BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio multi family housing building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio custom homes building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio structural engineering expert witnessesColumbus Ohio construction scheduling expert witnessColumbus Ohio reconstruction expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction project management expert witnessesColumbus Ohio construction expert witness public projectsColumbus Ohio engineering expert witnessColumbus Ohio engineering consultant
    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


    Blog Completes Sixteenth Year

    More (and Simpler) Options Under New Oregon Retention Law

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (06/29/22)

    New York Restrictions on Flow Through Provision in Subcontracts

    Motion for Reconsideration Challenging Appraisal Determining Cause of Loss Denied

    New Home Sales Slip, but Still Strong

    Housing Agency Claims It Is Not a Party in Construction Defect Case

    Safety Accusations Fly in Dispute Between New York Developer and Contractor

    Presenting a “Total Time” Delay Claim Is Not Sufficient

    ASCE Joins White House Summit on Building Climate-Resilient Communities

    White and Williams Recognized by BTI Consulting Group for Client Service

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

    Montana Federal Court Upholds Application of Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause

    Rebuilding the West: Construction Considerations After the Smoke Clears

    California’s Labor Enforcement Task Force Continues to Set Fire to the Underground Economy

    Water Leak Covered for First Thirteen Days

    Bad Faith and a Partial Summary Judgment in Seattle Construction Defect Case

    Primer Debuts on Life-Cycle Assessments of Embodied Carbon in Buildings

    Killer Subcontract Provisions

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight Rated as One of the Top 50 in a Survey of Construction Law Firms in the United States

    Construction Problems May Delay Bay Bridge

    Hawaii Building Codes to Stay in State Control

    Insurer Obligated to Cover Preventative Remediation of Construction Defects

    Hunton Insurance Practice Again Scores “Tier 1” National Ranking in US News Best Law Firm Rankings

    California Supreme Court McMillin Ruling

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/1/24) – Hybrid Work Technologies, AI in Construction and the Market for Office Buildings

    Wait! Don’t Sign Yet: Reviewing Contract Protections During the COVID Pandemic

    Broken Buildings: Legal Rights and Remedies in the Wake of a Collapse

    No Interlocutory Appeals of "Garden-Variety" Contract Disputes

    Happy Thanksgiving from CDJ

    Business Risk Exclusions Dismissed in Summary Judgment Motion

    Preparing For the Worst with Smart Books & Records

    Defending Against the Res Ipsa Loquitur Doctrine – Liability Considerations

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Win Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings In Favor of Insurer

    COVID-19 Response: Key Legal Considerations for Event Cancellations

    UK Construction Defect Suit Lost over One Word

    Insurer’s Broad Duty to Defend in Oregon, and the Recent Ruling in State of Oregon v. Pacific Indemnity Company

    Seattle’s Newest Residential Developer

    Liability Insurer Precluded from Intervening in Insured’s Lawsuit

    As California Faces Mandatory Water Use Reductions How Will the Construction Industry be Impacted?

    Civil Engineers: Montana's Infrastructure Grade Declines to a 'C-'

    Construction Manager’s Win in Michigan after Michigan Supreme Court Finds a Subcontractor’s Unintended Faulty Work is an ‘Occurrence’ Under CGL

    U.S. Navy Sailors Sue Tokyo Utility Company Over Radiation Poisoning

    Iowa Court Holds Defective Work Performed by Insured's Subcontractor Constitutes an "Occurrence"

    Can an Architect, Hired by an Owner, Be Sued by the General Contractor?

    Court Rules that Collapse Coverage for Damage Caused “Only By” Specified Perils Violates Efficient Proximate Cause Rule and is Unenforceable

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

    Is Construction Defect Notice under Florida Repair Statute a Suit?

    Owners and Contractors are Liable for Injuries Caused by their Independent Contractors under the “Peculiar Risk Doctrine”

    Thank Your Founding Fathers for Mechanic’s Liens
    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. Drawing 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

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

    July 06, 2011 —

    Last November, mold problems were discovered at the Siena Condominiums in Montclair, New Jersey, which had been described by their developers as “an enclave of luxury in an urban village setting.” The owners have filed a lawsuit against Pinnacle Companies, Kohl Parnters, and Herod Development, seeking “compensatory damages, interest, reasonable attorney’s fee and costs, and for such other, further, and different relief as the Court may deem just and proper.”

    According to the article on Baristanet.com, an engineering report commissioned by the condominium association revealed many problems, including improperly installed windows and siding. The developers commissioned two engineering reports themselves and found evidence of water pounding on the roof. Despite these reports and repeated promises, no repairs have been made.

    Read the full story…

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

    Designers “Airpocalyspe” Creations

    May 19, 2014 —
    Blaine Brownell in Architect Magazine discussed how recently some designers have created items to deal with urban pollution, however, the creations themselves are more politically-charged than practical. Brownell lists recent examples of architects and designers “perverse” creations: “Notable smog-inspired works include the Aegis Parka, a protective jacket created by Dutch design studio Nieuwe Heren; a palladium dichloride coat that changes color in the presence of carbon dioxide emissions and is designed by London-based artist Lauren Bowker; and R&Sie(n)’s ‘Dustyrelief’ building in Bangkok, designed to collect atmospheric dust via an electrostatically-charged facade.” “Perhaps such proposals—and the disarming irony they conjure—will motivate the changes necessary to clean up our act,” Brownell concluded. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Turkey Digs Out From a Catastrophe

    April 18, 2023 —
    In what’s left of Antakya, a once-thriving and cosmopolitan tourist destination in the southeastern edge of Turkey, the streets seem weirdly quiet. Buildings stand askew at odd angles or are completely toppled, and the rubble from the homes of people who lived inside of them is neatly collected into piles and mounds. Reprinted courtesy of Pam McFarland, Engineering News-Record Ms. McFarland may be contacted at mcfarlandp@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Spending Had Strongest Increase in Four Years

    January 13, 2014 —
    The Commerce Department announced a 1% gain in construction spending, from October to November, which is the biggest gain that construction has seen since March 2009, according to The Spokesman-Review. The gain brought construction spending to an adjusted annual rate of $934.4 billion. The Spokesman-Review further reports that residential construction rose 1.9% in November, while commercial construction rose 2.7%. Government construction, on the other hand, fell 1.8%. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Subsequent Purchaser Can Assert Claims for Construction Defects

    October 17, 2022 —
    Can a subsequent purchaser pursue construction defect claims relating to the original construction of the property? This was the threshold issue on a motion for summary judgment by a drywall manufacturer against a subsequent purchaser of a home in Karpel v. Knauf Gips KG, 2022 WL 4366946 (S.D. Fla. 2022). This matter deals with the defective Chinese drywall that was installed in homes years ago. The plaintiffs, which were subsequent purchasers of a home, sued the manufacturer of the defective drywall for various theories including negligence, negligence per se, strict liability, breach of express and/or implied warranty, private nuisance, unjust enrichment, and Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. The trial court noted, from the onset, that Florida does NOT have a subsequent purchaser rule that prohibits subsequent purchasers from asserting construction defect claims. With this consideration in mind, the trial court went through the claims the plaintiff, as a subsequent purchaser, asserted against the manufacturer to determine whether they were viable claims as a matter of law. Negligence Claim The trial court found that a subsequent purchaser could sue in negligence. “Florida courts have long allowed subsequent purchasers to sue for negligence including in construction defect litigation.” Karpel, supra, at *2. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

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

    December 29, 2020 —
    THE FEDERAL APPELLATE COURTS The U.S. Court of Appeals On November 23, 2020, the court, in a 2-to-1 vote, rejected the plaintiff’s request for an emergency injunction pending appeal in the case of Manzanita Band of Kumeyaay Nation, et al. v. Wolf. The majority held the requirement for such relief did not meet the requirements set forth in Winter v. NRDC, 555 US 7 (2008). Here, the plaintiffs allege that that the government’s construction of a border wall violates several environmental laws that were illegally waived by the Secretary of the Interior. Judge Millett dissented in part because the plaintiffs demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits. She pointed to the argument that the authority of the Secretary—or Acting Secretary—to take these actions has been successfully challenged in several federal district courts. An expedited pleading schedule was established by the court. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit On November 17, 2020, in Ergon-West ,Inc. v. EPA, the court again reversed the EPA’s decision denying regulatory relief to a small refinery seeking a waiver of the renewable fuels mandate of the Clean Air Act. Ergon is a small refinery and requested relief in the basis of the economic harm that compliance would entail. In 2018, the court ruled in Ergon’s favor and remanded the case back to the agency. After relief was again denied, the court held that “Ergon has come forward with sufficient evidence undermining one aspect” of the agency’s latest decision, and the ruling was returned to EPA for additional analysis. It appears that a complicated process has become even more complicated. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Denies Review of Pro-Policy Decision

    October 22, 2014 —
    According to McCarter & English, LLP, “product manufacturers relied on commercial general liability policies to defend and indemnify them for product liability claims,” however, in result of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision in Kvaerner Metals Division of Kvaerner U.S., Inc. v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., 908 A.2d 888 (Pa. 2006), “[i]nsurers began denying coverage to Pennsylvania companies – and companies around the country – arguing that a design or manufacturing defect was not an ‘accident.’” McCarter & English, LLP reported that “the tide has begun to turn, and product manufacturers may once again be reliably protected by from product liability claims.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Certificates of Insurance May Confer Coverage

    December 30, 2019 —
    Certificates of insurance are a common tool used in the construction industry to provide proof of insurance coverage. The legal effect of certificates of insurance has been a source of debate in Washington. Insurance companies have argued that certificates of insurance are “informational only” and do not alter the terms of the applicable insurance policy. Insurance companies have taken the position that if a certificate of insurance provides for coverage that is different than what the policy provides, the insurance company is only bound to provide what the policy provides. The Washington State Supreme Court weighed in on this issue in an opinion issued on October 10, 2019, and held that an insurance company is bound by the terms of its certificate of insurance – even if it conflicts with the policy. In T-Mobile USA, Inc. v. Selective Insurance Company of America, Selective’s agent issued a certificate of insurance to “T-Mobile USA, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliates” and stated that those entities were “included as additional insured” under the policy. The certificate of insurance was issued by Selective’s agent when T-Mobile’s contractor purchased an insurance policy from Selective for a cell tower project. The contractor’s agreement for the project was with T-Mobile Northeast – not T-Mobile USA. The contract between T-Mobile Northeast and the contractor stated that T-Mobile Northeast would be an additional insured. The Selective insurance policy stated that any third party would automatically be an additional insured if the contractor was required to name the third party as an additional insured. The contract did not provide that T-Mobile USA would be an additional insured. A property owner damaged by the cell tower project sued T-Mobile USA. T-Mobile USA tendered the claim to Selective. Selective denied the claim because the contract between the contractor and T-Mobile Northeast did not require the contractor to name T-Mobile USA as an additional insured. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brett M. Hill, Ahlers Cressman Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at brett.hill@acslawyers.com