Justia Lawyer Rating for Robert D. Kreisman

by

John Blommer worked as an apprentice carman repairing railroad cars for Great Northern Railway, which was the predecessor to BNSF Railway Co. He started working at the railroad in 1953 and worked for several months before joining the U.S. Army. He returned to the railroad after his military service and then left his employment in 1956 to work at the U.S. Postal Service. In all, Blommer worked for the railroad for a total of nearly 26 months. During that time, he was exposed daily to asbestos from various products he handled. Asbestos was found to be included in pipe wrapping, insulation, raw asbestos fibers and other asbestos-containing products.

In 2010, Blommer, then age 78, was diagnosed with mesothelioma. He underwent chemotherapy treatments and talc pleurodesis, which is a procedure in which fluid is drained from the lining of the lungs; then the ribcage and lining are scraped and filled with a talc product to glue the lungs to the ribcage. The purpose is to prevent the fluid from returning. After about two years, the fluid did return and Blommer underwent additional chemotherapy until the treatments were no longer effective.

Blommer sued BNSF under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) claiming that the railroad chose not to provide a safe workplace by protecting employees from asbestos exposure.

Continue reading

by

In February 2010, the plaintiff Janusz Bruszniewski, 55, was working for a plumbing subcontractor at a renovation project at 2132 Jefferson St. in Joliet, Ill. While leaving the building, he slipped and fell on a sheet of ice in front of the entranceway. Bruszniewski suffered a distal femur fracture in his left leg just above the knee, which required internal reduction fixation surgery with the placement of a rod to support the healing fracture.

However, the femur did not heal due to nonunion. Bruszniewski underwent a second surgery to remove the original hardware and insert a plate. He also required bone grafting.

The fractured femur eventually healed, but Bruszniewski also suffered aggravation of pre-existing arthritis in his left knee, causing continued pain and limitations, which have prevented him from returning to work as a plumber.

Continue reading

by

On March 25, 2011, Patricia Anderson was a passenger in a taxi driven by the defendant Chouaib Sadix, who was driving westbound on Grand Avenue in Chicago. As the cab approached Central Park Avenue, other westbound cars were stopped for a red light. The cab passed those vehicles on the right side by traveling in the curb lane, which Anderson contended was a parking/bus lane.

In the meantime, another driver was attempting to make a left turn from eastbound Grand Avenue into a CVS parking lot at 3552 W. Grand Ave. The driver of that car, Robert Andino, turned between two stopped westbound vehicles and crashed into the cab in the curb lane.

Anderson, 60, suffered aggravation of a pre-existing partial thickness rotator cuff tear, which caused it to progress to a full thickness tear and required arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

Continue reading

by

Cynthia DeCornmier suffered serious injuries when she fell from her motorcycle on a motorcycle training course. Before the beginning of the training course, DeCornmier signed a release of all claims that may have resulted from or arising out of her participation in the training course. The release document stated in bold letters that it covered all claims she may have, including without limitation, all claims resulting from the negligence of those involved in the course.

In spite of the release that was signed in advance of the motorcycle training course, she filed a lawsuit against Harley-Davidson and Gateway Harvey-Davidson alleging that they were negligent and reckless by directing her to perform motorcycle maneuvers on a range that was icy and slippery. In the lawsuit, DeCornmier maintained that the liability release document that she signed in advance was unenforceable against claims of gross negligence or recklessness.

The defendants Harley Davidson and Gateway Harley-Davidson, filed motions for summary judgment, which the trial judge granted dismissing DeCornmier’s case.

Continue reading

by

Carl Rogers had been working at a tire plant owned by Kelly-Springfield Tire Co., which is a Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. subsidiary. He started working at the plant in 1969 and left employment after just one year. He returned to work there in 1975, and he continued working through the mid-1980s. Rogers worked with various tire-building machines but also used asbestos-containing brake assemblies.

He was exposed to asbestos during his ongoing repair and replacement of asbestos pipe installation at the Goodyear plant.

In August 2008, he was diagnosed with mesothelioma as a result of being exposed to asbestos. He died the next year at the age of 60 survived by his wife and two adult daughters. His paid medical expenses stipulated at the jury trial were $170,000.

Continue reading

by

On Feb. 2, 2012, Elliot Gonzalez was walking northbound across Erie Street at May Street in Chicago when he was hit in the crosswalk by Patrick Kennely’s pickup truck. Kennely was a commercial property manager and was making a left turn from northbound May Street onto Erie at the time of the accident.

The plaintiff, Elliot Gonzalez, 19 at the time, sustained three transverse process vertebral fractures, a sprained ankle, contusions and bruises. His medical bills totaled $32,627. He also missed a week and half of work as a cell phone salesman.

Kennely admitted liability but contested the plaintiff’s claims of damages. His attorney cross-examined Gonzalez’s treating physician and orthopedic surgeon for 4 ½ hours regarding the care and treatment he gave to the plaintiff. The jury apparently was persuaded by that round of cross-examination because its verdict of $29,565 was less than the offer to settle the case, which was $45,000.

Continue reading

by

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago has affirmed a decision by the district court judge regarding circumstantial evidence without an expert witness. In this case, the plaintiffs, Howard Piltch and Barbara Nelson-Piltch, were driving in their 2003 Mercury Mountaineer in 2006 when they were involved in an accident; the airbags of their vehicle did not deploy. After the crash, the couple repaired their car, but did not confirm whether the restraint control module, which monitors a crash and electronically decides whether to deploy airbags, was reset during or after repair work.

One year later, the Piltches were driving the car when it hit a patch of black ice. This caused the car to slide off of the road and hit a wall. On impact, none of the cars’ airbags deployed.

After the second crash, the couple had their Mountaineer repaired at the same repair shop that had repaired the car after the 2006 incident. In 2009, the Piltches sold the car to a mechanic who reprogrammed the vehicle’s black box, wiping out the data that might have been remaining from either of the two crashes.

Continue reading

by

The beneficiaries of the Barbara B. Kaull Trust included the biological children of Mark James Kaull’s father, Mark Kaull, who died in 2010. Mary Kaull, acting as trustee of the Barbara B. Kaull Trust, petitioned the court for a ruling on whether Mark, the elder, was also the father of Ryan Donald Schrader. Mark James Kaull might be the brother of Ryan Donald Schrader. To determine whether they were in fact brothers, Mary Kaull asked the court for an order compelling Mark James Kaull to submit to a DNA test. Mark James Kaull refused and was held in contempt of court. Mark James Kaull argued that the Illinois Supreme Court Rule 215 as revised and amended in 1996 is unconstitutional under the U.S. and Illinois Constitutions.

Mark James claimed that the revised Rule 215 violated the prohibition on reasonable searches and seizures under the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment, plus his right under Article 1, Section 6 of the Illinois Constitution to be free from unreasonable searches, seizures and invasions of privacy.

This case, which was set in Winnebago County, Ill., granted Mary’s request for the DNA testing. Mark appealed from that order which fined him $100 and a dollar a day for declining to obey.

Continue reading

by

In the model years 2009 and 2010, Toyota’s Corolla has been targeted as a dangerous vehicle because of the electric power steering (ETS) system. In fact, two Toyota Corolla owners, one in New York and one in Pennsylvania, filed suit. The Corolla owners have alleged that the steering system’s defect caused their cars to drift out of control. The lawsuits claim that the steering system defect is a serious safety problem and that Toyota was aware of the problem but did nothing to fix it.

It was alleged in the lawsuit that the defect in the electric power steering system caused a driver to spin out of control on a highway, cross the center line into oncoming traffic before crashing into an embankment. The plaintiffs have alleged that the defect in the electric power steering system is significant and widespread, and they seek to have a class certified by the court.

Toyota, on the other hand, has argued that the court should not allow class certification nationwide because the vehicle shares no common problem. Toyota said the defect in the steering system affects only a small number of Corolla owners. Toyota also said it has reviewed the reports of steering problems and has found that the individual complaints may relate to the way steering feels to them or tire conditions on the particular vehicle.

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Supreme Court has reversed the Illinois Appellate Court in a case centering on an application for legal malpractice insurance. In this case, one of the partners of the law firm of Tuzzolino and Terpinas (T&T) filled out a renewal form for legal malpractice with ISBA Mutual for himself and for the firm. In the application, he was asked whether there were any circumstances that would give rise to an unreported legal malpractice claim. The attorney who filled out the form answered “no.” In fact, a legal malpractice claim had already been brought against one of the firm’s attorneys, Mr. Tuzzolino, but was not yet reported to the firm’s

insurer.

The attorney who filled out the form, Mr. Terpinas, did not sign his name to the form. He claimed to have become aware of the claim against Mr. Tuzzolino about a month later and then reported the claim to ISBA Mutual.

As ISBA was then on notice of the claim and the errant application form, it filed a lawsuit for rescission of the insurance policy in March 2009. There were cross-motions for summary judgment filed and the trial court granted ISBA’s motion for summary judgment. The trial judge found that ISBA was entitled to rescission of the policy in its entirety and that it had no duty to defend Terpinas or the law firm because of the errantly completed form.

Continue reading