Quantcast
Channel: Madison - St. Clair Record
Viewing all 22055 articles
Browse latest View live

Motorist blames Missouri driver for causing crash, injuries

$
0
0

EDWARDSVILLE — An Illinois motorist is suing a St. Louis driver, alleging the defendant's negligence caused a crash that injured the plaintiff. 

Leonard Latham filed a complaint Sept. 22 in Madison County Circuit Court against Adam Radetic, alleging the defendant carelessly drove through an intersection with the light red.

According to the complaint, on Sept. 23, 2014, Latham's car was stopped near the intersection of state Route 203 and Third Street in Madison when the red light turned to a green arrow, allowing the plaintiff to proceed to turn left. The suit says Radetic negligently proceeded through the intersection on a red light, causing a collision with Latham's vehicle.

The lawsuit states the ensuing crash caused Latham to sustain injuries to his neck, back, right shoulder and left wrist, and that he suffered great pain, disability and damage to his car. The plaintiff alleges Radetic failed to keep proper lookout, failed to timely stop to avoid a collision and carelessly proceeded through a red light at a speed greater than reasonable and proper.

Latham seeks trial by jury, judgment of more than $50,000, plus costs of suit and all other relief the court deems just and proper. He is represented by attorneys Michael J. Brunton and Mary M. Stewart of Brunton Law Offices PC in Collinsville.

Madison County Circuit Court case number 16-L-1335


Madison County civil docket Oct. 11-14

$
0
0

Tuesday, October 11

9:00 AM

RIPOSTA FRANK  V.  ASBESTOS CORPORATION LIMITED
15-L-001598, ASBESTOS JUDGE 327

WILKERSON BRIEANA A MIN BY HER  V.  PELO PATRICIA
14-L-000449, MATOESIAN 351

KLINKE ROSEMARY  V.  KANUMURI RAGHU MD
14-L-001046, RUTH 311

O'BRIEN HUNTER A MINOR BY HIS  V.  EAST ALTON WOOD RIVER
13-L-001587, CROWDER 320

ADAIR KIERSTYN G A MINOR BY RO  V.  LEGATE GAILE M
14-L-001638, MATOESIAN 351

PAITZ LAURI S  V.  COLEMAN AMANDA L
14-L-000500, MATOESIAN 351

Thursday, October 13

9:00 AM

WILLIAMS GARY L  V.  KIDDS RESTAURANTS INC DBA JIMM
12-L-000632, MUDGE 302

LAKIN JAMES  V.  CASEYS RETAIL COMPANY DBA CASE
14-L-000655, MUDGE 302

Friday, October 14

9:00 AM

HEINEMAN LACEY IND AND AS ADMI  V.  ROBINSON MICHAEL
16-L-000631, RUTH 311

BUFFO ANTONIO  V.  UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATIO
14-L-001176, RUTH 311

STOVEY STEPHEN  V.  ROGERS AARON
16-L-000773, RUTH 311

RYLANDER CHERYL SPEC ADM OF TH  V.  PETERSEN MANAGEMENT COMPANY
15-L-000922, RUTH 311

TIMMERMEIER EARL AS SPEC REP O  V.  ST ELIZABETHS HOSPITAL OF
15-L-001151, RUTH 311

TUCKER ZACHARY  V.  PAPA JOHNS INTERNATIONAL, INC
16-L-000049, MATOESIAN 351

DEL VALLE NELSON  V.  GRANDVIEW FARMS LIMITED PARTNE
15-L-001356, RUTH 311

RLJ LENDING CO  V.  ANDERSON MICHAEL C
16-L-001041, RUTH 311

BUCKINGHAM ROBERT  V.  ADERHOLD DORIS
14-L-000231, RUTH 311

AGEE JAMES  V.  MADISON COUNTY ILLINOIS
16-L-000815, RUTH 311

CARTER JAAVANTE  V.  PIASA ENTERPRISES INC
15-L-000965, RUTH 311

CARTER DONNA  V.  PIASA ENTERPRISES INC
15-L-000967, RUTH 311

MAYBERRY CHRISTIAN  V.  LONGWELL CLARENCE SR
16-L-001155, RUTH 311

GILLESPIE JODEE L AS INDEPENDE  V.  GOFF KEITH
16-L-001101, RUTH 311

ALLARIA NICOLE M  V.  THOMAS GEORGE
16-L-000943, RUTH 311

Customer voluntarily dismisses shopping center from icy slip and fall suit

$
0
0

A Schnucks customer voluntarily dismissed an East St. Louis shopping center after he changed the location of his parking lot slip and fall on ice.

Plaintiff Lawrence Butler filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss defendant State Street Shopping Center without prejudice and with leave to reinstate on Sept. 20 through attorneys Lanny Darr of Alton and Michael Sudekum of St. Louis.

State Street Shopping Center filed a motion to dismiss on Sept. 2 through attorney Beth Boggs of Boggs Avellino Lach & Boggs in St. Louis.

In its motion to dismiss, the defendant explains that in his second amended complaint, Butler alleged injuries from a slip and fall in a Schnucks parking lot at 2511 State Street in East St. Louis. Then in his third amended complaint, Butler said his alleged injuries were from a slip and fall in a Schnucks parking lot at 5720 North Belt West in Belleville.

Butler alleges State Street Shopping Center owned, leased, possessed or controlled the parking lots, which the defendant calls “unquestionably false.”

“Plaintiff’s counsel has merely lazily swapped out the address of the location of the alleged fall without bothering to dismiss this defendant and add an appropriate defendant.

“The only reason that State Street Shopping Center was ever a party to this case at all was because Plaintiff failed to identify the correct parking lot location in his original petition.

“To continue with claims against State Street Shopping Center in this matter is a farce that this Court should end.

Butler filed the suit December 2015 alleging injuries after falling on ice in a Schnuck Markets parking lot.

He claims he was grocery shopping at the store on Jan. 27, 2014. After leaving the store, he alleges he slipped on ice that had accumulated due to improper shoveling and plowing or improper chemical treatment of the parking lot.

As a result, Butler claims he suffered pain and disability, accumulated ongoing medical expenses and has lost wages and expects to continue to do so in the future.

Butler also named Hank’s Excavating and Landscaping a defendant, which was hired to keep the parking lot clear of ice and snow. The defendant is represented by Mark Osland of St. Louis.

Schnuck Markets is represented by Beth Kamp Veath of Brown & James in Belleville.

Madison County Circuit Court case number 15-L-1551

Madison County foreclosures Sept. 26-Oct. 5

$
0
0

SEPTEMBER 26, 2016

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE V. MARIA D. JESUS GOMEZ AND PEDRO GOMEZ, $131,201.25, 501 RICHTER HILL RD., COLLINSVILLE. 16-CH-578
WELLS FARGO BANK V. JAME D. II AND ANGELA R. EBERHART, $38,847.75, 215 HALLER AVE., WOOD RIVER. 16-CH-579
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING V. BYRON CLEMONS, $66,738.71, 2719 HILLCREST AVE., ALTON. 16-CH-580
CARRINGTON MORTGAGE SERVICES V. JOANNIE MORGAN, $48,383.13, 1704 FERGUSON AVE., GRANITE CITY. 16-CH-581
BANK OF AMERICA V. GRAHAM AND SARAH WALKER, $91,888.34, 2111 HILL CREST DR., HIGHLAND. 16-CH-582
US BANK V. RICK D. HESSENAUER, $74,207.57, 420 LAUREL ST., HIGHLAND. 16-CH-583
PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES V. CHERI MCINTIRE AND MICHAEL BELL, $73,355.04, 3871 BERKELEY  AVE., ALTON. 16-CH-584
US BANK V. RONNIE L. AND KIMBERLY J. DAVIDSON, $89,555.00, 2517 IVY LN., GRANITE CITY. 16-CH-585
US BANK V. ELIZABETH N. CARRION, $156,145.09, 18 AUTUMN GLEN DR., GLEN CARBON. 16-CH-586

SEPTEMBER 27, 2016

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE V. PATRINA R. SMITH, $86,338.72, 2031 BECKWITH AVE., MADISON. 16-CH-587
BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING V. ROBY REA AND CHERYL REA, $97,142.80, 1318 CARRIBEAN DR., EDWARDSVILLE. 16-CH-588
DITECH FINANCIAL V. CHRISTOPHER L. AND KRISTEN SHERRILL , $131,037.83, 1897 FOUNTAINBLEAU DR., WORDEN. 16-CH-589
WELLS FARGO BANK V. MICHELLE Y. ZUCKERMAN, $112,800.27, 5116 STATEN DR., GODFREY. 16-CH-590
BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING V. CHONTAY GREGORY, LOWELL WALKER AND CAROL WALKER, $31,723.16,1645 5TH ST., MADISON. 16-CH-592

SEPTEMBER 28, 2016

WELLS FARGO BANK V. RICKY AND DARLENE GORDON, $80,661.52, 2855 GRAND AVE., GRANITE CITY. 16-CH-594
PHH MORTGAGE V. RICHARD THOMAS , $65,955.37, 2 ROXBURY CT., GRANITE CITY. 16-CH-595
PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES V. DAVID W. TURNER-COLE, $103,363.83, 908 LANGDON ST., ALTON. 16-CH-596
MIDFIRST BANK V. JOSHUA  AND KRYSTAL JORDAN, $92,380.41, 5124 STEPHANIE DR., GRANITE CITY. 16-CH-597

SEPTEMBER 29, 2016

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE V. KENNETH M. AND LISA A. SHELTON, $133,961.68, 10 SADDLEBROOKE , TROY. 16-CH-599
US BANK V. MARK AND KELLY HOWARD , $104,750.61, 5205 BLACK OAK RD., ALTON. 16-CH-600
US BANK V. PATRICK G. GIBBS, $87,874.48, 368 12TH ST., WOODRIVER. 16-CH-601

SEPTEMBER 30, 2016

US BANK V. JEFFERIE WATKINS, $133,612.50, 519 OAK HILL DR., EDWARDSVILLE. 16-CH-602
FIRST COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION V. FREIDA F. WHITE, $50,261.89, 105 ALAMO DR., COLLINSVILLE. 16-CH-603
WELLS FARGO BANK V. LEONARD D. MANLEY JR. AND SHERY L. MOORE, $74,278.41, 236 S. CLINTON ST., COLLINSVILLE. 16-CH-604
US BANK V. JEREMY R. BROWN AND CHRISTINA L. BROWN, $134,283.09, 1130 TULIP LN., HIGHLAND. 16-CH-605
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE V. ANDUJAR AND EUNICA STANLEY, $49,568.53, 1821 SPRUCE ST., GRANITE CITY. 16-CH-606
CARRINGTON MORTGAGE V. COREY N. BECHTOLD, $114,191.72, 101 WHISPERING OAKS DR., BETHALTO. 16-CH-607
WELLS FARGO BANK V. BRENDA L. DORSEY, $112,594.25, 200 WILSON PARK LN., GRANITE CITY. 16-CH-608

OCTOBER 3, 2016

US BANK V. TERESA BUTLER, $11,260.84, 251 VICTORY DR., E. ALTON. 16-CH-609

OCTOBER 5, 2016

US BANK V. BRIAN J. AND MICHELE A. CLARKIN, $149,237.62, 5 SUNRISE CT., HIGHLAND. 16-CH-610

Appellate record shows Cook made eight reversible errors leading up to heroin arrest; Two murder suspects also got new trials

$
0
0

Former St. Clair County judge Michael Cook abused the rights of 10 suspects and prisoners in 10 months prior to his arrest on heroin charges.
 
Fifth District appellate judges reversed eight orders from that time, and Circuit Judge Robert Haida granted two new murder trials.
 
Haida and two other judges, John Baricevic, chief judge, and Robert LeChien, took the unusual step of running for election this year, instead of retention, so they could more openly discuss issues related to Cook’s drug addiction while campaigning.

Cook’s drug use and that of associate judge Joe Christ, who died from a cocaine overdose in 2013 while the two were together at a Cook family hunting lodge, became campaign issues for judges seeking election to Cook’s vacancy in 2014.

The drug issue also has arisen this election cycle in a contest between Baricevic, Democrat, and Belleville attorney Ron Duebbert, Republican, who says in campaign literature that “the dark cloud of heroin still hangs in the courthouse.”

Baricevic has demanded that Duebbert abandon that line of attack, saying that he has worked to ensure that there are no remaining drug problems in the court system.

The two also remain at odds over drug testing for judges.

Cook’s record on appeal
 
Court records at the Fifth District show a plain possibility that Cook made good decisions until addiction overtook him.

Cook was elected circuit judge in November 2010, after having served as an associate judge for three years.
 
From the start of 2011 to the middle of 2012, he committed no errors that the Fifth District judges caught.
 
He made his first error on a petition from prisoner Kareson Chapman, who claimed that in 2009 his judge broke a Supreme Court rule at jury selection.
 
Chapman claimed he tried to raise the issue on appeal but his lawyer ignored it.
 
Cook dismissed Chapman’s petition in July of 2012, for failure to present the gist of a constitutional claim.
 
Fifth District judges reversed Cook in 2014, finding they arguably would have granted a new trial on the first appeal if counsel had raised the issue.
 
They didn’t identify the trial judge or appellate counsel.
 
Cook made another error on a petition from prisoner Andrew Scott, who claimed counsel brushed off his request to interview a witness who could exonerate him.
 
Cook dismissed the petition in August of 2012, for failure to present the gist of a constitutional claim.
 
Fifth District judges reversed him in 2014, finding it at least arguable that Scott would have benefited from the witness’s testimony.
 
They held that a defense lawyer must make a reasonable investigation or a reasonable decision that makes a particular investigation unnecessary.
 
They didn’t identify Scott’s counsel.
 
Cook made another error in September of 2012, letting jurors watch too much video of a police interrogation.
 
Jurors convicted Rachael Howard of aggravated criminal sexual assault, on a theory of accountability for actions of other defendants.
 
Cook denied a motion for a new trial, sentenced Howard to 17 years in prison, and denied reconsideration of the sentence.
 
Fifth District judges granted Howard a new trial this January, finding jurors could have easily understood her responses without hearing inflammatory statements.

Justice Melissa Chapman wrote that officers repeatedly exaggerated the brutality of the assault and the extent of the injuries.
 
Chapman quoted a detective telling Howard three times that she was just as responsible as the other defendants.
 
“This, of course, was the ultimate question jurors were called on to decide,” Chapman wrote.

Cook made another error on a petition from prisoner Tiffany Hall, who alleged ineffective assistance and her own mental incompetency.
 
In 2008, she agreed to plead guilty to four counts of murder in the first degree and one count of intentional homicide of an unborn child.
 
At a hearing on June 9, 2008, former judge Milton Wharton asked defense counsel James Gomric if anything created a doubt in his mind about her fitness to plead.
 
Gomric said psychologist Daniel Cuneo examined her sanity and fitness.
 
“We have confirmed that in point of fact she was then and is now and has been throughout this process both fit and sane,” Gomric said.

He said he believed some issues involved mental health and limited intellect.
 
Wharton imposed four concurrent life sentences for the murders and 60 concurrent years for the death of the unborn child.
 
Hall sought relief in 2012, claiming Gomric failed to investigate her mental health.
 
She wrote that he didn’t receive documentation of her psychiatric evaluation until two days after she pleaded guilty.
 
She attached a report of Robert Heilbronner, stamped, “Received Jun 11 2008.”
 
Heilbronner found Hall’s history included several psychiatric hospitalizations.
 
He found her symptoms relevant to the commission of the crime and mitigation.
 
“Psychiatric examination would also be helpful to assist in further differential diagnosis and to ascertain whether the voices she claims to hear represent actual auditory command hallucinations or some form of obsessive thinking,” he wrote.
 
Hall’s petition claimed that evaluations at Dwight correctional center resulted in diagnoses of psychotic disorder, traumatic stress, schizophrenia, mood disorder, bipolar disorder, and mild mental retardation.
 
Cook dismissed her petition in January 2013, finding that the record refuted her allegations and that she failed to state the gist of a “constitutional deprecation.”
 
Fifth District judges reversed him in 2014, finding Cuneo’s report was completely silent on Hall’s sanity at the time of the murders.
 
Justice Stephen Spomer wrote, “Counsel were awaiting Dr. Heilbronner’s report, which explicitly addressed the issue of the defendant’s sanity at the time of the alleged offenses, but had not received it at the time they advised the defendant to plead guilty.

“As the defendant points out on appeal, it was Dr. Heilbronner’s report, not Dr. Cuneo’s, which if followed up on might have supported a possible insanity defense at trial, which in turn might have led to a finding of not guilty by reason of insanity, a crucial distinction that would not have been lost on capable and diligent trial counsel.”
 
He found it worth mentioning that Cook scribbled the order in two sentences.
 
Cook made another error by missing the point of a petition from prisoner James Cherry, who alleged ineffective assistance against two lawyers.
 
Grand jurors indicted Cherry in 2010, on Class X felony charges of armed violence and aggravated battery with a firearm.
 
The state predicated the armed violence count on his knowingly causing great bodily harm to another as prohibited by the aggravated battery statute.
 
Jurors convicted him in 2011.
 
Prior to sentencing, Cherry sent Cook a letter claiming ineffective assistance.
 
Cherry read the letter out loud at his sentencing hearing.
 
Cook told him his complaints were more properly brought up on appeal and not relevant to sentencing.
 
Cook merged the offenses for sentencing purposes and imposed 25 years.
 
Cherry moved for a different lawyer on the spot, and Cook granted the motion.
 
A new lawyer moved to reconsider the sentence, and Cook denied the motion.
 
In January 2013, Cook held a hearing on Cherry’s letter and denied relief.
 
On appeal, Cherry claimed his lawyers should have argued that the armed violence statute specifically excludes aggravated battery as a predicate offense.
 
Fifth District judges vacated the armed violence conviction and ordered a new sentence in 2014, in an opinion they published as official precedent.
 
They found it patently unreasonable to conclude that the prosecution might sidestep the statutory exclusion.
 
They absolved the lawyers of ineffective assistance, and left out their names.
 
Two Fifth District opinions from this period, both on ineffective assistance, lack specific dates for Cook’s errors.
 
In one, Jamaul Harris agreed to plead guilty to a Class One felony charge that he received for distribution a package of cannabis weighing more than 2,000 grams.
 
The weight jumped to more than 5,000 grams at his plea hearing, as the state tied him to another package from the same shipment.
 
That made it a Class X felony, but Harris didn’t withdraw his plea on the spot.
 
Associate judge Jan Fiss sentenced him to 10 years.
 
Harris later moved for a new sentence, claiming counsel should have discovered that the second package was never in his possession.
 
Chief Judge John Baricevic assigned the motion to Cook, who dismissed it.
 
He found Harris failed to state the gist of a constitutional claim, failed to show that counsel’s performance fell below standard, and failed to show prejudice.
 
On appeal, state’s attorney Brendan Kelly confessed error and agreed that Harris deserved a post conviction hearing in circuit court with appointed counsel.
 
The Fifth District’s opinion didn’t identify Harris’s counsel.
 
In the other case with no date of error in the opinion, prisoner Floyd Robinson claimed he got 10 years after his lawyer promised probation.
 
He pleaded guilty of retail theft and escape in May of 2012, saying he understood the possible penalties and understood that he would be sentenced later.
 
At a hearing the state requested 14 years for escape and six for theft, claiming he committed the offenses on supervision three months after release from prison.
 
Cook sentenced Robinson to 10 years on the escape and three concurrent years on the theft, with two years of supervised release.
 
Robinson moved to withdraw his plea the next day, pro se.
 
He claimed that if he had known the state would extend the sentence on escape, he would have accepted their original offer of three years.
 
He claimed he discussed the offer with his second public defender, Alex Baker, and that Baker told him to plead guilty and get probation.
 
Baker moved for reconsideration of the sentence, but Cook ruled that a conflict of interest existed between him and his client.
 
Public defender Andrew Liefer entered and moved to vacate the judgment.
 
He certified that he consulted with his client in person, ascertained his contention of error, and examined the trial court file and the report of the plea proceedings.
 
At a hearing in October 2012, a prosecutor said he wanted to make sure Robinson would withdraw all motions that he and Baker filed.
 
Liefer agreed, and Cook asked Robinson if he understood.
 
Robinson said, “This is the first time I’ve known about it but I guess so. Yes, sir.”
 
Cook denied Liefer’s motion.
 
Robinson then filed a motion claiming he told Liefer about the original offer and Liefer told him he would bring it to the court’s attention.
 
At a hearing, Cook told Robinson he waived everything except the motion to vacate judgment.
 
Cook told him he entered his plea knowingly with the advice of counsel.
 
Cook told him he didn’t show that but for Liefer’s errors he would have refrained from pleading guilty.
 
Fifth District judges reversed Cook this May, ruling that he should have detected a clear communication problem between Liefer and his client.
 
They found he violated a Supreme Court rule providing that a court shall not accept a guilty plea without first determining that it is voluntary.
 
Justice Richard Goldenhersh wrote, “If the trial court asked defendant whether any promises had been made and defendant denied any such promises, then we might be inclined to rule differently.”
 
Errors in all these cases occurred before March 10, 2013, the day Cook found associate judge Joe Christ dead at the Cook family hunting lodge in Pike County.
 
An autopsy would find he died of cocaine intoxication, and Pike County sheriff Paul Petty kept it confidential while leading an investigation.
 
Cook returned from the lodge to preside over a murder trial that ended in a guilty verdict against Gregory Muse.
 
Muse moved for a new trial, alleging various errors.
 
In April 2013, Cook presided over a murder trial that ended in a guilty verdict against William Cosby.
 
Cook committed another reversible error on May 10, 2013, when he denied an ineffective assistance petition from prisoner Robert Plair.
 
Fifth District judges would later find nothing in the record contradicting Plair’s assertion that counsel ignored his request to perfect an appeal.
 
Cook’s judicial career ended on May 23, 2013, when federal agents arrested him at the home of Belleville heroin dealer Sean McGilvery.
 
Federal prosecutors charged Cook with possessing heroin and using it while possessing firearms.
 
Agents arrested McGilvery, who admitted he distributed heroin.
 
They arrested county probation officer James Fogarty, who admitted he sold cocaine to Christ but denied providing the cocaine that killed him.
 
Muse filed another motion for a new trial, claiming Cook’s addiction affected his judgment and slurred his speech.
 
Cosby also moved for a new trial.
 
Haida granted new trials to both in October 2013.
 
At a hearing, he cited a rule providing that a judge must recuse himself if his impartiality might be questioned.
 
Muse bargained a plea, and Cosby gained acquittal.
 
Cook and Fogarty served their sentences, and McGilvery remains behind bars.

What to do when the dog won't behave

$
0
0

Who let the dog out?

That's the question you ask when the dog goes missing and you've got to look for him. Especially if he's a bad dog, one that hasn't been trained properly and doesn't mind. You know he's going to get into trouble, so you've got to find him fast and get him locked up.

Le chien is “the dog” in French, and the last name of a judge in St. Clair County.

Robert LeChien is a bad doggie, too. You'd think a judge would have some training and know how to follow rules, but LeChien seems to think that the rules don't apply to him.

That's a problem. If common sense rules don’t apply to LeChien, how can that apply to anyone else? People are going to ask that question. If they don't get a reasonable answer, they're going to lose respect for law, maybe even become lawless.

Along with fellow circuit court judges John Baricevic and Robert Haida, LeChien decided he'd avoid the higher retention standard state law sets for incumbents (60 percent) by resigning his judgeship and pretending to be a first-time candidate in November, electable by a simple majority.

The old dog is pretending that his new trick is ok, since it's not expressly prohibited, but it's clear to any reasonable person that he's bending the rules to the breaking point.

Having bent that rule, LeChien proceeded to another, the one that requires a sitting judge to recuse himself when he has a relationship with a party appearing before him in court.

LeChien dismissed a suit filed against Cahokia Village Clerk Richard Duncan by Donna Ayres, who subsequently provided documentary evidence of the relationship between the judge and the defendant. She’s appealing the case.

If he wouldn't recuse himself from a race he doesn't belong in, why would he recuse himself from a case?

 LeChien is a bad doggie.

Illinois appellate judges reverse Judge Barberis' workers' compenstaion decision for lack of jurisdiction

$
0
0

Illinois appellate judges from each district came together and vacated Madison County Circuit Judge John Barberis’ ruling that a woman’s injury did not arise out of her work with the Collinsville Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center.

Justice Thomas Hoffman (First District) delivered the Rule 23 decision on Sept. 27, finding that the Madison County Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction in the matter. The case was remanded back to the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission for further proceedings.

Justices William Holdridge (Third District), Donald Hudson (Second District), Thomas Harris (Fourth District) and Bruce Stewart (Fifth District) concurred

Claimant Diane Patterson filed an application for adjustment of claim pursuant to the Workers’ Compensation Act, seeking benefits for injuries she allegedly sustained on Aug. 20, 2013, while working for Collinsville Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center.

Following a hearing, an arbitrator found that Patterson failed to prove her injury was the result of an accident from work. The arbitrator declined to address the remaining issues and denied workers’ compensation benefits.

Patterson sought review of the decision by the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission. The Commission reversed the arbitrator’s decision on July 7, 2015, with one commissioner dissenting. The Commission then remanded the matter back to the arbitrator to address the issues “previously deemed moot.”

Collinsville Rehabilitation filed a petition for judicial review in the Madison County Circuit Court.

Barberis reversed the decision of the Commission on Nov. 18, 2015, “holding that the Commission’s determination that the claimant’s accident arose out of and in the course of her employment was against the manifest weight of the evidence.”

Patterson appealed.

Hoffman wrote that while the parties did not raise the issue of the Madison County Circuit Court’s jurisdiction on appeal, “this court has an obligation to examine the jurisdictional issue sua sponte. That obligation stems from the fundamental principle that, if the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, then its orders are void and of no effect.”

The appellate court stated that only final determinations of the Commission are appealable.

“Accordingly, the decision issued by the Commission was not a final determination because it mandated further administrative proceedings and did not dispose of the claimant’s request for [temporary total disability] benefits …,” the decision states.

“In the absence of a final determination by the Commission, the circuit court lacked the requisite subject matter jurisdiction to entertain this mater and, therefore, its order reversing the Commission’s decision is void,” it continues.

Madison County Circuit Court case number 15-MR-196

Passengers allege driver caused fatal crash

$
0
0

EDWARDSVILLE — Several passengers are suing the representative of the estate of a motorist whom the plaintiffs allege caused a crash that killed the defendant and injured the plaintiffs. 

Nadine Thompson, Vicki Suhre, Evelyn Suhre and Jaime Mifflin, individually, and Jaime Mifflin as natural mother and next friend of minors Elizabeth and Jonathan Mifflin, filed a lawsuit Sept. 23 in Madison County Circuit Court against Denise A. Crisler, personal representative of the estate of Dean Lanphere, alleging Lanphere negligently failed to operate his vehicle with reasonable care for the safety of other persons and their property.

According to the complaint, on Oct. 5, 2014, the plaintiffs were passengers in a vehicle stopped near the intersection of State Route 143 and Enviro Way in Wood River when Lanphere caused a chain-reaction collision, including the vehicle occupied by the plaintiffs.

The collision, the suit says, caused the plaintiffs severe injuries, resulting in medical expenses, pain and suffering, disability and loss of normal life. The plaintiffs allege Lanphere operated his vehicle too closely to the vehicles ahead of him, failed to keep proper lookout and failed to keep his vehicle under control.

The plaintiffs seek trial by jury, judgment of at least $50,000 for each plaintiff and costs of suit. They are represented by attorney Justin B. Mattea of Collinsville.

Madison County Circuit Court case number 16-L-1340


Motorist accused of negligence in collision

$
0
0

EDWARDSVILLE — A motorist is suing another driver for allegedly causing a collision.

Timothy D. Sykes filed a complaint on Sept. 13 in Madison County Circuit Court against David M. Moehn, alleging that the defendant failed to operate his vehicle under proper control.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that on Oct. 28, 2015, he began to slow down while driving as he approached stopped traffic when the defendant's truck allegedly collided with the rear of his vehicle.

The plaintiff claims he suffered injuries that have caused great pain, mental anguish and medical expenses.

The plaintiff claims Moehn failed to keep proper lookout, failed to operate his vehicle at a speed reasonable under the existing conditions and failed to use every precaution to avoid the collision.

The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks judgment against defendant in an amount greater than $50,000, plus costs of suit and all other relief the court deems just. He is represented by Keith Short of Law Office of Keith Short PC in Collinsville.

Madison County Circuit Court case number 16-L-1300

Local judges shared tips and experiences of trial ethics at IDC conference

$
0
0

Local circuit judges came together on Sept. 29 to discuss a judicial perspective of ethical pitfalls at the Illinois Association of Defense Trial Council's Perspectives, Predictions & Pointers seminar held at Busch Stadium in St. Louis.

Madison County Circuit Judge William Mudge, St. Clair County Circuit Judge Vincent Lopinot and St. Louis Circuit Judge Steven Ohmer shared personal stories and provided tips to attorneys present at the IDC's conference on how to conduct themselves in the courtroom.

Civility Dos and Don’ts

Lopinot said it’s simple. Parties should be respectful and should attempt to discuss and work things out.

“I don’t really have many problems with civility. The problems come with certain attorneys who routinely can’t agree on anything,” he said. “They can’t even agree on the time of day.”

Ohmer agreed and said nothing is more frustrating than when lawyers won’t talk to one another.

He said a lawyer’s reputation is everything and once it is lost, it is difficult to get back.

Mudge added that inappropriate court conduct detracts from professionalism and puts judges in a difficult position.

Judicial Handling of Improper Contacts in Trial

Mudge was the only judge who actually appreciated the ease of communicating with parties via email.

Ohmer called email communication a “waste of time” and said he has trouble making sure all parties are kept in the loop.

Lopinot agreed, saying he sometimes gets caught up in email arguments between attorneys.

While Mudge doesn’t mind corresponding with email, he said he has had to instruct parties to leave him out when an argument erupts.

“I don’t mind talking about scheduling, but when it gets into arguing, I don’t want to be involved,” he said.

Judicial Handling of Special Problems with Pro Se Litigations in Trial

All three judges agreed that pro se litigants are difficult to navigate around, but they do their best to accommodate them.

They have certain rules in place when dealing with pro se litigants to prevent them from suspecting the attorneys and judges are working together.

“It avoids the appearance that the deck is stacked against them,” Mudge said.

Mudge explained that he tries to prevent attorneys from entering his chambers when a pro se litigant is involved. He also makes sure both parties approach the bench.

“Do not approach the bench without the pro se litigant. I guarantee they think you are conspiring against them.”

Ohmer called the situation “delicate” and agreed that all pro se matters should be handled on the bench with all parties present.

He said attorneys sometimes feel like pro se litigants receive special treatment, but Ohmer explained that they need help understanding what is required of them to litigate their claims.

“It’s tedious, but it levels the playing field,” he said.

Judicial Handling of Social Medial Issues in Trial

Ohmer said younger jurors look at social media differently and have to be reminded that discussing the case on social media platforms is no different than talking about it face-to-face with something, which is forbidden.

Mudge added that while measures have to be taken when dealing with the jury and social media, attorneys also have to be careful how they use social media.

In Madison County, attorneys are provided a list of the potential jurors a week before trial. Oftentimes, attorneys will monitor prospective jurors online to get an idea of who they will be screening.

However, Lopinot said attorneys cannot send friend requests or messages to potential jurors or do anything that would “send a message to prospective jurors that they are being watched.”

Local defense attorneys discussed changes to IL and MO case law at IDC conference

$
0
0

Defense attorneys Richard Hunsaker and Debbie Champion outlined Illinois and Missouri litigation trends based on recent case law and what defense attorneys should watch for in court.

The two presented a case law update at the Illinois Associate of Defense Trial Council’s Perspectives, Predictions & Pointers seminar on Sept. 29 at Busch Stadium in St. Louis.

Hunsaker, of Heyl Royster in Edwardsville, outlined several new rulings out of Illinois courts that could change the scope of defense litigation.

Addressing statute of repose versus statute of limitations, Hunsaker said the Illinois Supreme Court entered a decision on Sept. 22 in Moon v Rhode where the plaintiff filed suit against two doctors. However, during litigation he received a report stating that the radiologist may have also violated the standard of care.

Hunsaker said the court now has to struggle with whether to take the general wrongful death statute of limitations of two years or accept the four-year statute of repose period based on the discovery rule. The court ended up remanding the case for more facts.

“I was a little troubled with the opinion,” he said.

He suggested that the case may result in legislative changes to law.

Also on Sept. 22 the Illinois Supreme Court found six-person juries unconstitutional when it ruled that the 1970 Constitution calls for 12 jurors.

According to the case, James Kakos and his wife sued five doctors and their employers for medical malpractice. The defendants requested a 12-member jury at trial and moved to have the recent amendment permitting six-person juries declared unconstitutional.

In regards to Illinois’ premises liability litigation, Hunsaker said that in Bulduk v Walgreens, a woman was walking down the aisle when she tripped on a floor cleaning device. She argued that it created a dangerous condition. The court agreed.

The court found that while the floor cleaning device was “open and obvious,” the defendant should have known that its customers would be distracted by the items on the shelves and may not notice the obstruction.

On the other hand, in Burns v City of Chicago a man tripped on the required ADA sensory tiles. The plaintiff claims to have been distracted by someone shouting during a political protest. The court agreed that the shouting would be distracting but ruled in favor of the defendant, saying the sensory tiles were not a trip hazard.

Missouri case law

Rather than simply focus on new Missouri case law, Champion instead looked to changes in what judges were taught in judicial college this year. She discussed seven key issues.

Discovery apex deposition rule:

Champion, of Rynearson Suess Schnurbusch & Champion in St. Louis, explained that in Missouri, litigants may call anyone they wish as a witness, but if the witness is a “top level employee,” then litigants must prove that the potential witness has discoverable information.

Judges are taught that the party seeking a protection order has the burden of proving an order is important.

“The bottom line on this is we have a little bit of guidance now, a little clear guidance, but we still have the burden,” she said.

Comparative fault:

“This one scares me,” Champion said.

In Isaiah Rider v YMCA, Champion explained that a kid was walking on a wet floor when he fell and hurt his leg, which had to be amputated. The case resulted in a $6 million verdict. However, the jury allotted 6 percent liability on the boy.

Rider appealed, arguing that he shouldn’t be held liable because there was no evidence that he should have known about the wet floor.

The Western District Appellate Court reversed the circuit court’s ruling and found YMCA was 100 percent liable.

Champion said this is important because it changed who has the burden and defendants “now have to have substantial evidence for the giving of the comparative fault instruction.”

“Your evidence can’t just be ‘kinda,’ it has to be ‘substantial,’” she said.

“I don’t think that’s what they meant to do, to alter the standard, but I’m worried about it because that is what the judges were taught,” she added.

Withdrawal instruction:

In Meyers v City of West Plains, Champion said it raises the issue of whether or not the court should allow an instruction withdrawing failure to supervise. She said the judges learned that withdrawal of instructions is generally inappropriate.

However, she said attorneys were taught that judges could withdraw issues if there is confusion.

“Bottom line is this, the judges know it’s abuse of discretion, but this most recent case has taught them to not permit withdrawal of instruction,” Champion said.

Cross examination:

During cross examination, Champion said the Mitchell v Kardesch case taught judges that “it will be the unusual case where balancing weighs in favor of evidence.”

“I think that is a misstatement of law,” she said.

In Mitchell, the doctor being cross examined lied about having his license suspended or taken away. She said parties can generally impeach a witness when his ability is questioned. However, the jury found in favor of the doctor in this case.

Default judgments:

Champion said that as a general rule, the trial court has less discretion to deny a motion to set aside default judgments than to grant it. However, she added that appellate courts are affirming a lot of sustained motions to set aside default judgments.

She explained that attorneys will have to support their default motions with evidence and affidavits explaining any open and obvious situations.

Punitive damages:

Champion said plaintiffs can’t be awarded punitive damages beyond five times the compensatory damages.

However, in Harvey v Missouri Department of Corrections, the jury awarded $200,000 in punitive damages and $22,000 in compensatory damages, which raised the question of whether the punitive damages rule applied before or after attorneys’ fees are awarded.

The judge concluded that the attorneys’ fees are included in determining punitive damages.

New jury instructions:

Champion said there are two rulings involving jury instructions that contradict one another, raising questions on how to handle situations of jury misconduct at trial.

In Smotherman v Cass Regional Medical Center, a jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant in a slip and fall case. However, afterwards, the parties learned that the jurors checked the weather forecast and discovered that it had snowed or rained the day of the slip and fall.

The ruling was later reversed.

Champion said a jury’s verdict can be impeached when prejudice is expressed during deliberations or when additional evidence is gathered outside the courtroom.

In this case, the jury did independent investigation. Even though the information may have been important for the case, it was reversed.

However, in Waters v Meritas Health Corp., a juror brought in a newspaper with an ad praising the defendant’s lifesaving care.

The juror told the court he could still be fair and a mistrial was denied.

The jury reached a verdict in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff appealed, but the decision was upheld.

Champion said in one case the burden was on the defendant to overcome the presumption of prejudice while the other case placed the burden on the plaintiff to prove an improper influence was on the jury.

“One improper, one not. What the heck to we do with this at trial?” she asked.

Illinois appellate judges reverse Judge Barberis' workers' compensation decision for lack of jurisdiction

$
0
0

Illinois appellate judges from each district came together and vacated Madison County Circuit Judge John Barberis’ ruling that a woman’s injury did not arise out of her work with the Collinsville Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center.

Justice Thomas Hoffman (First District) delivered the Rule 23 decision on Sept. 27, finding that the Madison County Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction in the matter. The case was remanded back to the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission for further proceedings.

Justices William Holdridge (Third District), Donald Hudson (Second District), Thomas Harris (Fourth District) and Bruce Stewart (Fifth District) concurred

Claimant Diane Patterson filed an application for adjustment of claim pursuant to the Workers’ Compensation Act, seeking benefits for injuries she allegedly sustained on Aug. 20, 2013, while working for Collinsville Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center.

Following a hearing, an arbitrator found that Patterson failed to prove her injury was the result of an accident from work. The arbitrator declined to address the remaining issues and denied workers’ compensation benefits.

Patterson sought review of the decision by the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission. The Commission reversed the arbitrator’s decision on July 7, 2015, with one commissioner dissenting. The Commission then remanded the matter back to the arbitrator to address the issues “previously deemed moot.”

Collinsville Rehabilitation filed a petition for judicial review in the Madison County Circuit Court.

Barberis reversed the decision of the Commission on Nov. 18, 2015, “holding that the Commission’s determination that the claimant’s accident arose out of and in the course of her employment was against the manifest weight of the evidence.”

Patterson appealed.

Hoffman wrote that while the parties did not raise the issue of the Madison County Circuit Court’s jurisdiction on appeal, “this court has an obligation to examine the jurisdictional issue sua sponte. That obligation stems from the fundamental principle that, if the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, then its orders are void and of no effect.”

The appellate court stated that only final determinations of the Commission are appealable.

“Accordingly, the decision issued by the Commission was not a final determination because it mandated further administrative proceedings and did not dispose of the claimant’s request for [temporary total disability] benefits …,” the decision states.

“In the absence of a final determination by the Commission, the circuit court lacked the requisite subject matter jurisdiction to entertain this mater and, therefore, its order reversing the Commission’s decision is void,” it continues.

Madison County Circuit Court case number 15-MR-196

Tucker Ellis law firm opens new office in St. Louis

$
0
0

ST. LOUIS – The Tucker Ellis law firm has opened an office in St. Louis that will be dedicated to serving the entire metropolitan area.

The office will pick up much of the work that the firm’s other offices around the nation are already handling.

“Every company that manufactures, sells or distributes products in any volume in this country is embroiled at some level in litigation in the St. Louis and Southern Illinois region,” Tucker Ellis managing partner Joe Morford stated in a press release.

“Many of our top clients have asked us to help them there, as they want Tucker Ellis-quality people and Tucker Ellis-level service in this particularly litigious region. Since we have been able to recruit the quality of people we have in this group, we are happy to oblige.”

The firm, which boasts 200 attorneys across the nation, says it is "thrilled" to have the opportunity to expand its national footprint.

The new office, which will be headed up by partner Brian Huelsmann, will be composed of 10 individuals, including six attorneys.

“The opportunity to open the Tucker Ellis office in St. Louis and join forces with a nationally recognized trial firm with a diverse practice and client base, as well as a reputation for excellence, was too good to pass up,” Huelsmann told the Record in an email. “I look forward to contributing to the ongoing success and growth of this special law firm.”

Huelsmann is a veteran litigator experienced in civil defense litigation and insurance disputes along with environmental and commercial litigation. The bulk of his work has been representing defendants in Illinois and Missouri, but he has also served as national counsel for defendants in asbestos, benzene and silica litigation. Additionally, he has tried four asbestos trials to verdict, with a fifth trial settling before closing arguments, and has obtained favorable jury verdicts on behalf of clients in multimillion-dollar matters.

Huelsmann received a bachelor of arts degree from Rockhurst University and a juris doctorate from Southern Illinois University School of Law.

The opening of the new office is a move which displays the continuously growing momentum of Tucker Ellis, the firm said.

“Tucker Ellis continues to expand its service offerings and market presence based on client demand for a different and better experience with their outside counsel relationships,” the press release went on to say. “This year alone, 27 attorneys – including four partners – have joined the firm, and Tucker Ellis anticipates adding throughout the firm still more high-quality people who excel at the practice of law before year-end to meet burgeoning client demand.”

LeChien's substitution rate remains high; Six times in six recent days, records show

$
0
0

A review of cases assigned to St. Clair County Circuit Judge Robert LeChien shows that parties asked for substitutes five times in September’s last week and once the next Monday.  
In Illinois, any party can substitute a judge once without cause if the judge has not made a substantive ruling.  
Parties rarely exercise the right, except with LeChien, according to the docket sheets of St. Clair County civil litigation.
Chief Judge John Baricevic demoted LeChien from civil law cases last year, after parties substituted him 38 times in 102 days.
Baricevic assigned miscellaneous relief cases to LeChien and placed him in charge of chancery court, where foreclosures dominate the docket.
No one substituted LeChien in August except State Farm, as defendant in a miscellaneous relief action about fire coverage.  
Michael Bedesky of Reed Armstrong in Edwardsville filed the motion.  
Health Care Service Corporation, parent of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Illinois, substituted LeChien in a miscellaneous relief action on Sept. 9.  
In that action, David Cates of Swansea and David Novoselsky of Waukegan seek discovery in advance of a suit they intend to file.  
Michael Nester of Belleville filed the substitution motion.  
In chancery court, one side of a family in a dispute over a trust fund substituted LeChien on Sept. 21.  
Donald Schoemaker of the Greensfelder firm in Swansea filed the motion.  
Archangels Biorecovery substituted LeChien on Sept. 26, as defendant in a chancery suit alleging it damaged a home that the owner hired it to clean.  
Jonathan Kibler of Marion filed the motion.  
Illinois Fair Plan substituted LeChien the same day, as defendant in a miscellaneous relief action about fire coverage.  
John Cunningham of Brown and James in Belleville filed the motion.   
American Modern Select Insurance substituted LeChien on Sept. 28, as plaintiff in a miscellaneous relief action over hail coverage.  
Corey Kraushaar of Brown and James filed the motion.  
Sandra Mckenzie substituted LeChien on the same day, as defendant in a chancery suit alleging breach of a partnership agreement to rehabilitate a house.   
Terry Neubauer of Fairview Heights filed the motion.  
Pekin Insurance substituted LeChien on Sept. 29, as plaintiff in a miscellaneous relief action over fire coverage.  
Peter Syregelas of Chicago filed the motion.  
St. Clair Township substituted LeChien on Oct. 3, as defendant in a miscellaneous relief action over highway spending.  
Highway commissioner Skip Kernan seeks an order providing funds he claims he needs to keep the public safe.  
Brian Funk of O’Fallon filed the motion.  
Cases continue slipping away from LeChien in another direction.  
In August and September, Baricevic reassigned 14 of LeChien’s foreclosures because a member of his family represented a party.  
LeChien resigned last year so he could run for partisan election this year rather than stand for retention, which would have required 60 percent approval.
LeChien is running as a Democrat and faces Republican Laninya Cason.
Their race will be decided by St. Clair County voters only. Had LeChien stood for retention, he would have been on the ballot in all five counties that make up the Twentieth Judicial Circuit: St. Clair, Monroe, Perry. Randolph and Washington.

Son sues nursing homes, other defendants over mother’s alleged neglect, death

$
0
0

EAST ST. LOUIS – Two nursing homes are being sued after a woman allegedly was neglected in their care and later died from complications related to her poor health.

Shawn Overmiller, as the independent administrator of the estate of his deceased mother Kathleen Peveto, filed suit in the St. Clair County Circuit Court against Petersen Health Care II Inc., doing business as Swansea Rehabilitation & Health Care Center; UDI #2 LLC and Unlimited Development Inc., both doing business as Manor Court of Maryville, alleging wrongful death and other counts.

Overmiller claims his mother, Peveto, was living in the Swansea Rehabilitation & Health Care Center when she was transferred to a local hospital in June 2014 for a urinary tract infection and other medical issues. The plaintiff alleges that when his mother arrived at the hospital she was noted to be suffering from several medical problems, most notably sepsis and pressure sores. Overmiller purports that when Peveto was transferred out of the hospital to the care of Manor Court of Maryville, her caregivers were provided instructions to care for her sepsis and bed sores. However, within a two-week period Peveto was transferred to another hospital where she died.

The defendants allegedly failed to provide Peveto with proper care.  

The plaintiff is seeking of more than $50,000 in damages.

Overmiller is represented by Daniel C. Katzman of Belleville-based Katzmann & Sudden LLC in Belleville.

St. Clair County Circuit Court case number 16-L-327

Employee accuses Granite City business of wrongful termination

$
0
0

EDWARDSVILLE — A Madison County man is suing a Granite City company and a supervisor, alleging retaliation and wrongful termination.

Ronald Geiser filed a lawsuit in Madison County Circuit Court against River's Edge Terminals LLC and Ken Owens, alleging they failed to comply with the Illinois Workers' Compensation Act.

According to the complaint, on July 2, 2014, Geiser sustained injuries at work. As a result, the suit says, he requested compensation benefits from River's Edge. Instead, the lawsuit states, he was discharged Aug. 21, 2014, causing him to suffer lost wages and fringe benefits, emotional trauma and other consequential and incidental damages. 

The plaintiff alleges the defendants discharged him for requesting worker's compensation benefits, and that Owens provided inaccurate information and made the malicious decision to terminate him.

Geiser seeks trial by jury, judgment of more than $50,000, plus costs of suit, pre-judgment interest and all other relief the court deems proper. He is represented by attorneys Michael J. Brunton and Mary M. Stewart of Brunton Law Offices PC in Collinsville.

Madison County Circuit Court case number 16-L-1185

Landlord sues Madison tenants for $210,000 in back rent, other costs

$
0
0

EDWARDSVILLE — Two Wood River, Illinois tenants are being sued by their landlord for more than $210,000 in back rent and other associated costs.
Wood River Capital LLC filed suit against Rhonda G. Aylward, Mathew E. Aylward and Prestige Management LLC in the Third Judicial Circuit Court of Madison County.
Wood River Capital claims the defendants defaulted on their lease of property at 1901 E. Edwardsville Road by failing to pay rent. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants are unlawfully withholding possession of the premises.
The plaintiff is seeking $210,286.75 in back rent, costs and damages, plus attorneys fees.
Wood River Capital LLC is represented by David L. Antognoli of Edwardsville-based Goldenberg Heller & Rowland P.C.
Third Judicial Circuit Court Case number 16-L-1016

Edwardsville motorist allegedly crashed into other car while distracted by radio

$
0
0

EDWARDSVILLE — A woman and two minor children are suing an Edwardsville motorist, alleging he crashed into their vehicle while distracted by his radio.
Jamie Anderson, and minors Samantha McGowan and Keaton Anderson filed a complaint on Sept. 27 in Madison County Circuit Court against Kyle Carlson alleging that the motorist failed to operate his vehicle at a proper speed.
According to the complaint, the plaintiffs allege that on Jan. 21, 2015 Jamie Anderson was driving a motor vehicle carrying the two minors. She was stopped at the intersection of Edwardsville Crossing when the defendant allegedly struck the rear of her vehicle at a high rate of speed, causing the vehicle's occupants severe injuries that resulted in pain and suffering, mental anguish, disability and medical expenses. 
The plaintiffs allege Carlson is responsible because he allegedly failed to maintain proper lookout, failed to control his vehicle and failed to change the course of his vehicle to avoid collision.
The plaintiffs request a trial by jury and seek judgment against the defendant in an amount in excess of $50,000, plus costs of suit. They are represented by Eric M. Terry of TorHoerman Law LLC in Edwardsville.
Madison County Circuit Court Case number 16-L-1350

Insurers seek declaration that they are not responsible to indemnify client in motorcycle death suit

$
0
0

EAST ST. LOUIS – Two insurance companies seek declaration from the court that they are not responsible to indemnify their client in a lawsuit concerning the death of a man who was killed after being struck by a commercial truck while riding his motorcycle.

Sentinel Insurance Co. LTD and Hartford Casualty Insurance Co., filed suit against Juneau Associates Inc.; P.C. and Lacey Heineman, individually and as administrator of the estate of Jeffrey W. Pride; and Shane Pride in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District in Illinois, East St. Louis Division.

The defendants claim they were wrongfully brought into a lawsuit filed by Heineman in May concerning the death of Jeffrey W. Pride, who was struck by a commercial truck and killed while riding a motorcycle out of an entrance to an industrial park in Granite City. The entrance in question was allegedly improperly designed by Juneau Associates Inc., which is central to a lawsuit brought by Heineman over the matter of Pride’s death.

However, the plaintiffs claim that under Juneau’s insurance policy they cannot be held responsible to defend or indemnity Juneau due to an exclusion regarding engineering services.

The plaintiffs are seeking an exemption from legal responsibility in Heineman’s lawsuit.

Sentinel Insurance Company LTD and Hartford Casualty Insurance Company are represented by Michael J. Duffy and Abigail E. Rocap of Chicago-based Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP.

U.S. District Court for the Southern District in Illinois, East St. Louis Division case no. 3:16-cv-00793.

Couple alleges improperly processed mortgage payments resulted in foreclosure

$
0
0

EDWARDSVILLE — A Granite City couple is suing a mortgage provider claiming it improperly processed payments resulting in their home being foreclosed on.

Jennifer and William Fite filed suit against Carrington Mortgage Services LLC in Madison County Circuit Court.

The Fites claim they undertook Chapter 13 bankruptcy on April 21, 2009. The plaintiffs allege the bankruptcy court allowed them to design a plan that would allow them to keep their home, which they had first purchased through a mortgage loan in 2006. During the bankruptcy proceedings, the Fites contend they were up to date on all payments to Carrington Mortgage Services LLC, the processor for their mortgage. However, in December 2014 the plaintiffs allege they contacted the defendant to make a mortgage payment and were told they were five payments behind, even though they maintain documents on file with the bankruptcy court said they were up to date on mortgage payments.

Following the notice of being behind on their mortgage payments, the Fites contend they were denied the ability to make further payments until the account was brought up to date and as a result their home foreclosed on.

The defendants are accused of slander of title, violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and violating the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act.

The plaintiffs are seeking damages of more than $50,000. The Fites are represented by St. Louis-based attorney Robert T. Healey of Healey Law LLC.

Madison County Circuit Court case number 16-L-968
Viewing all 22055 articles
Browse latest View live


<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>