• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Murphysboro Illinois parking structure building expert Murphysboro Illinois custom homes building expert Murphysboro Illinois Subterranean parking building expert Murphysboro Illinois hospital construction building expert Murphysboro Illinois tract home building expert Murphysboro Illinois casino resort building expert Murphysboro Illinois condominium building expert Murphysboro Illinois multi family housing building expert Murphysboro Illinois production housing building expert Murphysboro Illinois institutional building building expert Murphysboro Illinois office building building expert Murphysboro Illinois landscaping construction building expert Murphysboro Illinois industrial building building expert Murphysboro Illinois mid-rise construction building expert Murphysboro Illinois concrete tilt-up building expert Murphysboro Illinois high-rise construction building expert Murphysboro Illinois structural steel construction building expert Murphysboro Illinois low-income housing building expert Murphysboro Illinois custom home building expert Murphysboro Illinois retail construction building expert Murphysboro Illinois Medical building building expert Murphysboro Illinois
    Murphysboro Illinois engineering expert witnessMurphysboro Illinois expert witness commercial buildingsMurphysboro Illinois ada design expert witnessMurphysboro Illinois forensic architectMurphysboro Illinois building code expert witnessMurphysboro Illinois building expertMurphysboro Illinois expert witness windows
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Murphysboro, 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 Murphysboro Illinois

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

    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Southern Illinois
    Local # 1466
    PO Box 510
    Cobden, IL 62920

    Murphysboro Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Greater Southwest Illinois
    Local # 1468
    6100 W Main St
    Maryville, IL 62062

    Murphysboro Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Effingham Area Home Builders Association
    Local # 1423
    PO Box 1323
    Effingham, IL 62401

    Murphysboro Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Springfield Area Home Builders Association
    Local # 1470
    3921 Pintail Dr Ste B
    Springfield, IL 62711

    Murphysboro Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Illinois
    Local # 1400
    112 W Edwards Street
    Springfield, IL 62704

    Murphysboro Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Metro Decatur Home Builders Association
    Local # 1435
    PO Box 1166
    Decatur, IL 62525

    Murphysboro Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Quincy
    Local # 1460
    PO Box 3615
    Quincy, IL 62305
    Murphysboro Illinois Building Expert 10/ 10

    Building Expert News and Information
    For Murphysboro Illinois

    Do Hurricane-Prone Coastal States Need to Update their Building Codes?

    Louisiana 13th in List of Defective Bridges

    Pancakes Decision Survives Challenge Before Hawaii Appellate Court

    Multiple Occurrences Found For Claims Against Supplier of Asbestos Products

    Foundation Arbitration Doesn’t Preclude Suing Over Cracks

    In Supreme Court Showdown, California Appeals Courts Choose Sides Regarding Whether Right to Repair Act is Exclusive Remedy for Homeowners

    Consulting Firm Indicted and Charged with Falsifying Concrete Reports

    Are You Satisfying WISHA Standards?

    California Supreme Court Shifts Gears on “Reverse CEQA”

    Honoring Veterans Under Our Roof & Across the World

    Alleged Defective Water Pump Leads to 900K in Damages

    Insurance and Your Roof

    Court Denies Insurers' Motions for Summary Judgment Under All Risk Policies

    Rooftop Solar Leases Scaring Buyers When Homeowners Sell

    Oregon Supreme Court Confirms Broad Duty to Defend

    IoT: Take Guessing Out of the Concrete Drying Process

    Fracking Fears Grow as Oklahoma Hit by More Earthquakes Than California

    Colorado Abandons the “Completed and Accepted Rule” in Favor of the “Foreseeability Rule” in Determining a Contractor’s Duty to a Third Party After Work Has Been Completed

    Remediation Work Caused by Installation of Defective Tiles Not Covered

    Stacking of Service Interruption and Contingent Business Interruption Coverages Permitted

    Subsequent Owners of Homes Again Have Right to Sue Builders for Construction Defects

    In Personal Injury Actions, Prejudgment Interest on Costs Not Recoverable

    Insurer’s Optional Appeals Process Does Not Toll Statute of Limitations Following Unequivocal Written Denial

    Insurance Law Alert: Incorporation of Defective Work Does Not Result in Covered Property Damage in California Construction Claims

    Building Supplier Sued for Late and Defective Building Materials

    Kiewit-Turner Stops Work on VA Project—Now What?

    Back to Basics: What is a Changes Clause?

    Subcontractor Sued for Alleged Defective Work

    Tender the Defense of a Lawsuit to your Liability Carrier

    Harmon Tower Opponents to Try Mediation

    New Member Added to Seattle Law Firm Williams Kastner

    How Many New Home Starts are from Teardowns?

    Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review Regarding Necessary Parties in Lien Foreclosure Actions

    Reasons to Be Skeptical About a Millennial Homebuying Boom in 2016

    Builders Seek to Modify Scaffold Law

    Texas Windstorm Insurance Agency Under Scrutiny

    Boston Building Boom Seems Sustainable

    When is a Contract not a Contract?

    Water Seepage, Ensuing Mold Damage Covered by Homeowner's Policy

    KF-103 v. American Family Mutual Insurance: An Exception to the Four Corners Rule

    Contractor Not Liable for Flooding House

    Construction Insurance Costs for New York Schools is Going Up

    Are “Green” Building Designations and Certifications Truly Necessary?

    Before Celebrating the Market Rebound, Builders Need to Read the Fine Print: New Changes in Construction Law Coming Out of the Recession

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

    No Coverage for Installation of Defective Steel Framing

    CDJ’s #6 Topic of the Year: Does Colorado Need Construction Defect Legislation to Spur Affordable Home Development?

    Nevada State Senator Says HOA Scandal Shows Need for Construction Defect Reform

    Chinese Hunt for Trophy Properties Boosts NYC, London Prices

    Subcontractor Exception to "Your Work" Exclusion Does Not Apply to Coverage Under Subcontractor's Policy
    Corporate Profile


    The Murphysboro, Illinois Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 5,500 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 Murphysboro's 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
    Murphysboro, Illinois

    Manhattan to Get Tall, Skinny Tower

    October 21, 2013 —
    At its narrowest, it’s going to be only sixty feet wide. And that will run 1,350 feet into the air. A new apartment tower is going up in New York, and one of its amenities will be that residents in the top floors will be able to look down on the Empire State Building. “It may be the skinniest building ever,” said Gregg Pasquarelli, the principal of SHoP Architects, the firm that designed the building. He estimates its ratio of height to width as “something like 25-to-1.” For all its height, the building will be divided into about 100 units. As part of the development deal, the tower will incorporate and preserve the landmark Steinway Hall. The chair of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, Robert Tierney, described it as “the best of both worlds of new construction and design and historic preservation.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Upturn in Silicon Valley

    August 17, 2011 —

    Work resumed after nearly three years on an office tower in Santa Clara, according to the San Jose Mercury News. Work had stalled on the building due to the economy, but now the developer is planning a second five-story building on the site. Other dormant projects in the area are also getting restarted. Santa Clara County saw the addition of 1,800 construction jobs in June.

    A spokesperson for the Operating Engineers Local 3 in Alameda told the paper, “two years ago we had five thousand folks on the out-of-work list. It’s now down to about 1,700.”

    Read the full story…

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

    Condo Board May Be Negligent for not Filing Construction Defect Suit in a Timely Fashion

    December 09, 2011 —

    The Maryland Court of Special Appeals has ruled that condominium association boards have a duty to “properly pursue any claims,” overturning the decision of a lower court that said that it had no legal duty to file suit. Tom Schild, writing at, writes about Greenstein v. Avalon Courts Six Condominium, Inc.

    In this case, the condominium board waited six years after residents complained about water intrusion problems before suing the developer. The court ruled that the suit could not be filed, as the statute of limitations was only three years. After residents were assessed for the repairs, homeowners sued the board, arguing that their delay lead to the need for the special assessment.

    After overturning the decision, the Court of Special Appeals has asked the trial court to review the negligence claim.

    Read the full story…

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

    BE PROACTIVE: Steps to Preserve and Enhance Your Insurance Rights In Light of the Recent Natural Disasters

    October 19, 2017 —
    Our hearts go out to those families and businesses who have suffered losses due to the recent fires, hurricanes, and other natural disasters. We hope that everyone in Sonoma, Napa, Orange County, and nationwide affected by these tragic events is somewhere safe. As someone who lost a house in a fire growing up and now is an attorney who helps both residential and business policyholders, there are a few pieces of wisdom I’d like to pass along to help prepare for the worst: 1) MAINTAIN DUPLICATES OF CRITICAL DOCUMENTS OFFSITE OR ONLINE After the fire, you’re going to need your insurance policies and other critical documents. While it’s usually possible to request copies, this can take weeks, which will hold up your claims process. We are fortunate enough to have the technology for cloud-based storage of key documents – like your insurance policy, insurance broker contact information, tax returns, life insurance policies, will, business plan, inventories, etc. – oftentimes for free. Maintaining these records onsite during your daily life and business operations is important, but so is taking the time and trouble to make sure you have a back-up offsite. It’s easy to do, and so much easier than trying to recreate it after the fact. 2) MAKE A RECORD OF YOUR PROPERTY AND POSSESSIONS If you are lucky enough to still be in your home or business property, I strongly recommend that you take a video of your property and possessions to keep for your records. A digital inventory with receipts would be great – but a video log will also be very helpful later.
    • For your home: This includes the furniture, artwork, appliances, jewelry, electronics, collectibles, landscaping and custom features of the inside and outside of your house.
    • For your business: This includes your furniture and artwork, your inventory and your electronics.
    Look into offsite back-ups of your important electronic data – whether documents, e-mails, insurance policies, inventory logs, accounting data, client correspondence, or pictures of your kids or grandkids. Why A Record Is Important in the Insurance Claims Process Though I hope no one has to deal with this, a video record will make it much easier in the event of a tragedy to deal with insurance claims for two reasons:
    • It is evidence to submit to the insurance company to show exactly what your property was like before disaster struck.
      • For your home, you likely have a homeowner's insurance policy that covers your “3 bedroom, 2 bath, 2000 square foot home built in 1962,” but your insurer won’t know the quality of what is actually inside. It will be up to you to prove you had a brand new Viking stovetop, rather than a 20-year old Kitchenaid; custom built-in cabinets rather than Ikea furniture. (On this note, if you ever do any remodeling, be sure to tell your broker to make sure it's covered by your policy!)
      • For your business, your policy will similarly be generic, and the insurer will similarly insist on evidence of your business inventory, sales orders, equipment, artwork, etc. in the event of a loss.
    • A video record will also help to jog your memory to create itemized inventories to submit to the insurance company. Creating an inventory of everything lost after a casualty can be the most difficult and emotional part of the rebuilding process. I encourage you to do anything you can do now to lessen the stress later. After a traumatic loss, it’s impossible to remember everything, so most people never collect their full insurance benefits. United Policyholders, an amazing non-profit resource for policyholders, has a great app and other online tools to help create your inventory. You can find the app and other helpful information at
    3) CHECK YOUR POLICY Even if you have not been personally affected by the recent disasters, these tragedies are an excellent reminder to check to make sure you are fully covered.
    • Make sure you understand what is covered under your policy, and get confirmation that you are covered for a total loss. Talk with your broker to make sure your policy limits make sense, including those for separate structures, personal property, and additional living expenses, which are usually a percentage of your dwelling coverage limit.
    • Check to make sure your personal property limits would cover your possessions– if you have a lot of artwork, jewelry, antiques, and other valuables, the standard limits might not be enough for you.
    • Consider this question: Does your additional living expense/business interruption coverage (aka the amount your insurance company will pay while your home or business property is being rebuilt) provide enough for your needs? Even if your limits/coverage made sense when you purchased the policy, things may have changed.
    • You can usually increase your other coverage limits with a quick email to your insurance broker, often with very little impact on your annual premium. 4) DON’T BE AFRAID TO ASK FOR HELP As simple as it sounds, don’t be afraid to ask for help. No one expects you to be an expert on this, and pretending you don’t need assistance can cost you thousands of dollars in insurance benefits in the future. So be sure to take advantage of the resources out there so that you are fully prepared to handle whatever disaster nature sends your way. For any additional questions, and for help navigating the insurance claims process after a disaster, please do not hesitate to reach out. Jacquelyn Mohr is an associate in the Walnut Creek office of Newmeyer & Dillion, focusing in business litigation, insurance coverage, securities fraud and construction disputes. Jacquelyn can be reached at or 925.988.3200. About Newmeyer & Dillion For more than 30 years, Newmeyer & Dillion has delivered creative and outstanding legal solutions and trial results for a wide array of clients. With over 70 attorneys practicing in all aspects of business, employment, real estate, construction and insurance law, Newmeyer & Dillion delivers legal services tailored to meet each client’s needs. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, with offices in Walnut Creek, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, Newmeyer & Dillion attorneys are recognized by The Best Lawyers in America©, and Super Lawyers as top tier and some of the best lawyers in California, and have been given Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review's AV Preeminent® highest rating. For additional information, call 949-854-7000 or visit Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of Jacquelyn M. Mohr, Newmeyer & Dillion LLP
      Ms. Mohr may be contacted at

      Boston Tower Project to Create 450 Jobs

      November 18, 2011 —

      Continuing the development of Boston’s Theater District, Millennium Partners broke ground for the building of Hayward Place, a 15-story residential tower with street-level shops. The project is expected to take two years to complete and will employ about 450 construction workers.

      Thomas Menino, the mayor of Boston said that the “ground breaking of Hayward Place is another sign of economic growth and forward progress on the revitalization of this area.” The project will be built by Suffolk Construction. John Fish, their CEO, said they were “fortunate as a contractor to be the beneficiary of this.”

      The report in the Boston Herald notes that a few blocks away, the site of the former Filenes department store is still “an empty eyesore.” Menino joked, “anyone want to bid for it?” He promised that site would also be developed.

      Read the full story…

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

      New Case Alert: California Federal Court Allows Policy Stacking to Cover Continuous Injury

      November 23, 2016 —
      “Stacking” is a practice that is very favorable for policyholders, especially in environmental coverage cases involving extended pollution events. It allows a policyholder to combine the limits of multiple consecutive policies to cover continuous injury claims occurring over multiple policy periods. Without stacking, insurers can limit a policyholder’s recovery to a single policy limit. The Eastern District of California recently decided that a policyholder could stack the limits of six consecutive policies, where the occurrence was a continuous injury spanning all six policy years. Among other rulings, the court determined that the plain language of the policy under dispute did not prevent stacking. Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of William S. Bennett, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
      Mr. Bennett may be contacted at

      California Supreme Court Finds that When it Comes to Intentional Interference Claims, Public Works Projects are Just Different, Special Even

      April 20, 2017 —
      Earlier, we reported on a California Court of Appeals decision – Roy Allan Slurry Seal, Inc. v. American Asphalt South, Inc. – which held for the first time that a second-place bidder on a public works contract could sue a winning bidder who failed to pay its workers prevailing wages, under the business tort of intentional interference with prospective economic advantage. Fast forward nearly two years, several amicus briefs, and “one doghouse”* later and the California Supreme Court has . . . reversed. The Roy Allan Slurry Seal Case To catch you up, or rather, refresh your recollection . . . Between 2009 and 2012, American Asphalt South, Inc. was awarded 23 public works contracts totaling more than $14.6 million throughout Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino and San Diego counties. Two of the losing bidders on those projects – Roy Allan Slurry Seal, Inc. and Doug Martin Contracting, Inc. – sued American in each of these counties for intentional interference with prospective economic advantage as well as under the Unfair Practices Act (“UPA”) (Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17000 et seq.) and the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) (Bus. & Prof. Code §17200). Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
      Mr. Murai may be contacted at

      Entire Fairness or Business Judgment? It’s Anyone’s Guess

      January 09, 2015 —
      In lawsuits challenging the validity of business transactions and combinations, the most significant issue is often which standard of review the court applies: the defense-friendly “Business Judgment Rule” or the more stringent “Entire Fairness Standard.” The standard utilized by the court – or more often times the standard which the parties think the court will apply – can drive decisions on motion practice, settlement discussions, and resolution strategy. Under the Business Judgment Rule, directors are presumed to have acted in good faith and their decisions will only be questioned when they are shown to have engaged in self-dealing or fraud. However, if a “Controlling Shareholder” stands on both sides of the transaction, the court will often scrutinize the transaction under the more plaintiff-friendly “Entire Fairness Standard.” So, what constitutes a “Controlling Shareholder?” If the party in question owns more than 50% of a company’s equity, the answer is clear-cut. However, for cases involving stockholders who own less than 50% of a company’s equity and stand on both sides of the disputed transaction, the answer is not so simple. This uncertainty was highlighted in back-to-back decisions by the Delaware Chancery Court in November 2014. On November 25, 2014, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss a derivative lawsuit alleging breach of fiduciary duty in In Re Sanchez Energy Derivative Litigation (“Sanchez”). Vice Chancellor Glasscock held that the complaint failed to plead facts sufficient to raise an inference that two directors with a collective 21.5% equity interest in the company were Controlling Shareholders. The very next day, in In Re Zhongpin Inc. Stockholders Litigation (“Zhongpin”), the Delaware Chancery Court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss breach of fiduciary duty claims against an alleged “Controlling Shareholder” and members of the company’s board. In Zhongpin, Vice Chancellor Noble held that sufficient facts were plead to raise an inference that a CEO with a 17.5% equity was a “Controlling Shareholder.” Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys Maurice Pesso, Greg M. Steinberg and Christopher J. Orrico Mr. Pesso may be contacted at Mr. Steinberg may be contacted at Mr. Orrico may be contacted at Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of