BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction expert witness Hardin County Ohio mid-rise construction expert witness Hardin County Ohio multi family housing expert witness Hardin County Ohio industrial building expert witness Hardin County Ohio retail construction expert witness Hardin County Ohio condominiums expert witness Hardin County Ohio parking structure expert witness Hardin County Ohio structural steel construction expert witness Hardin County Ohio condominium expert witness Hardin County Ohio housing expert witness Hardin County Ohio low-income housing expert witness Hardin County Ohio office building expert witness Hardin County Ohio institutional building expert witness Hardin County Ohio landscaping construction expert witness Hardin County Ohio custom homes expert witness Hardin County Ohio custom home expert witness Hardin County Ohio Medical building expert witness Hardin County Ohio concrete tilt-up expert witness Hardin County Ohio casino resort expert witness Hardin County Ohio tract home expert witness Hardin County Ohio Subterranean parking expert witness Hardin County Ohio production housing expert witness Hardin County Ohio
    Hardin County Ohio soil failure expert witnessHardin County Ohio forensic architectHardin County Ohio consulting engineersHardin County Ohio construction defect expert witnessHardin County Ohio construction claims expert witnessHardin County Ohio consulting architect expert witnessHardin County Ohio construction expert witness consultant
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Roofing Expert Witness Builders Information
    Hardin County, 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.


    Roofing Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Hardin County Ohio

    Licensing is done at the local level. Licenses required for plumbing, electrical, HVAC, heating, and hydronics trades.


    Roofing Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Mercer Co Builders Association
    Local # 3656
    PO Box 363
    Rockford, OH 45882
    Hardin County Ohio Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Mercer Co Builders Association
    Local # 3656
    PO Box 363
    Rockford, OH 45882
    Hardin County Ohio Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    East Central OH Building Industry Association
    Local # 3664
    706 E. Shafer Ave
    Dover, OH 44622

    Hardin County Ohio Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    East Central OH Building Industry Association
    Local # 3664
    706 E. Shafer Ave
    Dover, OH 44622

    Hardin County Ohio Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of North Central OH
    Local # 3651
    1183 Lexington Avenue
    Mansfield, OH 44907

    Hardin County Ohio Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of North Central OH
    Local # 3651
    1183 Lexington Avenue
    Mansfield, OH 44907

    Hardin County Ohio Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    West Central Buckeye Builders Association
    Local # 3648
    1520 Allentown Rd
    Lima, OH 45805

    Hardin County Ohio Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Roofing Expert Witness News and Information
    For Hardin County Ohio


    Moving Toward a Telework Future: A Checklist of Considerations for Employers

    Jason Smith and Teddie Arnold Co-Author Updated “United States – Construction” Chapter in 2024 Legal 500: Country Comparative Guides

    Fungi, Wet Rot, Dry Rot and "Virus": One of These Things is Not Like the Other

    Too Costly to Be Fair: Texas Appellate Court Finds the Arbitration Clause in a Residential Construction Contract Unenforceable

    Is the Construction Industry Actually a Technology Hotbed?

    Insurer’s Duty to Indemnify Not Ripe Until Underlying Lawsuit Against Insured Resolved

    Lewis Brisbois Listed as Top 10 Firm of 2022 on Leopard Solutions Law Firm Index

    Storm Eunice Damage in U.K. Could Top £300 Million

    Warranty Reform Legislation for Condominiums – Unfair Practices used by Developers and Builders to avoid Warranty Responsibility for Construction Defects in Newly Constructed Condominiums

    Building Stagnant in Las Cruces Region

    Insurer Must Defend and Indemnify Construction Defect Claims Under Iowa Law

    More thoughts on Virginia Mechanic’s Liens

    Obama Asks for $302 Billion to Fix Bridges and Potholes

    Texas Court Construes Breach of Contract Exclusion Narrowly in Duty-to-Defend Case

    New Jersey Supreme Court Holding Impacts Allocation of Damages in Cases Involving Successive Tortfeasors

    Colorado Senate Committee Approves Construction Defect Bill

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

    Commercial Development Nearly Quadruples in Jacksonville Area

    Acceptable Worksite: New City of Seattle Specification Provisions Now In Effect

    Biden Unveils $2.3 Trillion American Jobs Plan

    Another Las Vegas Tower at the Center of Construction Defect Claims

    Want to Build Affordable Housing in the Heart of Paris? Make It Chic.

    The Hidden Price of Outdated Damage Prevention Laws: Part I

    As Fracture Questions Remain, Team Raced to Save Mississippi River Bridge

    Key Economic & Geopolitical Themes To Monitor In 2024

    Is Everybody Single? More Than Half the U.S. Now, Up From 37% in '76

    Turning Back the Clock: DOL Proposes Previous Davis-Bacon Prevailing Wage Definition

    Dispositive Motions in AAA Construction Arbitration: Why You Should Think Twice

    Louisiana Court Applies Manifestation Trigger to Affirm Denial of Coverage

    How the Pandemic Pushed the Construction Industry Five Years Into the Future

    New Window Insulation Introduced to U.S. Market

    Hunton’s Geoffrey Fehling Confirmed to DC Bar Foundation’s Young Lawyers Network Leadership Council

    Aarow Equipment v. Travelers- An Update

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in 2021 Best Lawyers in America and Best Lawyers: Ones To Watch!

    San Francisco OKs Revamped Settling Millennium Tower Fix

    Lump Sum Subcontract? Perhaps Not.

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

    Full Extent of Damage From Turkey Quakes Takes Shape

    Update: New VOSH Maximum Penalties as of July 1

    The Ups and Downs of Elevator Maintenance Contractor's Policy Limits

    Homeowner Allowed to Amend Complaint to Demonstrate Third-Party Beneficiary Status Under Lender-Placed Policy

    Be Careful When Requiring Fitness for Duty Examinations

    UK SFO Makes Arrests in European Data Center Bribery Probe

    Protect Against Design Errors With Owners Protective Professional Indemnity Coverage

    Sacramento Water Works Recognized as a Historic Civil Engineering Landmark

    Corps Proposes $4.6B Plan to Steel Miami for Storm Surge

    Professional Liability Client Alert: Law Firms Should Consider Hiring Outside Counsel Before Suing Clients For Unpaid Fees

    Nine Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    New York Philharmonic Will Open Geffen Hall Two Years Ahead of Schedule

    Get Your Contracts Lean- Its Better than Dieting
    Corporate Profile

    HARDIN COUNTY OHIO ROOFING EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Hardin County, Ohio Roofing Expert Witness Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Hardin County's 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.

    Roofing Expert Witness News & Info
    Hardin County, Ohio

    Tampa Team Obtains Highly Favorable Verdict for Property Owner Client in Lawsuit over Traffic Accident

    March 24, 2026 —
    Tampa Managing Partner John Rine and Partner Nick Dareneau obtained a very favorable verdict for their property owner client in a Sarasota County trial in a lawsuit arising from a traffic accident. At the end of closing arguments, plaintiff’s counsel requested appropriately $18 million from the jury. The jury returned a net verdict of just over a thousand dollars. The plaintiff was on a scooter and was involved in an accident with an SUV in a parking lot intersection. Our firm represented the property owner. The plaintiffs argued that the landscape vegetation was too tall and violated the sight lines of the two drivers, and that the height of the shrubbery violated the owner’s landscaping contract and a local sight line ordinance. They also argued that the intersection lacked a stop sign in contrast to the other six parking lot entrances, which had stop signs. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Travelers Injury Impact Report Highlights Longer Recovery Times Amid Declining Injury Rates

    May 05, 2026 —
    HARTFORD, Conn.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The Travelers Companies, Inc. (NYSE: TRV) today released its 2026 Injury Impact Report, an analysis of more than 1.2 million workers compensation claims received by the company from 2021 through 2025. The report finds that even as workplace injury rates decline, the injuries that do occur are growing more complex and taking longer to heal – a trend driven by an aging workforce and the disproportionate vulnerability of first-year employees. “The decrease in workplace injuries is a positive story, yet injured workers are still missing an average of 80 workdays,” said Claude Howard, Vice President of Workers Compensation Claim at Travelers. “This report is a reminder that progress doesn’t mean the risk environment requires any less attention, and an employer’s commitment to safety must keep pace with an ever-evolving workforce and injury landscape.” Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Travelers Companies, Inc.

    U.S. Supreme Court Decision May Negate State Law Requirement to File a Certificate of Merit with the Complaint in a Federal Action Against a Design Professional

    April 27, 2026 —
    To deter frivolous and unfounded claims against design professionals, states throughout the country have enacted statutes which generally require litigants to furnish a formal certification of merit (“COM”) from a qualified expert or face potential dismissal of their lawsuit. These COM statutes can impose a significant front-end burden on claimants who must pay an expert to review project records, interview the project team, and prepare a formal report before the lawsuit can be filed—often regardless of the amount in controversy. However, in light of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in a medical malpractice case, most, if not all of these statutes, may no longer be enforceable in federal court. This article examines the recent decision in Berk v. Choy, 146 S. Ct. 546 (2026), the decisions thus far which have applied Berk to invalidate COM statutes, and other categories of statutes applicable to the construction industry which may face a similar fate. The U.S. Supreme Court Decision (Berk v. Choy) In Berk, the plaintiff, Harold Berk, sued a doctor for medical malpractice under Delaware law in Delaware federal court. 146 S. Ct. at 551. Under Del. Code, Tit. 18, § 6853(a)(1), an affidavit of merit (like a COM) must accompany a complaint alleging medical malpractice. Id. Berk failed to include an affidavit of merit with his complaint. Id. at 552. Applying Delaware state law, the federal court dismissed Berk’s medical malpractice claim. Berk appealed to the Third Circuit, arguing that the affidavit of merit required by § 6853(a)(1) is unenforceable in federal court because it is more onerous than the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Third Circuit affirmed the District Court’s ruling, finding § 6853(a)(1) enforceable in federal court. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Olsen, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Phillip Boldt, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Olsen may be contacted at colsen@pecklaw.com Mr. Boldt may be contacted at pboldt@pecklaw.com Read the full story...

    Potential Gap in Workers Compensation Immunity Statutory Framework

    June 02, 2026 —
    Workers compensation insurance is important. As an owner, you want to ensure the contractors you hire have workers compensation insurance. Assuming you hire a contractor that is statutorily exempt from workers compensation, you want to make sure, no exception, that any subcontractor that is hired has workers compensation insurance. (Regardless, you always want subcontractors to have workers compensation insurance.). In construction, the prime contractor serves as the “statutory employer” for purposes of workers compensation insurance. With workers compensation comes workers compensation immunity. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Los Angeles Times Ranks Lewis Brisbois Third Largest Firm in LA County, Largest for Litigation

    June 08, 2026 —
    The Los Angeles Times has ranked Lewis Brisbois the third largest firm in LA County by attorney headcount, and first for number of litigation attorneys. Lewis Brisbois, whose Los Angeles office is led by Co-Managing Partners Jana I. Lubert and Kathleen Walker, has 273 attorneys working in LA County, including 167 partners. The firm ranked No. 1 for Litigation in the county, with 206 attorneys under the leadership of Partner Craig Holden. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    The AVOID Act: A New Timeline for Liability in New York Construction Projects

    February 23, 2026 —
    By April 18, 2026, New York construction litigation will operate on a faster—and far less forgiving—timeline. The Avoiding Vexatious Overuse of Impleading to Delay (the “AVOID Act”), signed into law on December 19, 2025, fundamentally rewrites third‑party practice under CPLR § 1007 by imposing strict deadlines to bring subcontractors, suppliers, and other responsible parties into a case. For owners, developers, general contractors, and their in‑house counsel, this change will shift risk assessment, contract enforcement, and litigation strategy to the very front end of a claim—particularly in New York Labor Law and construction defect cases. What Changed—and Why It Matters to Construction Cases Historically, New York defendants could implead subcontractors and other players well into discovery. The AVOID Act ends that practice. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Meghan Douris, Seyfarth Shaw LLP
    Ms. Douris may be contacted at mdouris@seyfarth.com

    GRSM Secures Illinois Appellate Victory for Architectural Firm in Implied Warranty Dispute

    May 14, 2026 —
    Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Partner Jonathan Federman, Partner Thomas Cronin, and Senior Counsel Garrett Lee recently secured a victory in the Illinois Appellate Court, Fifth District, on behalf of the firm’s client, an architectural firm, in a liability dispute. The case arose following an entity’s purchase of a 111-unit building for use as an investment or rental property. The plaintiff made claims against the architect of the building, alleging that there were design defects that breached an implied warranty, as well as a negligence claim. GRSM argued that an architect could not be liable for implied warranties, particularly for an implied warranty which no Illinois court has ever recognized. GRSM further argued that Illinois law bars an architect from liability for negligence arising from a duty pursuant to contract under the economic loss doctrine. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    Land Use Team Wins Appeal for Affordable Senior Housing Development in San Francisco

    February 23, 2026 —
    Sheppard successfully defended client Mitchelville Real Estate Group and its non-profit development partner Bernal Heights Housing Corporation in an appeal of a 70-unit, 100% affordable senior housing development at 3333 Mission Street in San Francisco’s Bernal Heights neighborhood. The team secured approval of the project, representing the developer on complex land use issues including split zoning, SB 35, the State Density Bonus Law, the Housing Crisis Act, tribal cultural resources and the Subdivision Map Act. Although the ministerially approved parcel map for the project utilized SB 35, it was appealed to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and unanimously rejected. Sheppard’s real estate transactional team also assisted with the acquisition of the property. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sheppard