Justia Lawyer Rating for Robert D. Kreisman

by

On Nov. 27, 2008, Galissa Brown walked out of the Nitro Nightclub in west suburban Stone Park, Ill., at about 1 a.m. She began walking with some of her friends to their car. The police had already been called to this nightclub because of 4 or 5 stabbings. It had been a violent night.

Two blocks from the nightclub, Brown was the victim of a hit-and-run driver. Brown was taken to Loyola Medical Center in Maywood, Ill., and pronounced dead at 1:58 a.m. Neither the vehicle nor the individual driver was ever identified.

On Nov. 23, 2009, Reginald Brown, Galissa’s father, filed a lawsuit against Nitro under the Liquor Control Act of 1934, which is also known as the Illinois Dram Shop Act.

Continue reading

by

A Philadelphia jury entered a verdict of $55 million in damages after nine days of trial testimony in favor of Carlos Martinez who suffered paralysis in a car crash when his Honda SUV rolled over. Martinez’s head hit the roof of the vehicle in the rollover. There was evidence revealed during the discovery process that showed that Honda had determined that a seat-belted driver would strike his or her head on the roof in a rollover crash. The Honda vehicle, an Integra SUV, was not further tested by Honda to resolve that defect to protect drivers and passengers in rollover incidences.

The lawyer representing Martinez maintained that the injuries suffered could have been avoided by a safer design of the seat belt that was already in existence. It is hopeful that this verdict would send a message to Honda that it must correct the defect to the seat belt in this Honda vehicle.

The jury’s verdict of $55 million included $25 million for past and future damages, $14.6 million for medical expenses and $15 million that was assigned for the benefit of Martinez’s wife for loss of consortium.

Continue reading

by

Cheneka Ross, 13, was playing tag at a Chicago Park District Park playground while being chased by another child. She ran to the slide to avoid being tagged by one of her playmates. Cheneka climbed up the slide and as she started to slide down, one of her feet became caught on a piece of plastic near the slide’s bottom. She was not able to see the plastic from the top as the slide was curved. The girl fractured her ankle requiring surgery.

Cheneka’s mother, Artenia Bowman, filed a lawsuit against the Chicago Park District asking for her daughter’s medical expenses as well as damages, claiming that the district had acted willfully and wantonly toward the slide’s users. It was also alleged that the park district had received numerous complaints from the community about the slide’s condition and submitted multiple affidavits showed that the park district had received complaints about the slide’s defect since 2010.

The park district’s records system showed that in August 2010 the slide was “boarded up and waiting for repair.” One week prior to the incident with Cheneka, the park district log indicated that the “slide west of park [was] still broken.”

Continue reading

by

In September 2008, Erica Perkins was involved in a car crash while driving a car owned by Beverly Perkins. LaTonya Reese and Kionna Griffin sued Erica Perkins for the injuries they suffered in the crash.

American Access Casualty Co. issued a non-owner’s insurance policy to Erica Perkins and provided a defense to Erica against each of the complaints filed against her. However, the insurance company required Erica to cooperate with American Access and to answer all questions and provide any written proofs that American Access required.

American Access charged that Beverly Perkins regularly let Erica drive without adding her as a primary insured. American Access alleged that the Perkinses have been uncooperative, choosing not to answer questions or cooperate with American Access’s investigation. As a result, American Access filed for a declaratory judgment against Erica, Reese and Griffin seeking a judicial declaration that American Access owed no duty to defend Erica because the car was not a “non-owned automobile.”

Continue reading

by

Mei Pang was a passenger in a car driven by Ingrid Chan in January 2002 when a crash occurred between Chan’s car and another vehicle driven by Donald McGinnis. Pang was injured severely. McGinnis’s insurer paid Pang $100,000 to settle her personal injury lawsuit and claim.

Chan was insured by Farmers Insurance Group. Chan and her husband had a special “umbrella policy.” The umbrella policy covered the named insureds (the Chans themselves), any relatives of the Chans by blood, marriage or adoption or any person under 21 in the care of the named insured.

On Jan. 7, 2010, Pang filed a complaint for underinsured motorist coverage seeking coverage both from Farmers under the Chan umbrella policy and also from Mid-Century Insurance Co., which issued the Chans their primary auto insurance policy.

Continue reading

by

On May 11, 2009, Manuel Banuelos was driving a dump truck through a construction zone on northbound Interstate 94 in Lake County, Ill., when he attempted to turn into a construction site a quarter-mile north of Illinois Route 176. At that point, Banuelos was rear-ended by a semi-tractor-trailer driven by the defendant Dezell Kelley, pushing Banuelos’ truck into a ditch causing his serious injuries.

Banuelos claimed that he had slowed down in advance of his turn, that his flashers were engaged and signs were present warning drivers of a flagger ahead and the trucks were entering and exiting this highway.

Two witnesses confirmed that Banuelos had slowed and his flashers were on. Banuelos was 39 years old at the time of the crash. He sustained a herniated L5-S1 disc that required a discectomy and fusion, a torn meniscus in his right knee that required arthroscopic surgery and a herniated C5-6 disc requiring treatment and future fusion surgery, all leaving him unable to return to work as a truck driver.

Continue reading

by

G3 Enterprises, a wine and beverage packaging and transportation company, had a long-term subhauling contract with Sun Valley Express Transport Inc. Sun Valley in turn contracted with Velazquez & Sons Trucking Co. to haul grapes using G3’s trailers. Velazquez & Sons assigned its new driver, Juan Velazquez, to do the job, which was coordinated and dispatched by G3.

As Velazquez was driving a big rig, hauling G3‘s double trailer on the highway, he crashed into a charter bus driven by Jimmy Duncan. The bus then crashed into attenuator barrels before becoming trapped between the big rig and the wall of an overpass. Rescue workers had to use the Jaws of Life to evacuate injured passengers of the bus.

Duncan, 50, was rushed to a hospital’s emergency department suffering from pain, nausea and dizziness. He was diagnosed with chest and abdominal contusions and neck and low back strain. However, the X-rays showed narrowing of Duncan’s spinal canal, which caused compression of the spinal cord and nerve roots at C6-7, narrowing of the space between L2-3 and L3-4 vertebrae, with pockets of air between the disks. The impact of the crash also aggravated Duncan’s pre-existing spinal injuries from which he had undergone two prior surgeries.

Continue reading

by

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago has reversed a decision of a U.S. district court judge regarding whether a case should be remanded back to an Illinois state court. This case arises out of the bankruptcy of a company known as Parmalat. Parmalat was a large Italian food and dairy company that entered bankruptcy in Italy in 2013. Enrico Bondi was appointed “extraordinary commissioner,” which is the Italian version of a bankruptcy trustee.

In 2004, Bondi initiated in the Southern District of New York Bankruptcy Court, a proceeding under Section 304 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code to “enjoin the commencement” of a lawsuit against Parmalat with respect to property involved in the Italian bankruptcy.

After filing the lawsuit in the Southern District of New York’s Bankruptcy Court, Bondi filed a separate lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Cook County against Grant Thornton International, an accounting firm. That lawsuit claimed that Grant Thornton was responsible for Parmalat’s collapse through its involvement in fraudulent audits of Parmalat’s books in violation of Illinois law.

Continue reading

by

Mary Dicks died on Sept. 25, 2012. Her granddaughter, Jennifer Barber, was her closest living relative and her only heir. Barber claimed that Dicks died intestate and filed a petition to be named administrator of her estate.

However, Allison Ferconio, who was Dicks’s niece, filed a will with the Circuit Court. The will was dated May 23, 2012 naming Ferconio as executor and left Dicks’s estate to six individuals. On that list was Ferconio, but not Barber. The will was signed and witnessed by Richard Tebik and Robert Abraham who signed a standard attestation clause.

The attestation clause indicated that the will was signed in the presence of each of the two witnesses. There was a second attestation clause, claiming that Dicks signed the document as her will and acknowledged her signature in the presence of both witnesses. The court admitted the will and named Ferconio as her executor. Barber filed a request for a formal proof of will seeking the testimony of Tebik and Abraham.

Continue reading

by

According to the Illinois Appellate Court, a corporate condominium association that was dissolved is in a legal standing the same as that of a dead natural person such as found in the case of Markus v. Chicago Title & Trust, 373 Ill.557 (1940).

Under Illinois §12.80 of the Business Corporation Act of 1983, a five-year window is open for suing a corporation on any claim that existed or liability that was incurred before the dissolution of the company.

In this particular case, the issue was whether (a) two subcontractors who are dissolved and allegedly botched work on a condominium project and (b) the general contractor who wasn’t sued by the condominium association until more than five years after the subcontractors closed shop. Does §12.80 block the general contractor from filing an indemnification, contribution claim against the defunct contractors, or do “equitable considerations” extend the deadline?

Continue reading