Justia Lawyer Rating for Robert D. Kreisman

by

Theodus Williams was driving a fully loaded dump truck owned by Valvano Construction when he lost control of the vehicle on a two-lane highway. This caused a crash with another car, which in turn rear-ended an SUV in which Holly Ann Cuchwara was riding. After being rear-ended, the SUV hit a utility pole before it came to a stop. Cuchwara, 38, suffered multiple injuries, including a fractured spine, closed-head injury, a broken ankle and a corneal abrasion. Cuchwara now suffers from headaches, chronic pain and fatigue.

Cuchwara and her husband sued Williams, claiming that he was negligent in his driving. The lawsuit also claimed that Valvano Construction and its corporate management had chosen not to maintain and inspect the dump truck that Williams was driving. The Cuchwaras claimed that the dump truck was not roadworthy due to the defective steering system and faulty brakes. Cuchwara did not claim lost income or past medical expenses.

After a jury trial, the jurors entered a verdict of $10.1 million and a finding that Williams was 30% responsible for Cuchwara’s injuries. The verdict would be paid by those defendants according to the jury’s percentage splits. The Cuchwara family was represented by attorneys Joseph A. Quinn, Jr. and Michael A. Lombardo III.

Continue reading

by

In a case dealing with an accident at a construction work site, Samuel Escareno sought damages against Terra Cotta Commons Condominium Association and Kass Management Services for injuries he suffered. Terra Cotta Condominium was the owner of a condominium building that was managed by Kass Management. Kass hired Sherwin Painters Inc. to do both the painting and the labor to paint portions of the building.

One of the painters hired by Sherwin was Samuel Escareno. He was injured when he fell off a ladder while trying to replace a window screen.

In January 2010, Escareno filed suit against Kass and Terra Cotta. Kass third-partied and sued Sherwin for contribution, but Sherwin moved to dismiss, citing that it had waived its lien on Escareno’s recovery.

Continue reading

by

Robert Barnett, a homeowner, hired Dawson Construction LLC to do some home repair work. The work included climbing a ladder to get on the roof to make some repairs to it. Juan Garcia , a 43-year-old day laborer, was working for Dawson Construction at the time. Garcia was asked to work on the roof, which was wet.

Garcia climbed the ladder to the roof and then fell. He sustained multiple injuries, including cervical injuries at C3-4, a left elbow fracture and a fractured right knee cap (patella). Garcia underwent a number of surgeries related to his injuries and incurred approximately $118,300 in medical expenses.

He filed a lawsuit against the homeowner, Robert Barnett, claiming that he chose not to comply with state law by correctly evaluating Dawson Construction, which was not licensed or bonded, before hiring the contractor and insuring that the work at his home would be performed safely.

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Appellate Court has reversed and remanded a decision by a Cook County Circuit Judge relating to a sale agreement for a condominium purchase. In November 2010, the Habitat Co., the Gautreaux Development Manager for the Chicago Housing Authority, signed a purchase and sale agreement with Tera Healy to buy her condominium for $250,000. The contract was contingent on Habitat and Healy getting final approval from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Healy’s lender approving a short payoff.

These approvals were met, but the 3721-3723 Elston Condominium Association intervened, exercising its right of first refusal and purchased Healy’s condominium. The housing authority filed a lawsuit against the association, charging it with tortious interference of contract and breach of contract, seeking specific performance: the sale of the condominium.

The authority argued that the contract between Habitat and Healy was valid and binding. Moreover, the authority argued that the association did not have the right of first refusal contained in any of its declarations or bylaws, but nonetheless attempted to exercise this right.

Continue reading

by

On Oct. 8, 2009, Kristin Gosell was driving northbound on the Willow Road exit ramp from Interstate 294 when the defendant, 42-year-old Hope Lerman, ran a red light on eastbound Willow Road and T-boned the driver’s side of Gosell’s car. Both cars were totaled in the high-speed crash. Gosell was trapped inside her car for 20 minutes until the Glenview Fire Department personnel could extract her from the vehicle.

She was taken by ambulance to Glenbrook Hospital where she was treated and released. However, Gosell, 39, sustained herniated discs at C3-4 and C5-6, soft tissue injuries to her neck, back and ribs and bruising to her chest and stomach. She underwent physical therapy, was treated by a pain specialist and first saw an orthopedist, Dr. Jay Levin, in October 2012. She had presented evidence of $34,851 for her medical expenses and also claimed lost time from her job as a teacher.

Dr. Levin testified that Gosell’s disc condition was permanent, but she was not a candidate for follow-up surgery.

Continue reading

by

Brooke Melton, 29, died allegedly because of the General Motors’ ignition switch flaw. Her case had been pending for a period of time when it was settled by General Motors in October 2013. The settlement was reached before General Motors was found to have been downplaying and otherwise concealing the ignition switch problems from consumers and lawyers involved in these tragic cases.

Although the Melton case was settled, the Melton family lawyers want to reopen the case and show that General Motors was guilty of fraudulent concealment regarding the switch problem. If the Meltons are successful in reopening this case, other settled injury or death cases arising from the ignition switch defect may be reopened for further consideration.

Today the lawsuits or claims management of the many ignition switch injury cases are being handled by attorney Kenneth Feinberg, whose group has settled hundreds of the GM death and injury claims from crashes that were caused by the ignition switch defect.

Continue reading

by

In a variety of cases that end in settlement, the parties often agree to make the settlement agreement confidential. When the parties agree separately that the terms of the settlement remain confidential, it’s a different story than the one in which the court is required or asked to seal the settlement agreement.

In the case of Goesel v. Boley International, there were two court-sealed settlement agreements that were the subject of an appeal to the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago. The appeal asked to keep the settlement agreements sealed. Judge Richard A. Posner ruled that a confidential agreement between the parties was an insufficient basis for the settlement documents to be sealed.

The Goesel case was a personal-injury lawsuit brought on behalf of a minor. Because of the status of the plaintiff, that being a minor, the plaintiff was required to obtain a district judge’s approval of the settlement. The trial judge reduced a portion of the settlement proceeds that were payable to the plaintiff’s law firm for attorney fees and costs and approved the settlement as then revised. The appeal in this case is by the law firm that challenged the judge’s modification of the settlement terms, which included attorney fees.

Continue reading

by

On Aug. 7, 2008, Frosini Xeniotis was evaluated by an oral surgeon, Dr. Cynthia Satko. One of Xeniotis’s baby teeth had never fallen out, and her adult tooth had grown in behind it. The result was just simply “not aesthetically pleasing” to Xeniotis.

Xeniotis was referred to Dr. Satko by her primary dentist. To improve the condition, an oral surgeon would have to remove both the baby tooth and the adult tooth and fill the remaining space. Dr. Satko recommended an implant during this initial consultation.

The procedure described by Dr. Satko involved surgically inserting a titanium screw into the bone and then attaching an artificial tooth to the screw. Under the best of circumstances, this procedure would have been followed by a dental crown. Xeniotis agreed with the plan, and the next day Dr. Satko removed the two teeth and inserted the implant. Over the following year and half, the artificial tooth failed to fully afix into Xeniotis’s jaw.

Continue reading

by

Shuffle Tech made automatic card-shuffling equipment for the consumer market and particularly for casinos. In 2010, Shuffle Tech and Wolff Gaming, a distributor of the equipment, signed a letter of intent that expressed their mutual commitment to proceed with a draft agreement regarding product development and distribution.

The agreement laid out a deal in which Shuffle Tech and Wolff Gaming would collaborate to develop a casino-grade shuffling machine. In return for providing financial assistance, Wolff would become the exclusive equipment distributor in the Western Hemisphere.

The next year, but before the new equipment was developed, Shuffle Tech wrote to Wolff proposing that the companies part ways and settle all outstanding business. Several months later, Shuffle Tech filed a lawsuit in the federal court seeking a declaratory judgment that the draft agreement was not an enforceable contract, that the letter of intent was enforceable and that Wolff had broken the letter of intent agreement.

Continue reading

by

Gamesa Technology Corp. entered into a contract with Minnesota-based Outland Renewable Energy to provide maintenance for Gamesa’s wind turbines. Iberdrola Renewables Inc. runs the Gamesa-made turbines at the Cayuga Wind Farm located in Livingston County, Ill.

While servicing a Cayuga turbine, one of Outland’s employees, Aaron McCoy, was electrocuted when the turbine unexpectedly re-energized. McCoy filed a personal injury lawsuit in state court against Iberdrola Renewables and Gamesa. The case was removed from state court to federal court on diversity of citizenship grounds. Iberdrola Renewables impleaded Outland Renewable Energy LLC, claiming indemnification based on the contract and the Illinois Joint Tortfeasor Contribution Act.

Outland then filed 22 counterclaims, which included indemnification raising federal and state anti-trust claims and other state law claims. Outland was not successful in seeking a preliminary injunction against Gamesa’s allegedly unfair competitive practices.

Continue reading