BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio custom homes building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio multi family housing building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio construction expertsColumbus Ohio construction code expert witnessColumbus Ohio engineering expert witnessColumbus Ohio building consultant expertColumbus Ohio expert witness windowsColumbus Ohio architectural expert witnessColumbus Ohio reconstruction 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


    Challenging and Defending a California Public Works Stop Payment Notice: Affidavit vs. Counter-Affidavit Process

    Lenders and Post-Foreclosure Purchasers Have Standing to Make Construction Defect Claims for After-Discovered Conditions

    My Top 5 Innovations for Greater Efficiency, Sustainability & Quality

    Court Rules Planned Development of Banning Ranch May Proceed

    Stucco Contractor Trying to Limit Communication in Construction Defect Case

    Kiewit-Turner Stops Work on VA Project—Now What?

    Sales of Existing Homes in U.S. Fall to Lowest Since 2012

    Court Exclaims “Enough!” To Homeowner Who Kept Raising Wrongful Foreclosure Claims

    The Top 3 Trends That Will Impact the Construction Industry in 2024

    Mortgage Interest Rates Increase on Newly Built Homes

    New York State Trial Court: Non-Cumulation Provision in Excess Policies Mandates “All Sums” Allocation

    Court Clarifies Sequence in California’s SB800

    California Homeowners Can Release Future, Unknown Claims Against Builders

    Rihanna Gained an Edge in Construction Defect Case

    Do Not Lose Your Mechanics Lien Right Through a Subordination Agreement

    What You Need to Know About “Ipso Facto” Clauses and Their Impact on Termination of a Contractor or Subcontractor in a Bankruptcy

    Partner Lisa M. Rolle and Associate Vito John Marzano Obtain Dismissal of Third-Party Indemnification Claims

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Business Interruption Claim Denied

    Toll Brothers Report End of Year Results

    John Boyden, Alison Kertis Named “Top Rank Attorneys” by Nevada Business Magazine

    Firm Announces Remediation of Defective Drywall

    Release Of “Unknown” Claim Does Not Bar Release Of “Unaccrued” Claim: Fair Or Unfair?

    Like Water For Chocolate: Insurer Prevails Over Chocolatier In Hurricane Sandy Claim

    Navigating the Hurdles of Florida Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Lumber Drops to Nine-Month Low, Extending Retreat From Record

    Construction Picks Up Post-COVID and So Do Claims (and A Construction Lawyer Can Help)

    Construction Up in Northern Ohio

    Construction Law Firm Welin, O'Shaughnessy + Scheaf Merging with McDonald Hopkins LLC

    Presenting a “Total Time” Delay Claim Is Not Sufficient

    What Should Be in Every Construction Agreement

    U.S. Army Corps Announces Regulatory Program “Modernization” Plan

    Supreme Court Holds That Prevailing Wage Statute is Constitutional

    Extreme Heat, Smoke Should Get US Disaster Label, Groups Say

    California Ballot Initiative Seeks to Repeal Infrastructure Funding Bill

    Zinc in London Climbs for Second Day Before U.S. Housing Data

    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is Proud to Announce Jeannette Garcia Has Been Elected as Secretary of the Hispanic Bar Association of Orange County!

    Insurer's Quote on Coverage for Theft by Hacker Creates Issue of Fact

    Weslaco, Texas Investigating Possible Fraudulent Contractor Invoices

    Notice of Claim Sufficient to Invoke Coverage

    Unravel the Facts Before Asserting FDUTPA and Tortious Interference Claims

    Are You Satisfying WISHA Standards?

    Coverage Exists for Landlord as Additional Insured

    California Appeals Court Says Loss of Use Is “Property Damage” Under Liability Policy, and Damages Can be Measured by Diminished Value

    Loss of Use From Allegedly Improper Drainage System Triggers Defense Under CGL Policy

    South Carolina Supreme Court Asked Whether Attorney-Client Privilege Waived When Insurer Denies Bad Faith

    Ritzy NYC Tower Developer Says Residents’ Lawsuit ‘Ill-Advised’

    Are Defense Costs In Addition to Policy Limits?

    Message from the Chair: Kelsey Funes (Volume I)

    New Insurance Case: Owners'​ Insurance Barred in Reimbursement Action against Tenant

    Exception to Watercraft Exclusion Does Not Apply
    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

    What Should Business Owners Do If a Customer Won’t Pay

    January 02, 2024 —
    It should be simple: you provide a service, and your customer pays you for that service. Unfortunately, it is not always so simple. Not getting paid for your work can be one of the most frustrating issues, especially for small businesses. It also does not take much for money matters to lead to larger disputes. So, what should small business owners do in these cases? 1. Start with a reminder notice Most sources, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, agree that business owners should not begin by escalating the situation. Take time to review and fully understand the circumstances of this individual case. Then, begin with resending the invoice or sending reminders to pay. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott L. Baker, Baker & Associates
    Mr. Baker may be contacted at slb@bakerslaw.com

    Texas Supreme Court Holds Anadarko’s $100M Deepwater Horizon Defense Costs Are Not Subject To Joint Venture Liability Limits

    February 27, 2019 —
    Reversing a Texas Court of Appeals decision that allowed Anadarko’s Lloyd’s of London excess insurers to escape coverage for more than $100 million in defense costs incurred in connection with claims from the Deepwater Horizon well blowout, the Supreme Court of Texas held that the insurers’ obligations to pay defense costs under an “energy package” liability policy are not capped by a joint venture coverage limit for “liability” insured. Anadarko Petroleum Corp. et al. v. Houston Casualty Co. et al., No. 16-1013 (Tex. Jan. 25, 2019). While the Lloyd’s of London insurers had agreed to pay Anadarko $37.5 million for damages, they declined to cover $100 million-plus in defense fees, arguing that both Anadarko’s liability and defense expenses are subject to the $37.5 million joint venture limit for “liability” insured. Anadarko asserted that only amounts paid as damages to third parties are subject to that limit. Defense costs, however, are not amounts paid as damages to a third party and, thus, are not a “liability.” Those amounts, therefore, are not subject to the joint venture limit and are instead subject to the policy’s $150 million coverage limit. Reprinted courtesy of Sergio F. Oehninger, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Oehninger may be contacted at soehninger@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/13/22

    April 25, 2022 —
    Phishing schemes target the mortgage industry, housing prices rise in Europe as Ukrainian refugees flee from their home country, the SEC announces new climate change regulations that will impact commercial real estate, and more. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    The Coverage Fun House Mirror: When Things Are Not What They Seem

    December 14, 2020 —
    When it comes to commercial general liability coverage, sometimes things are not what they seem. Some policy language looks like it has a clear meaning. But it turns out that there is more than meets the eye. To see this, you need not look further than the first page of the commercial general liability form. Take its insuring agreement. Its words are by now etched in stone tablets. But even so. Any potential coverage is tied, in part, to damages because of “bodily injury.” Everyone knows what “bodily injury” is. The blood and broken bones are hard to miss. But is emotional injury bodily injury? Or what about hair loss, weight loss, fragile fingernails, loss of sleep, crying or a knot in your stomach? Courts have been required to address whether all of these are “bodily injury.” And was that “bodily injury” caused by an “occurrence?” as required by the CGL insuring agreement? An “occurrence” is defined as an accident. Of course everyone knows what an accident is. Then why is it the oldest and most litigated coverage question of them all, with courts struggling with it for about 150 years? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Randy J. Maniloff, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Maniloff may be contacted at maniloffr@whiteandwilliams.com

    Bad Faith Claim for Inadequate Investigation Does Not Survive Summary Judgment

    May 20, 2015 —
    The insured's claim for bad faith investigation regarding their hail damage claim did not survive the insurer's motion for summary judgment. Amarillo Hospitality Tenant, LLC v. Mass. Bay Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56228 (N. D. Tex. April 29, 2015). A hailstorm caused damage to the Courtyard Marriot. The day after the storm, the insured inspected the roof of the hotel and observed damage to a sign and some aluminum vent tubes. No damage to the roof itself was observed. Subsequently, leaks were found on the tenth floor of the hotel. A public adjuster concluded that the roof had sustained damage during the hailstorm. The insured filed a claim with Massachusetts Bay Insurance Company. The insurer paid for the cost of repairing the damaged sign. To determine whether the damage to the roof was caused by the hailstorm, the insurer hired Donna Engineering, who conducted two inspections of the roof. Both inspections concluded that the hailstorm did not cause damage to the roof. Consequently, the claim was denied. 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

    The G2G Year in Review: 2021

    January 24, 2022 —
    With 2021 now behind us, we wanted to share our top five most-read articles of 2021 from Gravel2Gavel. The most-read blog posts covered real estate and construction industry trends ranging from Proptech, smart construction, COVID-eviction moratoriums, and blockchain tokenization. Throughout the year, G2G posts provided deep industry insight and summarized hot topics addressing the legal implications and disruptions that affected the market, and we will continue to expand on these insights in 2022. Our 2021 roundup:
    1. Blockchain Innovations and Real Estate: NFTs, DeFis and dApps by Craig A. de Ridder
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    UPDATE: ACS Obtains Additional $13.6 Million for General Contractor Client After $19.2 Million Jury Trial Victory

    June 27, 2022 —
    In March 2022, ACS obtained a $19.2 million jury verdict in favor of its general contractor client after a lengthy trial against the project owner. Since that time, ACS has successfully obtained awards through post-trial motion practice for an additional $13.6 million in favor of the general contractor. These awards increased to total judgment to more than $32 million. When moving to enter judgment on the jury verdict, ACS successfully argued for and obtained more than $5 million in prejudgment interest on the jury verdict to compensate the general contractor for having to go years without payment for work performed. ACS also successfully obtained a decree of foreclosure on its construction lien and incorporated language in the judgment requiring the owner to pay an additional $1.9 million in Washington State sales tax on the jury award. Finally, under the authority of the Washington construction lien statute (RCW 60.04.181), ACS sought to recover the attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses incurred by the general contractor client during the course of litigation. ACS succeeded in obtaining an award for more than $6.6 million for various expenses and costs including ACS’s attorney fees, all the costs of hiring expert witnesses, costs and expenses related to subcontractors’ presentation of pass-through claims against the owner, and other litigation costs and expenses. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kristina Southwell, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Ms. Southwell may be contacted at wendy.wheatmccoy@acslawyers.com

    California Pipeline Disaster Brings More Scandal for PG&E

    September 17, 2014 —
    A deadly pipeline explosion that shattered a California town four years ago continues to rip through the state agency weighing a record penalty for the disaster. The president of the California Public Utilities Commission asked his chief of staff to resign and recused himself from the case after “inappropriate e-mail exchanges” with PG&E Corp. (PCG) raised questions about bias, according to a statement from the commission yesterday. The CPUC may decide within weeks whether to levy a proposed $1.4 billion penalty -- the biggest safety fine in the state’s history -- against PG&E for the 2010 explosion of a natural gas pipeline that killed eight people in San Bruno. Commission President Michael Peevey, who has been accused by San Bruno officials and consumer advocates of being too close to the utility, said in the statement he would not take part in penalty deliberations to eliminate any appearance of impropriety. The move is a step toward regaining credibility for the CPUC after two years of political infighting has created an ongoing climate of scandal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mark Chediak, Bloomberg
    Mr. Chediak may be contacted at mchediak@bloomberg.net