Broadmark Capital Corp. v. GlobalNet, Inc., 169 F. Supp. 2d 873 (N.D. Ill. 2001): Judgment on the pleadings in favor of client/ investment banking firm that defendant was contractually required to compensate investment banking firm for introducing a third-party investor.

Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Home Ins. Co., 324 Ill. App. 3d 441, 753 N.E.2d 999 (1st Dist. 2001): Representing commercial policyholder in insurance coverage dispute relating to environmental claims. Two insurers asserted defense of late notice. After circuit court rendered summary judgment in favor of both insurers, appellate court reversed as to one insurer, holding that defense was invalid to defeat coverage for client, but affirmed as to other.

Lindland v. United States of America Wrestling Ass'n, 227 F.3d 1000, 228 F.3d 782, 230 F.3d 1036 (7th Cir. 2000): Series of expedited appellate decisions in favor of client/plaintiff relating to confirmation of an arbitration award in client's favor, ordering that the plaintiff be named to the 2000 United States Greco-Roman Wrestling Olympic Team. Issues involved interpretations of the Federal Arbitration Act's provisions for confirming and vacating arbitral awards, and application of injunctions to non-parties in "active concert or participation" with enjoined party. The client ultimately won a Silver Medal in Sydney.

Smith v. Chevron Chemical Co., 242 F.3d 376, 2000 WL 1852621 (8th Cir. 2000): Action against defendant/ client by plaintiff who was severely burned by an explosion and fire during of installation of a live gas line for which Chevron was a component manufacturer. Following a jury trial in which the plaintiff received less than four percent of his demanded damages, the Court of Appeals affirmed that verdict, as well as a contribution award in client Chevron's favor against a third-party defendant. Kevin Duff argued the case before the Eighth Circuit.

Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Imperial Cas. & Indemnity Co., 81 Cal. App. 4th 356, 97 Cal. Rptr. 2d 44 (2d Dist. 2000): In litigation on behalf of plaintiff policyholder to secure insurance coverage for environmental claims, court of appeals issued ruling that insurer had a duty to provide "first dollar" coverage, reversing lower court's summary judgment ruling for insurer.

Thermal Management, Inc. v. Coactive Networks, 108 F. Supp. 2d 1029 (N.D. Ill. 2000): In reported decision, court denied the client/ defendant's motion to dismiss defamation claims based on statute of limitations. Ultimately, court entered judgment on the pleadings in favor of client/ defendant on the basis of the "innocent construction" rule. The defendant had been retained to render advice as to malfunctions in a HVAC system installed by the plaintiff.

Alliance General Ins. Co. v. Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, L.L.P., 1999 WL 637205 (N.D. Ill. 1999): On client/ defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction or transfer venue to a more convenient district, court entered order transferring case to defendant's home district.

Hu-Friedy Mfg. Co. v. General Electric Co., 1999 WL 528545 (N.D. Ill. 1999): Lawsuit was brought on behalf of client/ manufacturer of dental products against supplier of resin material relating to unsuitability of material for purposes sold. In reported decision, the court rejected the defendant's efforts to disqualify client/ manufacturer's counsel.

Ty, Inc. v. Salvino, Inc., 1999 U.S. LEXIS 3496 (N.D. Ill. 1999): Ruling on discovery motions in lawsuit alleging that defendants engaged in copyright and trademark infringement in marketing stuffed bears. Client was importer of stuffed bears.

Amgen, Inc. v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp., 303 Ill. App. 3d 370, 708 N.E.2d 385 (1st Dist. 1999): In dispute involving interpretation of an arbitration clause in a licensing agreement for a patented pharmaceutical product, the appellate court affirmed summary judgment against client/ defendant.

Buckley v. County of DuPage, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18825 (N.D. Ill. 1998): In third-party action for declaration of insurance coverage for claims of alleged civil rights violations, defamation, malicious prosecution, and other alleged "personal injury" offenses, order in favor of client/ policyholder, denying insurers' motions to dismiss coverage action as unripe.

Board of Trustees of Community College, Dist. No. 508 v. Coopers & Lybrand, LLP, 296 Ill. App. 3d 538, 696 N.E.2d 3 (1st Dist. 1998): Accounting malpractice action against Coopers & Lybrand and Arthur Andersen on behalf of the Board of the City Colleges of Chicago, arising from their failure to identify and report that the Board's treasurer had committed numerous violations of the Board's investment policy by churning investments and investing in high-risk derivative investments. In this reported decision, the appellate court affirmed dismissal of Arthur Andersen's third-party claims against the individual Board members.

Dunlap v. Alcuin Montessori School, 298 Ill. App. 3d 329, 698 N.E.2d 574 (1st Dist.), app. denied, 179 Ill. 2d 580, 705 N.E.2d 436 (1998): In a case alleging breach of an employment contract and defamation, appellate decision in client/defendant's favor, reducing from $150,000 to $625 the damages assessed on the breach of contract count and affirming summary judgment for the client/defendant on the defamation count.

Beale v. Edgemark Financial Corp., 279 Ill. App. 3d 242, 664 N.E.2d 302 (1st Dist.), app. denied, 168 Ill. 2d 582, 671 N.E.2d 726 (1996): Trial court granted client's pre-suit petition to discover the identity of persons who could be responsible in damages for securities fraud. The appellate court affirmed the client's right to the discovery sought.

RWT Corp. v. Wonderware Corp. 931 F. Supp. 583 (N.D. Ill. 1996): Defeated efforts by a competitor to impose a preliminary injunction against client/ defendant in trademark infringement case involving client's use of the junior mark "InTrack," where plaintiff/ competitor had the senior, registered mark "OnTrack." The trademarks related to directly competing computer software.

Carter v. O'Sullivan, 924 F. Supp. 903 (C.D. Ill. 1996), aff'd mem., 124 F.3d 203 (1997): The court granted clients' motion for summary judgment in a civil rights suit alleging violations of associational rights under the First Amendment and the right of access to counsel under the Sixth Amendment.

Peleschak v. Verex Assurance, Inc., 272 Ill. App. 3d 1077, 651 N.E.2d 562 (1st Dist. 1995): In class action on behalf of home mortgage borrowers, appellate court affirmed summary judgment in favor of client/ defendant. Claims arose from the mortgage lender's practice of not refunding to borrowers unearned premiums under $25 on mortgage guaranty insurance.

NIBCO Inc. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., 1995 WL 865762 (N.D. Ind. 1995): On cross-motions for summary judgment in an insurance coverage dispute for environmental claims, granting summary judgment in favor of client policyholder and denying insurer's motion.

Beale v. Edgemark Financial Corp., 164 F.R.D. 649 (N.D. Ill. 1995): In a class action securities fraud suit, the court granted plaintiff-client's motion for class certification.

U.S. Gypsum Co. v. Admiral Insurance Co., 268 Ill.App.3d 598, 643 N.E.2d 1226 (1st Dist. 1994), app. denied, 161 Ill. 2d 542, 649 N.E.2d 426 (1995): In comprehensive lawsuit involving insurance coverage for asbestos claims against approximately 20 insurers, appellate decision in favor of client/policyholder on various issues including that coverage existed under policies at issue, and that none of the exclusions cited by insurers applied

Bourque v. Medline Industries, Inc., 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12005 (N.D. Ill. 1994): Granting client/defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim for "negligent retention" of an employee who allegedly sexually harassed the plaintiff.

Janivo Holding, B.V. v. Continental Bank, 859 F. Supp. 316 (N.D. Ill. 1994): In lawsuit involving claim that defendant banks wrongfully paid out on a letter of credit in connection with a failed real estate project, client/plaintiff successfully defeated motion for summary judgment on key count of the complaint.

Aetna Cas. & Surety Co. v. Jefferson Trust & Savings Bank, 993 F.2d 1364 (8th Cir. 1993): Court of Appeals upheld grant of client/insured's motion for stay or dismissal of insurer's declaratory judgment suit in favor of the subsequently filed Illinois state court action filed by the client-policyholder. The coverage dispute related to a lender liability claims.

Stamps v. Collagen Corp., 984 F.2d 1416 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 824 (1993): Representing amicus curiae, Product Liability Advisory Council, which supported medical device manufacturer in a successful defense of a product liability suit on the grounds of federal preemption.

Principal Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Gulf States Steel, Inc., 1993 WL 479051 (N.D. Ill. 1993): Defending client against actions brought by a consortium of lenders who had filed parallel actions in state and federal court. Reported decision involves grant of client's motion to stay federal court action under the Colorado River doctrine.

Cuevas v. Washington, 811 F. Supp. 1294 (N.D. Ill. 1992), rev'd, 36 F.3d 612 (7th Cir. 1993): In pro bono representation of prisoner in habeas corpus proceedings, district court granted writ, which was reversed on appeal.

Hang-Well Corp. v. Kenney Mfg. Corp., 1992 WL 253277 (N.D. Ill. 1992): Lawsuit brought by licensor/inventor of drapery system against client/ licensee, alleging that licensee failed to use reasonable efforts to promote sales of the system. In the reported decision, court granted in part and denied in part the plaintiff's motion to strike affirmative defenses. Ultimately, the parties entered into a confidential settlement after a vigorous defense by client, including whether the "one-year on sale bar" of the patent law impaired the licensed product's patent.

U.S.F. & G. v. Wilkin Insulation Co., 144 Ill. 2d 64, 578 N.E.2d 926 (1991): In insurance coverage dispute for asbestos claims, appellate decision in favor of client/ policyholder that insurers owed a duty to defend the claims.

Galva Foundry Co. v. Heiden, 924 F.2d 729 (7th Cir. 1991): Affirming trial court's dismissal of claims asserted against client/ defendant for lack of diversity jurisdiction.

Heiden v. Galva Foundry Co., 223 Ill. App. 3d 163, 584 N.E.2d 518 (3d Dist. 1991): In a dispute between a former controlling stockholder and an acquiring company, the appellate court reversed trial court's denial of the acquiring company's motion to compel arbitration.

Irvine v. American National Bank & Trust Co., 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9538 (N.D. Ill. 1991): In class action alleging sex discrimination in compensation paid to female employees, denying summary judgment to client/ defendant, with the caveat that "we do not want to give [the plaintiff] the impression that she has a stronger case than she actually does."

McGuirk Oil Co. v. Amoco Oil Co., 889 F.2d 734 (6th Cir. 1989): Successful appeal in favor of client/ defendant, reversing bench verdict that franchiser breached alleged fiduciary duties or duties of good faith and fair dealing. On appeal, the court held that there were no fiduciary obligations created by franchise agreement.

Dubrovin v. Marshall Field's & Co. Employees' Credit Union, 180 Ill. App. 3d 992, 536 N.E.2d 800 (1st Dist.), app. denied, 127 Ill. 2d 614, 545 N.E.2d 108 (1989): Affirming dismissal of defamation action brought by former employee of client/defendant. The former employee alleged that the manner in which he was involuntarily terminated gave the false impression that he was fired for dishonesty.

Chicago Heights Venture v. Dynamit Nobel of America, 782 F.2d 723 (7th Cir. 1986): In lawsuit involving a failed roof, affirming dismissal of tort claims against client/ defendant based on economic loss doctrine.

Walgreen Co. v. Illinois Liquor Commission, 111 Ill. 2d 120, 488 N.E.2d 980, app. dismissed, 476 U.S. 1180 (1986): In a dispute involving the number of signatures required to hold a Local Option referendum to vote a precinct dry, the Illinois Supreme Court reversed a Circuit Court decision that had held that the statutory signature requirement was an unconstitutional burden on ballot access under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The Supreme Court decision was a victory for the client, Walgreen Company.