Articles Posted in Wrongful Death

by

A Cook County jury has determined that the company engaging a torch-cutter is responsible for worker’s wrongful death. The jury verdict was $734,400. Fernando Corral, age 51, was working as a torch-cutter at Mervis Industries, Inc. cutting a portion of a single-deck rail car when a piece of steel fell on him causing his wrongful death. He was survived by his wife and four children.

The family of Mr. Corral brought an Illinois wrongful death lawsuit alleging that the defendant company, Mervis, chose not to make the area where Mr. Corral was working safe, that it should have recognized the hazards involved in torch-cutting work and guarded against those hazards.

The Illinois wrongful death case had a complicated past. A motion for summary judgment was first granted by a trial judge indicating that Mervis did not owe a duty to Corral because he was working for an independent contractor at the time of this incident.

Continue reading

by

An Illinois family was decimated by the wrongful death of a 27 year old woman, April Simmons, who was eight months pregnant when the vehicle driven by John Homatas ran head-on into her SUV near South Elgin, Illinois. The Illinois wrongful death lawsuit claimed that the West Chicago strip club, Diamonds Gentlemen’s Club, owned and operated by On Stage Productions, Inc., was negligent when its employees assisted an apparently drunk patron, John Homatas, and his friend into Homatas’s car, Simmons v. Homatas, 236 Ill.2d 459, 925 N.E.2d 1089 (Ill. 2010), and thus was liable for the Illinois car and SUV accident.

The Illinois wrongful death case revolved around the fact that the drunk driver and another man had gotten drunk at the club and were ejected by bouncers. Homatas was seen in the club’s men’s room vomiting. The employees then escorted Homatas and John Chiarello out of the club. The Illinois car crash with woman’s vehicle occurred only fifteen minutes after Homatas left Diamonds. Chiarello was also killed.

The strip club does not serve liquor, but patrons were allowed to bring their own. Because of that fact, Diamonds argued it was not responsible for Homatas’ bad acts. In fact the Illinois wrongful death case had been argued in the circuit court on Diamonds’ motion to dismiss. The motion was denied and an appeal was taken. The review went all the way to the Illinois Supreme Court, which ruled that the club did make itself accountable for Homatas. The facts were that the bouncers had instructed the valet service to bring around Homatas’ car to the front and left it running for him.

Continue reading

by

An Illinois wrongful death case recently settled in Will County for $5 million. The case was brought by the estate of a 57 year-old married mother of two adult children after she was killed in an Illinois auto accident. Estate of Heinz v. Messel, et al., No. 07 L 0090.

The highway crash took place on I-55, a highway connecting Chicago to St. Louis. The decedent driver was traveling northbound on the highway in the area of the Plainfield Township when a car driving southbound crossed the grassy median separating the different directions of traffic and crashed into the woman’s vehicle. The head-on crash caused the decedent’s car to flip over and land in a ditch off to the side of the highway.

An investigation of the accident revealed that the at fault driver was intoxicated at the time of the Illinois car crash. Whenever an Illinois car accident involves a DUI, the Illinois state’s attorney can bring his/her own criminal charges against the offending driver. Under Illinois law, a person may be deemed intoxicated if their blood alcohol content (BAC) is measured at .08 or higher. Presumably some sort of action was taken in response to the fatal car accident; however, the criminal action would have been completely separate from the civil action involving the wrongful death claims.

Continue reading

by

An Illinois nursing home abuse lawsuit was recently the subject of a review by the Illinois Appellate Court; Peterson v. Residential Alternatives of Illinois, Inc., No. 3-09-0743. The court reviewed whether the Illinois nursing home had the right to demand the decedent’s estate arbitrate its two-count complaint claiming a wrongful death count and a survival action count under the Illinois Nursing Home Care Act.

The trial court upheld the defendant’s right to arbitrate and denied plaintiff’s request for a jury trial. This arbitration clause issue was recently ruled on by the Illinois Supreme Court in Carter v. SSC Odin Operating Co., LLC, No. 106511 (4/15/10), where the Court upheld the nursing home’s right to arbitrate in Illinois nursing home abuse cases.

The main issue in both Peterson and Carter revolves around the signed arbitration agreement. However, while in Carter the arbitration language was included in the nursing home care contract, in Peterson the arbitration agreement was a separate document. It seems that this seemingly small difference has in fact resulted in a very different legal outcome in Peterson.

The Appellate Court held that even though the two documents were signed on the same date that there was no evidence that they should be taken as one unified document. The language used in the arbitration agreement was very vague and never specifically referred to the nursing home care contract, nor did the nursing home care contract ever refer to the arbitration agreement. Specifically, the arbitration agreement stated, “Notwithstanding the parties intent to submit any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this agreement or any other document signed or initialed in connection with this agreement to arbitration.”
While the court noted that prior case law has supported the connection between two separate documents signed at the same time, the law requires that “an enforceable contract must be premised on language that is definite and certain as to all essential terms.” Academy Chicago Publishers v. Cheever, 144 Ill. 2d1224, 30 (1991). The court found that the language included in the arbitration agreement did not satisfy this requirement.

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Appellate Court has affirmed in part and reversed in part a ruling by a Lake County, Illinois circuit court judge regarding parents’ liability when minors consume alcohol at their home. The decision in Bell v. Hutsell, No. 2-09-0577, involves a case where two 18 year-old males who had been drinking at the defendants’ home were killed after their car crashed into a tree.

The Illinois wrongful death lawsuit was filed by the mother of the driver of the vehicle and alleged that the defendants were negligent when they failed to prevent their underage guests from consuming alcohol on their property and that the defendants were in violation of the Illinois Liquor Control Act because they failed to control access to alcohol on their premises. Both decedents had attended a party at the defendants’ residence hosted by their son where alcohol was being consumed.

According to the case facts, the defendants had informed their son that they would not allow any alcoholic beverages at his party and that they would be home and checking up on the teenagers to ensure there was no drinking. The defendants removed all the alcohol from the basement where the party was held and instead stocked it with soda. However, the facts further show that the defendant parents were in fact at the party when people were drinking. Witnesses further confirmed that the decedent driver was drinking at the party and was impaired when he left it.

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Supreme Court is in the process of reviewing an Illinois wrongful death case involving a construction worker who fell to his death from a scaffold. The case of Ready v. United/Goedecke Services, Inc., No. 108910 had already been reviewed by the Illinois Supreme Court and remanded to the Appellate Court. However, Ready returned to the Illinois Supreme Court for review after the Illinois Appellate Court disregarded the higher court’s mandate.

In Ready, the Illinois wrongful death claim was brought by the construction worker’s widow against the owner of the plant where decedent was working, the general contractor for the construction job, and a scaffolding subcontractor. Prior to the 2003 Cook County trial both the plant owner and the general contractor settled with the decedent’s widow regarding the Illinois construction site injury.

However, the scaffolding contractor elected to go to trial where a $14 million verdict was entered in favor of decedent’s estate. The jury did find that the plaintiff-decedent contributed to his own fall, valuing his contributory-negligence for the construction site injury at 35%. Therefore, since the plaintiff-decedent was 35% responsible, the $14 million verdict was reduced by 35%, or $4.2 million. The verdict was further reduced by the value of the settlements already secured by plaintiff so that in the end the verdict was reduced by almost $8 million.

Continue reading

by

In the recently-filed Illinois product liability case of Padilla v. Hunter Douglas Window Coverings, Inc., No. 09-cv-1222 (Jan 19, 2010), the Northern District of Illinois Court reviewed the Plaintiff’s Complaint to determine whether the plaintiff’s complaint set out sufficient claims of liability against the three defendants. While the court ultimately decided that there were sufficient claims for potential negligence and liability on behalf of the defendants, if it had ruled that the plaintiff had not established a sufficient claim then the Illinois product liability claim would have been dismissed.

The review of the complaint in this lawsuit was prompted by the defense filing a Motion to Dismiss pursuant to the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Under the Federal Rule 12(b)(6), the Court examines the Complaint to ensure it satisfies the following requirements:

• provides a clear and concise claim showing that the plaintiffs are entitled to receive relief from the defendants and that the defendants had fair notice of the underlying problem;
• a set of facts that are sufficient to support its arguments of liability on behalf of the defendant(s).

The Illinois product liability lawsuit was filed after the plaintiff’s toddler died after becoming entangled in a metal cord at his home’s mini blinds. The complaint was direct towards product’s manufacturer, Hunter Douglas Window Covering, and two industry trade groups involved in reviewing the safety of the mini blinds in question. Defendant WCMA is a window covering industry trade group responsible for the development and implementation of manufacturing standards. Defendant WCSC is a coalition of window covering manufacturers set up to correct the strangulation hazard posed by window coverings, such as those involved in Padilla.

Continue reading

by

Picking the right daycare center is an important decision for Illinois residents. Entrusting your child in the care of others requires not only careful research on the part of the parents, but also requires a high degree of trust. A recent Illinois wrongful death settlement is an example of a parent’s worst nightmare when it comes to daycare.

The recent Illinois settlement was reached between the family of a child and the daycare center where the toddler had been placed at. The settlement was reached after it was determined that the daycare had violated an Illinois law that stated that two daycare workers were required to be in the center’s toddler room at all times.

The Illinois wrongful death claim against the daycare comes after the death of the 16-month old toddler after a daycare worker threw the child to the ground. The daycare worker was alleged frustrated because other toddlers in the room were fussing.

Continue reading

by

While crossing a Chicago west side intersection with her sister, an 18-year-old woman was struck by a bus. The woman’s estate filed suit against the bus driver and the private bus company for the wrongful death of the decedent.

In any wrongful death case certain criteria must be met. Negligence must be established on behalf of the defendant and the death must be determined to be the result of the defendant’s actions. Furthermore, if the decedent left behind dependents and the dependents suffered monetary damages as a result of the death, then a wrongful death case may be filed.

In Illinois, and in many other states, a pedestrian in the crosswalk always has the right of way. This means that drivers must always stop for pedestrians in crosswalks, even if the light is red and the pedestrian is walking against the light. Therefore, it is important that the driver of any vehicle exercise due care while crossing an intersection and be cautious and mindful of any pedestrians attempting to cross the street.

Continue reading

by

Illinois construction companies have an obligation to provide a safe work environment for their employees and do what they can to avoid Illinois construction site accidents. Because of this duty on the part of construction companies, Illinois construction workers can generally assume that the equipment and materials at a construction site are safe and hazard-free.

However, sometimes this is not the reality, in which case an Illinois construction site injury can result from the failure of a construction company to provide a safe and healthy work environment. Consider the case of Diaz v. Archer Daniels Midland Company, 07 L 142 (Ill., Macon County), in which a 26 year-old construction worker was fatally injured as a result of an Illinois construction site accident.

At the time of his Illinois construction site injury, Francisco Garcia was working for a contractor who had been hired to perform work at the Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) Bioproducts plant. Garcia was busy insulating pipes 15 feet in the air while harnessed to a scissors lift. While Garcia was working, a nearby waste compression system over-pressurized, spraying him with scalding steam, toxic chemicals and boiling water.

Continue reading