Trent Cotney

09/02/2026

A roof leak is not automatically a warranty claim.

In my latest article for Professional Roofing, I discuss an important distinction for roofing contractors: the difference between a construction defect claim and a warranty claim.

That distinction can determine:

• Applicable deadlines and statutes of repose
• Notice and inspection requirements
• Available defenses
• Insurance considerations
• The scope of required repairs
• Whether the contractor is responsible at all

The same physical condition can produce very different legal obligations depending on the contract, warranty language, cause of the problem, maintenance history, and actions of other trades.

One of the biggest mistakes contractors can make is treating every service call as an admission of warranty responsibility. Investigate first, preserve the evidence, review the governing documents, and determine exactly what type of claim you are dealing with.

In roofing disputes, the legal category can matter just as much as the condition of the roof.

Read the full article, “What Went Wrong,” in the September issue of Professional Roofing. Adams & Reese National Roofing Contractors Association

What went wrong by Trent Cotney Understanding the differences between roofing disputes is crucial

09/01/2026

Qualifying a roofing company in Florida involves much more than allowing a business to use your license.

Florida law places significant responsibility on qualifying agents for the company's construction operations and, depending on the circumstances, its financial activities. That responsibility needs to come with real authority, access to information and the ability to stop noncompliant work.

In my latest article for the Florida Roofing and Sheet Metal Contractors Association (FRSA), I discuss why every Florida roofing contractor should have a well-drafted qualifier agreement addressing:

• Scope of the qualifier's authority
• Access to contracts, permits and project records
• Supervision and compliance procedures
• Insurance, indemnification and compensation
• Restrictions on unauthorized use of the license
• Termination and DBPR notification requirements
• Changes in ownership, control or business operations

A qualifier agreement cannot eliminate the statutory obligations imposed on a license holder. It can, however, make sure the qualifier has the contractual authority necessary to fulfill those obligations and clearly define the expectations of both parties.

For contractors and qualifiers alike, this is an agreement worth reviewing before a problem arises.

Read the full article from FRSA:
https://www.floridaroof.com/why-qualifier-agreements-matter

Adams & Reese

Trent Cotney, FRSA Legal Counsel, Florida Roofing Contractor, Qualifier Agreement, Florida Statutes, Section 489.119, Section 489.1195

08/29/2026

This specification booklet for Reilly Bonded Roofs was published in 1962 by the Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation of Indianapolis and reflects the era when built-up roofing systems relied heavily on coal tar pitch, tarred felts, gravel, and slag surfacing.

Reilly’s roots went back much further. Founder Peter C. Reilly entered the coal-tar business in 1886 and organized his own coal-tar distilling company in Indianapolis in 1900, which eventually became Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation. By the 1920s, operations included coal-tar refining and creosote wood treatment, and the company later expanded into specialty chemical manufacturing.

What makes this piece especially interesting is the scale shown on the cover. By 1962, Reilly listed plants from Chicago and Cleveland to Texas, Alabama, Utah, Washington, and Virginia, illustrating how national the roofing-material supply chain had already become.

The company later changed its name to Reilly Industries in 1989, marking another chapter in a business whose history stretched across much of the twentieth century.

Old specifications like this are a reminder that many of the systems, materials, and technical standards we use today developed from more than a century of experimentation and industrial roofing practice.

08/28/2026

Data center construction continues to expand rapidly, but the conversation is changing.

States and local communities are increasingly focused on who pays for the infrastructure needed to support these projects, including power generation and transmission, water, roads and other public improvements.

For developers and contractors, that means data center construction is becoming much more than a traditional construction issue. Energy availability, permitting, environmental requirements, infrastructure costs and community relations are becoming critical parts of project planning.

As demand continues to grow, I expect these issues to play an increasingly important role in where data centers get built, how quickly projects move forward and what they ultimately cost.

Take a look at my recent article on Yahoo here: https://finance.yahoo.com/real-estate/articles/pennsylvania-data-center-rules-mean-103024082.html Adams & Reese

Pennsylvania joins New York and Texas as states pivot from trying to attract data centers to asking who pays for the infrastructure, attorneys say.

08/27/2026

I had the pleasure of speaking at Clemson University on legal aspects of roofing. Adams & Reese

08/26/2026

I spoke with Construction Dive about Pennsylvania’s new data center rules and what they could mean for developers and contractors.

The broader trend is important: states are moving beyond simply trying to attract data centers and are increasingly asking who pays for the power, water and infrastructure needed to support them.

For the construction industry, that means data center development is becoming as much an energy, regulatory and community-relations issue as it is a traditional construction issue.

Pennsylvania’s new requirements may slow projects at the front end and increase development costs, but they should not prevent well-capitalized and well-planned projects from moving forward.

Thanks to Construction Dive for including my perspective.

Adams & Reese

Pennsylvania joins New York and Texas as states pivot from trying to attract data centers to asking who pays for the infrastructure, attorneys say.

08/25/2026

Meal-break and paid-leave claims can create significant exposure for roofing contractors, particularly when policies, documentation, and field practices do not line up.

My latest article for Western States Roofing Contractors Association highlights practical steps contractors can take to stay compliant, reduce claim risk, and protect their businesses.

Good compliance starts before a claim is filed.

Adams & Reese

08/24/2026

I recently joined Adam Brissman, CEO of Roofed Right America, and Nick Sabino, Regional President of Roofing Corp of America, for a discussion on private equity and the roofing industry.

Selling your company to private equity involves much more than valuation. We discussed why roofing companies continue to attract PE interest, how contractors can determine whether they are actually ready to sell, common red flags and deal mistakes, the importance of NDAs and due diligence, and what owners and employees should expect after closing.

We also shared real-world perspectives on what separates a successful transaction from one that looks good on paper but creates problems later.

For roofing contractors considering a sale, the key is understanding both the economics of the deal and what the transaction means for the company, its employees, and its future.

National Roofing Contractors Association Adams & Reese

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Klf44H3b9d8&t=1s

08/22/2026

This is a great piece of roofing history from Scott & Co. of Cincinnati, Ohio, one of the early American manufacturers of iron and steel roofing.

Scott & Co. was established in 1872 and operated from 75 East Front Street in Cincinnati during the late 19th century. Cincinnati city directories list the company at that address by the early 1880s, and contemporary construction publications were already discussing Scott & Co. roofing systems in 1882. One technical publication described the company's sheet-iron roofing design and its use of crimps intended to address the expansion and contraction of metal roofing.

The advertisement itself provides an interesting snapshot of how metal roofing was marketed more than 130 years ago. Scott & Co. promoted standing seam roofing, crimped roofing, corrugated roofing and siding, while emphasizing that its systems were "easy to apply" and required "no expensive tools." The company was also clearly selling nationally, advertising special rates for carload quantities and later telling customers that it would pay the freight on roofing and siding for mills and grain elevators.

Scott & Co. remained in the Cincinnati roofing business for decades. By 1893, Cincinnati's Illustrated Business Directory identified Edward D. Bevitt of Scott & Co. at 75 East Front Street. By 1904, the company had moved to 234 East Front Street at the Public Landing and had expanded its offerings to include roofing, siding, sheet building materials, ceiling products, corrugated iron arches, eaves troughs, conductor pipe and roof coatings.

One dating note: although this piece is sometimes identified as an 1888 or 1889 advertisement, the wording "Our Twentieth Year" is difficult to reconcile with the company's documented 1872 founding. That language would place the advertisement closer to 1891-1892, so I would describe it as circa 1890 unless additional provenance establishes an exact date.

What stands out to me is how familiar the sales pitch sounds. Durability, ease of installation, labor savings, freight costs and the ability to install the system without specialized equipment were selling points then just as constructability and labor efficiency are today.

The materials and technology have changed dramatically. The fundamentals of selling a roof have not.

08/20/2026

Community opposition is no longer just an owner or developer issue. It is becoming a real construction risk.

Public concerns over traffic, power and water use, noise, environmental impacts, and neighborhood disruption can delay permits, restrict work hours, change site access, increase costs, and even affect utility service.

Contractors need to identify these risks before bidding and make sure the contract clearly addresses responsibility for entitlements, community commitments, schedule impacts, and additional costs.

In my latest article, I discuss how contractors can better protect themselves as community opposition becomes an increasingly important part of project risk. https://www.trentcotney.com/business/community-opposition-is-becoming-a-construction-risk/

Adams & Reese