BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio production housing building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio multi family housing building expert Columbus Ohio concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio soil failure expert witnessColumbus Ohio expert witness roofingColumbus Ohio civil engineering expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction claims expert witnessColumbus Ohio expert witness concrete failureColumbus Ohio expert witness windowsColumbus 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


    Navigating the Construction Burrito: OCIP Policies in California’s Construction Defect Cases

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2022 Illinois Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    Latin America’s Biggest Corporate Crime Gets a Worthy Epic

    Florida Lien Law and Substantial Compliance vs. Strict Compliance

    Buildings Don't Have To Be Bird-Killers

    Eighth Circuit Affirms Finding of Bad Faith, Award of Costs and Prejudgment Interest

    Blackstone to Buy Chicago’s Willis Tower for $1.3 Billion

    Cameron Pledges to Double Starter Homes to Boost Supply

    Think Twice About Depreciating Repair Costs in Our State, says the Tennessee Supreme Court

    Serving Notice of Nonpayment Under Miller Act

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: RACHEL CLANCY

    Nevada Court Adopts Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2021 Top Lawyers by Hudson Valley Magazine

    Seattle’s Audacious Aquarium Throws Builders Swerves, Curves, Twists and Turns

    Cross-Office Team Secures Defense Verdict in Favor of Client in Asbestos Case

    Update: New VOSH Maximum Penalties as of July 1

    Electrical Subcontractor Sues over Termination

    Illinois Court Addresses Rip-And-Tear Coverage And Existence Of An “Occurrence” In Defective Product Suit

    Issues of Fact Prevent Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion in Collapse Case

    Homebuyers Get Break as Loan Rates Defy Fed Tapering: Mortgages

    While Starts Fall, Builder Confidence and Permits are on the Rise

    Hiring Subcontractors with Workers Compensation Insurance

    Recovery Crews Swing Into Action as Hurricane Michael Departs

    Number of Occurrences Is On the Agenda at This Year's ICLC Seminar

    As Recovery Continues, Home Improvement Stores Make Sales

    Hurricane Damage Not Covered for Home Owner Not Named in Policy

    Cause Still Unclear in March Retaining Wall Collapse on $900M NJ Interchange

    Related’s $1 Billion Los Angeles Project Opens After 15-Year Wait

    Hake Law Attorneys Join National Law Firm Wilson Elser

    No Coverage for Construction Defect Claim Only Impacting Insured's Work

    Recent Florida Legislative Changes Shorten Both Statute of Limitation ("SOL") and Statute of Repose ("SOR") for Construction Defect Claims

    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

    State Farm Unsuccessful In Seeking Dismissal of Qui Tam Case

    COVID-19 Likely No Longer Covered Under Force Majeure

    BWB&O Partners are Recognized as 2022 AV Preeminent Attorneys by Martindale-Hubbell!

    U.S. Homebuilder Confidence Rises Most in Almost a Year

    SFAA and Coalition of Partners Encourage Lawmakers to Require Essential Surety Bonding Protections on All Federally-Financed Projects Receiving WIFIA Funds

    Request for Stay Denied in Dispute Over Coverage for Volcano Damage

    What You Need to Know to Protect the Project Against Defect Claims

    BE PROACTIVE: Steps to Preserve and Enhance Your Insurance Rights In Light of the Recent Natural Disasters

    Forget the Apple Watch. Apple’s Next Biggest Thing Isn’t for Sale

    Part II: Key Provisions of School Facility Construction & Design Contracts

    L.A.’s Modest Solution to the ‘Missing Middle’ Housing Problem

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    Haight Welcomes Robert S. Rucci

    Insureds Survive Motion to Dismiss Civil Authority Claim

    Engineers Propose 'River' Alternative to Border Wall

    Wilke Fleury Celebrates the Addition of Two New Partners

    Hirers Must Affirmatively Exercise Retained Control to be Liable Under Hooker Exception to Privette Doctrine

    The Metaphysics of When an Accident is an “Accident” (or Not) Under Your Insurance Policy
    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

    Treble Damages Awarded After Insurer Denies Coverage for Collapse

    July 03, 2022 —
    The Fourth Circuit upheld the district court's decision that a collapse was covered, but reversed the denial of treble damages to the insured. DENC, LLC v. Phila. Indem. Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 10443 (4th Cir. April 18, 2022). The district court decision was summarized here. DENC owned The Crest, an apartment building leased to Elon University for student housing. Philadelphia Indemnity Company insured the property. In January 2018, students gathered on a second-floor breezeway for a party. Partygoers began jumping in the breezeway, which caused an abrupt collapse. Observers noticed that the breezeway was hanging down by more that a foot. DENC filed a claim with Philadelphia the next day. An adjuster was sent to inspect the breezeway. By that time, the city had condemned The Crest. The adjuster said that undiscovered "water damage which occurred over an extended period of time" caused the loss. 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

    Builders Can’t Rely on SB800

    October 01, 2013 —
    In coming to their ruling on SB800, the California Court of Appeals looked to the legislative intent behind the law. Valentine Hoy, Timothy Hutter, and Erin Sedloff of Allen Matkins, in an article on the ruling, note that SB800 was written in response to Aas v. Superior Court, in which the court found that there was no remedy for construction defects that had not resulted in property damage. In the latest ruling, Liberty Mutual v. Brookfield Crystal Cove, LLC, the court concluded that SB800 was passed to give homeowners a way to address defects that had not lead to damage. However, the court also concluded that the legislature did not intend for SB800 to be the only remedy. In Liberty Mutual, the insurance company sought reimbursement for claims it had paid on a homeowner’s claim after a fire sprinkler pipe burst. Liberty Mutual had insured the homeowner and sought repayment from the builder. Escrow had closed on the home in 2004, the pipe burst in 2008, and Liberty Mutual filed their claim in 2011, seven years after the close of escrow. But for plumbing issues, SB800 has a four-year statute of limitations. The writers describe California as “a hotbed for construction defect litigation.” Due to the Liberty Mutual ruling, developers now “cannot rely on the statutes of limitation set forth in SB800.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insured's Motion for Reconsideration on Denial of Coverage Unsuccessful

    September 28, 2017 —
    The insured's motion to reconsider an order granting the insurer summary judgment challenges the insured's theory it was an additional insured was rejected by the federal district court. Hanover Ins. Co. v. Superior Labor Servs., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133127 (E.D. La. Aug. 21, 2017). The court previously granted Lexington Insurance Company's motion for summary judgment, finding Allied Shipyard, Inc. was not an additional insured and was not entitled to a defense in the underlying actions. On reconsideration, Allied argued the court ruled it was not a "certificate holder" under the Lexington policy, but Allied was not given the opportunity to conduct discovery with respect to whether it was a "certificate holder." Summary judgment was granted before Allied answered Lexington's amended complaint in intervention. Allied submitted its answer could have raised a genuine issue of material fact because it was entitled to coverage under the policy if it was a certificate holder. 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

    Alaska District Court Sets Aside Rulings Under New Administration’s EO 13795

    May 06, 2019 —
    On March 29, the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska issued two separate rulings that reversed and set aside energy and environmental decisions made by the current administration, which had revoked decisions made in these same matters by the prior administration. The cases are League of Conservation Voters, et al., v. Trump (concerning the development of oil and gas leases on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)) and Friends of Alaska National Wildlife Refuges, et al., v. Bernhardt, Acting Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior (which concerns a Land Exchange that would facilitate the construction of a road between two remote Alaska communities when that road would traverse parts of a designated national wilderness). In the League of Conservation Voters matter, the District Court held that the President’s Executive Order 13795 (released on April 28, 2017), which purported to revoke President Obama’s decisions to withdraw certain OCS tracts from oil and gas exploration and development, was unlawful because it was not authorized by Section 12(a) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA). In 2015 and 2016, President Obama issued Presidential Memorandums and an Executive Order withdrawing these particular tracts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Federal Court Requires Auto Liability Carrier to Cover Suit Involving Independent Contractor Despite “Employee Exclusion”

    August 30, 2017 —
    A recent federal court decision rendered in July of 2017 highlights the importance of worker classification in the transportation industry and the potential insurance implications. In Spirit Commercial Auto Risk Retention Grp., Inc. v. Kailey, 1 the court determined that an “employee exclusion” in a motor carrier’s automobile liability insurance policy did not exclude coverage for liability resulting from the bodily injury of an independent contractor operating the motor carrier’s tractor-trailer. In April of 2014, a team of two drivers hired by the motor carrier, Kailey Trucking Line (KTL), were involved in a collision while operating KTL’s truck. The passenger in the truck, who was not operating the vehicle at the time, was killed in the accident. Subsequently, the spouse of the decedent filed suit against KTL as well as the driver of the truck. KTL sought coverage for the suit under its automobile liability insurance policy, issued by Spirit Commercial Auto Risk Retention Group, Incorporated (Spirit). However, Spirit took the position that it had no duty to defend or indemnify KTL, and ultimately filed a declaratory judgment action in United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The policy issued to KTL provided coverage for damages due to bodily injury or property damage caused by an accident resulting from the ownership, maintenance, or use of a covered auto. However, the policy excluded from coverage any bodily injury to an employee or fellow employee of the insured arising out of and in the course of employment of the insured. Accordingly, to the extent that the decedent qualified as an “employee” of KTL, Spirit had no duty to indemnify KTL in the litigation. Reprinted courtesy of H. Scott Williams, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Brendan C. Colt, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Holt may be contacted at bch@sdvlaw.com Mr. Williams may be contacted at hsw@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ex-Engineered Products Firm Executive Convicted of Bid Rigging

    March 06, 2022 —
    A federal jury convicted a former executive at an engineered construction products firm Feb. 1 for his role in a bid-rigging scheme that targeted the North Carolina Dept. of Transportation. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractors: A Lesson on Being Friendly

    April 06, 2016 —
    I know. You’re just trying to be friendly. Don’t. Particularly when you’re a contractor bidding on a public works project. Those dinners at swanky restaurants, tickets to The Jersey Boys, and all expense paid trips to the Napa Valley have a way of appearing less “friendly” in hindsight, and more like bribery, or as they say, “pay to play.” In Sweetwater Union High School District v. Gilbane Building Company, California Court of Appeals for the Fourth District, Case No. D067383 (February 24, 2016), three contractors, Gilbane Building Company (“Gilbane”), The Seville Group, Inc. (“Seville”) and Gilbane/SGI Joint Venture (“Gilbane/SGI”) (collectively “Contractors”) were sued by the Sweetwater Union School District (“District”) to void their contracts with the District and for disgorgement of all monies paid to them under Government Code section 1090 after it was discovered that the Contractors had engaged in a “pay to play” scheme involving several officials of the District. 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

    Arizona Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Provision Relating to Statutory Authority for Constructing and Operating Sports and Tourism Complexes

    June 18, 2019 —
    In an opinion published February 25, 2019, the Arizona Supreme Court held that Maricopa County’s surcharge on car rental agencies to fund a stadium and other sports- and tourism-related projects did not violate either the dormant Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution or the anti-diversion provision of the Arizona Constitution, art. 9, § 14. Saban Rent-a-Car LLC v. Ariz. Dep’t of Revenue. In 2000, the Arizona Legislature created the Arizona Tourism and Sports Authority (the Authority) to build and/or operate a variety of sports-related facilities, including Major League Baseball spring training facilities, and youth and amateur sports and recreation centers. Taxes and surcharges, approved by voters, are the sole funding for the Authority’s construction projects, including the challenged surcharge in Maricopa County. This surcharge is based on the income from car rental companies leasing vehicles to customers for less than one year, and is the greater of $2.50 per rental or 3.25% of the company’s gross proceeds or income. A.R.S. § 5-839. The state treasurer deposits $2.50 per rental transaction into the Maricopa County Stadium District, as it has since 1991, and the remaining amount of the difference between $2.50 per transaction and 3.25% of the company’s gross income or proceeds is distributed to the Authority. Rental car companies often pass this surcharge on to their customers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Amanda Z. Weaver, Snell & Wilmer
    Ms. Weaver may be contacted at aweaver@swlaw.com