PRACTICE AREAS
COMMERCIAL LITIGATION RESULTS
We obtained summary judgment under Section 3-420 against a mortgagee after our client’s draft was fraudulently negotiated by a contractor to deprive the mortgagee of its interest in the draft. The Court of Appeals Affirmed the ruling.
We obtained reversal of a judgment entered against our client when the trial court wrongfully added a pre-suit notice requirement into the replevin act.
The Court of Appeals affirmed our win in the trial Court, holding that the common law defense of “innocent insured” is trumped by policy language.
Both the trial court and the Court of Appeals agreed with us that policy language controls the question of whether a misrepresentation under one coverage part voids coverage for the entire loss.
The trial court dismissed a $19M lawsuit against our client pursuant to the Moorman Doctrine. The Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal.
The Court of Appeals reinstated a jury verdict we received holding that material misrepresentation by an insured removes any obligation for the insurer to cover a loss.
Our client’s alleged awareness of mold before a loss did not overcome the policy’s exclusion of losses caused by mold. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision in our favor.
We obtained dismissal of numerous cases in Courts of Appeal short of rulings due to procedural defects (i.e. lack of jurisdiction, untimeliness) in appeals filed by our opponents.
THIRD PARTY LIABILITY
The Firm specializes in defending bodily injury lawsuits, including auto cases, premise liability cases and uninsured motorist claims. Our lawyers have successfully tried dozens and dozens of cases to verdict in Illinois and Indiana and have handled hundred of arbitration’s in various forums. Our lawyers are licensed to practice in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Wisconsin.
THIRD PARTY LIABILITY
The Firm specializes in defending bodily injury lawsuits, including auto cases, premise liability cases and uninsured motorist claims. Our lawyers have successfully tried dozens and dozens of cases to verdict in Illinois and Indiana and have handled hundred of arbitration’s in various forums. Our lawyers are licensed to practice in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Wisconsin.
THIRD PARTY LIABILITY RESULTS
We won a summary judgment motion in favor of a hotel in a lawsuit brought by a guest who claimed she slipped and fell on water leaking from an air conditioning unit.
We won summary judgment in favor of a manufacturer in a lawsuit brought by an independent trucker who alleged a load of industrial pipe was negligently loaded on a trailer an then fell during unloading, injuring causing significant injury. The plaintiff made a seven-figure demand to settle.
We received a not guilty verdict in a case in which a pedestrian said motorist struck him, knocking to the ground, causing personal injury.
We received a not guilty verdict in a case in which defendant admitted rear ending the plaintiff on Lake Shore Drive in Chicago. The plaintiff filed a police report afterwards and then visited the emergency room. Plaintiff’s medical bills totaled $57,781. Plaintiff asked for an award of $155,088.
We received a not guilty verdict in a case in which defendant rear ended the plaintiff on the Kennedy Expressway in Chicago. Police arrived at the scene and the plaintiff went to the emergency room complaining of spinal pain. She visited a neurosurgeon three days after the accident and six days later she visited with an interventional pain management specialist. Plaintiff’s medical specials totaled $42,184 and the plaintiff asked the jury for an award of $136,999.12. The jury deliberated for 17 minutes.
We received a not guilty verdict in a case in which the defendant admitted rear ending the plaintiff, a school bus driver. Plaintiff visited the emergency room three days after the accident and missed four months of work. Defendant did not appear at trial.
A jury entered a $632 verdict against a defendant who admitted rear ending the plaintiff in four-car collision. Plaintiff had $44,000 in specials. The jury awarded the plaintiff $607 in medical bills and $25 for lost wages. Plaintiff asked the jury for $124,562.
A jury entered a $5,000 award in a case in which the defendant struck the plaintiff while she was distracted by a man changing the tire on his vehicle. Plaintiff was transported to the emergency room by ambulance. Six days later he had a follow-up evaluation by his primary care physician. He also received treatment from an interventional pain management specialist and a chiropractor. Plaintiff introduced $42,000 of paid bills into evidence. His doctor said his future medical expenses could approach $900,000. Plaintiff asked the jury for an award of $1,017,374.
We received a not guilty verdict in a case in which a woman claimed she suffered a knee injury in a department store when a flatbed cart struck her knee. Plaintiff stated she developed an embolism while being treated in the hospital. No offer to settle was made.
FIRST-PARTY & CATASTROPHE CLAIMS RESULTS
We received a defense verdict based on the vandalism exclusion in a lawsuit brought by the owners of a home which allegedly caught fire from errant fireworks.
We prevailed at trial in a claim brought by a beauty supply store owner who reported tens of thousands of dollars of merchandise stolen.
The Appellate Court affirmed the trial court’s ruling that policy language controls the question of whether a misrepresentation under one coverage part voids coverage for the entire loss.
The Appellate Court affirmed the trial court’s ruling in favor of our client, holding the “innocent insured” defense is trumped by policy language.
We received summary judgment in a theft and vandalism claim worth hundreds of thousands of dollars based on the contractual suit-filing limitation.
The Appellate Court reinstated a jury verdict, holding that a material misrepresentation by an insured removes any obligation for the insurer to cover a loss.
We received summary judgment after proving an insured falsified receipts.
We received summary judgment by asserting the policy’s earth-moving exclusion in a claim worth more than three-quarters of a million dollars.
EXTRA-CONTRACTUAL DAMAGES RESULTS
Disputes arising from condominium and lease documents and their interplay with insurance policies.
Mechanic’s liens and claims for attorney’s fees.
Conflicts involving interpretation of commercial leases
Bailment and replevin claims on behalf of insurers and automobile owners whose vehicles are towed.
APPELLATE RESULTS
We obtained summary judgment under Section 3-420 against a mortgagee after our client’s draft was fraudulently negotiated by a contractor to deprive the mortgagee of its interest in the draft. The Court of Appeals Affirmed the ruling.
We obtained reversal of a judgment entered against our client when the trial court wrongfully added a pre-suit notice requirement into the replevin act.
The Court of Appeals affirmed our win in the trial Court, holding that the common law defense of “innocent insured” is trumped by policy language.
Both the trial court and the Court of Appeals agreed with us that policy language controls the question of whether a misrepresentation under one coverage part voids coverage for the entire loss.
The Court of Appeals affirmed our win in the trial Court, holding that the common law defense of “innocent insured” is trumped by policy language.
The trial court dismissed a $19M lawsuit against our client pursuant to the Moorman Doctrine. The Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal.
The Court of Appeals affirmed our win in the trial Court, holding that the common law defense of “innocent insured” is trumped by policy language.
The Court of Appeals reinstated a jury verdict we received holding that material misrepresentation by an insured removes any obligation for the insurer to cover a loss.
Our client’s alleged awareness of mold before a loss did not overcome the policy’s exclusion of losses caused by mold. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision in our favor.
The Court of Appeals reinstated a jury verdict we received holding that material misrepresentation by an insured removes any obligation for the insurer to cover a loss.
Our client’s alleged awareness of mold before a loss did not overcome the policy’s exclusion of losses caused by mold. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision in our favor.
We obtained dismissal of numerous cases in Courts of Appeal short of rulings due to procedural defects (i.e. lack of jurisdiction, untimeliness) in appeals filed by our opponents.
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION RESULTS
Disputes arising from condominium and lease documents and their interplay with insurance policies.
Mechanic’s liens and claims for attorney’s fees.
Conflicts involving interpretation of commercial leases
Bailment and replevin claims on behalf of insurers and automobile owners whose vehicles are towed.