Tips for Lawyers :: Illinois Injury Lawyer Blog

Home > Tips for Lawyers

March 7, 2010

Case Law Update: Duty of Care in Premises Liability

Pence v. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Corporation, No. 1-08-3668 (2-3-10) found that when the plaintiff parked his car in Metra parking lot, and walked diagonally across the street, and in middle of street tripped on bolt protruding from railroad tie. Metra owed no duty to Plaintiff as he was not a passenger, as he had not yet boarded train and had not purchased train ticket that morning, even though Plaintiff stated that he had monthly train pass and intended to board train. Plaintiff was not in a crosswalk at time of his fall, thus he was not intended user of middle of street and Metra owed no duty of care to him. This case will impact Illinois premises liability law.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

March 7, 2010

Legislative Update: Electronic notice

House Bill 5381 would allow the circuit court to give required notice to a party by email if the party has an electronic address. Requires that the circuit clerk maintain a copy of the electronic content and a delivery receipt in his or her records. Gives electronic notices the same effect as a hard copy notice. This bill would have a large impact on Illinois lawyers.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

February 14, 2010

Case Law Update: Summary Judgment in Negligence

Norman v. Brandt, no. 4-09-0246 (2-4-10) is a case where the Plaintiff alleged that Defendant, who offered to lead cars of friends who were heading to lake to swim, drove his vehicle "in concert" with driver of vehicle from which Plaintiff was thrown to cause his injuries and death. The appellate court affirmed the district court’s decision that granted summary judgment for Defendant because Plaintiff's vehicle was following closely behind Defendant on a narrow country road and careened off road and rolled over in field. Despite Defendant having exceeded speed limit, he did not commit tort in concert, per Restatement of Torts Section 876, as not attempting to race, no horseplay, and did not drive in way to encourage or substantially assist other driver to driver tortiously. This case will impact Illinois per se negligence.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

February 13, 2010

Case Law Update: Punitive Damages in Products Liability

Jackson v. Ford Motor Company, No. 5-05-0723 affirmed a jury verdict for $43 million, including $15 million in punitive damages. The plaintiffs, in 1993 Lincoln Town Car, were rear-ended in dead center of car, at about 60 mph; fuel tank was crushed, and pipe wrench in trunk pierced fuel tank and caught fire immediately; both were severely burned and one Plaintiff died. Products liability and four negligence claims as to design of fuel tank. Court declined to extend due-process analysis of excessive punitive-damage awards to liability for punitive damages. Court concluded both parties received fair trial, as jury heard extensive evidence from both sides, and contested issues were fully and fairly presented. Ample evidence of standard of care and of alternative fuel tank locations recognized and used in auto industry. Defendant failed to submit special interrogatories and thus cannot claim prejudice on claim alleged to be unsupported by sufficient evidence. Proper to admit evidence of Defendant's pre-injury, post-sale safety improvements, as policy considerations that bar admission of post-accident remedial measures are inapplicable. This case will impact products liability law in Illinois.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

February 12, 2010

Case Law Update: Insurance in Automobile Accidents

Erie Insurance Exchange v. Triana, Nos. 1-08-3310 (2-3-10) affirmed a decision ruling that a driver and a passenger who were in an automobile accident in Galena with an underinsured motorist should have been grated summary judgment. The summary judgment for the underinsured motorist was proper where the trial court found setoff provisions of the policy were not ambiguous; and only $100,000 in total UIM benefits remained for all defendant after setoff by $200,000 total paid to both by other driver's insurer. Underinsured motorists split limits of $300,000 per person/$300,000 per accident, but with setoff provision that these limits would be set off by aggregate amount paid by tortfeasor. This case will impact automobile accident law.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

February 12, 2010

Case Law Update: Negligence in Premises Liability

Pence v. Northeast Illinois Regional Committee Corporation, No. 1-08-3668 (2-3-10) affirmed a decision ruling that since the plaintiff parked his car in the Metra parking lot, and then walked diagonally across the street, and it was in middle of street tripped on bolt protruding from railroad tie, Metra owed no duty to Plaintiff as he was not a passenger, as he had not yet boarded train and had not purchased train ticket that morning, even though Plaintiff stated that he had monthly train pass and intended to board train. Plaintiff was not in a crosswalk at time of his fall, thus he was not intended user of middle of street and Metra owed no duty of care to him. This Illinois case will impact premises liability.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

February 5, 2010

Cook County Judicial Primary Results are Tabulated

The judicial primary results for Cook County have been released. To view the results, please click the link.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

January 30, 2010

Cook County Releases Judiciary Recommendations

Each year, judicial candidates are rated by the member bars of the Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening based on detailed information supplied by candidates, a background check by trained lawyers/investigators, and interviews of each candidate. To see a full list of the judicial recommendations, visit the Chicago Sun-Times.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

January 28, 2010

Update for attorneys: AAJ dangerous defects in autos teleseminar

After the recent Toyota gas pedal recall affecting millions of vehicles, the attorneys at Levin & Perconti wanted to highlight an especially important teleseminar that the American Association for Justice is offering to car accident attorneys. The teleseminar is entitled Dangerous Defects in Automobiles – Hot Topics in Crashworthiness Cases. The package includes audio CDs to use in the car, a multimedia CD including reference materials, and MP3 and iPod audio files to use on your iPod.

Click here for more information on the auto defects AAJ teleseminar.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Motor Vehicle Accidents , Product Recalls , Tips for Lawyers

| Share

January 16, 2010

Legislative Update: New Pleading Requirements

House Bill 4931 amended the Code of Civil Procedure to do three things: 1) Requires "any person" who files more than 10 civil actions a year seeking money damages against natural persons to attach a new statutory notice to the summons. If the action is based on an assigned claim, it requires the notice to state that the written assignment must be attached to the complaint as an exhibit or recited therein and that the defendant is entitled to a copy of all assignments of the debt. (2) Prohibits a court from entering a judgment unless plaintiff complies with the assignment section (Sec. 2-403). This includes actions in small claims. (3) If a plaintiff recites in the complaint that the proceeding is based on a written assignment, a copy must be provided to the defendant if he or she requests. This bill has been assigned to the house rules committee and would have a great impact on Illinois lawyers.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

January 9, 2010

Case Law Update: Tort Immunity Act as Applied to Premises Liability

Doria v. The Village of Downers Grove, No. 2-08-0821 (12-29-09) affirmed that the plaintiff fell while removing package from the car which he parked near the store building, where the gravel area and the roadway converged, and alleged that the fall was a result of four-inch difference in elevation between gravel area and an adjoining street. The nature of the gravel lot and surrounding area indicate that gravel area was not intended to be used as parking lot, and the Plaintiff demonstrated no historical use to indicate that gravel lot was so intended; thus, Village not liable under Section 3-102(a) of Tort Immunity Act. This case will impact premises liability in Illinois law.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

December 15, 2009

Case Law Update: Negligence at Wal-Mart

Johnson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. No. 08-4226 (12/1/09) found that the district court did not err in granting defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's negligence claim alleging that defendant's illegal sale of bullets to plaintiff's wife without asking her to present FOID card was proximate cause of wife committing suicide by shooting herself in chest. Under Illinois’ suicide rule, plaintiff's suicide was independent intervening event that prevented plaintiff from establishing probable cause. The court rejected plaintiff's argument that violation of public safety statute alone can generate reasonable inference of proximate cause in circumstance of plaintiff's suicide. This seventh circuit case will impact Illinois negligence law.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

December 9, 2009

Case Law Update: Pleadings in Illinois

Cable America, Inc. v. Pace Electronics, Inc., No. 1-08-3073 (11-16-09) found that a court was within its discretion to dismiss with prejudice Plaintiff's fifth amended complaint, where court had given Plaintiff numerous warnings of pleading deficiencies, yet still non-compliance with requirement of 735 ILCS 5/2-603 for plain and concise statement of cause of action by inclusion of multiple causes of action, and by not specifying whether claiming breach of oral or written contract. This case will impact Illinois law.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

December 8, 2009

Case Law Update: Experts and Summary Judgment

Thompon v. Gordon, No. 2-07-0667 (11-19-09) found that the language in contract between engineering companies and developer obligated engineering companies to employ professional standard of care in designing replacement for bridge deck. Affidavit of civil engineer is evidence that companies breached standard of care by not considering or designing improved median barrier, although median barrier was not explicitly mentioned in contract. This case will impact Illinois law.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

December 7, 2009

Case Law Update: Jury Verdicts in Comparative Negligence

Heupal v. Jenkins, No. 1-07-1138 (11-10-09) decided that in a trial for pedestrian's injuries resulting from collision of two vehicles, court erred in including good-faith settling tortfeasor on verdict form for allocation of fault, as Section 2-1117 settling tortfeasors should not be listed on verdict form or considered in apportionment of fault. This Illinois case will impact personal injury law.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

December 6, 2009

Case Law Update: Premises Liability

Eckburg v. Presbytery of Blackhawk of the Presbyterian Church, No. 2-08-0995 (11-13-09) found that the defendant, who had been informed of rotted trees on its land in highway easement, could be liable for death and injuries of motorcyclist and passenger who were struck by falling tree. The error to find that distinction of land as "rural" was dispositive; instead, parties should be allowed to conduct discovery to determine whether duty owed to plaintiff, including duty from notice of dangerous natural condition on land. This Illinois case will greatly affect premises liability law.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

November 22, 2009

Case Law Update: Time Frame for Motions to Reconsider

Heiden v. DNA Diagnostic Center, No. 2-07-0620 (11/9/09) found that a post judgment motion to extend time for filing notice of appeal of ruling on motion which challenges judgment, per Rule 303(a)(1), is necessary for the appellate court to have jurisdiction. A "Motion to Reconsider" which is actually a request to clarify judgment is not a challenge to judgment. This case will greatly impact all Illinois law.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

November 17, 2009

Legal opinions just got easier to access

The attorneys at Levin & Perconti wanted to share some great news with other attorneys – Legal opinions are now available on Google Scholar! Google Scholar users have the ability to search for specific opinions related to broad topics, such as product liability law. Completeness cannot be guaranteed, but this will definitely help access to legal opinions.

Click here if you are interested in learning more about Google Scholar.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

October 25, 2009

Legislative Update: “Red Flags” Rule Exclusion for Small Firms

The U.S. House passed a bill Tuesday that would exempt attorneys in small firms and other professionals from the Federal Trade Commission's "red flags" rule, which is set to go into effect November 1. This legislation will greatly impact Illinois law.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share

October 18, 2009

Case Law Update: Res Judicata Applied to Voluntary Dismissal

Quintas v. Asset Management Group, Inc., No. 1-08-1950 (9-30-09) reversed a decision that found that the docket entry, which was inconsistent with the written order, stated plaintiffs were granted leave to refile, and thus the docket entry is express reservation of plaintiffs’ right to refile and their suit not being res judicata. Defendants did not acquiesce in refilling, as they raised res judicata defense in their answer to re-filed complaint and timely filed motion for expenses per Rule 219(e), acquiescence exception to res judicata does not apply. This case will impact all Illinois cases.

Posted by Levin & Perconti | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Tips for Lawyers

| Share