Justia Lawyer Rating for Robert D. Kreisman

by

There’s the old adage “you don’t get something for nothing,” a concept that holds particularly true in business dealings. Yet in the business litigation case of John A. Dore, Andrew G. Chenelle, Michael O’Rourke and Michael C. Moody v. Sweports Ltd., 07 L 12136, the defendants expected to do just that. The lawsuit was filed after the defendant company took the plaintiff investors money, but then rescinded all of the plaintiffs’ stock interest.

The four plaintiffs, Dore, Chenelle, O’Rourke, and Moody, became involved in Sweports, Ltd. in 2006. Sweports, a Delaware company, was looking for investors for its subsidiary, UMF Corporation. UMF created and sold various antimicrobial cleaning products under the trademark name “PerfectClean.” Dore et al. agreed to help finance UMF in exchange for 11 percent of the company’s stock.

However, in June 2007, Sweports’s president, George Clarke, passed a corporate resolution that effectively rescinded all of Dore et al.’s stock interest in the company. This resolution was passed without any prior notice to the plaintiffs. So just a year after Dore et al. had invested around $800,000 in Sweports and UMF, they no longer owned any portion of the company. Dore et al. promptly filed a business litigation suit against Sweports, Ltd.

Continue reading

by

You don’t have to be a commercial truck driver to know about driver fatigue. We’ve all been there, whether driving home from work, or the long trip home from school – when your eyes become heavy and that cup of coffee doesn’t seem to be doing the trick. Under these conditions, drivers are much less aware and highway accidents are much more likely to occur.

While casual drivers might have the luxury of switching drivers, or pulling off the road when driver fatigue sets in, commercial drivers are not so lucky. Which is why the federal government is working to create new regulations that work towards preventing driver fatigue for commercial truck drivers. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) introduced new rules limiting the amount of daily and weekly hours truck drivers are allowed to be behind the wheel.

According to the 2011 HOS RIA -Main Document.pdf, truck drivers may be on the road for up to 11 hours per day. In addition, after every eight hours shift, truck drivers are required to take a minimum 30 minute break before they are able to get back on the road. And while the 11 hour daily limit may seem high, the FMCSA did reduce the maximum hours a truck driver can be on the road for the whole week by 12 hours from prior rules, setting the new weekly limit at 70 hours.

Continue reading

by

Technology has brought many improvements to our day to day lives, whether by allowing us the convenience of looking up directions when we’re lost, or by allowing us to conduct quick research online. However, technology has also created new complications and potentially dangerous situations. For example, before cell phones were invented it was unthinkable that you would write a message while driving, whereas in today’s age, texting while driving has become a widespread problem that can lead to potentially deadly auto accidents.

A new study released by the University of North Texas Health Science Center reported that in between 2001 and 2007 over 16,000 people lost their lives as a result of car accidents caused by drivers who were texting. Despite these numbers, less than 20 states have adopted legislation that places bans on texting while driving. Illinois is among the few states who have laws against texting and driving; however, it will take more than legislation to stop the drivers from texting.

Many of those opposed to texting while driving have advocated to an approach similar to the one used to encourage drivers to observe seat belt laws. Prior to the 1960s, many cars did not come equipped with seat belts and many drivers and passengers did not see the value in using seat belts when they were introduced. It wasn’t until people began to associate seat belts with safety that they began to adopt the buckle up mentality. Today many parents won’t even move their car until their children’s seat belts are in place to prevent car accident fatalities. As a result, most people automatically buckle up when they get into a car. It is this type of strategy that we need to apply to texting while driving.

Continue reading

by

An Indiana jury found entered a $4.25 million verdict against a truck driver and his employer for the wrongful death of 28 year-old Hawa Sissoko in Estate of Hawa Sissoko, deceased v. Roadway Express, Inc., YRC Worldwide, Inc., et al., 09 L 2542.

Sissoko’s vehicle was stopped on an Indiana tollway; Sissoko’s 2007 Dodge Intrepid was not pulled to the side of the road, but was in fact sitting in the right lane of traffic. According to eyewitness reports, Sissoko was standing behind her car when she was struck by a semi truck driven by Alfred Baggiani. Sissoko was pinned between the truck and her car, which then caught on firing; Sissoko died immediately as a result of the highway accident.

Sissoko was survived by her parents and eight siblings, all of whom lived in Mali, West Africa. And while Sissoko’s parents had not seen her since 2000, they maintained regular contact by telephone. A lawsuit was brought by Sissoko’s surviving family members against Baggiani according to the Illinois Wrongful Death Act. Sissoko’s estate also brought a claim against Roadway Express, Inc., the trucking company Baggiani worked for, and its parent company, YRC Worldwide, Inc. The wrongful death claims sought damages for the loss of Sissoko’s society that her family had allegedly suffered as a result of the defendants’ negligence.

Continue reading

by

According to the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission, workers’ compensation is “a no-fault system of benefits paid by employers to workers who experience job-related injuries or diseases.” The idea behind workers’ compensation is that when an employee is injured during the scope of his/her employment, that the employer will cover medical fees associated with that injury.

And while the employer may sometimes dispute the extent and nature of the injured worker’s injury, that was not the basis for the Illinois lawsuit of Elite Labor Services, Ltd. as subrogee of Fulgencio Nunez v. William Dudek Manufacturing, 09 L 14859. Rather, the lawsuit involved a dispute about who should pay the workers’ compensation benefits – the injured worker’s employer, or the company he was performing work for.

Fulgencio Nunez was employed by Elite Labor Services, a staffing agency specializing in contract and temp employees. Elite had agreed to supply staff to William Dudek Manufacturing, a manufacturing company that specialized in creating precision metal stampings and wire forms. In addition to supplying staff to Dudek, Elite had agreed to cover all workers’ compensation benefits for the workers it supplied to Dudek. However, the agreement regarding the workers’ compensation benefits was not formally set down in any contract, but rather was a verbal agreement between Elite and Dudek.

Continue reading

by

When you are first learning to ride a bike, you take precautions to ensure your safety – perhaps by wearing a bicycle helmet, or by using training wheels. But as we become more confident bicyclists we tend to abandon those safety measures. However, the decision not to wear a bicycle helmet and to engage in dangerous bike riding behavior can lead to potentially fatal bicycle accidents.

According to a recent report released by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, in 2009 alone 630 bicyclists were killed in motor vehicle accidents and 51,000 bicyclists were injured. Of those bicyclists who were killed, the study showed that 91 percent of them were not wearing bicycle helmets. And according to the National Highway Safety Administration, only about 35% of bicyclists use bike helmets on a regular basis.

Illinois does not currently have a bicycle helmet law in place that would require bicycle riders to wear an approved helmet while riding their bicycles. In fact, only 37 of the 50 U.S. states actually require bike riders to wear helmets; most of the bike helmet laws in place only apply to riders aged 18 and younger.

Continue reading

by

The US Army is investigating whether the death of two soldiers was in any way caused by workout supplements. Both soldiers died after being engaged in physical activity on a Southwest Army base. Dimethylamylamine (DMAA), the active ingredient in these workout supplements, was later found in both soldiers’ toxicology reports. The Army is trying to determine whether there is a connection between health problems and these popular workout supplements.

Perhaps the most well known examples of these pre-workout “boosters” are Jack3d and OxyElite Pro, both manufactured by USPlabs. Both products contain DMAA and are advertised as being able to increase the taker’s energy and lead to better workouts. Currently both Jack3d and OxyElite Pro are classified as dietary supplements and subsequently do not need to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

A recent New York Times article quoted Kerri Toloczko, a USPlabs spokeswoman, as stating that “there have been over one billion doses of DMAA-containing products taken without a single corroborated serious” health problem among those taking the workout boosters as directed. But while those responsible for manufacturing and marketing these products claim they are safe when used as directed, medical experts are claiming there might be serious health concerns when taking DMAA.

Continue reading

by

An Illinois construction worker’s lawsuit was dismissed after the trial judge found that the plaintiff had failed to show sufficient evidence to support his claim against the one of the construction job subcontractors. While the plaintiff attempted to overturn this ruling in his appeal, the Illinois Appellate Court agreed with the trial court, thereby dismissing the plaintiff’s Illinois construction injury claims against the ironwork subcontractor. Oshana v. FCL Builders.pdf.

The personal injury claim was based on an injury that occurred at the Willow Inn construction site. Plaintiff Anwar Oshana was working as an ironworker for JAK Ironworks when he fell from a steel beam. Oshana filed a personal injury claim against Suburban Ironworks, the site’s ironwork subcontractor that was responsible for fabricating and delivering the project’s structural steel. Oshana claimed that Suburban Ironworks was responsible for ensuring that the steel was erected in a safe manner.

However, Suburban Ironworks argued that it was not responsible for JAK Ironworks’s employees safety. Suburban Ironworks pointed out that it did not have an ongoing presence at the job site and therefore was not responsible for overseeing the safety of the various employees involved in erecting its steel structures. Under this theory, Suburban Ironworks moved to dismiss the case on the basis that Oshana had not presented sufficient evidence to show that Suburban had control of the construction site. The trial judge agreed and dismissed Oshana’s claim against Suburban Ironworks, a decision that Oshana then appealed.

Continue reading

by

In order for a case to be dismissed on summary judgment, there needs to be a clear and obvious outcome that precludes the need to hold a jury trial. A judge may grant a motion for summary judgment if there is only one possible conclusion a jury could find. The idea is that if it is already obvious which way the jury will find, then there does not need to be a jury trial. However, if there are any unresolved issues of fact which remain to be decided upon, then the civil suit needs to proceed to trial.

The Illinois Appellate court recently reviewed a trial judge’s dismissal of a personal injury lawsuit after granting summary judgment in favor of the defense; Gregory Gvillo v. DeCamp Junction, 2011 IL App. (5th) 100262 (October 31, 2011). The defendants claimed that the plaintiff’s claim was precluded under the contract sports exception, whereas the plaintiff contended that it did not apply based on the defendants willful and wanton misconduct. While the appellate court agreed with the defendants, it still found that the defendants were not entitled to summary judgment because a genuine issue of fact remained unresolved.

Gvillo was filed after Gregory Gvillo suffered an ankle fracture and nerve injury during a softball game. Gvillo was playing first base at the time of his softball injury when Aron Klenke was running towards first base when he collided with Gvillo. Gvillo filed a personal injury lawsuit against DeCamp Junction, Inc. and Jim Moultrie for not setting the softball field up according to Amateur Softball Association (ASA) guidelines. Gvillo also filed a claim against Klenke for his role in Gvillo’s personal injury.

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Appellate Court recently entered a ruling on whether or not the payment of a workers’ compensation lien cancels out a party’s contribution claim. The court found that while a contribution claim is not eliminated when a workers’ compensation lien is waived following a jury verdict, it is null and void when the lien is waived following a settlement. Scott McMackin v. Weberpal Roofing.pdf.

Scott McMackin owned and operated his own construction company, McMackin Construction Company. In August 2006, Scott was working on a construction site when he was injured. Scott sued Weberpal Roofing, the construction contractor, for negligence in causing his construction site injury. In turn, Weberpal Roofing filed a third-party contribution claim against McMackin Construction under the Illinois Joint Tortfeasor Contribution Act.

And while Scott’s personal injury case against Weberpal Roofing settled for $450,000; Weberpal’s claim against McMackin remained unsettled. However, following Scott’s settlement, McMackin Construction sought to dismiss Weberpal’s claim by filing an affirmative defense. In its filing, McMackin Construction pointed to the fact that it had waived its workers’ compensation lien following Scott’s settlement with Weberpal. Because Scott worked for McMackin Construction, it had been responsible for paying Scott $134,797 under the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act for the injury he sustained while at work.

According to McMackin Construction’s defense, the $134,797 was the maximum amount that Weberpal was entitled to recover from McMackin under its third-party contribution claim. However, Weberpal had relinquished its right to recover those funds when McMackin waived its workers’ compensation lien for Weberpal’s settlement. The trial court agreed with McMackin and dismissed Weberpal’s third-party claim; however, Weberpal appealed this decision to the Illinois Appellate Court.

Continue reading