BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio production housing building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio multi family housing building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio custom homes building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio forensic architectColumbus Ohio OSHA expert witness constructionColumbus Ohio civil engineer expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction safety expertColumbus Ohio construction defect expert witnessColumbus Ohio concrete expert witnessColumbus Ohio hospital construction 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


    Insurer Entitled to Reimbursement of Defense Costs Under Unjust Enrichment Theory

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/17/23) – A Flop in Flipping, Plastic Microbes and Psychological Hard Hats

    How AI Can Become a Design Adviser

    Cutting the Salt Out: Tips for Avoiding Union Salting Charges

    Preventing Acts of God: Construction Accidents Caused by Outside Factors

    Hospital Settles Lawsuit over Construction Problems

    California Court Broadly Interprets Insurance Policy’s “Liability Arising Out of” Language

    Gillotti v. Stewart (2017) 2017 WL 1488711 Rejects Liberty Mutual, Holding Once Again that the Right to Repair Act is the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    Chambers USA 2022 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    Suing the Lowest Bidder on Public Construction Projects

    New Pedestrian, Utility Bridge Takes Shape on Everett Waterfront

    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment in Pinellas County Circuit Court

    Arizona Court Affirms Homeowners’ Association’s Right to Sue Over Construction Defects

    Best Practices in Construction– What are Yours?

    Payne & Fears LLP Recognized by U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers in 2023 “Best Law Firms” Rankings

    Utah’s Highest Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Properly Commence an Action to Rely on the Relation-Back Doctrine to Overcome the Statute of Repose

    School District Settles Over Defective Athletic Field

    Product Liability Alert: Evidence of Apportionment of Fault Admissible in Strict Products Liability Action

    Fourth Circuit Rejects Application of Wrap-Up Exclusion to Additional Insured

    Seattle’s Newest Residential Developer

    Give Way or Yield? The Jurisdiction of Your Contract Does Matter! (Law note)

    The Peak of Hurricane Season Is Here: How to Manage Risks Before They Manage You

    Goldman Veteran Said to Buy Mortgages After Big Short

    Builder’s Be Wary of Insurance Policies that Provide No Coverage for Building: Mt. Hawley Ins. Co v. Creek Side at Parker HOA

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Museums

    Port Authority Revises Plans for $10B Midtown NYC Bus Terminal Replacement

    Delays Caused When Government (Owner) Pushes Contractor’s Work Into Rainy / Adverse Weather Season

    Condominiums and Homeowners Associations Remain Popular Housing Choices for U-S Homeowners

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

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 3: Standard Form Policy Exclusions

    Existing U.S. Home Sales Rise to Second-Highest Since 2007

    Tidal Lagoon Plans Marine Project to Power Every Home in Wales

    Implementation of CA Building Energy Efficiency Standards Delayed

    Contractual Setoff and Application When Performance Bond Buys Out of its Exposure

    Ahead of the Storm: Preparing for Dorian

    Preparing For and Avoiding Residential Construction Disputes: For Homeowners and Contractors

    Exploring the Future of Robotic Construction with Dr. Thomas Bock

    Proximity Trace Used to Monitor, Maintain Social Distancing on $1.9-Billion KCI Airport Project

    The Construction Industry Lost Jobs (No Surprise) but it Gained Some Too (Surprise)

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Two Recent Cases Address Copyright Protection for Architectural Works

    Wyncrest Commons: Commonly Used Progress Payments in Construction Contracts Do Not Render Them Installment Contracts

    Virginia Chinese Drywall “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and number of “occurrences”

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

    “Bound by the Bond”

    Wilke Fleury Attorney Featured in 2022 Best Lawyers in America and Best Lawyers: Ones To Watch!

    25 Days After Explosion, Another Utility Shuts Off Gas in Boston Area

    Congratulations 2024 DE, MA, MD, NJ, NY, and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Former SNC-Lavalin CEO Now Set for Trial in Bribe Case

    Insurance Lawyers Recognized by JD Supra 2020 Readers' Choice Awards

    How Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Decision Affects Coverage of Faulty Workmanship Claims
    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

    Fluor Agrees to $14.5M Fixed-Price Project Cost Pact with SEC

    September 25, 2023 —
    Fluor Corp. has agreed to pay $14.5 million to resolve a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigation for alleged “improper accounting” and "overly optimistic" cost and timing estimates in bidding two legacy fixed-price projects that forced the company to restate its 2020 financial results, the agency said on Sept. 6. Reprinted courtesy of Debra K. Rubin, Engineering News-Record Ms. Rubin may be contacted at rubind@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Steps to Defending against Construction Defect Lawsuits

    July 21, 2011 —

    Writing in Claims Journal, Bryan Rendzio notes that the decline in construction has not been matched by a decline in construction defect lawsuits over condominiums. He reviews the ways in which lawyers representing developers can help protect their clients. He identifies four important considerations in defending developers from claims of construction defects.

    He advocates a careful review of the contract. “Under a breach of contract claim, the insured’s duties to the party who brought the claim against the insured flow from the contract. Commonly, construction contracts limit the scope of recoverable damages, such as by waiving consequential damages.’

    The next step, according to Rendzio is to check of a settlement agreement is already in place, noting that these are “a familiar occurrence in the construction industry, regardless of any lawsuits having been filed.”

    He considers the statute of repose “the single-most decisive weapon an insured possesses in its arsenal during a condo defect lawsuit.” He notes that no lawsuits can be brought for construction defects after the end specified by the statute of repose, and if a lawsuit is brought beforehand, no additional parties can be named once the statute has taken effect.

    Finally, he warns adjusters to be suspicious when a condo association requests contractual indemnification. He notes that the pitfall in this is that developers and the subsequent condominium association often have similar names, given the theoretical example of a condo project built by “Fake Lakes LLC” and later run by the “Fake Lakes Condominium Association.” Writing in regards to Florida law, he notes that condominium associations do not have successor interest in contracts developers made with contractors.

    Read the full story…

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

    New Window Insulation Introduced to U.S. Market

    February 04, 2014 —
    According to Construction Digital, Nitto has introduced PENJEREX, “a new transparent energy-saving window insulation film to the US Market” that may “satisfy the requirement for enhanced energy efficiency and CO2 reduction in the housing industry.” The film is transparent, while still providing insulation, which helps maintain “the natural look of the home,” reported Construction Digital. The product “is said to improve insulation by reducing heat transfer by 35 percent.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Notice of Completion Determines Mechanics Lien Deadline

    August 13, 2019 —
    The California Mechanics Lien is one of the most valuable collection devices available to contractors, subcontractors and suppliers who are unpaid for work performed and materials supplied in relation to a California Private Works project. The mechanics lien allows the claimant to sell the property where the work was performed in order to obtain payment. The process starts with the recording of a mechanics lien in the office of the County Recorder where the property in question is located. As noted below, certain deadlines must be met. Know Your Mechanics Lien Filing Deadlines Generally Working within deadlines is absolutely crucial to preserving mechanics lien rights under California law. The deadlines differ, depending on whether you are a ”direct” contractor, also known as “original” or “prime” contractor (one who contracts directly with the property owner) or a subcontractor or material supplier. The primary differences are that, the direct contractor is only required to serve the “Preliminary Notice” on the Construction Lender (Civil Code section 8200-8216), whereas the subcontractor and material supplier must serve not only the Construction Lender, but also the Owner and Direct Contractor (see Civil Code section 8200(e)). Another difference is that a direct contractor has a longer period of time in which to record a mechanics lien after a valid “notice of completion” or a “notice of cessation” has been recorded (Civil Code sections 8180-8190), (60 days for original contractors as compared to 30 days for subcontractors and suppliers – See Civil Code sections 8412 and 8414). A further general description of the rules is as follows: Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Questions of Fact Regarding Collapse of Basement Walls Prevent Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    December 19, 2018 —
    The court denied the insurer's motion for summary judgment on whether the policy covered the collapse of basement walls based upon factual issues presented. Sirois v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158508 (D. Conn. Sept. 18, 2018). The insureds' purchased their home in 2010. In December 2015, a crack in the basement wall was noticed. It was not thought to be a serious problem. But in 2016, the insured read an article about defective concrete problems affecting homeowners in Connecticut. An inspector, Dean Soucy, was hired. He found faults and cracks in the foundation walls. Thereafter, a claim was submitted to USAA under homeowners' policies issued over the years to the insureds. USAA denied coverage. 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

    South Carolina “occurrence” and allocation

    September 01, 2011 —

    In Crossman Communities of North Carolina, Inc. v. Harleysville Mutual Insurance Co., No. 26909 (S.C. Aug. 22, 2011), insured Crossman was the developer and general contractor of several condominium projects constructed by Crossman’s subcontractors over multiple years. After completion, Crossman was sued by homeowners alleging negligent construction of exterior components resulting in moisture penetration property damage to non-defective components occurring during multiple years.  Crossman settled the underlying lawsuit and then filed suit against its CGL insurers to recover the settlement amount.  Crossman settled with all of the insurers except for Harleysville.  Crossman and Harleysville stipulated that the only coverage issue was whether there was an “occurrence.”  The trial court subsequently entered judgment in favor of Crossman, determining that there was an “occurrence.” The trial court also ruled that Harleysville was liable for the entire settlement amount without offset for the amounts paid by the other insurers.  

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

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

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

    July 20, 2011 —

    The Court of Appeals of Indiana ruled on July 8 in the case of Rollander Enterprises, Inc. v. H.C. Nutting Co. Judge Baily wrote the opinion affirming the decision of the trial court.

    The case involved an unfinished condominium complex, the Slopes of Greendale, in Greendale, Indiana. Rollander is a real estate development company incorporated in Ohio. One of the issues in the case was whether the case should be settled in the Indiana courts or be tried in Ohio. The project was owned by a special purpose entity limited liability corporation incorporated in Indiana.

    Rollander hired Nutting to determine the geological composition of the site. Nutting’s report described the site as “a medium plastic clay containing pieces of shale and limestone.” The court summarized this as corresponding with “slope instability and landslides.” Rollander then hired Nutting to design the retaining walls, which were constructed by Scherziner Drilling.

    After cracking was discovered on State Route 1, the walls were discovered to be inadequate. More dirt was brought in and a system of tie-backs was designed to anchor the walls. Not only were the tie-backs unsightly, local officials would not approve the complex for occupancy. Further, the failure of the wall below one building lead to damage of that building.

    The court concluded that since almost all events occurred in Indiana, they rejected Rollander’s contention that the case should be tried in Ohio. Further, the court notes “the last event making Nutting potentially liable on both claims was an injury that occurred in Indiana and consequently, under the lex loci delicti analysis, Indiana law applies.”

    Nor did the court find that Nutting was responsible for the damage to the rest of the project, citing an Indiana Supreme Court ruling, that “there is no liability in tort to the owner of a major construction project for pure economic loss caused unintentionally by contractors, subcontractors, engineers, design professionals, or others engaged in the project with whom the project owner, whether or not technically in privity of contract, is connected through a network or chain of contracts.”

    The court concluded:

    Because Rollander was in contractual privity with Nutting, and Indy was connected to Nutting through a chain of contracts and no exception applies, the economic loss rule precludes their recovery in tort. Damage to Building B was not damage to "other property," and the negligent misrepresentation exception to the economic loss rule is inapplicable on these facts. The trial court therefore did not abuse its discretion by entering judgment on the evidence in favor of Nutting on the Appellants' negligence and negligent misrepresentation claims.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Appraisal Award for Damaged Roof Tiles Challenged

    December 04, 2023 —
    The district court denied Travelers' motion for summary judgment and granted the insureds' motion in part regarding replacement of roof tiles damaged in a hail storm. Bertisen v. Travelers Home & Marine Ins. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159649 (D. Colo. Sept. 8,2023). On May 8, 2017, the insureds' home was struck by a hailstorm that damaged their property. A Travelers inspector found damage to metal roof components, a deck, patio furniture and gutters. A partial payment of $6,381.04 was made. A further payment was made for personal property damaged by the storm. Travelers disputed that the hailstorm caused damage to all of the roof tiles. Travelers' adjustor reinspected the property and observed additional damages caused by hail and another payment of $6,605.22 was issued. 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