BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio custom homes building expert Columbus Ohio industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio multi family housing building expert Columbus Ohio low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio expert witness concrete failureColumbus Ohio architecture expert witnessColumbus Ohio engineering consultantColumbus Ohio construction expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction project management expert witnessesColumbus Ohio delay claim expert witnessColumbus Ohio expert witness windows
    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


    In Oregon Construction Defect Claims, “Contract Is (Still) King”

    CISA Guidance 3.1: Not Much Change for Construction

    Construction Mezzanine Financing

    More Hensel Phelps Ripples in the Statute of Limitations Pond?

    Sales of New U.S. Homes Rose More Than Forecast to End 2014

    Quick Note: Insurer Must Comply with Florida’s Claims Administration Act

    Dispute between City and Construction Company Over Unsightly Arches

    Tightest Credit Market in 16 Years Rejects Bernanke’s Bid

    Boston Team Secures Summary Judgment Dismissal on Client’s Behalf in Serious Personal Injury Case

    Bought a New Vacation Home? I’m So Sorry

    Dangerous Condition, Dangerous Precedent: California Supreme Court Expands Scope of Dangerous Condition Liability Involving Third Party Negligent/Criminal Conduct

    Millennials Skip the Ring and Mortgage

    New Case Law Alert: Licensed General Contractors Cannot Sue Owners to Recover Funds for Work Performed by An Unlicensed Subcontractor

    Pass-Through Subcontractor Claims, Liquidating Agreements, and Avoiding a Two-Front War

    “But it’s 2021!” Service of Motion to Vacate Via Email Found Insufficient by the Eleventh Circuit

    New Jersey Appellate Decision Reminds Bid Protestors to Take Caution When Determining Where to File an Action

    Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP Expands into Georgia

    Heavy Rains Cause Flooding, Mudslides in Japan

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Museums

    Condo Collapse Spurs Hometown House Member to Demand U.S. Rules

    Review your Additional Insured Endorsement

    President Trump Repeals Contractor “Blacklisting” Rule

    From Singapore to Rio Green Buildings Keep Tropical Tenants Cool

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Water Damage Claims

    Avoiding 'E-trouble' in Construction Litigation

    Wisconsin High Court Rejects Insurer’s Misuse of “Other Insurance” Provision

    Stadium Intended for the 2010 World Cup Still Not Ready

    You Cannot Arbitrate Claims Not Covered By The Arbitration Agreement

    Insurance Company’s Reservation of Rights Letter Negates its Interest in the Litigation

    How Many Bridges Does the Chesapeake Bay Need?

    OSHA’s New Severe Injury and Fatality Reporting Requirements, Are You Ready?

    July 1, 2015 Statutory Changes Affecting Virginia Contractors and Subcontractors

    Standard of Care

    Four Things Construction Professionals Need to Know About Asbestos

    Construction Bidding for Success

    New Jersey Appellate Court Reinstates Asbestos Action

    Colorado’s Three-Bill Approach to Alleged Construction Defect Issues

    Massive Redesign Turns Newark Airport Terminal Into a Foodie Theme Park

    The Devil is in the Details: The Texas Construction Trust Fund Pitfalls Residential Remodelers (and General Contractors) Should Avoid

    Who Is To Blame For Defective — And Still LEED Certified — Courthouse Square?

    Changes to Pennsylvania Mechanic’s Lien Code

    Are Construction Defect Claims Covered Under CGL Policies?

    Apprentices on Public Works Projects: Sometimes it’s Not What You Do But Who You Do the Work For That Counts

    New York Construction Practice Team Obtains Summary Judgment and Dismissal of Labor Law Claims

    Is There Direct Physical Loss Under A Property Policy When COVID-19 is Present?

    Construction Defect Not a RICO Case, Says Court

    Georgia Super Lawyers Recognized Two Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

    Lane Construction Sues JV Partner Skanska Over Orlando I-4 Project

    COVID-19 Response: Recent Executive Orders Present Opportunities for Businesses Seeking Regulatory and Enforcement Relief and Expedited Project Development

    Preparing For the Worst with Smart Books & Records
    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

    Keller Group Fires Two Executives in Suspected Australia Profits Reporting Fraud

    February 20, 2023 —
    London-based geotechnical contracting giant Keller Group's profits from its Australia business unit may have been fraudulently inflated by the U.S. equivalent of as much as $20 million in today’s dollars since 2019, the company has revealed. 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

    Pennsylvania Reconstruction Project Beset by Problems

    October 15, 2014 —
    The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported that “[t]he Penn Avenue reconstruction project in Garfield, described as ‘a comedy of errors’ by one neighborhood leader, remains months behind schedule and has gone well over budget.” The $4.7 million construction budget has increased “by at least $800,000,” according to the Pittsburgh post-Gazette. Problems included the underground utilities not on maps or mapped inaccurately, water lines breaking, and old streetcar tracks were discovered to have contaminated soil. Rick Swartz, executive director of the Bloomfield-Garfield Corp., told the Gazette that the project has been “plagued with problems and poor communication from the very start.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Good Examination of Fraud, Contract and Negligence Per Se

    February 28, 2018 —
    I have spoken on several occasions here at Construction Law Musings about the interplay (or lack thereof) between fraud and contract as it relates to construction in Virginia. The general rule is that fraud and contract claims don’t mix and a fraud claim in the face of a contractual one is likely to be dismissed. However, there are exceptions to this rule as there are to just about every legal rule (we construction lawyers would be out of a job without them). A good examination of the interplay between fraud and contract was set out by the Eastern District of Virginia federal court in Zuberi et al v. Hirezi et al. In that case the Zuberis purchased a home from the Hirezis and later filed suit alleging that the Hirezis concealed serious structural defects that made the house uninhabitable and unsellable. Among the many claims by the Zuberis were those fro fraud, fraudulent inducement, constructive fraud, negligence per se, violation of the Virginia Consumer Protection Act, and civil conspiracy. In short, they were out for blood. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    New Jersey Federal Court Examines And Applies The “j.(5)” Ongoing Operations Exclusion

    October 07, 2019 —
    In PJR Construction of N.J. v. Valley Forge Insurance Company, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127973 (D.N.J. July 31, 2019) (PJR Construction), a New Jersey federal court held that the “j.(5)” “Ongoing Operations Exclusion” applied to bar coverage for property damage to property on which a construction company allegedly performed faulty work. The court’s opinion follows prior New Jersey state court precedent, including Ohio Casualty Insurance Company v. Island Pool & Spa, Inc., 12 A.3d 719 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2011) (Island Pool), but also provides additional guidance on the elements which can make the Ongoing Operations Exclusion applicable to exclude coverage. In PJR Construction, a commercial property owner engaged a construction company to build a 26,000 square foot swim club and related 3,000 square foot pavilion building in New Jersey. After about 75% of the work was completed, the property owner fired the construction company and denied it access to the property. The owner later sued the construction company in New Jersey state court alleging “shoddy workmanship” in, among other things, sealants, flashing, water resistant barriers, masonry and the handicap ramps. The construction company sought coverage from its CGL insurer, which denied coverage based on, among other things, the j.(5) Ongoing Operations Exclusion. After the denial of coverage, the company sued the insurer in New Jersey federal court seeking a declaration of coverage. Reprinted courtesy of Anthony L. Miscioscia, White and Williams LLP and Timothy A. Carroll, White and Williams LLP Mr. Miscioscia may be contacted at misciosciaa@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Carroll may be contacted at carrollt@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Safer Schools Rendered Unsafe Due to Construction Defects

    February 10, 2012 —

    Built on a program for safer school buildings, schools in Neenan County, Colorado have been shown to have mild-to-moderate structural problems, rendering some of them unsafe. The Denver Post reports that a third-party review of schools built by the Neenan Company has shown structural issues in all fifteen school buildings.

    One school, Meeker Elementary, has been closed as it could collapse under high winds or during an earthquake. Sargent Junior-Senior High School is in use, but there are plans to evacuate the buildings if winds exceed 25 mile per hour. Two schools have roofs that are unable to bear expected loads of snow during the winter.

    The Neenan Company says that the school buildings are not up to their standards and is working with the school districts to repair the buildings. Repairs are expected to be complete by August.

    Read the full story…

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

    Amazon Urged to Review Emergency Plans in Wake of Deadly Tornado

    June 20, 2022 —
    Amazon.com Inc. should better prepare workers for extreme weather events, according to federal regulators who investigated a deadly tornado strike on a company warehouse in Edwardsville, Illinois. The storm ripped through the facility in December, killing six workers and injuring several others, prompting the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to launch a probe. At the time, Amazon said the facility complied with all construction regulations and that proper safety procedures were followed when the tornado struck. But several workers told Bloomberg that training for such events was minimal and mostly entailed pointing out emergency exits and assembly points. An OSHA report released on Tuesday echoed those concerns. The agency said a bullhorn that was supposed to be used to tell workers to take cover was locked up in a cage and inaccessible. In interviews with investigators, some employees couldn’t recall ever participating in emergency drills and said they mistakenly took shelter in a bathroom on the south side of the building rather than in designated restrooms on the north side. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Spencer Soper, Bloomberg

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

    July 18, 2022 —
    White and Williams is once again recognized by Chambers USA as a leading law firm in Pennsylvania for achievements and client service in the areas of insurance law and real estate finance law. The firm has also been recognized for achievements and client service in banking and finance law in Philadelphia and the surrounding area. In addition, seven lawyers received individual honors: two for their work in insurance, two for their work in real estate finance, another for his work in real estate, one for her work in bankruptcy and restructuring and one for his work in commercial litigation. White and Williams is acknowledged for our renowned practice offering expert representation to insurers and reinsurers across an impressive range of areas including coverage, bad faith litigation and excess liability. The firm is recognized for notable strength in transactional and regulatory matters, complemented by the team's adroit handling of complex alternative dispute resolution proceedings. Chambers USA also acknowledged the firm's broad trial capabilities include handling data privacy, professional liability and toxic tort coverage claims. White and Williams’ lawyers have further expertise in substantial claims arising from bodily injury and wrongful death suits. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    North Dakota Court Determines Inadvertent Faulty Workmanship is an "Occurrence"

    May 10, 2013 —
    Joining what it called the majority of jurisdictions, the North Dakota Supreme Court found that damage caused by faulty workmanship can be an "occurrence." K&L Homes, Inc. v. Am. Family Mutual Ins. Co., 2013 N.D. LEXIS 61 (N.D. April 5, 2013). The insured, K&L, was a general contractor who was sued after completing construction of a new home. The suit was based upon breach of contract and breach of implied warranties claims. The homeowners alleged that improper compacting of soil had caused shifting of their home, leading to property damage. K&L had hired a subcontractor to do the soil compaction work. The insurer denied coverage. K&L sued the insurer, but lost at the summary judgment stage. On appeal, K&L argued the policy should be interpreted to give effect to the document as a whole and the "subcontractor exception" to the "your work" exclusion should apply. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com