Justia Lawyer Rating for Robert D. Kreisman

by

In 2007, Illinois amended the Wrongful Death Act to add language saying, “including damages for grief, sorrow and mental suffering.” The language was added to the description of available wrongful death damages.

According to this Chicago federal court case, Hammond v. System Transport, Inc., the Illinois legislature’s intentions in amending the wrongful death statute “was to compensate for the spouse’s and next of kin’s emotional consequences from the end of a decedent’s life, including the process or manner of death.”  The damages, grief, sorrow and mental suffering resulting from the manner of death may be compensable under the Wrongful Death Act, according to the case opinion.

However, the court held that “evidence of defendant Austin’s [the truck driver’s] negligence, such as the allegation that he violated rules limiting the hours he could work before resting, which resulted in his falling asleep and running a stop sign, is not relevant to plaintiff’s claim.” 

Continue reading

by

Heike Wehrle and Robert Wehrle were severely injured in an auto crash with a drunk driver who had minimal insurance coverage.  The Wehrles had an underinsured motorist insurance policy with Cincinnati Insurance Co. that paid the difference between their $1 million coverage limit and the $200,000 that they received from the at-fault driver. 

The Wehrles sued Cincinnati claiming that they were entitled to the full $1 million of underinsurance rather than $800,000, which was the difference between the $1 million provided by Cincinnati and the $200,000 provided by the insurance company for the tortfeasor drunk driver.

The Wehrles were driving their sport-utility vehicle in Kane County, Ill., in December 2010.  They were hit by a drunk driver, Eric Barth. The Wehrles were severely injured and their medical expenses and damages far exceeded the policy limits of either Barth’s insurance or their own underinsurance policy. 

Continue reading

by

Deirdre Hastings was an ironworker employed by Area Erectors Inc.On March 5, 2007, Hastings was unloading steel beams from the bed of a flatbed truck. The steel beams were hooked to a 90-ton hydraulic crane, which would move the steel onto the building that was being constructed. 

The crane was rented from the defendant Jefco Equipment Co. The crane was being operated by Greg Windbiel, who performed the work for Jefco, although he was  employed by Area. 

As the beam was being guided by Hastings, the beam struck her on the chest, knocking her to the ground with the beam falling on her right leg, breaking it.

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Appellate Court has reversed a decision by a Cook County judge in a case involving two statutes of limitation, which were possible choices in a breach of contract case.

On Aug. 2, 2002, the plaintiff, Advanced Credit Inc. (ACI), and the defendant Samuel Linares signed a promissory note in the amount of $8,000 at an interest rate of 20%. The note required Linares to pay ACI $8,000 plus interest on demand. On Dec. 1, 2004, ACI demanded the loan’s repayment. Linares did not pay. Nothing was done at that time.

On Aug. 25, 2010, ACI filed a lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Cook County demanding enforcement of the note. ACI alleged that the amount due, including principal and interest after giving Linares credit for payments made, was $20,192. In addition, ACI demanded a per diem interest at $2.67 plus attorney fees and court costs.

Continue reading

by

Pedestrian Eusebio Camacho was struck and injured when crossing midblock at night by defendant Michael Lynch’s eastbound car. Camacho received a $56,803 verdict although a 50 percent comparative fault reduction was entered by the jury. 

The accident occurred on Oct. 12, 2010 when Camacho was walking northbound across Irving Park Road in Chicago in the middle of the block at night. He was hit by Lynch’s car. The car had crossed over the double yellow median lines as Lynch was trying to gain access to the left-turn lane. 

Camacho, 44, suffered a fractured tibia and torn rotator cuff.  He lost four months of work as Walgreen’s store manager. 

Continue reading

by

Humberto Menendez was working for Steine Cold Storage, Inc., which was a subcontractor for the installation of thermo units at a Wal-Mart store under construction in Indiana. Steine rented a boom lift from NES Rentals. 

NES Rentals delivered the lift to the construction site on Aug. 23, 2006. The Steine foreman on site signed a 1-page, double-sided, rental agreement that was given to him by NES Rentals.

A paragraph including an indemnification clause was posted on the backside of the rental agreement. The indemnification clause stated that Steine indemnified NES against any claims arising out of negligence as to the use of the rented boom lift. 

Continue reading

by

In this auto accident case, the defendant insurance company, Safeway Insurance Co., insured Ruben Delatorre under a policy of insurance with a limit of $40,000. Safeway hired an attorney to represent Delatorre in the personal injury lawsuit brought against Delatorre. However, the lawyer for Delatorre/Safeway never submitted a bill and was never paid. The lawyer apparently abandoned the case, and a default judgment was entered against Delatorre in the amount of $250,000. 

Then the plaintiff in the auto-injury case received an assignment from  Delatorre allowing the personal injury plaintiff to sue Safeway directly for the excess judgment. 

The judge in the Circuit Court of Cook County granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, ruling that Safeway breached its duty to defend and was liable for the entire $250,000 judgment.

Continue reading

by

The Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a decision by a federal district court judge in the Central District of Illinois, finding that an employee handbook that was silent as to termination of a nonprobationary employee compared to the section on probationary employees was insufficient to overcome Illinois’ presumption of at-will employment. 

Steven Cromwell was a lieutenant in the Momence Police Department. Cromwell was involved in an incident of alcohol-related misconduct in April 2010. After an investigation, it was determined that Cromwell lied to his superiors and was insubordinate. 

Several months later, Cromwell received a letter from the City Council stating that his charges had been filed with the Police Committee and that a recommendation had  been made to terminate him. The letter also stated that Cromwell was invited to attend a hearing in which he would be given an opportunity to reply to the charges made against him. 

Continue reading

by

Dorma Lawson, age 59, was driving northbound on Western Avenue in Chicago Heights, Ill., when she stopped to make a left turn into a bank parking lot north of Lincoln Highway. Lawson’s car was then rear-ended by a Kickert school bus. Lawson claimed that she sustained soft tissue injuries to her neck, back and left knee. She had arthroscopic knee surgery, which showed that she did not have a torn meniscus.

Lawson is on disability due to a hip injury alleged to have been caused by this crash. The defendant bus driver, Patricia Savage, age 34, claimed that Lawson made a sudden stop and did not use her left turn signal. This, Savage said, was the cause of the crash. 

The defendants also argued that the impact was very minor. Defendants maintained that Lawson was not injured to the extent that she claimed, and that her disability was unrelated to the crash.

Continue reading

by

The Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago found that an injured motorcyclist’s husband’s statement was an admissible statement for the jury to hear and not barred as hearsay. The man told a state trooper that although his wife was severely injured, she said to him:  “I’m sorry. It’s not the trucker’s fault.It was mine.”

Betty Jordan, the motorcyclist, was severely injured when her motorcycle collided with a semi-trailer truck on an Indianapolis interstate highway. Both of Jordan’s legs were amputated at the knees. The Jordans filed suit against the trucker and his employer for negligence and loss of consortium. 

After a jury verdict for the defendants, the plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals arguing that the district court erred in ruling that the state trooper’s testimony — about what the husband told him — was hearsay under Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE) 801.

Continue reading