Search

The article discusses a court case wherein the Fifth District Appellate Court ruled in favor of a pharmaceutical firm in a lawsuit filed by a consumer under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. In De Bouse v. Bayer, AG, the former filed a class action complaint against Bayer and other manufacturers for concealing negative safety and efficacy data on pharmaceutical products sold in Illinois.

The article focuses on the plaintiff's practice to simultaneously file a motion for class certification and class action complaint. Topics discussed include a review of the court case Ballard RN Center, Inc. v. Kohll's Pharmacy and Homecare, Inc. wherein the plaintiff attempted to apply the practice, the use of the court case Barber v. American Airlines, Inc. as reference by the appellate court to deliberate on the practice, and an assessment on the significance of the Ballard case.

The article discusses the case Italia Foods, Inc. v. Sun Tours, Inc. in which the plaintiff filed a class action complaint alleging that it received unsolicited fax advertisements for discounted travel from the defendants. The defendants countered to dismiss the complaint, asserting that private federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA) claims were not actionable in Illinois state courts.

The article discusses the issues of whether claims under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) may be heard by Illinois courts. It specifically examines whether such claims are assignable and whether penalty limitations period should follow the two years prescribed in Illinois or the four years prescribed by federal law. The court ruled that no state legislation is required to enable TCPA claims and that TCPA is a remedial statute. The question on statue of limitations was unresolved as it was not relevant to the case being heard.

The article offers information on the court case DOD Technologies v. Mesirow Insurance Services Inc. in Illinois. Accordingly, the Illinois Appellate Court First District in this case reversed a trial court's dismissal of a case involving contingent commissions paid to an insurance brokers. The court explained that the relationship between an insured and its broker continues to be a fudiciary.

The article discusses the case in which the Illinois Appellate Court for the Fifth District held that California law is applicable to claims relating to the sales of computer processors in Illinois. The plaintiffs who were residents of Illinois and Missouri filed a nationwide lawsuit against Intel, manufacturer of processors they have purchased from retailers in Illinois and Missouri, after its disappointing performance. Details related to the decision of the court are presented.

The article focuses on the lawsuit Pappas v. Pella Corp., which involved concealment of a product defect. The plaintiff purchased windows from Pella Corp. which were later found to be defective and led to rotting of the premature wood. It was also declared by the purchaser that Pella knew of the defect but did not inform the plaintiff about it. The case was filed under Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act claiming for fraud and unfair improvement.

The article focuses on the court ruling in Negro Nest LLC v. Mid-Northern Management Inc. in Illinois. The Fourth District Appellate Court disallowed the awarding of attorney's fees despite the fact that the contract between the parties stated an award of collection costs. The case set a precedent for both parties to be cautious in drafting contracts to clearly determine the payment of attorney's fees required to recover payment for a breach of contract.

Discusses the 'Horwitz v. Holabird and Root' Supreme Court case in Illinois in May 2004. Court ruling that the client is not liable for attorney's exercise of independent professional judgement; Details of the case and legal precedents; Implications on commercial law.

The article reports on a class action lawsuit involving the high price of gasoline. The author says that in Siegel v. Shell Oil Co., the plaintiff sued five of the eight largest oil companies and sought class certification for claims under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reportedly rejected the lawsuit, as it found that the plaintiff failed to prove that in the suit he had filed, common issues predominated over individual issues.

The article reports on the controversy whether a quantum meruit claim is available for contractors who breach the Illinois Home Repair and Remodeling Act. The reference that oral contracts under the Act are unlawful has been debated as an inaccurate legal term to revoke the common law resolution of quantum meruit. This commercial law issue, however, may have to be reviewed by the Illinois Supreme Court.

The article discusses the court case, Kunkel v. P.K. Dependable Construction, where plaintiff filed claim of breach of contract and warranty under the Home Repair Remodelling Act and claims under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (ICFA). The appellate court affirmed the trial court's finding of liability on the breach of contract and warranty claim by not providing the homeowner with a copy of a consumer's right brochure. The court found that it was not enough to establish a violation of the ICFA.

The article discusses a court case wherein the plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit against Wal-Mart after purchasing a trampoline online, alleging that Wal-Mart charged unauthorized sales tax on shipping charges for goods purchased through its website. The trial court dismissed the complaint because the shipping charges were subject to sales tax as a matter of law and the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the trial court's ruling.

The article discusses a court case filed by wood purchaser Kitzes against Home Depot USA Inc. for alleged violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (ICFA). Kitzes' alleges that Home Depot sold wood products for outdoor residential use that were treated with chromated copper arsenate (CCA) preservatives. The trial court denied the Kitzes' motion for class certification and Illinois First District Appellate Court affirms the decision.

The article reports on the judgment by the Appellate Court of Illinois regarding a commercial law. It notes that the plaintiffs sued both the dealership and Ford Motor Company after experiencing a problem with the purchased vehicle. The company moved for summary judgments in the trial court on the grounds that the dealership was not their agent. Furthermore, the plaintiffs prevailed on their claim against the dealership, but the court ruled in favor of Ford on the consumer fraud claim.

The article reports on the Illinois Appelate Court's decision over a case involving a car buyer who sells car in excess of its market value. The plaintiff argued that he established damages since two of the witnesses attested that the truck's value was decreased at the time it was purchased. The defendant replied that the plaintiff failed to establish present damages. The Appellate Court reversed the decision since the plaintiff provided evidence of his damages at the time of acceptance.

The article focuses on the lawsuit against DaimlerChrysler Corp. filed by William L. White who alleged that the industry held back a material defect in making and selling jeep vehicles in Illinois. However , the First District Appellate Court affirmed the dismissal of the case, since the plaintiff failed to plead the actual damages on stating the nondisclosure claim under the Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act.