There is a ton of political nonsense about whether or not President Obama should be able to nominate a Supreme Court justice or if it should be the job of the next President. That’s not what this blog post is about.

Whether it’s in a few months or next year, eventually there will be a new Judge on the Court and you can bet your last dollar that they will be a lawyer. As an attorney myself you’d be surprised to know that I don’t think that is the best idea.

Nothing in the law of the land requires that a Supreme Court Judge actually be an attorney. I do think it makes sense that most of the Judges are lawyers and understanding case law, legal precedent and how the system works is certainly a good idea. It’s also not rocket science and is something we teach to every first year law student. Certainly it could be grasped by a non lawyer of any reasonable intelligence.

While I’m not suggesting that anyone off the street can/should take this job, I do think that a non-partisan, successful person would be a great choice. Howard Stern jokes that he’ll be appointed Judge if Donald Trump gets elected. He’s not serious, but the reality is that he was a great judge on America’s Got Talent because he had firm opinions that all had an explanation for them.

To me the most important quality in a Judge aside from being impartial is that they are willing to look at both sides of an issue and then make a decision based on reasoning, not emotion. It’s one thing if law is settled such as free speech under the first amendment. But when there are questions like should corporations be able to get out of class action lawsuits via hidden arbitration clause agreements or deciding what limits should be placed on a “well regulated militia”, we need someone who can look at these issues as they apply to our world today and offer common sense rationale.

With Judges we have the advantage of their previous rulings to determine if they are biased in favor of one side or another. With non-lawyers we wouldn’t have that, but we would have the lifetime of their tweets as well as a look at what they’ve done with their professional career to see if they are really impartial or not.

The point is that non-lawyer citizens seem to have no representation whatsoever on the Court and deserve to have their own voice. If that voice ends up being the swing vote it’s even better as results might actually then reflect the will of the people.

Sadly we don’t have nine Judges who are real swing votes. In most cases you know how most of them are going to vote and that their reasoning will just end up fitting their desires. How great would it be to have a Judge who actually judged? If it takes a non-lawyer to do that it’s even better.

You’ve all seen the ads.  Especially on those days when for whatever reason you aren’t at work, but are instead watching Jerry Springer or Judge Judy in the middle of the day.  The creepy, slimy attorneys who say things like “We don’t get paid until you do!” or “I’m a warrior” or “We did it for them” along with pictures/video of clients on crutches, in wheel chairs or with bandages around their heads.

They are essentially a Better Call Saul episode that has come to life.  It’s gross and helps give attorneys a bad name.

Every year I get called by cable companies asking me if I would run a TV ad.  Every year my response is the same. Yes if the price is right AND if you can develop a non-cheesy, not disgusting ad for my law firm.  I’ve never been pitched anything that I’d be proud to put my name on. Granted, our practice is unique in that we provide legal guidance and lawyer referrals, so it’s not as if they can take a cookie cutter approach with us and re-do an ad that worked well for someone else.

I have looked at a bunch of lawyer commercials myself because I’m intrigued as to whether it’s even possible to create a good lawyer commercial.  I’m creative, but not that creative, so it won’t be me that can put something together.

So we are holding a contest.  If you can create a great lawyer commercial for, we’ll pay you $5,000.00 if we use your commercial or concept.  No hidden agenda or strings attached.  We have traditionally done all of our ads on the internet, but wanted to see if there was a good way to promote our service on TV.

Looking for guidance.  30 seconds tops.  Not something that would run on day time crap TV.  Our motto is that we treat callers like family members or friends while at the same time giving direct, plain English advice because that’s how we would want to be treated.

If you think you have a concept for us, fill out our contact form and let’s go from there.  We will accept submissions between now and May 1st.

We post a new blog every Wednesday on a different legal topic.  We’ve been helping people find the right lawyer for their case since 2001 and have helped more than 300,000 people during that time.

With the end of the year upon us, we just wanted to take a moment to say thank you to everyone who has trusted us as the top resource for people who need Illinois legal help.  Many lawyers hate what they do, but we love it because we actually get to help people.

Have a safe and happy holidays.  We are on call 24/7 over the next few days and every day.  So if you need our help, please call us at (312) 346-5320 or fill out the form to the right. It’s always free and confidential.


Full disclosure, I’m a soccer nut.  I’ve traveled the world to support the U.S. Men’s and Women’s National Teams and never miss a televised game.  I’m also a dad and a hater of dumb laws that aren’t well thought through.  So while I am soccer crazy and want the U.S. Men to win a World Cup in my lifetime, I have to call out the United States Soccer Federation (“USSF”) for putting in place a mandatory rule that will discourage kids from playing soccer.

Currently there are approximately 3 million youth soccer players aged 5-19, 85% of whom are under the age of 14.  This does not include more than 600,000 who play AYSO, which is pure recreational soccer. The great majority of these players will never play professionally, and having been a youth coach for five plus years, I can tell you that the great majority don’t have that as their goal.  I coached a pretty competitive team last year full of amazing kids, and when I asked them their favorite thing about playing, the runaway winner was “playing with my friends.”

From that list of 3 million youth players, 52% are male, which comes to 1,560,000 players.  According to Wikipedia, there are currently 559 male professional players born in the United States playing somewhere in the world for money.  From that list, there are 26 players from Illinois, four from our neighbor Indiana, two from Iowa and six from Wisconsin.  So your odds of becoming a pro, even if you are a stud player, aren’t that great.  I watch a crazy amount of soccer, and I’ve never heard of any of the six from Wisconsin.  None of them play for major clubs so while they may have aspirations, they aren’t yet making a real living at soccer.

The point I’m trying to make is that while it’s great to strive to be an amazing soccer country, the rules of YOUTH soccer should not be changed to help the .036% that will play professionally, most of whom will not even play for Major League Soccer.

What the USSF wants to do is to group kids by the calendar year in which they were born.  That may not sound like a big deal to you, but currently, the USSF  groups kids by the grade they are in.  The calendar for the current grade-level system runs from August 1 to July 31st which mirrors (or is at least close to) how most schools recommend you place your child in a grade. So a child born October 20, 2005 would currently be a u10 player, as would a child born March 10, 2006.

The way age brackets are currently set up makes sense, because the two kids in my example would likely be in the same grade.  Most youth clubs enroll kids from a relatively small geographic area, and the kids I’ve coached love that they get to play with their classmates and friends from their neighborhood.  It encourages their soccer development because it’s more fun and they may end up playing soccer together at recess.  It also gives them more common ground on the soccer field.  The experiences of a 5th grade elementary student are much different than that of a sixth grade middle school child.  In general, these kids just want to be with their friends.  If they can’t do it in soccer, they’ll do it in basketball, lacrosse, baseball or something else.  Most of these kids, even the amazing players, don’t just play one sport and the USSF shouldn’t motivate them to pick a different sport.

As kids get older, it also makes sense from a practical standpoint to organize by grade.  Once you hit high school, club soccer stops during the high school soccer season.  I’m in favor of that, because only the elite kids should be playing club ball year round at that age and the rest should be encouraged to play for their school.  What will happen with the USSF change to calendar year, is that club teams will be made up of 8th graders and freshman in high school.  The 8th graders won’t have enough teammates to play during the high school season (which is about four months) because you aren’t allowed to do both at the same time.  So what will happen is good players won’t be able to play and develop which is surely against the goal of this reform.

The same problem will happen to older high school seniors.  Anyone who is going to turn 18 before December 31 would be considered a u19 player, whereas before they’d be considered u18. In most places, their former teammates will be off to college or working, so they too will have great challenges when it comes to fielding a complete team.  Many just won’t be able to play.

The goal of this change is to mirror how leagues are run in other countries, as well as to align with how national team age groups are made.  That might work well in another country, but the difference is that in places like Brazil, England, Germany, Spain, etc., soccer is “the sport.”  You don’t make it “the sport” in the United States by forcing kids away from their friends.

I also wouldn’t discount the fact that many kids in the U.S. are signed up for teams not because their parents love soccer, but because they hear that one or more of their kid’s classmates signed up to play. Your social circle as a parent often becomes the parents of the kids who go to school with your kids.  If they learn that their six year old can’t play with their friend, just because they were born in different years, they’ll be more likely to have them do some other sport or activity, especially if they can only make it work via carpooling.

Growing up in Chicago, I was a lousy back up goalkeeper on an amazing team.  My senior year we finished second in the state. The top juggler on our team had a high of around 200 juggles which we all thought was amazing. Now the top nine year old on my son’s team has a high of 700 and there is another kid who can do 400.  Kids today are much more talented than the ones I grew up playing with, and I played against US soccer great Brian McBride, and with and against a bunch of kids who played high level college soccer.

The point from the little juggling tale is that the soccer development for interested kids right now is incredible. I didn’t start playing year round soccer until high school.  Now kids as young as six can play year round.  I used to think that was nuts, but then I met some dance moms and learned about their daughters’ crazy schedules.  American kids now are amazingly more skilled, and thanks to all of the soccer on TV and on the internet, they get to watch incredible players all of the time.  So the foundation has been laid to create some incredible, world class players, and it wouldn’t surprise me at all, if in 10 years, there were more than 1,000 American citizens who played professional soccer.

What the USSF has done well is create competitive academies where the best players can be pushed and thrive.  This, in turn, has lead to great instruction and technical and tactical development.  They are changing the focus from winning to development, and having younger players participate in games with fewer players (e.g., 4v4 instead of 6v6) so they get more opportunities to touch the ball.  I would like to see them also mandate roster sizes so kids get more playing time.

What the USSF has done terribly is change the rules for the sake of the .036% at the expense of the three million who will never play professionally and don’t want to.  This new rule, which will be mandatory by 2017 if it’s not reversed, does not meet the goal of developing better players.  It simply serves to discourage good young athletes and drive them to choose other sports or activities.  It’s no better than a terrible law on child support or anything else.  And if you see a terrible law, you need to speak up before it causes great harm.  According to U.S. Soccer Youth Technical Director, Tab Ramos, this change will help the Federation identify potential players for national teams.  So again, we are going to mess up the experience for almost everyone for the sake of a few. It’s also a cop out as the rule does nothing to identify the strongest players as most of those will be playing up an age group anyway.

In my own life, I have a son who is pretty talented at soccer, although I have no illusions of him going pro and, quite honestly, just want him to love the sport and hopefully play it or something else in high school.  He’s also a strong basketball player and, unlike me, is not destined to be a six-foot power forward.  His two best friends with whom he has played soccer with since they were five, are born in different calendar years. My son was born in 2006, and was told that when this is implemented, he can choose to play with the 2006-born boys or the 2005-born boys since he’s a strong player.  Either way, one of the three amigos will be without the other two.  His two buddies also play hockey and baseball.  It would not surprise me at all if the one who gets left behind focuses on his other sport.

Of course kids can play soccer without their best friends, and one day it might happen anyway.  But why would USSF make that happen sooner than it has to, especially for pre-teens?  It’s a terrible rule which hurts kids, hurts the game and should be reversed.



A concerned mother wrote me the following, but didn’t include her contact information, so I thought this would be a good place to respond.  Here’s what she said:

I need to know if I have a case against a man who is over 4 yrs older than my daughter, age of 16, now pregnant. As a mother I was aware she was dating someone older but was unable to stop the relationship on my own. I never consented to the relationship and have never met this person.

The simple answer is that this is statutory rape and her best option is to go to the police.  It’s likely that suing is not a good option because what are you going to get from a 20 year old that preys on young girls, but that could also be a possibility too.

But if I could speak to her, I’d tell her that she isn’t to blame and even if she had approved of the relationship, you can’t consent to rape or for someone else to be raped.  And that’s what this is.  Even the most mature of 16 year old doesn’t fully understand what they are doing when they sleep with someone in their 20’s.

Beyond that, the truth is that the likelihood of their relationship lasting isn’t very strong.  Bringing these charges will expose this guy for what he really is too and help in a child custody case.

The worst thing you can do is nothing.  Rape is rape.  This might not be as bad as if he drugged her or held a knife to her throat, but it’s still rape.

As I was typing this out, the Mom contacted me over the phone.  She’s trying to protect her kid, which is what every parent should do.  She’s kind of kicking herself for not stepping in sooner, but you can’t do that.  You can just do the best you can and do the right thing.  Unfortunately this 20 something guy didn’t do the same.

Written by Michael Helfand


I was saddened yesterday to talk to the widow of a man who was killed Monday in a trucking accident.  She only called me though because since the accident she has been flooded with calls from law firms and their investigators who are trying to get her to sign up with their firm to pursue a lawsuit.  This is ambulance chasing plain and simple.

Attorneys in Illinois are barred from soliciting cases.  Unless you contact them or they have a prior relationship with you, the only contact an attorney can make is to mail something to them and it must say “lawyer advertisement” on the envelope.

So if my neighbor is in a car accident or I hear he gets arrested for a DUI, I can go offer my services, but if it’s someone I’ve never met and I do that, I can and should lose my law license.

For the most part, the State does a good job of disciplining attorneys, but when it comes to these leeches, they do a terrible job.  And most of them aren’t sly about how they do it; some will go as far as to ring your doorbell or show up at your hospital bed.

I did refer her to an attorney who is nationally known for representing plaintiffs in trucking accident lawsuits.  His firm would never seek out a client the way these others do.  Fortunately there are many law firms like his.

If an attorney contacts you out of the blue, they are basically telling you that they have no morals.  That is a sign as to how they would handle your case if you hired them.  They’d be looking out for themselves and when things go bad you shouldn’t be surprised.

I personally don’t know how any attorney could risk his/her law license over any one case.  But I guess if the State doesn’t clamp down on them they don’t worry about being punished.

If you get an unsolicited call, report the lawyer to the ARDC at (312) 565-2600.  I’m sure it’s the last thing you want to do when you are mourning the loss of a loved one.  But this is the only way to stop people who’d prey on vulnerable people instead of letting them go forward when they are ready.

Written by Michael Helfand


It’s never too late to make some new year’s resolutions. If you’re tired of resolving to lose weight, or get organized, or whatever other promises you make to yourself every year, try these legal resolutions for a change. They won’t all apply to you, but if they do, it might be time to do something about it.

–       Take another look at your estate plan. If you have an outdated estate plan, get it updated as soon as possible. We’d argue that an outdated plan is worse than no plan at all. If you’ve experienced a major life change, such as divorce, marriage, or having a child, then your plan likely needs an update. If you don’t have an estate plan, it’s time to get one. A simple will, perhaps a trust, and powers of attorney are in a typical package. At the very least, properly execute a power of attorney (one for healthcare and one for finances). You can get these forms free online. You also may want to fill out a living will or advance directive (which tells doctors whether you want to be kept alive on life support). I wouldn’t recommend doing your own will or trust, but the other three documents I mentioned aren’t as complicated. If you have legal advice while filling them out, great. But make sure you don’t pay a lot because they’re fairly straight forward.

–       Pay those parking tickets. These can add up and lead to worse than the fine you face now. If you accumulate too many unpaid parking tickets, your license can be suspended. If it gets this far, it’s a pain to take care of. But what’s worse is if you get caught driving on a suspended license. Even if you didn’t know your license was suspended (they notify you but that notice doesn’t always get to the right person), you’re still in the same trouble. Driving on a suspended license is a crime. Jail time isn’t likely if you have a clean record, but it’s certainly on the table. If you can’t afford to pay your parking tickets, ask about payment plans.

–       Get that child support you’ve been waiting for. If you don’t have a court order, that will be your first step. Once you have that order, you can enforce it. It can be daunting, especially if the other parent is hiding, lives out of state, makes their money under the table, etc. However, these are common situations, which child support collection attorneys are familiar with. If you can’t afford to hire an attorney to get you the child support you’re owed, try going through the state. There is an agency that helps parents collect. It’s not as quick, but it’s worth a try if it’s your only option. There are no guarantees either way, unfortunately, but I hate to see people give up before trying. It’s money for your child and it may be possible to get what you’re owed, including past payments that you never received.

–       Check your record. Look for lingering arrests, cases, convictions, etc. You may not be able to clear up everything, but do what you can. In some cases, you can clear up everything. It just depends on what you’ve got. There are two ways to clean up your record – you can seal it or expunge it. Expunging your record (or certain things on it) is the better option because it’s completely erased. Sealing your record is still good, because it will hide your record from the general public at least. Employers can’t see a sealed record when they do a background check, for example. Start by contacting the police department where your case originated or where you were arrested and request a copy of your record.


The new amendments to the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Laws are in effect for injuries occurring September 1st, 2011 or after.  Some of these changes will directly alter how you access you benefits under the law.  Here are 5 important changes you should know.

1.  Your choice of doctor now has limits.

Under the workers’ compensation system, you are entitled to receive benefits for treatment by two physicians, and others they refer you to, such as surgeons and therapists.  What is new, though, is that the choice of the two physicians is not solely up to you anymore.

Employers can now be part of preferred provider networks for workers’ compensation.  You can decide to use one of the doctors in the network for your first choice.  You can decide not to use any of the network doctors, but then you are left with only one choice of doctor.  So the only way to have two doctor picks under the new law, is to pick one from the network list and one of your own.

2.  Carpal Tunnel injury benefits are reduced.

Carpal Tunnel syndrome is an injury that impacts the use of the hand.  It is caused by repetitive stress, and frequently found in jobs that involve excessive typing.  Benefits for these injuries are paid based on a percentage of loss of the use of the hand.

With the recent changes in the law, the percentage loss is limited to 15%, unless you can clearly prove that you have a severe case, and then it could be as much as 30%.  The total number of weeks the benefits are available is now reduced to 190 weeks.

3.  Wage differential benefits for partial disabilities have a time limit.

If your injury still allows you to work, but causes your wages to be reduced because of your limitations, you are entitled to receive the percentage difference in pay.  Previously, these benefits could continue indefinitely, but now there is a cap.  You may receive the wage loss differential benefit for five years, or until you turn 67, whichever is later.

4.  Different criteria will be used to for permanent disability determinations.

A new, more objective, set of guidelines has been put in place to make the determination of a permanent partial disability.  Though no one, specific factor will be given more weight than any other, the American Medical Association guidelines will be used to evaluate the loss of range of motion, loss of strength and other factors that impact the extent of the impairment.  These AMA guidelines will be considered along with the occupation and age, future earning capacity, and other evidence of the disability contained in the medical records.  Subjective factors, such as the testimony of the employee are no longer part of the determination.

5.  Injuries where intoxication is an issue are handled differently.

If drug or alcohol use by a worker is found to have caused the accident, then benefits will not be allowed for the injury.  The employee has the responsibility to prove that the intoxication was not the cause.  If a drug or alcohol test is failed, or if the worker refuses the test, then there is a presumption that the substance was involved and caused the injury.  This is a hurdle that the worker will have to overcome in order to receive benefits in these situations.

Also, if the intoxication was not necessarily the cause of the accident, benefits could also be denied if the worker was so intoxicated at the time, that he or she would be considered to be acting outside the scope of the employment.


Yesterday we did a blog post on the largest injury cases from Cook County in 2009.  Today is a listing of the biggest ones from outside of Cook County.  Of course there aren’t as many and they aren’t as large because there are more people in Cook County than anywhere else and the rest of the state is more conservative.


Award for Plaintiff: $12.50 Million

Case Cite: Keith Quadros, et al. vs Undisclosed Medical Provider,

Brief Description: Feeding tube was inserted into 3 week old premature infants lung space instead of his stomach.  Baby went into respiratory arrest after being fed and suffered oxygen deprivation which in turn caused cerebral palsy.

Award for Plaintiff: $12.00 Million

Case Cite: Michael Davis, etc. vs Rashidi Gani Loya, MD., et al

Brief Description: 44 year old woman suffered anoxic encephalopathy and brain damage as a result of alarms failing to sound on the ventilator equipment during an elective biopsy for left ankle pain.

Award for Plaintiff: $12.00 Million

Case Cite: Jeremy Law vs OSF Healthcare System

Brief Description: Baby boy born with permanent disabilities and is required to be on a ventilator and 24 hour care.  This is a result of the doctor failing to determine child was breech before inducing labor and the nurse’s failure to notify doctor of the baby becoming bradycardic.

Award for Plaintiff: $7.65 Million

Case Cite: Cindy Segerberg, etc. vs Provena St Joseph Medical Center

Brief Description: Nurse failed recognize and respond to fetal heart patterns causing baby boy to suffer from numerous permanent damages. Such as Hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, seizures, mental retardation, and cerebral palsy.

Award for Plaintiff: $7.00 Million

Case Cite: Claire Putman vs Target

Brief Description: 81 year old woman has suffered from a diffused brain injury which has caused some lasting cognitive deficiencies.  This was a result of Targets doors malfunctioning.

Award for Plaintiff: $6.00 Million

Case Cite: Steven Coulson, et vs A Utility Service Provider, et al.,

Brief Description: 43 year old mother of two suffered injuries such as severe brain injury causing cerebral edema, memory loss, vision problems and cognitive defects.  This happened while riding her bike on the sidewalk and hitting a warning sign which caused her to flip.

Award for Plaintiff: $5.50 Million

Case Cite: Tyanna Cannata, et al. vs Forest Preserve District of DuPage County, et al.

Brief Description: Contamination of ground water in Wayne Township affected the primary water source to about 90 families causing these families to suffer the loss of use and enjoyment of their homes.

Award for Plaintiff: $5.40 Million

Case Cite: Lindsey Welch vs Hinsdale Hospital, et al.,

Brief Description: New born girl and mother released from hospital despite detection of a heart murmur.  Mother was instructed to follow up with pediatrician in 2 weeks.  Within 1 week newborn suffered cardiovascular collapse due to congenital heart defect and coarctation of the aorta which resulted in sustained brain damage and moderate mental retardation.

Award for Plaintiff: $4.75 Million

Case Cite: George Baldwin IV vs William Klairmont, et al.,

Brief Description: 19 year old man was left paralyzed from the chest down as a result of the driver driving while intoxicated in November of  2006.  The two had been drinking at a residence in Lake Forest while a mother was present at the home.

Award for Plaintiff: $4.50 Million

Case Cite: Brief Description: 52 year old suffer severe and permanent brain damage as a result of the hospitals employees failing to properly monitor her post-operatively.  The hospital then failed to resuscitate the woman in a timely manner after apnea.

Award for Plaintiff: $4.10 Million                                       

Case Cite: Christopher Tornow, et al. vs St. Margaret Hospital.

Brief Description: Newborn baby boy suffers from cerebral palsy as a result of the hospital failing to recognize the signs and symptoms of Group B Strep.  After the infant was release the infection had progressed and was untreatable by morning.

Award for Plaintiff: $3.70 Million                           

Case Cite: Robert Brooks, et al. vs Larry L Roundy, et al,

Brief Description: 43 year old man suffered multiple injuries as a result of a truck driver speeding through a construction zone and colliding with another vehicle.

Award for Plaintiff: $3.50 Million                                                 

Case Cite: Estate of Heidi White vs. BroMenn Medical Center, et al.,

Brief Description: 27 year old woman went into respiratory arrest and passed away as a result of nurses failing to properly monitor her after being diagnosed with preeclampsia and HELLP syndrome, as well as the doctor failing to perform a physical exam and order anti-hypertensive medications in a timely manner.

Award for Plaintiff: $3.50 Million                                                 

Case Cite: Samuel Baker vs. Silver Cross Hospital, et al.,

Brief Description: As a result of the nurse failing to report 2.5 hours of fetal tachycardia to the attending OB during the delivery of a baby boy. The infant suffered from hypoxic ischemic injury, brain damage and cerebral palsy which contributed to his death by age 9

Award for Plaintiff: $3.50 Million                                                 

Case Cite: Estate of Ryan Rendleman vs. Effingham Equity, et al.,

Brief Description: 22 year old college student died as a result of a driver of a semi-tractor trailer loaded with 40 tons of agricultural lime failed to stop in a construction zone due to irresponsible driving.

Award for Plaintiff: $3.35 Million                                                 

Case Cite: Elizabeth Bryla, etc. vs. Edward Zurawski, et al.,

Brief Description: 45 year old man killed instantly when a construction superintendent ran a red light.

Award for Plaintiff: $3.20  Million                                                 

Case Cite: Braden metheny, et al. vs. Swedish American Hospital, et al.,

Brief Description: 41 year old man is unable to work and requires 24 hour care due to becoming a quadriplegic as a result of the nurse anesthetist failed to notify doctor of the mans drop in heart rate.  In conjunction to this the doctor continued screwing an allograft into place.  The screw fractured and by not removing the fragment immediately the man was left with pressure on the spine.

Award for Plaintiff: $3.00 Million                                                 

Case Cite: Hunter Santoro, etc. vs. Amber Barhart, MD., et al.,

Brief Description: Newborn suffers from nerve damage to his should and paralysis of his right arm as a result of the doctor using excessive force during the delivery instead of utilizing proper maneuvers to free the infants impacted shoulders.

Award for Plaintiff: $3.00 Million                                                 

Case Cite: Estate of Tiffany Ross vs Carle Foundation Hospital, Carl Clinic Association.,

Brief Description: 31 year old woman suffered from a brain herniation and passed away when there wasn’t a shunt placed during the posterior fossa craniotomy with total resection of the choroid plexus papiloma.

Award for Plaintiff: $3.00  Million

Case Cite: Jessalyn Barr, etc. vs. United States of America, et al.,

Brief Description: 4 year old girl is left blind in one eye and has required multiple plastic surgeries as a result of a concrete wall collapsing and crushing her skull at Great Lakes Naval Base.

Award for Plaintiff: $2.80 Million                                                 

Case Cite: Cindy Smith, etc. vs Jewel Food Stores, Inc., et al.,

Brief Description: 22 year old college student was killed as a result of being rear-ended by a truck driver.  Her vehicle was pushed into a concrete truck which caused her car to burst into flames and collapse.

Since 2001, has been the leading resource for Illinois attorney referrals and legal guidance. If you would like our help please contact one of our lawyers via our on-line form or call (800) 517-1614. We are based in Chicago, but help people find attorneys for legal matters throughout Illinois.  All inquiries are free and confidential.