Hearing oral argument in Stevens v. McGuireWoods LLP in the final days of its May term, the Illinois Supreme Court appeared skeptical of the Appellate Court’s holding reviving former shareholders’ professional negligence claim against the defendant for loss of certain derivative claims. Our detailed summary of the underlying facts and lower courts holdings in Stevens … Continue Reading
During its May term, the Illinois Supreme Court heard oral argument in Nelson v. Artley, which poses a question of considerable importance to the rental car industry: can a self-insured rental company be held liable without limitation for its customers’ accidents if the customer defaults? Our detailed summary of the underlying facts and lower court … Continue Reading
On May 22, 2015, the Florida Supreme Court accepted review of a First District en banc decision that certified that following as a question of great public importance: May a property owner maintain an action pursuant to the [Bert J. Harris, Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act] if that owner has not had a law, … Continue Reading
A pension board finds that a police officer is entitled to a line-of-duty disability pension. Is the board’s finding conclusive on the issue of whether the officer suffered a “catastrophic injury” so as to be entitled to health care premiums under the Public Safety Employee Benefits Act? The Illinois Supreme Court debated that question in … Continue Reading
About a week ago, I noticed that I was fast approaching my 500th post on Appellate Strategist. The occasion seemed to call for something different, so I started pondering what I might want to write about. As it turns out, this comes at a time of transition over at Appellate Strategist‘s sister blog, the Illinois … Continue Reading
In the closing days of its May term, the Illinois Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Klaine v. Southern Illinois Hospital Services, which poses an issue of potential importance to the medical malpractice bar: are applications for medical privileges discoverable in a negligent credentialing claim in a medical malpractice case? Our detailed summary of the … Continue Reading
According to the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 10/1-101), the statute of limitations for personal injury actions against “local public entities” is one year. So is a Zoo a “local public entity”? That’s the question the Illinois Supreme Court debated during its May term, hearing oral argument in O’Toole v. … Continue Reading
During its May term, the Illinois Supreme Court heard oral argument in Gurba v. Community High School District No. 155, a decision from the Second District which poses the question: are school districts subject to local zoning? Based upon the questioning patterns in oral argument, the Court appeared skeptical of the school district’s claim. Our … Continue Reading
Two cases are currently pending in the Florida Supreme Court regarding whether the arbitration agreements at issue in the cases are enforceable. Hernandez v. Crespo (No. SC15-67) In this case, the Court must decide whether an arbitration agreement violates the public policy pronounced by the Florida Legislature in the Medical Malpractice Act, chapter 766, Florida … Continue Reading
On May 14, 2015, the Florida Supreme Court answered the following two questions in the negative, which were certified to it by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals: Does “support plan” review under Fla. Stat. § 393.0651 require the Agency for Persons with Disabilities to consider the propriety of a continued involuntary admission to residential … Continue Reading
During the May term, the Illinois Supreme Court heard oral argument in Price v. Philip Morris, Inc., the second appeal from a massive $10.1 billion consumer fraud verdict. Price poses the question of how much discretion a trial court has on a motion to set aside a verdict based upon new and different circumstances. Our … Continue Reading
During its May term, the Illinois Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Henderson Square Condominium Association v. LAB Townhomes, a case posing several related questions about the scope of a developer’s tort duties in connection with a several-years-old building. Our detailed summary of the facts and lower court holdings in Henderson Square is here. The … Continue Reading
During its May term, an apparently skeptical Illinois Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Walker v. McGuire, a constitutional challenge to a fee (735 ILCS 5/15-1504.1) on foreclosure filings to support a state foreclosure prevention program. Walker began when the plaintiff paid the fee and filed suit for a refund, challenging the constitutionality of the … Continue Reading
Late in its May term, the Illinois Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Matthews v. Chicago Transit Authority, which poses the question of whether the health care benefits of Chicago Transit Authority employees and retirees are vested, and therefore immune from reduction. Our detailed summary of the underlying facts and lower court holdings in Matthews … Continue Reading
Federal law provides that Social Security benefits cannot be divided between spouses in a divorce settlement (as well as being exempt from execution, attachment, garnishment and bankruptcy distribution – virtually the only exception is spousal and child support). (42 U.S.C. § 407(a).) But if one spouse participates in an alternative pension system instead of Social … Continue Reading
May a plaintiff adapt the procedure found in Illinois Supreme Court Rule 224 to get a court order requiring an internet service provider to identify the author of an anonymous internet comment? Earlier this month, a unanimous Illinois Supreme Court held that the answer was “yes.” Our detailed summary of the underlying facts and lower … Continue Reading
According to Section 11-501.6 of the Illinois Vehicle Code, any driver involved in a fatal motor vehicle accident consents as a matter of law to chemical testing. (625 ILCS 5/11-501.6.) If the driver refuses to permit the test, his or her driver’s license is automatically suspended by the Secretary of State. During its May term, … Continue Reading
Can a personal injury claim be barred by judicial estoppel if you fail to disclose the unliquidated claim in your personal bankruptcy proceeding? That’s the issue posed by Seymour v. Collins, currently pending before the Illinois Supreme Court. Based upon the vigorous questioning of plaintiffs during oral argument last month, the Supreme Court appears inclined … Continue Reading
In the closing days of its May term, the Illinois Supreme Court agreed to decide an important issue for the construction industry: can a mechanic’s lien be enforced in connection with a project which is cancelled before completion? Christopher B. Burke Engineering, Ltd. v. Heritage Bank of Central Illinois arises from a contract between plaintiff … Continue Reading
In the closing days of its May term, the Illinois Supreme Court agreed to decide a question with potential implications for virtually every civil case: does a trial court have discretion to consider whether a litigant trying to exercise their “one free challenge” of the judge had an opportunity to test the judge’s views in … Continue Reading
(updates article posted on October 31, 2013) In Miles v. Weingrad, No. SC13-54, the Florida Supreme Court held that the medical malpractice cap on non-economic damages found in Chapter 766, Florida Statutes cannot be applied retroactively. To read the opinion, please click here. With respect to the underlying facts, Kimberly Ann Miles sought a second … Continue Reading
Supreme Court Rule 137(d) provides that “where a sanction is imposed under this rule,” the trial court judge “shall set forth with specificity the reasons and basis of any sanction so imposed.” A majority of the Justices of the Illinois Supreme Court appeared skeptical during oral argument last month of the Fifth District’s holding in … Continue Reading
(updates article posted on August 4, 2014) On May 28, 2015, the Florida Supreme Court answered the following rephrased certified question in the negative: Is a terminable-at-will agreement to pool lottery winnings unenforceable in the absence of an express agreement to continue the agreement for a period of time exceeding one year, when full performance … Continue Reading
(updates article posted on Aug. 19, 2014) On May 14, 2015 the Supreme Court of Florida rejected the “fundamental nature” exception with regard to objecting to an inconsistent verdict in products liability cases and announced that “a timely objection is required to an inconsistent verdict in all civil cases.” See Coba v. Tricam Indus., Inc., … Continue Reading
