Get above the noise
Log in for answers tailored to you — saved chats, your topics, and the full IJR suite.
Simpkins v. CSX Transp., Inc.
Illinois Supreme Court · 2012-03-22 · cited 177×
In Simpkins v. CSX Transportation, Inc., the plaintiff alleged that she developed mesothelioma from asbestos fibers carried home on her husband's clothing during his employment with the defendant railroad from 1958 to 1964. The circuit court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim, finding no duty owed to the non-employee plaintiff, but the appellate court reversed. The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the reversal of the dismissal but held that the complaint's allegations were insufficient to establish a duty of care, remanding the case to allow the plaintiff to amend her complaint. The court's reasoning focused on the factors for determining duty, including foreseeability of harm, the relationship between the parties, and public policy considerations regarding potential limitless liability.
torts & liabilitylabor & employmentbusiness & regulatory
In Re Thomas
Illinois Supreme Court · 2012-01-20 · cited 2×
This case involved disciplinary proceedings against Illinois attorney Robert C. Thomas, who had previously been suspended for 18 months following criminal convictions for DUI and driving on a revoked license. The Administrator charged Thomas with three counts of misconduct: making a false certificate of service to a bankruptcy court about when discovery materials were mailed, appearing as counsel in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals while suspended, and continuing to represent clients in DuPage County circuit court shortly after his suspension took effect. The Hearing Board found the charges proven and recommended a two-year suspension, but the Review Board recommended dismissal; the Supreme Court granted review and concluded that the misconduct had been established. The court imposed a one-year suspension, citing the deliberate nature of the violations, Thomas's prior discipline, and his refusal to acknowledge any wrongdoing.
procedure
People v. Washington
Illinois Supreme Court · 2012-01-20 · cited 19×
In People v. Washington, the defendant was convicted of first degree murder and aggravated battery with a firearm following a shooting during a dispute over a car accident. The trial court instructed the jury on self-defense but refused requests for instructions on second degree murder and involuntary manslaughter. The appellate court reversed the convictions and remanded for a new trial, holding that it was an abuse of discretion to deny a second degree murder instruction when self-defense was instructed. The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed, reasoning that the evidence raised a factual question about whether the defendant's belief in the need for force was reasonable or unreasonable, and that the jury should have been allowed to consider second degree murder.
criminal lawprocedure
Crossroads Ford Truck v. Sterling Truck
Illinois Supreme Court · 2011-12-01 · cited 15×
The case involved a truck dealership, Crossroads Ford Truck Sales, that sued Sterling Truck Corporation, Daimler Trucks, and an executive after the manufacturer discontinued the Sterling brand and terminated the dealer's franchise and related agreements, alleging violations of the Motor Vehicle Franchise Act along with breach of contract, tortious interference, and fraud claims. The circuit court dismissed most counts, the appellate court affirmed while also finding lack of subject matter jurisdiction over certain Act claims that should have gone to the Motor Vehicle Review Board, and the Illinois Supreme Court affirmed that judgment. The court held that claims seeking damages under section 4(d)(6) of the Act for improper termination must be filed first with the MVRB, which can determine good cause before any circuit court action for damages. Arguments challenging the dismissals of other counts under section 2-615 were deemed forfeited because they were not raised in the petition for leave to appeal.
business & regulatoryprocedure
In Re Mulroe
Illinois Supreme Court · 2011-09-22
The case involved disciplinary proceedings against Illinois attorney Mark Gerard Mulroe for improperly using funds from an IOLTA account that held escrow money from a client's divorce case to pay his personal and business expenses without authorization. The Hearing Board found that Mulroe had converted the funds and violated several rules of professional conduct, though it determined there was no clear evidence of dishonest intent. The Illinois Supreme Court upheld the finding of misconduct and imposed a three-month suspension from practice along with a requirement to attend a professionalism seminar, reasoning that the lack of dishonest intent, full restitution, remorse, and Mulroe's otherwise good record warranted this sanction rather than a longer suspension.
procedure
LaSalle Bank National Ass'n v. Cypress Creek 1, LP
Illinois Supreme Court · 2011-05-23 · cited 25×
This case involved the distribution of insufficient proceeds from a foreclosure sale of developed property between a mortgagee bank and several mechanics lien claimants, where the mortgage predated the liens but the bank had funded various construction improvements through loan disbursements. The Illinois Supreme Court reversed the appellate court, holding that the mortgagee was entitled to subrogation priority for the value of improvements it paid for, with that portion of the sale proceeds applied first to satisfy the mortgage. The court's reasoning centered on section 16 of the Mechanics Lien Act, which provides for subrogation in such circumstances to determine the proper allocation between the mortgage and the liens.
property