Insights
The Minefield of Appellate Practice: Illinois Supreme Court Rule 323(D) and Making Your Record in the Absence of a Court Reporter
March 5, 2026
Complex Tort & Casualty Defense
Simon Prop. Group, et al. v. Stewart, 263 N.E.3d 776 (Ind. Ct. App. 2025) (question of first impression re: reasonable foreseeability of mass shootings to mall owner and security contractor as a matter of law).
Williams v. Transdev Services, 2025 Md. App. LEXIS 717 (Md. App. Aug. 21, 2025) (jury verdict for defendant paratransit provider affirmed).
Parker v. Durham School Services, LLP, 130 F.4th 649 (8th Cir. 2025) (application of contract’s arbitration provision to claim of racial discrimination under 42 U.S.C. 1981).
Johnson v. Illinois State Toll Highway Authority, et al., 2024 IL App (1st) 210941-U (proximate cause of motor vehicle collision in highway construction zone).
De La Paz v. Reggie’s Pallets Co., et al., 2023 IL App (1st) 221093-U (no duty to maintain a semi-trailer in a condition with which it is safe to collide) (reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Nov. 14, 2023).
Cothran, et al. v. Durham School Services, L.P., et al., 666 S.W.3d 369 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2022) (as a matter of first impression in Tennessee, elementary school teachers and staff cannot state emotional distress claims based upon injury to school students).
Archie v. Pop Warner Little Scholars, Inc., 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 27288 (9th Cir. Sept. 10, 2021) (insufficient expert evidence of proximate cause linking concussions incurred playing youth tackle football with decedents’ CTE diagnoses; reported on by Law360, Sept. 13, 2021).
Kocher v. Durham School Services, L.P. (In re A.K.), 969 F.3d 625 (6th Cir. 2020) (school bus company liability to injured student who never boarded bus; reported on by Law360, Aug. 13, 2020).
Perez v. K&B Transportation, Inc., 967 F.3d 651 (7th Cir. 2020) (exclusion of plaintiffs’ experts on Daubert grounds; reported on by Law360, July 24, 2020).
Kramer v. Szczepaniak, et al., 2018 IL App (1st) 171411 (proximate cause; reported on by Law360, Dec. 20, 2018, and Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Jan. 14, 2019).
M.S. by Covington v. Hamilton County Department of Education, et al., 756 Fed. Appx. 510 (6th Cir. 2018) (as a matter of first impression in the Sixth Circuit, private school bus company that transports public school children is not a state actor for purposes of 42 U.S.C. 1983; reported on byLaw360, Nov. 2, 2018, and Business Insurance, Nov. 2, 2018).
Neuhengen v. Global Experience Specialists, Inc., et al., 2018 IL App (1st) 160322 (question of first impression re: viability of direct negligence claims against employer following employer’s admission of vicarious liability for employee’s negligence; reported on by Law360, June 28, 2018 and Jan. 10, 2019, and Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, June 29, 2018 and Sept. 26, 2018).
Higgins v. United Center Joint Venture, 2017 IL App (1st) 160828-U (negligence exception to immunity under the Illinois Hockey Facility Liability Act).
Lutkauskas v. Ricker, 2015 IL 117090 (Ill. 2015) (elements of civil claim based upon violation of Illinois School Code).
Clark v. Children’s Memorial Hospital, 2011 IL 108656 (question of first impression re: damages available to parents alleging wrongful birth).
Doe v. University of Chicago, et al., 2011 IL App (1st) 110306 (question of first impression re: civil liability under the Illinois Gender Violence Act; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Dec. 23, 2011).
Green v. Rogers, 234 Ill. 2d 478 (Ill. 2009) (question of first impression re: pleading defamation per se).
Theatre Mgmt. Group, Inc. v. Dalgliesh, 765 A.2d 986 (D.C. 2001) (question of first impression re: violation of Americans with Disabilities Act as evidence of negligence).
Casualty Defense/Workplace Injury
Hirmas v. Amazon.com, Inc., 2023 Wash. App. LEXIS 2206 (Wash. Ct. App. Nov. 27, 2023) (bench trial verdict for defendant distribution facility affirmed).
David Saxe Productions, LLC v. National Labor Relations Board, 888 F.3d 1305 (D.C. Cir. 2018) (secured reversal of NLRB decision that theatrical production company unlawfully discharged dancer in retaliation for her participation in concerted protected activity; reported on by Law360, Mar. 21, 2017, Jan. 18, 2018, May 7, 2018, and Wolters Kluwer Employment Law Daily, May 4, 2018).
Wilfong v. L.J. Dodd Construction Co., 401 Ill. App. 3d 1044 (2d Dist. 2010) (question of first impression re: assumption of risk by talking on cell phone while walking across construction site).
Brooks v. Judlau Contracting, Inc.,11 N.Y.3d 204 (2008) (question of first impression re: validity of partial contractual indemnification provisions between general contractor and subcontractor; reported on by New York Law Journal, Jan. 8, 2009, and DRI For The Defense, June 2009).
Cameron v. Merisel Properties, Inc., 187 N.C. App. 40 (2007) (question of first impression re: mold exposure).
Professional Liability Defense
Longhi v. Lewit, et al., 187 A.D.3d 873 (N.Y. App. 2020) (medical malpractice; reported on by Law360, Oct. 15, 2020).
Foster v. Cigna Healthspring, et al., 2019 IL App (1st) 190627-U (nursing home liability).
Saud v. Gardner, 2019 IL App (1st) 180866-U (absolute immunity of court-appointed medical experts).
Matter of Small Smiles Litigation, 109 A.D.3d 1212 (N.Y. App. 2013) (dental malpractice-fraud).
Kroner v. Deer & Stone, 2011 IL App (1st) 101444-U (legal malpractice).
COVID-19
Johnson v. Schulte Hospitality Group, Inc., 66 F.4th 1110 (8th Cir. 2023) (summary judgment on plaintiff’s racial discrimination claims affirmed where no evidence that plaintiff’s experience as a guest of the defendant hotel in June 2020 was so at variance with the treatment expected at a premium hotel during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic that it could only be explained by discrimination; reported on by Law360, May 3, 2023).
Kowalczyk v. Illinois Central Railroad Co., et al., 2021 IL App (1st) 210206-U (permissive appeal of order denying motion to dismiss or transfer for forum non conveniens on the ground that remote technologies implemented to handle litigation during COVID-19 pandemic render all forums convenient).
Estate of Maglioli v. Alliance HC Holdings, LLC, et al., 16 F.4th 393 (3d Cir. 2021) (amicus brief in support of nursing home defendants’ position that state law negligence claims seeking damages for decedents’ deaths from COVID-19 are preempted by the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act; reported on by Law360, Oct. 20, 2021).
Product Liability
Huseth v. Goodhue County Cooperative Electric Association, et al., 2024 Minn. App. Unpub. LEXIS 210 (Minn. Ct. App. March 11, 2024) (plaintiff’s causation experts properly excluded for lack of foundational reliability).
Genaw v. Garage Equipment Supply Co., 856 Fed. Appx. 23 (6th Cir. 2021) (product liability / sufficiency of the pleadings; reported on by Law360, April 15, 2021).
Estabrook v. Mazak Corp., 140 N.E.3d 830 (Ind. 2020) (statute of repose under Indiana Products Liability Act).
Baugh v. Cuprum, S.A. de C.V.,845 F.3d 838 (7th Cir. 2017) (proximate cause re: ladder design; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Jan. 17, 2017).
Dickie v. Cannondale Corp., 388 Ill. App. 3d 903 (1st Dist. 2009) (scope of stream of commerce test for asserting personal jurisdiction over foreign corporation in a product liability action; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Mar. 13, 2009, and Illinois State Bar Ass’n. E-Clips, Mar. 18, 2009).
Civil Procedure
Greco v. Syracuse ASC, LLC, 218 A.D.3d 1156 (N.Y. App. 2023) (question of first impression re: establishing injury-in-fact element of standing in data breach class action litigation).
Brinker of Baltimore v. Smith, 2021 Md. App. LEXIS 15 (Md. App. 2021) (remittitur; reported on by Law360, Jan. 7, 2021).
Gillard v. Northwestern Memorial Hosp., 2019 IL App (1st) 182348 (secured frivolous appeal sanctions against serial pro se plaintiff prohibiting further litigation absent leave of court).
R.D. v. Shohola, Inc.,769 Fed. Appx 73 (3d Cir. 2019) (evidentiary standard which must be met to depose opposing counsel’s private investigator about potential witness intimidation over a work product objection).
Johnson v. Nash, et al., 2019 IL App (1st) 180840 (forum non conveniens; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, April 3, 2019).
Williams by Williams v. Leonard, 2017 IL App (1st) 172045 (question of first impression re: Illinois substitution of judge statute; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Jan. 3, 2018).
Humbert v. Megabus USA, LLC, 2017 IL App (1st) 153165-U (forum non conveniens; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Jan. 17, 2017).
Owens v. VHS Acquisition Subsidiary Number 3, et al., 2017 IL App (1st) 161709 (statute of limitations).
Brinkman v. General Dynamics Corp., 671 Fed. Appx. 872 (4th Cir. 2016) (federal officer removal statute).
Matter of Small Smiles Litigation, 125 A.D.3d 1395 (N.Y. App. 2015) (secured reversal of order granting plaintiff a new trial following defense verdict where new trial was ordered on the basis of alleged jury stalking by a third-party trial spectator; reported on by Law360, Feb. 9, 2015, and ABA Journal, Feb. 11, 2015).
ACE European Group, Ltd. v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co., 621 Fed. Appx. 338 (6th Cir. 2015) (question of first impression re: appealable injunctions under 28 U.S.C. §1292(a)(1); reported by Law360, Aug. 13, 2015).
W Holding Co., Inc. v. AIG Insurance Company – Puerto Rico, 748 F. 3d 377 (1st Cir. 2014) (question of first impression re: appealable injunctions under 28 U.S.C. §1292(a)(1); reported on by Westlaw Journal Insurance Coverage, July 12, 2013; reported on by Law360, May 13, 2021).
Carolina Casualty Ins. Co. v. Team Equipment, Inc., et al., 741 F. 3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2014) (question of first impression re: pleading diversity of citizenship on information and belief).
Hergan v. Pawlan Law, LLC, et al., 2013 IL App (1st) 113812-U (claim splitting).
Ghilarducci v. Forrest, 2013 IL App (1st) 100596-U (res judicata).
McMillian v. Sheraton Chicago Hotel & Towers,567 F. 3d 839 (7th Cir. 2009) (amount in controversy requirement of diversity jurisdiction).
Liability Insurance Coverage
Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Lin, 97 F.4th 500 (7th Cir. 2024) (amount of workers’ compensation payments to injured party properly subtracted from underinsured motorist policy limit; reported on by Law360, April 1, 2024, and Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, April 16, 2024).
AKN Holdings, LLC v. Great American E&S Insurance Co., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 18903 (9th Cir. July 8, 2022) (contract exclusion precluded coverage for fraud action arising from real estate sale; reported on by Law360, Nov. 1, 2021, Jan. 12, 2022, June 17, 2022, and July 12, 2022).
Bartkowiak v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, 2015 IL App (1st) 133549 (collectability of primary policy as trigger of excess coverage; reported on by Law360, Aug. 17, 2015).
Carolina Casualty Ins. Co. v. Canal Ins. Co., 555 Fed. Appx. 474 (6th Cir. 2014) (policy definition of “covered auto you own”).
Admiral Insurance Co. v. PIF High Yield Fund II, 450 Fed. Appx. 682 (9th Cir. 2011) (rescission).
Preferred Mutual Ins. Co. v. New York Fire-Shield, 63 A.D.3d 1249 (N.Y. App. 2009) (late notice).
Hytko v. Hennessy, 62 A.D.3d 1081 (N.Y. App. 2009) (question of first impression re: application of doctrine of unclean hands to common law indemnification claims between carriers).
Norris v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 368 Ill. App. 3d 576 (1st Dist. 2006) (question of first impression re: liability of employer’s commercial trucking insurer to employee’s estate for both uninsured motorist and workers compensation benefits).
Directors & Officers Liability Insurance Coverage
Hanover Ins. Co. v. Larson, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 24016 (8th Cir. Aug. 10, 2026) (officers’ individual guaranties of corporate loans do not trigger insuring agreement).
Paraco Gas Corp. v. Ironshore Indemnity, Inc., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 14628 (2d Cir. June 17, 2024) (action seeking enforcement of insured corporation’s shareholder agreements excluded from coverage by contract exclusion; reported on by Law360, June 22, 2023, Dec. 5, 2023, March 22, 2024, March 27, 2024, June 18, 2024).
Ironshore Indemnity, Inc. v. Rogas, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 28172 (9th Cir. Oct. 24, 2023) (preclusion of coverage by warranty letter exclusion; reported on by Law360, Sept. 19, 2022, May 24, 2023, July 17, 2023, Oct. 5, 2023, and Oct. 25, 2023).
Adelman v. United States Specialty Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 35554 (9th Cir. Dec. 23, 2022) (WARN Act exclusion barred coverage where the only breach of fiduciary duty alleged was that directors and officers caused insured entity to violate the WARN Act; reported on by Law360, May 18, 2022 and Aug. 5, 2022).
Commercial Litigation
Medponics Illinois LLC v. Illinois Department of Agriculture, 2021 IL 125443 (administrative review of medical cannabis cultivation center permit award; reported on by Law360, March 11, 2021 and May 21, 2021).
Mountain Valley Property, Inc. v. Applied Risk Services, Inc., 863 F.3d 90 (1st Cir. 2017) (appealability and construction of arbitrator’s finding that dispute is not arbitrable).
Kadiyala v. Bank of America, 630 Fed. Appx. 633 (7th Cir. 2016) (breach of contract).
Adgooroo, LLC v. Hechtman, 2016 IL App (1st) 142531-U (settlement consideration; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Jan. 29, 2016).
Luv N’ Care, Ltd. v. Angel Juvenile Products, et al., 640 Fed. Appx. 389 (5th Cir. 2016) (breach of contract).
Property Insurance Coverage
Board of Educ. of Tp. High School Dist. No. 211 v. TIG Ins. Co., 378 Ill. App. 3d 191 (1st Dist. 2007) (notice of loss; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Dec. 27, 2007).
Ocean Partners, LLC v. North River Ins. Co., 25 A.D.3d 514 (N.Y. App. 2006) (notice of loss).
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Commonwealth Ins. Co., 19 A.D.3d 211 (N.Y. App. 2005) (business interruption, September 11 loss).
D.R. Watson Holdings, LLC v. Caliber One Indem. Co., 15 A.D.3d 969 (N.Y. App. 2005) (wear-and-tear and faulty/defective maintenance exclusions).
Chatham Corp. v. Dann Ins., 351 Ill. App. 3d 353 (1st Dist. 2004) (question of first impression re: extra expense coverage).
Wal-Mart Stores v. U.S.F. &G., 784 N.Y.S.2d 25 (N.Y. App. 2004) (suit limitation provision).
Tacoma Electric Supply, Inc. v. Atlantic Mutual Ins. Co., 40 Fed. Appx. 567 (9th Cir. 2002) (earth movement exclusion).
Life Insurance
American General Life Ins. Co. v. Shenkman, 455 Fed. Appx. 263 (3rd Cir. 2011) (suicide exclusion).
Pro Bono
People v. Daniels, 2021 IL App (2d) 190011-U (conviction of criminal trespass to a residence reversed and new trial ordered due to ineffective assistance of counsel).
U.S. v. Billings, 546 F.3d 472 (7th Cir. 2008) (appeal of sentencing following guilty plea).
Complex Tort & Casualty Defense
Simon Prop. Group, et al. v. Stewart, 263 N.E.3d 776 (Ind. Ct. App. 2025) (question of first impression re: reasonable foreseeability of mass shootings to mall owner and security contractor as a matter of law).
Williams v. Transdev Services, 2025 Md. App. LEXIS 717 (Md. App. Aug. 21, 2025) (jury verdict for defendant paratransit provider affirmed).
Parker v. Durham School Services, LLP, 130 F.4th 649 (8th Cir. 2025) (application of contract’s arbitration provision to claim of racial discrimination under 42 U.S.C. 1981).
Johnson v. Illinois State Toll Highway Authority, et al., 2024 IL App (1st) 210941-U (proximate cause of motor vehicle collision in highway construction zone).
De La Paz v. Reggie’s Pallets Co., et al., 2023 IL App (1st) 221093-U (no duty to maintain a semi-trailer in a condition with which it is safe to collide) (reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Nov. 14, 2023).
Cothran, et al. v. Durham School Services, L.P., et al., 666 S.W.3d 369 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2022) (as a matter of first impression in Tennessee, elementary school teachers and staff cannot state emotional distress claims based upon injury to school students).
Archie v. Pop Warner Little Scholars, Inc., 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 27288 (9th Cir. Sept. 10, 2021) (insufficient expert evidence of proximate cause linking concussions incurred playing youth tackle football with decedents’ CTE diagnoses; reported on by Law360, Sept. 13, 2021).
Kocher v. Durham School Services, L.P. (In re A.K.), 969 F.3d 625 (6th Cir. 2020) (school bus company liability to injured student who never boarded bus; reported on by Law360, Aug. 13, 2020).
Perez v. K&B Transportation, Inc., 967 F.3d 651 (7th Cir. 2020) (exclusion of plaintiffs’ experts on Daubert grounds; reported on by Law360, July 24, 2020).
Kramer v. Szczepaniak, et al., 2018 IL App (1st) 171411 (proximate cause; reported on by Law360, Dec. 20, 2018, and Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Jan. 14, 2019).
M.S. by Covington v. Hamilton County Department of Education, et al., 756 Fed. Appx. 510 (6th Cir. 2018) (as a matter of first impression in the Sixth Circuit, private school bus company that transports public school children is not a state actor for purposes of 42 U.S.C. 1983; reported on byLaw360, Nov. 2, 2018, and Business Insurance, Nov. 2, 2018).
Neuhengen v. Global Experience Specialists, Inc., et al., 2018 IL App (1st) 160322 (question of first impression re: viability of direct negligence claims against employer following employer’s admission of vicarious liability for employee’s negligence; reported on by Law360, June 28, 2018 and Jan. 10, 2019, and Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, June 29, 2018 and Sept. 26, 2018).
Higgins v. United Center Joint Venture, 2017 IL App (1st) 160828-U (negligence exception to immunity under the Illinois Hockey Facility Liability Act).
Lutkauskas v. Ricker, 2015 IL 117090 (Ill. 2015) (elements of civil claim based upon violation of Illinois School Code).
Clark v. Children’s Memorial Hospital, 2011 IL 108656 (question of first impression re: damages available to parents alleging wrongful birth).
Doe v. University of Chicago, et al., 2011 IL App (1st) 110306 (question of first impression re: civil liability under the Illinois Gender Violence Act; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Dec. 23, 2011).
Green v. Rogers, 234 Ill. 2d 478 (Ill. 2009) (question of first impression re: pleading defamation per se).
Theatre Mgmt. Group, Inc. v. Dalgliesh, 765 A.2d 986 (D.C. 2001) (question of first impression re: violation of Americans with Disabilities Act as evidence of negligence).
Casualty Defense/Workplace Injury
Hirmas v. Amazon.com, Inc., 2023 Wash. App. LEXIS 2206 (Wash. Ct. App. Nov. 27, 2023) (bench trial verdict for defendant distribution facility affirmed).
David Saxe Productions, LLC v. National Labor Relations Board, 888 F.3d 1305 (D.C. Cir. 2018) (secured reversal of NLRB decision that theatrical production company unlawfully discharged dancer in retaliation for her participation in concerted protected activity; reported on by Law360, Mar. 21, 2017, Jan. 18, 2018, May 7, 2018, and Wolters Kluwer Employment Law Daily, May 4, 2018).
Wilfong v. L.J. Dodd Construction Co., 401 Ill. App. 3d 1044 (2d Dist. 2010) (question of first impression re: assumption of risk by talking on cell phone while walking across construction site).
Brooks v. Judlau Contracting, Inc.,11 N.Y.3d 204 (2008) (question of first impression re: validity of partial contractual indemnification provisions between general contractor and subcontractor; reported on by New York Law Journal, Jan. 8, 2009, and DRI For The Defense, June 2009).
Cameron v. Merisel Properties, Inc., 187 N.C. App. 40 (2007) (question of first impression re: mold exposure).
Professional Liability Defense
Longhi v. Lewit, et al., 187 A.D.3d 873 (N.Y. App. 2020) (medical malpractice; reported on by Law360, Oct. 15, 2020).
Foster v. Cigna Healthspring, et al., 2019 IL App (1st) 190627-U (nursing home liability).
Saud v. Gardner, 2019 IL App (1st) 180866-U (absolute immunity of court-appointed medical experts).
Matter of Small Smiles Litigation, 109 A.D.3d 1212 (N.Y. App. 2013) (dental malpractice-fraud).
Kroner v. Deer & Stone, 2011 IL App (1st) 101444-U (legal malpractice).
COVID-19
Johnson v. Schulte Hospitality Group, Inc., 66 F.4th 1110 (8th Cir. 2023) (summary judgment on plaintiff’s racial discrimination claims affirmed where no evidence that plaintiff’s experience as a guest of the defendant hotel in June 2020 was so at variance with the treatment expected at a premium hotel during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic that it could only be explained by discrimination; reported on by Law360, May 3, 2023).
Kowalczyk v. Illinois Central Railroad Co., et al., 2021 IL App (1st) 210206-U (permissive appeal of order denying motion to dismiss or transfer for forum non conveniens on the ground that remote technologies implemented to handle litigation during COVID-19 pandemic render all forums convenient).
Estate of Maglioli v. Alliance HC Holdings, LLC, et al., 16 F.4th 393 (3d Cir. 2021) (amicus brief in support of nursing home defendants’ position that state law negligence claims seeking damages for decedents’ deaths from COVID-19 are preempted by the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act; reported on by Law360, Oct. 20, 2021).
Product Liability
Huseth v. Goodhue County Cooperative Electric Association, et al., 2024 Minn. App. Unpub. LEXIS 210 (Minn. Ct. App. March 11, 2024) (plaintiff’s causation experts properly excluded for lack of foundational reliability).
Genaw v. Garage Equipment Supply Co., 856 Fed. Appx. 23 (6th Cir. 2021) (product liability / sufficiency of the pleadings; reported on by Law360, April 15, 2021).
Estabrook v. Mazak Corp., 140 N.E.3d 830 (Ind. 2020) (statute of repose under Indiana Products Liability Act).
Baugh v. Cuprum, S.A. de C.V.,845 F.3d 838 (7th Cir. 2017) (proximate cause re: ladder design; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Jan. 17, 2017).
Dickie v. Cannondale Corp., 388 Ill. App. 3d 903 (1st Dist. 2009) (scope of stream of commerce test for asserting personal jurisdiction over foreign corporation in a product liability action; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Mar. 13, 2009, and Illinois State Bar Ass’n. E-Clips, Mar. 18, 2009).
Civil Procedure
Greco v. Syracuse ASC, LLC, 218 A.D.3d 1156 (N.Y. App. 2023) (question of first impression re: establishing injury-in-fact element of standing in data breach class action litigation).
Brinker of Baltimore v. Smith, 2021 Md. App. LEXIS 15 (Md. App. 2021) (remittitur; reported on by Law360, Jan. 7, 2021).
Gillard v. Northwestern Memorial Hosp., 2019 IL App (1st) 182348 (secured frivolous appeal sanctions against serial pro se plaintiff prohibiting further litigation absent leave of court).
R.D. v. Shohola, Inc.,769 Fed. Appx 73 (3d Cir. 2019) (evidentiary standard which must be met to depose opposing counsel’s private investigator about potential witness intimidation over a work product objection).
Johnson v. Nash, et al., 2019 IL App (1st) 180840 (forum non conveniens; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, April 3, 2019).
Williams by Williams v. Leonard, 2017 IL App (1st) 172045 (question of first impression re: Illinois substitution of judge statute; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Jan. 3, 2018).
Humbert v. Megabus USA, LLC, 2017 IL App (1st) 153165-U (forum non conveniens; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Jan. 17, 2017).
Owens v. VHS Acquisition Subsidiary Number 3, et al., 2017 IL App (1st) 161709 (statute of limitations).
Brinkman v. General Dynamics Corp., 671 Fed. Appx. 872 (4th Cir. 2016) (federal officer removal statute).
Matter of Small Smiles Litigation, 125 A.D.3d 1395 (N.Y. App. 2015) (secured reversal of order granting plaintiff a new trial following defense verdict where new trial was ordered on the basis of alleged jury stalking by a third-party trial spectator; reported on by Law360, Feb. 9, 2015, and ABA Journal, Feb. 11, 2015).
ACE European Group, Ltd. v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co., 621 Fed. Appx. 338 (6th Cir. 2015) (question of first impression re: appealable injunctions under 28 U.S.C. §1292(a)(1); reported by Law360, Aug. 13, 2015).
W Holding Co., Inc. v. AIG Insurance Company – Puerto Rico, 748 F. 3d 377 (1st Cir. 2014) (question of first impression re: appealable injunctions under 28 U.S.C. §1292(a)(1); reported on by Westlaw Journal Insurance Coverage, July 12, 2013; reported on by Law360, May 13, 2021).
Carolina Casualty Ins. Co. v. Team Equipment, Inc., et al., 741 F. 3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2014) (question of first impression re: pleading diversity of citizenship on information and belief).
Hergan v. Pawlan Law, LLC, et al., 2013 IL App (1st) 113812-U (claim splitting).
Ghilarducci v. Forrest, 2013 IL App (1st) 100596-U (res judicata).
McMillian v. Sheraton Chicago Hotel & Towers,567 F. 3d 839 (7th Cir. 2009) (amount in controversy requirement of diversity jurisdiction).
Liability Insurance Coverage
Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Lin, 97 F.4th 500 (7th Cir. 2024) (amount of workers’ compensation payments to injured party properly subtracted from underinsured motorist policy limit; reported on by Law360, April 1, 2024, and Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, April 16, 2024).
AKN Holdings, LLC v. Great American E&S Insurance Co., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 18903 (9th Cir. July 8, 2022) (contract exclusion precluded coverage for fraud action arising from real estate sale; reported on by Law360, Nov. 1, 2021, Jan. 12, 2022, June 17, 2022, and July 12, 2022).
Bartkowiak v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, 2015 IL App (1st) 133549 (collectability of primary policy as trigger of excess coverage; reported on by Law360, Aug. 17, 2015).
Carolina Casualty Ins. Co. v. Canal Ins. Co., 555 Fed. Appx. 474 (6th Cir. 2014) (policy definition of “covered auto you own”).
Admiral Insurance Co. v. PIF High Yield Fund II, 450 Fed. Appx. 682 (9th Cir. 2011) (rescission).
Preferred Mutual Ins. Co. v. New York Fire-Shield, 63 A.D.3d 1249 (N.Y. App. 2009) (late notice).
Hytko v. Hennessy, 62 A.D.3d 1081 (N.Y. App. 2009) (question of first impression re: application of doctrine of unclean hands to common law indemnification claims between carriers).
Norris v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 368 Ill. App. 3d 576 (1st Dist. 2006) (question of first impression re: liability of employer’s commercial trucking insurer to employee’s estate for both uninsured motorist and workers compensation benefits).
Directors & Officers Liability Insurance Coverage
Hanover Ins. Co. v. Larson, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 24016 (8th Cir. Aug. 10, 2026) (officers’ individual guaranties of corporate loans do not trigger insuring agreement).
Paraco Gas Corp. v. Ironshore Indemnity, Inc., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 14628 (2d Cir. June 17, 2024) (action seeking enforcement of insured corporation’s shareholder agreements excluded from coverage by contract exclusion; reported on by Law360, June 22, 2023, Dec. 5, 2023, March 22, 2024, March 27, 2024, June 18, 2024).
Ironshore Indemnity, Inc. v. Rogas, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 28172 (9th Cir. Oct. 24, 2023) (preclusion of coverage by warranty letter exclusion; reported on by Law360, Sept. 19, 2022, May 24, 2023, July 17, 2023, Oct. 5, 2023, and Oct. 25, 2023).
Adelman v. United States Specialty Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 35554 (9th Cir. Dec. 23, 2022) (WARN Act exclusion barred coverage where the only breach of fiduciary duty alleged was that directors and officers caused insured entity to violate the WARN Act; reported on by Law360, May 18, 2022 and Aug. 5, 2022).
Commercial Litigation
Medponics Illinois LLC v. Illinois Department of Agriculture, 2021 IL 125443 (administrative review of medical cannabis cultivation center permit award; reported on by Law360, March 11, 2021 and May 21, 2021).
Mountain Valley Property, Inc. v. Applied Risk Services, Inc., 863 F.3d 90 (1st Cir. 2017) (appealability and construction of arbitrator’s finding that dispute is not arbitrable).
Kadiyala v. Bank of America, 630 Fed. Appx. 633 (7th Cir. 2016) (breach of contract).
Adgooroo, LLC v. Hechtman, 2016 IL App (1st) 142531-U (settlement consideration; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Jan. 29, 2016).
Luv N’ Care, Ltd. v. Angel Juvenile Products, et al., 640 Fed. Appx. 389 (5th Cir. 2016) (breach of contract).
Property Insurance Coverage
Board of Educ. of Tp. High School Dist. No. 211 v. TIG Ins. Co., 378 Ill. App. 3d 191 (1st Dist. 2007) (notice of loss; reported on by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Dec. 27, 2007).
Ocean Partners, LLC v. North River Ins. Co., 25 A.D.3d 514 (N.Y. App. 2006) (notice of loss).
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Commonwealth Ins. Co., 19 A.D.3d 211 (N.Y. App. 2005) (business interruption, September 11 loss).
D.R. Watson Holdings, LLC v. Caliber One Indem. Co., 15 A.D.3d 969 (N.Y. App. 2005) (wear-and-tear and faulty/defective maintenance exclusions).
Chatham Corp. v. Dann Ins., 351 Ill. App. 3d 353 (1st Dist. 2004) (question of first impression re: extra expense coverage).
Wal-Mart Stores v. U.S.F. &G., 784 N.Y.S.2d 25 (N.Y. App. 2004) (suit limitation provision).
Tacoma Electric Supply, Inc. v. Atlantic Mutual Ins. Co., 40 Fed. Appx. 567 (9th Cir. 2002) (earth movement exclusion).
Life Insurance
American General Life Ins. Co. v. Shenkman, 455 Fed. Appx. 263 (3rd Cir. 2011) (suicide exclusion).
Pro Bono
People v. Daniels, 2021 IL App (2d) 190011-U (conviction of criminal trespass to a residence reversed and new trial ordered due to ineffective assistance of counsel).
U.S. v. Billings, 546 F.3d 472 (7th Cir. 2008) (appeal of sentencing following guilty plea).
Melissa Murphy-Petros (Of Counsel-Chicago, IL), Brigitte Smith (Partner-Baltimore, MD), and Zachary Miller (Associate-Baltimore, MD) represented a provider of public transportation services in Baltimore City to those with physical disabilities. The legally blind plaintiff, a regular rider, filed suit after he suffered a severe fracture when he fell on ice while walking from his front door to our client’s bus. The plaintiff claimed that our driver was negligent in not assisting him while he walked to the bus as the driver was required to do, but admitted that he did not wait for the driver to help him on the day of his injury. The case was tried to a defense verdict by Brigitte and Zak and Melissa handled the appeal. The appellate court affirmed the judgment on the jury’s verdict. The only issue plaintiff raised on appeal was the trial court’s order denying his motion to strike a supplemental medical expert opinion that we disclosed approximately 10 days before trial. It was plaintiff’s position that this testimony at trial was the basis for the jury’s defense verdict and it should not have been allowed, so he was entitled to a new trial. In the end, the court agreed with our argument that plaintiff’s own dilatory conduct in discovery led to the late timing of our supplemental disclosure in the first place, so the trial judge did not abuse her discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion to strike.
Melissa A. Murphy-Petros, Brigitte J. Smith and Zachary Miller
Melissa Murphy-Petros (Of Counsel-Chicago, IL) and James Thurston (Partner-Chicago, IL) obtained affirmance in Paraco Gas Corp. v. Ironshore Indemnity, Inc., No. 23-1069-cv. U.S. App., Second Circuit (June 17, 2024) for the firm’s specialty insurance client, Ironshore. The plaintiff, a closely held family corporation that distributes propane fuel and equipment, sought coverage under its D&O policy for a shareholder dispute involving share transfers. The Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff's complaint on the ground that its declaratory judgment action seeking enforcement of the shareholder agreement's stock transfer provisions is excluded from coverage under the policy's contract exclusion as an action arising out of the insured's contractual obligations under the shareholder agreement. This litigation was covered by Law360 extensively and reported on five times, most recently after the Second Circuit's decision was handed down.
Melissa A. Murphy-Petros and James K. Thurston
Jim Thurston (Partner-Chicago, IL), Melissa Murphy-Petros (Partner-Chicago, IL) and Jonathan Meer (Partner-New York, NY) prevailed on behalf of the firm’s insurance client in a case involving an insured closely held family corporation that sought coverage under its D&O policy for a declaratory judgment action seeking enforcement of the stock transfer provisions in its shareholders’ agreements. The Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint on the ground that the policy’s contract exclusion precluded coverage because the declaratory judgment action – although not an action for breach of contract – arose out of the insured’s contractual obligations under the shareholder agreements. Jim and Jonathan secured the dismissal in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; Jim and Melissa handled the Second Circuit briefing, and Melissa presented oral argument. Jim and Melissa are now 8-1 before the U.S. Court of Appeals, where they have handled matters in the First, Second, and Ninth Circuits.
The appeal was covered by Law360 in their June 22, 2023, December 5, 2023, March 22, 2024, March 27, 2024, June 17, 2024 articles.
James K. Thurston, Melissa A. Murphy-Petros and Jonathan E. Meer
John Loringer (Partner-Milwaukee, WI), Melissa Murphy-Petros (Of Counsel-Chicago, IL) and Brian Del Gatto (Partner-Phoenix, AZ) successfully defended the dismissal of a Canadian manufacturer of farm equipment before the Minnesota Court of Appeals. The plaintiff, a Minnesota dairy farmer, alleged that our client's product was the cause of a decrease in milk production over numerous years. The settlement demand throughout discovery was in excess of $3 million for the loss of production and untimely death of some of the cows. After having the case dismissed at the trial court by demonstrating the lack of foundational reliability with the plaintiff's expert witness theories regarding causation, the plaintiff appealed and the appellate court issued an order affirming dismissal by the trial court and securing a complete victory for the client. The result here solidifies appropriate rules of disclosure for expert opinions.
John P. Loringer, Melissa A. Murphy-Petros and Brian Del Gatto
Constantina Mirabile (Of Counsel-West Palm Beach, FL), Melissa Murphy-Petros (Of Counsel-Chicago, IL) and Anjali Das (Partner-Chicago, IL) represented an educational technology company that provides subscribers with access to online educational courses in a Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) class action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The plaintiff, a subscriber, allegedly viewed online course content offered by our client, and filed a putative class action on behalf of herself and all other subscribers for violations of the VPPA. The plaintiff alleged that Meta Pixel (a snippet of JavaScript code that tracks visitor activity on a website) was installed on our client’s website, which resulted in the disclosure of her personal information to Facebook, including the content she viewed, without her consent. Wilson Elser filed a Motion to Compel Arbitration, noting that the plaintiff (like all subscribers) was required to accept defendant’s Terms of Use, which included a mandatory binding arbitration provision. Moreover, the Terms of Use explicitly stated that all parties waived the right to participate in a class action or representative proceeding with respect to any claim. The court promptly granted Wilson Elser’s motion pursuant to the Terms of Service agreement. The ruling underscores the importance of arbitration and class action waiver language in Terms of Use agreements.
NOTE: The Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), enacted in 1998, sought to preserve personal privacy with respect to the rental, purchase or delivery of video tapes or similar audio visual materials. Plaintiffs have sought to resuscitate the statute by bringing VPPA claims into the 21st century based on the premise that organizations that offer prerecorded, online audio visual content are “video tape service providers” within the meaning of the statute, the draw being VPPA class actions include statutory damages of up to $2,500 per violation.
Melissa A. Murphy-Petros and Anjali C. Das
Melissa Murphy-Petros (Of Counsel-Chicago, IL) Jim Thurston (Partner-Chicago, IL), Daniel Tranen (Partner-St. Louis, MO), and Chad Butterfield (Partner-Las Vegas, NV) convinced the Nevada District Court that coverage was not available under a $5 million D&O policy for the putative claims by a bankruptcy litigation trustee against a former officer (Kay). Kay allegedly breached his fiduciary duties to an insured entity when he failed to uncover the criminal fraud of its former CEO (Rogas). The Court followed Wilson Elser’s arguments that Kay’s breaches were “arising from” Rogas’s prior fraud and, therefore, fell within the purview of the exclusionary language of a warranty letter executed by Rogas, wherein he represented that “no insured” (including Rogas) had knowledge or information of any act or error that might give rise to a claim. Following briefing and oral argument by Melissa, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed, holding that despite two non-imputation clauses in the policy and allegations of wrongdoing by Rogas after the warranty letter, “the broad language excluding any claim ‘arising from’ pre-execution knowledge” was sufficient to bar any coverage to Kay under the policy. This three-office victory evidences the successful collaboration between Wilson Elser’s coverage, litigation and appellate attorneys on an economical basis without having to use additional local counsel.
Melissa A. Murphy-Petros, James K. Thurston and Daniel E. Tranen
Melissa Murphy-Petros (Of Counsel-Chicago), Jim Thurston (Partner-Chicago) and Paul White (Partner-Los Angeles) prevailed in a coverage action before the Ninth Circuit. The underlying action involved the insured’s sale of a scientific manufacturing facility in Mexico without telling the buyer that the facility had been taken over by the El Chapo drug cartel. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of our Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss on the basis of the policy’s contract exclusion, finding that the underlying action – which stated claims for fraud – was an action “based on, arising from, or in any way related to an actual or alleged breach of contract.” This decision is important because the underlying action sought damages only for tort claims, and there were no breach of contract claims. Further, certain of the alleged wrongful acts occurred prior to the formation of any contract, yet both courts held the exclusion still had application. Although there was no claim for indemnity, the insured sought $5 million in defense costs.
This appeal has been reported on four times by Law360:
9th Circ. Won't Revive PE Firm's 'El Chapo' Insurance Dispute
Firm Faces Skeptical 9th Circ. In 'El Chapo' Insurance Dispute
Insurer Urges 9th Circ. To Toss Appeal In 'El Chapo' Dispute
Melissa A. Murphy-Petros and James K. Thurston