Truck was entitled to contribution from various coinsurers that issued first-level excess policies to Kaiser during the period in question. 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

    Does the Implied Warranty of Habitability Extend to Subsequent Purchasers? Depends on the State

    October 08, 2014 —
    Attorneys for Traub Liberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP (in JD Supra Business Advisor), discussed how state courts have come to different conclusions as to “whether a subsequent purchaser of a previously inhabited residence can recover contract damages from a builder or general contractor for breach of the implied warranty of habitability.” Recently, a Pennsylvania “sided with the builder, holding that the implied warranty of habitability was grounded in contract law. Thus, the Court reasoned that an action for breach of the implied warranty of habitability required a showing of contractual privity between the parties. Because there was no contractual privity between the Conways and the builder, the Conways could not pursue an action against the builder based on a breach of the implied warranty of habitability.” However, other state courts have made other conclusions. “Iowa permits an action for breach of the implied warranty of workmanlike construction by subsequent purchasers and does not require a showing of contractual privity. Rhode Island also does not require contractual privity, but limits liability to latent defects discovered within 10 years of construction.” Vermont and Connecticut, however, require contract privity. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Federal Court Finds a Breach of Contract Exclusion in a CGL Policy Bars All Coverage for a Construction Defect Action

    July 19, 2021 —
    The Southern District of California published a decision in May 2021 in Associated Industries Ins. Co. v. Mt. Hawley Ins. Co., 2021 WL 1921016 (S.D. Cal. 5/12/21) concerning the scope of a breach of contract exclusion in a general liability insurance policy as applied to a construction defect action. The suit was filed by Associated Industries Insurance Company against Mt. Hawley Insurance Company for equitable contribution for amounts spent to defend and indemnify the parties co-insured, referred to as JGCI in the decision. JGCI agreed to build a building for a third party pursuant to a written construction contract. The City of Davis issued a certificate of occupancy for the building on May 6, 2005. The City’s permits stated the building was final on that date. Mt. Hawley issued the first of several annual general liability insurance policies in September 2005. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert Dennison, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Dennison may be contacted at rdennison@tlsslaw.com

    Over 70 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 4th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    September 25, 2023 —
    (August 17, 2023) – 75 Lewis Brisbois attorneys across 25 offices have been named to the 4th edition of "Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America." Congratulations to the following attorneys on this recognition! You can see the full list of Lewis Brisbois attorneys named to Best Lawyers' 30th edition of The Best Lawyers in America here. Akron, OH
    • Associate Meleah M. Skillern – Commercial Litigation
    Atlanta, GA
    • Partner Candis R. Jones - Insurance Law, Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants, and Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants
    Boston, MA
    • Partner Amanda Mathieu - Labor and Employment Law – Management
    Charleston, WV
    • Partner Sophie L. Johns - Product Liability Litigation - Defendants
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

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

    August 05, 2024 —
    WASHINGTON — The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) commends the House of Representatives for passing H.R. 8812, the bipartisan Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) for 2024. The House WRDA 2024 bill will help improve America's ports and inland waterways, enhance flood risk management and storm risk reduction programs, and prioritize ecosystem restoration. While we urge the Senate to swiftly vote on its version of WRDA, we are encouraged that our nation's critical water resources infrastructure remains a congressional priority. The House version of WRDA includes several key provisions to enhance the safety of America's dams and levees, which each received a 'D' on the 2021 Report Card for America's Infrastructure, as well as provisions to modernize the nation's inland waterways system, which received a 'D+' in the 2021 Report Card. This includes one of ASCE's top legislative priorities for this year, the reauthorization of the National Dam Safety Program through 2028. But beyond the reauthorization, this bill reduces restrictions on the amount of funds states can receive in National Dam Safety Program State Assistance Grants; improves access to the High Hazard Potential Dam Rehabilitation Grant Program; and requires the incorporation of low-head dams into the National Inventory of Dams. Each of these provisions are critical to ensuring the long-term safety of our nation's dams and ASCE applauds the House for their inclusion. Furthermore, ASCE was pleased to see that the House legislation extends the National Levee Safety Program through 2033, which will help support the establishment of state levee safety programs, develop and publish national guidelines for levee safety, and enhance flood protection nationwide. While these measures are not included in the Senate version of WRDA, we encourage lawmakers to ensure they are included in a final conference version of the bill. We thank the House of Representatives for moving forward WRDA 2024 and strongly encourage the Senate to pass its version so that Congress can keep this vital water resources legislation on a biennial schedule and ensure our nation's dams, levees, ports, and inland waterways can support the American economy and protect public safety. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 160,000 civil engineers worldwide and is America's oldest national engineering society. ASCE works to raise awareness of the need to maintain and modernize the nation's infrastructure using sustainable and resilient practices, advocates for increasing and optimizing investment in infrastructure, and improve engineering knowledge and competency. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of