1. Biedron v. Eco Home Solutions– Property Damage

Cook County, Illinois (bench trial)

This case involved a property damage claim brought by plaintiff, homeowner, arising from damages allegedly sustained after electing to participate in the ComEd home energy savings program. We represented the subcontractor that performed the installation of insulation in the plaintiff’s home. We argued that there was no oral contract between plaintiff and defendant, and that plaintiff’s alleged damages were the result of excessive humidity levels in the home caused by an unsealed crawlspace, and not the result of the work performed by our subcontractor.  The matter proceeded to Cook County mandatory non-binding arbitration where an award of $0 was entered in favor of our client.  Plaintiff rejected the arbitration award and the matter was scheduled for trial.  Prior to trial, we were successful on a motion for summary judgment which dismissed plaintiff’s claim brought under the Home Repair and Remodeling Act through which plaintiff was seeking attorney’s fees.  At trial, plaintiff requested damages in excess of $25,000.00.  After a bench trial, an award of $0 was entered in favor of our client.

2.  Murphy, et al. v. Frito-Lay, Inc. – Trucking

            Cook County, Illinois

We represented a truck driver that was involved in an accident on the west side of Chicago.  The plaintiff and his alleged passenger claimed that they sustained serious injuries when our driver allegedly impacted their vehicle.  Plaintiffs made a combined demand of $17,000.00.  After reasonable efforts to settle, this matter proceeded to Cook County mandatory non-binding arbitration.  We argued that plaintiff’s vehicle impacted our driver’s parked truck when plaintiff cut the corner too short, and that the alleged passenger was not even present in the vehicle at the time of the accident.  After Cook County mandatory non-binding arbitration, an award of $0 was entered in favor of our client.

 

3. Carver v. FedEx Custom Critical, Inc. – Trucking

U.S. District Court, Northern District, Illinois

This lawsuit arose as the result of a backing accident involving a tractor trailer driven by defendant’s employee.  Plaintiff alleged medical damages of approximately $95,000.00, and made an initial policy limit demand, followed by a revised demand of $300,000.00.  Despite liability being against defendants, we were able to retain a report and opinions from a biomechanical expert which was very helpful in lowering the settlement value of this case.  Following a pretrial settlement conference, plaintiff settled this matter for $120,000.00.

4.  Clifton v. J.B. Hunt – Trucking

            Cook County, Illinois

We represented a truck driver and trucking company involved in an accident on I-294 north of Chicago.  The plaintiff and her passenger claimed that they sustained serious injuries when our driver rear-ended their vehicle.  Plaintiffs claimed total damages of $29,000.00 and $30,000.00, respectively.  We denied liability and argued that plaintiffs negligently pulled out in front of defendants’ tractor trailer.  Following mediation, this matter was settled for $28,000.00 to the plaintiff driver, and $39,000.00 to the plaintiff passenger, with an additional contribution of $22,000.00 to the plaintiff passenger from the plaintiff driver’s insurance company.

5. Zimmerman v. Jewel Food Stores – Trucking

            Cook County, Illinois

We represented a truck driver that was involved in an accident on I-94.  The plaintiff and his passenger alleged that they sustained serious injuries when our driver allegedly impacted their vehicle.  Plaintiffs made a demand of $10,000.00, per plaintiff.  The onboard dashcam video demonstrated the minor nature of the impact.  Moreover, our investigation into plaintiffs’ injuries revealed only very minor soft tissue injuries.  The plaintiffs settled this matter just prior to Cook County mandatory non-binding arbitration for $1,750, per plaintiff.

6.  Evans v. Carl Moody, et al. – Trucking

            Vermilion County, Illinois

We represented a trucking company that was involved in an accident in the parking lot of a truck stop.  The plaintiff, a truck driver, alleged he was seriously injured when our driver backed into plaintiff’s parked tractor.  Plaintiff made an initial settlement demand of $70,000.00.  However, through our investigation it was discovered that plaintiff’s claimed injuries were significantly less than alleged by plaintiff.  The plaintiff eventually settled this case for 5% of his initial demand.

7. Marlon Blackmon and Sherley Hampton v. Salvador Esquinca, et al. – Trucking

            Cook County, Illinois

We represented a driver that was involved in an accident after plaintiff failed to yield the right of way and improperly merged into our driver’s lane.  Plaintiff and his passenger alleged soft tissue injuries and combined damages of approximately $10,000.00.  Through our investigation we obtained favorable post-accident body camera footage from the Cook County Sheriff.  On the eve of the scheduled Cook County mandatory non-binding mediation, plaintiffs settled this matter for $1,000.00 each, for a total settlement of $2,000.00.

8. Wells v. Frito Lay Transportation, Inc. – Trucking

            Cook County, Illinois

We represented a truck driver and trucking company involved in a low-speed accident in a south suburb of Chicago, Illinois.  The plaintiffs claimed that they sustained serious injuries when our driver’s trailer made contact with the side of plaintiffs’ vehicle as our driver initiated a left-hand turn from a stop.  Plaintiffs claimed medical bills of approximately $6,200.00 and $19,400.00, respectively.  A successful mandatory non-binding arbitration award played a major role in decreasing the plaintiffs’ unreasonable expectations, and in reducing the value of the plaintiffs’ settlement demands.  Plaintiffs ultimately settled for $4,000.00 and $18,000.00, respectively.

 

9. Calabrese v. Jewel Food Stores, Inc. – Premises

            Cook County, Illinois

This lawsuit arose as the result of a slip and fall accident at a grocery store.  We represented the defendant grocery store.  The plaintiff alleged that he slipped and fell on “debris” and his description of the “debris” varied throughout discovery.  Plaintiff claimed an injury to his shoulder which required multiple shoulder surgeries.  Plaintiff alleged medical damages in excess of $250,000.00.  Witnesses for the defendant grocery store denied the occurrence of the incident.  During plaintiff’s deposition, he claimed permanent injury and the inability to use his arm.  He also claimed that he was no longer able to drive his motorcycle.  We obtained favorable surveillance of plaintiff using his arm and operating his motorcycle without difficulty.  Plaintiff settled for $24,000.00 after a pre-trial settlement conference.

10. Sullivan v. New Albertson’s, Inc. – Premises

            Lake County, Illinois

This lawsuit arose as the result of a trip and fall accident at a grocery store.  We represented the defendant grocery store.  The plaintiff alleged that he tripped and fell on floor mat as he entered the store.  Liability was against the defense as a store employee bunched up the rug while bringing in shopping carts shortly before plaintiff tripped.  Plaintiff claimed an injury to his knee which required multiple injections and surgery.  Plaintiff alleged medical bills totaling approximately $170,000.00, with ongoing permanent symptoms, and also claimed the necessity of a future knee replacement surgery.  Plaintiff settled for $150,000.00 after a lengthy mediation.

11.  Reid v. Jewel Food Stores, Inc. – Premises

            Cook County, Illinois

This lawsuit arose as the result of a slip and fall accident at a grocery store.  We represented the defendant grocery store.  The plaintiff alleged that he slipped and fell on a puddle of water while exiting the bathroom.  The plaintiff communicated an initial settlement demand that would net plaintiff $60,000.00.  During discovery we revealed that plaintiff’s alleged damages were grossly exaggerated.  Plaintiff eventually settled for $3,500.00 just prior to Cook County mandatory non-binding arbitration.

12.  Davis v. Jewel Food Stores, Inc.– Premises

Cook County, Illinois

This matter arose as the result of a slip and fall in a grocery store. Plaintiff alleged extensive injuries as a result of a very minor slip and fall.  We represented the defendant grocery store. Plaintiff’s version of events and testimony was directly contradicted by the store security video. Despite reasonable offers to settle, this matter proceeded to Cook County mandatory non-binding arbitration. Upon the completion of the arbitration, an award of $0 was entered in favor of our client.

13. Isaacson v. Jewel Food Stores, Inc.– Premises

Cook County, Illinois

This matter arose as the result of a slip and fall in a grocery store. Despite very minor injuries and damages, Plaintiff made a significant settlement demand.  We represented the defendant grocery store. Despite reasonable offers to settle, this matter proceeded to Cook County mandatory non-binding arbitration. Notwithstanding the likelihood of a finding of liability on behalf of defendant, upon the completion of the arbitration, an award of $0 was entered in favor of our client.

14.  Logan v. Jewel – Premises

            Cook County, Illinois

The lawsuit arose as the result of an alleged trip and fall accident at a grocery store.  We represented the defendant grocery store.  The plaintiff alleged that she tripped over a display sign while shopping.  An investigation into plaintiff’s medical history revealed an extensive history of pre and post-accident falls.  As a result, we were able to argue that plaintiff’s pre-existing condition caused her legs to give out, causing her alleged injuries.  In addition, we were able to elicit favorable testimony during plaintiff’s deposition.    Plaintiff eventually settled for 20% of her total alleged damages.

15.  Tabor v. Jewel Food Stores, Inc. – Premises

            Lake County, Illinois

We represented the defendant grocery store in connection with a slip and fall accident.  Liability was against the defense as the subject condition was present on the floor for more than twenty minutes prior to the subject accident, likely establishing constructive notice.  Plaintiff claimed that as a result of the subject incident he sustained a fractured right ankle, severe pain in his lower back and hips, severe pain in his right thigh and right knee, lower spine nerve damage, significant loss of feeling in his right leg, proprioception, damaged receptor nerves, loss of balance, and diminished feeling in his right leg.  Plaintiff also claimed that the subject incident significantly affected his pre-existing diabetes.  Plaintiff alleged special damages of approximately $38,000.00, with permanent nerve damage, and also claimed the necessity of a future surgery.  Following extensive settlement negotiations, plaintiff settled for $50,000.00, prior to incurring the expense of the depositions of store employees and plaintiff’s treating physicians.

16. Toczytlowski v. RTS Holdings, LLC – Trucking/Property Damage

            Cook County, Illinois

We represented a truck driver and trucking company involved in an accident near 48^th Street and Cicero Avenue in Chicago.  The plaintiff claimed substantial property damages when our driver suddenly blacked out and lost consciousness and drove through a fence and struck several parked cars in a used car lot. Plaintiff claimed total damages of $190,306.10.  Although this was a liability case, we asserted an Act of God defense based on our driver’s sudden and unexpected heart attack, which cause the subject accident.  Following a pretrial settlement conference, this matter was settled for $60,000.00.

 

17. Amers v. Jewel Food Stores, Inc. – Premises

            Cook County, Illinois

This lawsuit arose as the result of an accident at a grocery store.  We represented the defendant grocery store.  The plaintiff alleged that she sustained two lacerations and a contusion to the back of her heel as a result of a piece of metal protruding from the bottom corner of the dairy case door, which later became severely infected.  Plaintiff underwent surgery and subsequently claimed to have developed complex regional pain syndrome, which required injections.  At the time of settlement, plaintiff was just starting to build up her CRPS diagnosis and damages.  Plaintiff alleged ongoing medical damages in excess of $77,000.00, an unspecified wage loss claim, and permanent disability.  Following extensive settlement negotiations, plaintiff settled for $215,000.00.

18. Gozo, et al. v. United Natural Foods, Inc. – Trucking

            Cook County, Illinois

We represented a truck driver and trucking company that was involved in an accident in the west loop area of Chicago.  The plaintiff and her passenger claimed that they sustained serious injuries when our driver impacted their vehicle.  Plaintiffs made a combined demand of $55,000.00.  After reasonable efforts to settle, this matter proceeded to Cook County mandatory non-binding arbitration.  We argued that plaintiff’s vehicle improperly attempted to squeeze past our driver on the left side from behind while our driver was making a left turn. After Cook County mandatory non-binding arbitration, an award of $0 was entered in favor of our client.

19. Harris v. Hub Group Trucking, Inc. – Trucking

            Shelby County, Tennessee

We represented a truck driver and trucking company that was involved in an accident on I-55 in Memphis, Tennessee.  The plaintiff alleged that he sustained serious injuries when our driver allegedly improperly merged into plaintiff’s lane and impacted plaintiff’s vehicle.  Dashcam video of the subject incident was not favorable to the defense.  Plaintiff alleged special damages of approximately $17,155.00. Following extensive settlement negotiations, plaintiff settled this matter for $18,000.00 shortly after suit was filed.

20. Chandra v. Chandra

Cook County, Illinois

First Appellate District Court

Following recovery in a qui tam action, plaintiff, filed a cause of action for declaratory judgment against defendant seeking to enforce a contract entered into by the parties. Defendant filed answers and defenses, as well as a counterclaim and crossclaim, seeking to have the contract declared unenforceable. Plaintiff subsequently filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings and for prejudgment interest. After briefing and argument, the trial court granted the motion in part by finding the contract at issue to be enforceable, but denied the request for prejudgment interest.

Defendant appealed to the First District Appellate Court, contending that the trial court erred in finding the contract enforceable, asserting there was no consideration from plaintiff in forming the contract and that the contract itself violated the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct. Defendant asked the appellate court to reverse the trial court’s grant of judgment on the pleadings.  Plaintiff appealed the trial court’s denial of its request for prejudgment interest, arguing that the trial court erred in this portion of its determination because defendants’ actions prevented the distribution of funds to which the plaintiff was entitled under the contract, depriving plaintiff of the use and benefit of the proceeds. The Third District Appellate Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment finding that the contract at issue was valid and enforceable.  The appellate court also reversed the portion of the trial court’s judgment denying plaintiff’s request for prejudgment interest, finding that the plaintiff was entitled to an award of prejudgment interest under the Interest Act based on the existence of an instrument in writing and, alternatively, based on defendant’s unreasonable and vexatious delay of payment on the contract. The appellate court remanded the case to the trial court with directions to enter such award based on the amount of the qui tam recovery and the division agreed to by the parties in the valid and enforceable contract.

21. Santella v. Kolton, et al.

Cook County, Illinois (Summary Judgment)

Plaintiff brought an action under the Illinois Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act alleging that to avoid paying a monetary judgment in an underlying suit, defendant fraudulently transferred two parcels of property originally owned by defendant to his wife, brother, and mother.  Plaintiff’s complaint sought to set aside the fraudulent transfers.

Plaintiff subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment and the court granted summary judgment in plaintiff’s favor finding that defendant’s transfer of the two parcels constituted fraudulent transfers under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act.