May a condominium owner refuse to pay monthly and/or special assessments, in whole or in part, on the grounds that the condominium board had failed to maintain and repair the common elements of the condominium property? In the vast majority of jurisdictions around the country, the answer is simple: No. Last summer, in what the Chicago Tribune … Continue Reading
Yesterday, the Illinois Supreme Court granted leave to appeal in four new civil cases. We begin our previews of these newest additions to the court’s docket with Bartlow v. Costigan [pdf], which raises a variety of constitutional challenges to the powers of the Illinois Department of Labor under the Employee Classification Act, 820 ILCS 185/1 et … Continue Reading
In J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro, a plurality of the United States Supreme Court held that merely placing a product into the stream of commerce with the expectation that it would wind up in the forum state was not enough to justify the exercise of personal jurisdiction over the manufacturer. Russell v. SNFA is the … Continue Reading
If a state elected official is sued for his or her official actions, may the Attorney General refuse to defend the official based solely on the allegations of the complaint? That’s the question the Supreme Court debated earlier this month during the oral argument in McFatridge v. Madigan. Our detailed preview of McFatridge, discussing the facts and … Continue Reading
The mailbox rule applies to filing an appeal from an arbitrator to the Workers Compensation Commission. Norris v. Industrial Commission. And it applies to filing an appeal from the Circuit Court’s order on administrative review to the Appellate Court. Harrisburg-Raleigh Airport Authority v. Dept. of Revenue. So does it apply to the intermediate step – initiating an administrative review … Continue Reading
A relatively quiet Illinois Supreme Court gave little indication of its leanings last week during oral argument in DeHart v. DeHart. Our preview of DeHart is here. DeHart is a will contest. According to the complaint, the decedent had held plaintiff out for some sixty years as his son. This continued until 2000, when the plaintiff requested a … Continue Reading
Based upon questioning during last week’s oral argument, the Illinois Supreme Court seemed unlikely to forgive plaintiff’s counsel for filing a notice of appeal electronically in apparent violation of the Circuit Court’s local rules. Our preview of VC&M, Ltd. v. Andrews is here. VC&M arises from a real estate dispute. The defendants, a husband and wife, signed … Continue Reading
Can a homeowners’ association private security officer stop and briefly detain a resident who is exceeding the speed limit set for the association’s privately owned roads by the Board of Directors? Can the association enforce a small fine against the homeowner for his alleged violation? On Friday morning, a unanimous Illinois Supreme Court answered "yes" to both … Continue Reading
Friday morning, a unanimous Illinois Supreme Court held that in most cases, a tort claim for intentional interference with testamentary expectancy is not subject to the six-month statute of limitations on will contests. Reversing Division Three of the First District, the Court held in Bjork v. O’Meara that so long as the plaintiff isn’t passing up … Continue Reading
With 2012 over and the January term of the Illinois Supreme Court in full swing, it’s time to look back, both on the highlights of 2012 and the first two years of Chief Justice Kilbride’s Court. For my review of the Court’s major civil decisions of 2012 – a mostly encouraging year before the Court for … Continue Reading
This afternoon, the Illinois Supreme Court announced that it will file two new civil opinions on Friday morning: Poris v. Lake Holiday Property Owners Association, No. 113907 – (1) May a property association authorize private security officers to stop and detain persons on its property for speeding on association-owned roads? (2) May such an association place … Continue Reading
As we last noted here, the expansive interpretation in Stengel v. Medtronic Inc. of implied preemption of state law medical device claims has been under en banc review. The en banc opinion was released late last week. It is, to put it mildly, a substantial adjustment from the view of implied preemption laid out by … Continue Reading
One more note on National Gas Pipeline Co. v. Justiss is appropriate. The Texas Supreme Court held that the landowners had failed to present admissible evidence that the permanent nuisance caused by the defendant had diminished the value of their property. Normally, the loss of such a “no-evidence” point leads to the appellate court reversing … Continue Reading
Implicitly marking the 20th anniversary of its seminal decision in Knight v. Jewett, which established the doctrine of primary assumption of the risk, the California Supreme Court confirmed both the continuing vitality and breadth of that decision in Nalwa v. Cedar Fair (2012), S195031. In Knight, a plurality of the Supreme Court held that a … Continue Reading
The Illinois Supreme Court has announced its anticipated filing dates for January and February. Opinions are expected on Friday, January 25; Thursday, February 7; and Friday, February 22. Decisions on petitions for rehearing are expected on Monday, January 28th and decisions on petitions for leave to appeal are expected on Wednesday, January 30. The Court made substantial … Continue Reading
The Texas Supreme Court’s opinion in Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America v. Justiss highlights a subtle but important point regarding the way appellate courts treat undisputed facts. The case concerned claims by neighboring landowners that a natural gas plant created offensive odors, thus constituting a permanent nuisance. The statute of limitations for permanent nuisance … Continue Reading
Texas has long adhered to the “Property Owner Rule,” permitting property owners to testify as to the value of their property. Recent cases have emphasized that the testimony must relate to market value, rather than intrinsic or other value. In Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America v. Justiss, the Texas Supreme Court clarified that the Property … Continue Reading
Our preview of the civil cases to be heard by the Illinois Supreme Court during the upcoming January term concludes with Gruszeczka v. The Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission [pdf]. Gruszeczka poses an important question: does the mailbox rule apply to initiating judicial review of decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Commission? The claimant in Gruszeczka filed an … Continue Reading
We continue our previews of the civil cases scheduled for oral argument during the Illinois Supreme Court’s January term with VC&M, Ltd. v. Andrews. VC&M arises from a real estate dispute. The defendants were in the process of getting a divorce. They signed a contract with the plaintiff to list their residence. Plaintiff found a buyer, who put … Continue Reading
The Illinois Supreme Court has posted its docket for the impending January term, and the Court will hear argument in five civil cases. The civil portion of the Court’s docket begins during the 9:00 a.m. session on Wednesday, January 16 with McFatridge v. Madigan. McFatridge, which we previewed here,involves a dispute between a former State’s Attorney … Continue Reading
