• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Flossmoor Illinois landscaping construction building expert Flossmoor Illinois parking structure building expert Flossmoor Illinois custom homes building expert Flossmoor Illinois housing building expert Flossmoor Illinois low-income housing building expert Flossmoor Illinois mid-rise construction building expert Flossmoor Illinois industrial building building expert Flossmoor Illinois hospital construction building expert Flossmoor Illinois condominium building expert Flossmoor Illinois office building building expert Flossmoor Illinois high-rise construction building expert Flossmoor Illinois tract home building expert Flossmoor Illinois Medical building building expert Flossmoor Illinois townhome construction building expert Flossmoor Illinois production housing building expert Flossmoor Illinois custom home building expert Flossmoor Illinois structural steel construction building expert Flossmoor Illinois retail construction building expert Flossmoor Illinois multi family housing building expert Flossmoor Illinois casino resort building expert Flossmoor Illinois institutional building building expert Flossmoor Illinois
    Flossmoor Illinois expert witness concrete failureFlossmoor Illinois building code expert witnessFlossmoor Illinois soil failure expert witnessFlossmoor Illinois forensic architectFlossmoor Illinois construction expert witnessFlossmoor Illinois construction project management expert witnessesFlossmoor Illinois building consultant expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Flossmoor, Illinois

    Illinois Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB4873 Pending: The Notice and Opportunity to Repair Act provides that a construction professional shall be liable to a homeowner for damages caused by the acts or omissions of the professional and his or her agents, employees, or subcontractors. This bill requires the service of notice to the professional of the complained-of defect in the construction by the homeowner prior to commencement of a lawsuit. Allows the professional to make an offer of repair or settlement and to rescind this offer if the claimant fails to respond within 30 days.

    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Flossmoor Illinois

    No state license required for general contracting. License required for roofing.

    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    SouthWest Suburban Home Builders Association
    Local # 1432
    10767 W 163rd Pl
    Orland Park, IL 60467

    Flossmoor Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Northern Illinois Home Builders Association Inc
    Local # 1434
    3695 Darlene Ct Ste 102
    Aurora, IL 60504

    Flossmoor Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Greater Fox Valley
    Local # 1431
    PO Box 1146
    Saint Charles, IL 60174

    Flossmoor Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Kankakee
    Local # 1445
    221 S Schuyler Ave Ste B
    Kankakee, IL 60901

    Flossmoor Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Greater Chicago
    Local # 1425
    5999 S. New Wilke Rd Ste 104
    Rolling Meadows, IL 60008

    Flossmoor Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of the Greater Rockford Area
    Local # 1465
    631 N Longwood St Suite 102
    Rockford, IL 61107

    Flossmoor Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Greater Peoria
    Local # 1455
    1599 N Main Street
    East Peoria, IL 61611

    Flossmoor Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Building Expert News and Information
    For Flossmoor Illinois

    Construction Defect Coverage Barred Under Business Risk Exclusion in Colorado

    Lien Claimant’s Right to Execute against Bond Upheld in Court of Appeals

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

    Florida’s Supreme Court Resolves Conflicting Appellate Court Decisions on Concurrent Causation

    Not so Fast! How Does Revoking Acceleration of a Note Impact the Statute of Limitations?

    Inability to Confirm Coverage Supports Setting Aside Insured’s Default Judgment on Grounds of Extrinsic Mistake

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    Musk Says ‘Chicago Express’ Tunnel Project Could Start Work in Months

    California Department of Corrections Gets Hit With the Prison Bid Protest Blues

    No Coverage Under Exclusions For Wind and Water Damage

    Arizona Court Cites California Courts to Determine Construction Defect Coverage is Time Barred

    Pending Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Increase 0.8% in November

    I-35W Bridge Collapse may be Due to “Inadequate Load Capacity”

    Low Interest Rates Encourages Homeowners to become Landlords

    Allen, TX Board of Trustees Expected to Approve Stadium Repair Plans

    Sioux City Building Owners Sue Architect over Renovation Costs

    The Sky is Falling! – Or is it? Impacting Lives through Addressing the Fear of Environmental Liabilities

    Engineer and CNA Dispute Claim Over Dual 2014 Bridge Failures

    Lawsuits over Roof Dropped

    To Bee or Not to Bee - CA Court Finds Denial of Coverage Based on Exclusion was Premature Where Facts had not been Judicially Determined

    CRH to Buy Building-Products Firm Laurence for $1.3 Billion

    Duty to Defend Bodily Injury Evolving Over Many Policy Periods Prorated in Louisiana

    Construction Defect Lawsuits Hinted for Dublin, California

    Pennsylvania: Searching Questions Ahead of Oral Argument in Domtar

    Architect Blamed for Crumbling Public School Playground

    Rio de Janeiro's Bursting Real-Estate Bubble

    Guardrail Maker Defrauded U.S. of $175 Million and Created Hazard, Jury Says

    Spotting Problem Projects

    In Hong Kong, You Can Find a Home Where the Buffalo Roam

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Property Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Landmark Towers Association, Inc. v. UMB Bank, N.A. or: One Bad Apple Spoils the Whole Bunch

    E-Commerce Logistics Test Limits of Tilt-Up Construction

    Virginia Chinese Drywall “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and number of “occurrences”

    Solar and Wind Just Passed Another Big Turning Point

    2015 California Construction Law Update

    Pennsylvania Sues Firms to Recoup Harrisburg Incinerator Losses

    Property Damage Caused By Construction Next Door Covered as Ensuing Loss

    U.S., Canada, Mexico Set New Joint Clean-Energy Goal

    Condos Down in Denver Due to Construction Defect Litigation

    Serial ADA Lawsuits Targeting Small Business Owners

    Happy New Year from CDJ

    Construction Companies Can Be Liable for “Secondary Exposure” of Asbestos to Household Members

    Thieves Stole Backhoe for Use in Bank Heist

    Georgia Supreme Court Says Construction Defects Can Be an “Occurrence”

    Construction Delays for China’s Bahamas Resort Project

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

    Green Energy Can Complicate Real Estate Foreclosures

    Nevada’s Home Building Industry can Breathe Easier: No Action on SB250 Leaves Current Attorney’s Fees Provision Intact

    New Notary Language For Mechanics Lien Releases and Stop Payment Notice Releases

    U.S. Home Prices Climbed 0.1% in July as Gains Slowed
    Corporate Profile


    The Flossmoor, Illinois 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 this considerable body of 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
    Flossmoor, Illinois

    Building Permits Hit Five-Year High

    October 01, 2013 —
    The New York Times reports that building permits in August were at their highest since May 2008, even despite a recent rise in mortgage rates. Construction starts on single-family homes were at their highest in six months as well. On the other hand, construction starts for condominiums and apartments fell slightly more than 11 percent. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Housing Inventory Might be Distorted by Pocket Listings

    July 23, 2014 —
    NBC News reported that pocket listings, or unadvertised listings, may be hiding the true number of homes on the market. “A so-called pocket listing is when the real estate agent signs a listing agreement with a seller but does not advertise it widely or put it in a multiple listing service, where other agents and buyers can see it,” according to NBC News. Lawrence Yun, chief economist for the Realtors, told NBC News that he believes the perceived shortage of inventory “is due to the prevalence of pocket listings in some markets." Pocket listings aren’t illegal. There aren’t any “hard numbers” for these unadvertised listings, and so the number of actual listings is based on conjecture by realtors. "The conditions are ripe for this kind of approach to take," Nela Richardson, chief economist at Redfin, a real estate brokerage, told NBC News. “When there is limited inventory, an agent is able to convince a seller, because there is so much demand for housing that maybe as many eyeballs don’t need to see your home as in a traditional market.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Defects Not Occurrences under Ohio Law

    November 07, 2012 —
    Concluding the “claims of defective construction or workmanship brought by a property owners are not claims for ‘property damage’ caused by an ‘occurrence’ under a commercial general liability policy,” the Supreme Court of Ohio has ruled in Westfield Insurance Co. v. Custom Agri Systems, Inc. In the underlying case, Custom Agri Systems, Inc. built a grain bin as a subcontractor to Younglove Construction, LLC. Younglove had been contracted by PSD Development, which withheld payment, claiming it had suffered damages due to defects in Custom Agri System’s work. Younglove filed a complaint against Custom Agri, which filed complaints against its subcontractors. Custom Agri also requested that its insurer, Westfield Insurance Company, defend and indemnify it. Westfield claimed that it had no such duty. The Ohio Supreme Court concurred. The decision notes that “Custom was being sued under two general theories: defective construction and consequential damages resulting from the defective construction.” Westfield argued that none of the claims were “for ‘property damage’ caused by an ‘occurrence” and therefore none of the claims were covered under the CGL policy.” Further, Westfield argued that “even if the claims were for property damage caused by an occurrence, they were removed from coverage by an exclusion in the policy.” The case was filed in the US District Court which issued a summary judgment for Westfield. The plaintiff appealed and Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals certified the questions to the Supreme Court of Ohio. The court noted that “all of the claims against which Westfield is being asked to defect and indemnify Custom relate to Custom’s work itself.” And so, the court concluded that they “must decide whether Custom’s alleged defective construction of and workmanship on the steel grain bin constitute property damage caused by an ‘occurrence.’” However, the court noted that under the terms of the insurance contract, an occurrence is defined as “an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to substantially the same general harmful conditions,” and the court noted that the “natural and commonly accepted meaning” of “accident” is something “unexpected, as well as unintended.” The Ohio Supreme Court also looked at court decisions in other places, and found that in many similar cases, courts have concluded that construction defects are not occurrences. In a dissenting opinion, Justice Pfeifer argues that “if the defective construction is accidental, it constitutes an ‘occurrence’ under a CGL policy.” Justice Pfeifer characterized the majority’s definition of “accidental” as “broad, covering unexpected, unintentional happenings.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Failure to Timely File Suit in Federal Court for Flood Loss is Fatal

    June 29, 2017 —
    Although the insureds timely filed their suit for denial of flood benefits in state court, the Fourth Circuit found the lawsuit against the Insurer was untimely because it was not filed in federal district court. Woodson v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2017 U. S. App. LEXIS 7862 (4th Cir. May 3 , 2917). Hurricane Irene struck the insureds' house in August 27, 2011. Their property was flooded and for several hours, subjected to wave action, allegedly causing further damage to the home. The insureds contacted Allstate, who retained Rimkus Consulting Group, Inc. to inspect the property. Rimkus found that, other than a substantial loss of soil washed away around the supporting portion of the house, there was no damage to the structure of the house. Rimkus recommended reimbursement of $1200 for the washed out soil. The insureds retained House Engineering, P.C., which submitted a report describing substantial damage caused by the hurricane, including movement to the pilings that caused the house to no longer be level. The insureds claimed $228,822 in damages. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    New England Construction Defect Law Groups to Combine

    November 13, 2013 —
    The lawyers of Little Bulman Medeiros & Whitney PC will be joining Pierce Atwood on December 9, 2013. The combined firm will have a larger construction litigation practice. Little Bulman is already recognized for its handling of construction disputes. Pierce Atwood is one of the largest firms in New England. Their combined forces intended to create a strong presence in construction litigation throughout New England. Gloria Pinza, a managing partner at Pierce Atwood said of Little Bulman that “their exceptional credentials in the construction law area will combine with our strong construction practice to create a regional practice that will provide highly competitive expertise, depth and value throughout New England and beyond. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Common Construction Contract Provisions: No-Damages-for-Delay Clause

    March 16, 2017 —
    In continuing our series on common contract provisions found in construction contracts, this post highlights no-damages-for-delay clauses. Parties to a contract – particularly a construction contract – may agree that the performance of the contract must occur within a set amount of time. When a party is delayed in performing a contract, it may incur additional costs due to the delay. In most circumstances, unless the parties agree otherwise, the delayed party would be entitled to an extension of time to perform the contract. But it may also seek to recover the additional costs resulting from the delay. A no-damages-for-delay clause attempts to prevent the delayed party from recovering those additional costs. In construction contracts, an upstream party, such as an owner or prime contractor, typically relies on a no-damages-for-delay clause when presented with a delay claim by a downstream party, such as a subcontractor. Reprinted courtesy of David Cook, Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP and Chadd Reynolds, Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP Mr. Cook may be contacted at Mr. Reynolds may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Supreme Court Rules on Contractual Liability Exclusion in Construction Cases

    January 22, 2014 —
    The Texas Supreme Court ruled on Ewing v. Amerisure Ins. Co. on January 17th, a “much-anticipated” decision according to Carl A. Salisbury of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP. “Construction projects are always the subject of contracts among owners and contractors” Salisbury stated in his article on The recent decision demonstrates that “an exclusion in the standard Comprehensive Liability Insurance policy that precludes coverage for ‘liabilities assumed under contract’” does not usually “apply to construction contracts.” In 2008, Ewing Construction Company built a set of tennis courts in Corpus Christi, according to Salisbury. “Shortly after construction was complete, according to the school district, ‘the courts started flaking, crumbling, and cracking, rendering them unusable for their intended purpose of hosting competitive tennis events.’” After the school district sued Ewing in state court, Ewing “turned the suit over to Amerisure, its CGL insurer, seeking a defense and indemnity. Amerisure denied all coverage, citing the contractual liability exclusion in its policy. This inspired Ewing to sue the carrier in federal district court for the Southern District of Texas.” After several rulings and appeals, the case eventually reached the Texas Supreme Court: “According to the Ewing court, the contract claims that Ewing failed to perform in a good and workmanlike manner ‘are substantively the same as its claims that Ewing negligently performed under the contract because they contain the same factual allegations and alleged misconduct.’ Failure to perform in a ‘good and workmanlike manner’ is functionally and substantively the same as performing negligently. ‘Accordingly,’ the Ewing court said, ‘we conclude that a general contractor who agrees to perform its construction work in a good and workmanlike manner, without more, does not enlarge its duty to exercise ordinary care in fulfilling its contract, thus it does not ‘assume liability’ for damages arising out of its defective work so as to trigger the Contractual Liability Exclusion.’” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    January 28, 2014 —
    On January 3rd of this year, Chad Abraham reported in the Aspen Daily News that the Ute City building—a condominium on Hopkins Avenue in Aspen, Colorado—“lacks proper entryways to apartments and a basement-level nightclub space for both tenants and the disabled.” The owners, Michael Sedoy and Natalia Shvachko, have been sued by the city after refusing “to allow access to an eastside staircase and elevator for other building residents and disabled patrons of a basement restaurant,” according to the Aspen Daily News. “Their stance has forced the other tenants and the disabled to use a westside, alleyway service entrance, according to the city.” Sedoy and Schvachko’s attorney retorts in court documents “that the city approved of a building map and declarations that allow access through the westside entry in the alley.” Furthermore, in another article by Abraham published in the Aspen Daily News on January 25th, he relates that the owners had filed more than “more than 30 noise complaints with the police and the city’s environmental health department about eateries and bars around their home on Restaurant Row. That led to a trial for the Aspen Brewing Co., which a jury acquitted in about 10 minutes last week.” In addition, the couple is being sued by Mountain Home Window Fashions, the Ute City building general contractor. According to the lawsuit as reported by the Daily Aspen News, Mountain Home claims they are owed $12,332. The owners have counter-sued, alleging “that there were defects in Mountain Home Window Fashions’ work” and that one of the employees “made unauthorized charges on Sedoy’s credit card.” Read the full story, January 3rd article ... Read the full story, January 25th article ... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of