• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio production housing building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio custom home building expert Columbus Ohio multi family housing building expert Columbus Ohio institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio custom homes building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio slope failure expert witnessColumbus Ohio building code compliance expert witnessColumbus Ohio civil engineer expert witnessColumbus Ohio contractor expert witnessColumbus Ohio building expertColumbus Ohio consulting architect expert witnessColumbus Ohio expert witness roofing
    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


    Mechanics Lien Release Bond – What Happens Now? What exactly is a Mechanics Lien and Why Might it Need to be Released?

    A Court-Side Seat – Case Law Update (February 2022)

    Times Square Alteration Opened Up a Can of Worms

    Can a Contractor be Liable to Second Buyers of Homes for Construction Defects?

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “It’s One, Two… Eight Strikes: You’re Out!”

    Poor Pleading Leads to Loss of Claim for Trespass Due to Relation-Back Doctrine, Statute of Limitations

    Balcony Collapses Killing Six People

    Workers at Two NFL Stadiums Test Positive for COVID-19, But Construction Continues

    AI and the Optimization of Construction Projects

    Construction Defect Litigation in Nevada Called "Out of Control"

    Renters Trading Size for Frills Fuel U.S. Apartment Boom

    Recovery Crews Swing Into Action as Hurricane Michael Departs

    Are COVID-19 Claims Covered by Builders Risk Insurance Policies?

    Another Colorado District Court Refuses to Apply HB 10-1394 Retroactively

    Florida Project Could Help Address Runoff, Algae Blooms

    Caltrans to Speak before California Senate regarding Bay Bridge Expansion

    Are Construction Defect Laws a Factor in Millennials Home Buying Decisions?

    Planes, Trains and Prevailing Wages. Ok, No Planes, But Trains and Prevailing Wages Yes

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Preserves Possibility of Coverage

    Recent Developments Involving Cedell v. Farmers Insurance Company of Washington

    California Supreme Court Addresses “Good Faith” Construction Disputes Under Prompt Payment Laws

    Home Prices Rose in Fewer U.S. Markets in Fourth Quarter

    PFAS: From Happy Mistake to Ubiquity to Toxic Liability (But is there coverage?)

    HB 20-1046 - Private Retainage Reform - Postponed Indefinitely

    Fifth Circuit Asks Texas Supreme Court to Clarify Construction Defect Decision

    New Megablimp to Deliver to Remote Alaskan Construction Sites

    Fourteen Years as a Solo!

    Bad Faith in the First Party Insurance Context

    Case Alert Update: SDV Case Tabbed as One of New York’s Top Three Cases to Watch

    Sales of Existing U.S. Homes Unexpectedly Fell in January

    Replacement of Defective Gym Construction Exceeds Original Cost

    As Some States Use the Clean Water Act to Delay Energy Projects, EPA Issues New CWA 401 Guidance

    Tenth Circuit Reverses District Court's Ruling that Contractor Entitled to a Defense

    Addenda to Construction Contracts Can Be an Issue

    Phoenix Flood Victims Can’t Catch a Break as Storm Nears

    Home Builders and Developers Beware: SC Supreme Court Beats Up Hybrid Arbitration Clauses Mercilessly

    Ex-Construction Firm That Bought a $75m Michelangelo to Delist

    Subcontractors Eye 2022 with Guarded Optimism

    Amazon Can be Liable in Louisiana

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Brokers' MSJ on Duties Owed In Construction Defect Case

    What’s in a Name? Trademarks and Construction

    Providence Partner Monica R. Nelson Helps Union Carbide Secure Defense Verdict in 1st Rhode Island Asbestos Trial in Nearly 40 Years

    Philadelphia Revises Realty Transfer Tax Treatment of Acquired Real Estate Companies

    Forensic Team Finds Fault with Concrete Slabs in Oroville Dam Failure

    Be Careful with Good Faith Payments

    Florida’s Fourth District Appeals Court Clarifies What Actions Satisfy Florida’s Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    Malerie Anderson Named to D Magazine’s 2023 Best Lawyers Under 40

    Bel Air Mansion Construction Draws Community Backlash

    What Every Project Participant Needs to Know About Delay Claims

    Golden Gate Bridge's $76 Million Suicide Nets Near Approval
    Corporate Profile

    COLUMBUS OHIO BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Columbus, Ohio Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Columbus, Ohio

    Federal Court Finds Occurrence for Faulty Workmanship Under Virginia Law

    July 31, 2013 —
    The Federal District Court in Virginia found that allegations of faulty workmanship could arise from an occurrence. Nautilus Ins. Co. v. Strongwell Corp., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79163 (W. D. Va. June 4, 2013). Strongwell supplied certain fiberglass reinforced plastic materials to a subcontractor of Black & Veatch for a construction project at power plant. Black & Veatch subsequently sued Strongwell, claiming that numerous defects in Strongwell's materials and work were discovered after the project was completed. The complaint further alleged that as a result of the defects, there was widespread property damage to portions of the power plant. Nautilus defended under a reservation of rights. Nautilus also filed suit for a declaratory judgment that to establish it had no duty to defend or indemnify Strongwell. Strongwell moved to dismiss the complaint insofar as it requested a declaration that there was no duty to defend. Strongwell also filed a motion to stay the coverage action until the underlying case was completed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    April 25, 2012 —

    Contractual fairness ? it is part of my mantra. If you read the blog, you probably know that I preach brevity, balance and clarity in contracting. The State of Washington did well to finally eliminate something that has angered me for quite some time ? unfair indemnification.

    One of my favorite construction contract revisions is mutual indemnification. Many “up the chain” contractors and owners are going to stick you with a unilateral indemnification clause that protects them for just about everything, including their own fumbling of a project. Adding mutual indemnification provides some balance, and keeps parties reliant upon each other for success on the job site.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

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

    Texas Supreme Court Holds Stipulated Extrinsic Evidence May Be Considered in Determining Duty to Defend

    May 10, 2022 —
    Responding to certified questions from the Fifth Circuit, the Texas Supreme Court held that in limited circumstances, extrinsic evidence may be considered in determining the duty to defend. Monroe Guar. Ins. Co. v. Bitco Gen. Ins. Corp., 2022 Tex. LEXIS 148 (Tex. Feb. 11, 2022). The two insurers each provided CGL coverage to the insured, 5D Drilling & Pump Service, Inc., at different times. BIitco provided two consecutive one-year CGL policies covering October 2013 to October 2015. Monroe's CGL policy covered 5D from October 2015 to October 2016. 5D was sued by David Jones for breach of contract and negligence, seeking damage allegedly resulting from 5D's drilling operations on Jones's property. Jones contracted with 5D in the summer of 2014 to drill a 3600-foot irrigation well on his farmland. The complaint did not detail when 5D's purportedly negligent acts occurred or even when 5D began or stopped the work. 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

    Brazil Congress Chiefs Deny Wrongdoing in Petrobras Scandal

    March 12, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- Brazil’s congressional heads denied involvement in the country’s largest corruption scandal after being named among dozens of politicians for investigation. Renan Calheiros and Eduardo Cunha, the heads of the Senate and lower house respectively, and Rio de Janeiro Senator Lindbergh Farias all rejected allegations of graft in the kickback scheme dubbed Carwash. Farias told the Folha de Sao Paulo newspaper in an interview published Sunday that while he may have acted improperly, his actions weren’t illegal. The senator said he took a 2 million real-donation ($650,000) from Andrade Gutierrez SA, a Rio-based construction company. Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg reporters Raymond Colitt, Anna Edgerton and Sabrina Valle Mr. Colitt may be contacted at rcolitt@bloomberg.net Ms. Edgerton may be contacted at aedgerton@bloomberg.net Ms. Valle may be contacted at svalle@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell Recognized in 2024 Best Law Firm® Rankings

    November 16, 2023 —
    We are thrilled to announce that Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC (“HHMR”) has been recognized in the 2024 Best Law Firm® rankings. Our firm has been placed in Metro Tier 2 in Colorado for Construction Law, a testament to our unwavering commitment to providing top-tier legal services. At HHMR, we pride ourselves on our expertise in construction law and the litigation of construction-related claims. Our team of dedicated attorneys is well-versed and experienced in tort, contract, property, and general casualty litigation. This recognition by Best Lawyers affirms our dedication to serving our clients selflessly and to the best of our ability. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    For Whom Additional Insured Coverage Applies in New York

    November 11, 2024 —
    Simply including a requirement in a contract to add certain parties as additional insureds under a commercial general liability insurance (CGL) policy may not be enough to ensure such coverage is provided in New York. In New York City Hous. Auth. v. Harleysville Worcester Ins. Co., 226 A.D.3d 804 (2024), the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division – Second Department ruled that the language in an insurance endorsement required privity of contract with the insured party subcontractor to obtain additional insured status and denied coverage to others despite a provision in a subcontract requiring such additional insured coverage. In this case, an owner entered into a contract with a general contractor for construction services. The general contractor entered into a subcontract with a subcontractor. The subcontractor agreed to procure and maintain a CGL policy naming the owner, the general contractor, and another related party as additional insureds thereunder. An employee of the subcontractor was injured on the project and sued the three additional insureds and several other parties. Subcontractor’s insurance company refused to defend and indemnify any party other than the general contractor. All the parties sued by the subcontractor’s employee brought an action against the subcontractor’s insurance company, seeking coverage for defense and indemnification as additional insureds under the subcontractor’s CGL policy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bill Wilson, Robinson & Cole LLP
    Mr. Wilson may be contacted at wwilson@rc.com

    Waiver of Subrogation and Lack of Contractual Privity Bars Commercial Tenants’ Claims

    May 08, 2023 —
    In United States Automatic Sprinkler Corporation v. Erie Insurance Exchange, et al., No. 2SS-CT-264, 2023 Ind. LEXIS 105, the Supreme Court of Indiana (Supreme Court) reversed an order of the trial court that denied a motion for summary judgment filed by a sprinkler contractor. At issue was whether commercial tenants – one who contracted with the sprinkler contractor and others who did not – could recover for their respective property damages. The court held that under the contract’s subrogation waiver and agreement to insure, the contracting tenant waived its insurer’s rights to recover through subrogation. With respect to the non-contracting tenants, who sought to recover only property damages, the court held that the absence of contractual privity barred their recovery. The case centered around a sprinkler system that malfunctioned and flooded the Sycamore Springs Office Complex (Landlord), causing extensive property damage to four commercial tenants. Surgery Center, one of the four tenants, requested permission from the Landlord to install a sprinkler system inside the building. Landlord agreed, in exchange for Surgery Center agreeing to be solely responsible for maintaining the sprinkler system. Surgery Center hired United States Automatic Sprinkler (Automatic Sprinkler) to both install and conduct periodic inspection and testing of the sprinkler system. The contract terms outlined the scope of work to be performed by Automatic Sprinkler and the work was limited to the inspection and testing of the sprinkler system. Although repairs and emergency services were excluded from the contract, each could be performed upon the request and authorization of Surgery Center for an additional cost. The contract also contained certain risk allocation provisions including a waiver of subrogation and an agreement to insure. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Kenney, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Kenney may be contacted at kenneyme@whiteandwilliams.com

    Taylor Morrison Home Corp’ New San Jose Development

    October 15, 2014 —
    The Silicon Valley Business Journal reported that Taylor Morrison Home Corp has made the “biggest land acquisition so far in San Jose” after acquiring “an 8-acre chunk of dirt in the developing Montecito Vista area where it has plans to build out 184 townhomes.” The developer “paid about $32.5 million, or roughly $176,600 per buildable unit, for the land, according to public tax records,” according to the Silicon Valley Business Journal. Construction is scheduled to begin November of 2015 and models should be ready by April of 2016. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of