Justia Lawyer Rating for Robert D. Kreisman

by

Marina Kolchinsky and her mother, Lidia Kolchinsky, were severely injured in a car collision with a tractor-trailer in Illinois. They sued the truck driver and the two companies that contracted with him. The Kolchinskys filed in federal court based on diversity of citizenship. Illinois law controlled.

The district court entered partial summary judgment in favor of Western Dairy Transport LLC and WD Logistics LLC, concluding that the driver was an independent contractor. This was done so that the Kolchinskys could not hold the companies responsible for the driver’s alleged negligence.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in Chicago affirmed the summary judgment for these two companies, ruling that the district court properly classified the driver as an independent contractor.

Continue reading

by

On Feb. 16, 2017, Kevin and Anita Crawford died in an automobile crash along with one of their children. The remaining two children were placed in the care of Anita’s parents. Anita’s father, Irwin Schmidt, was named the executor of their estate on April 10, 2017.

On Aug. 4, 2017, Wayne Crawford, Kevin’s father, filed a claim against both Kevin and Anita’s estate, alleging that they each jointly and severally owed him $223,529.55 for money they had borrowed from Crawford beginning in 2005. It was alleged that these loans were for groceries, utility bills and debt payments.

Crawford also claimed that he leased a vehicle for Kevin and Anita and paid it off after their deaths.

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Appellate Court for the Fourth District has overturned a $3.2 million jury verdict against a manufacturer in an asbestos death case. The appeals panel found that there was not enough evidence to show that a glazier’s contact with caulk and tape was a substantial factor in Willard Krumwiede’s fatal contraction of mesothelioma.

Krumwiede worked as a window glazier, installing glass into wood or aluminum frames from the mid-1950s until he retired in the early 1990s.

Krumwiede died at the age of 81 in September 2012. An autopsy showed that he had “malignant mesothelioma consistent with industrial exposure of asbestos.”

Continue reading

by

Before the Illinois Supreme Court handed down its decision in Peach v. McGovern, there were differing Illinois Appellate Court cases about whether an expert was needed to testify about a photograph of post-accident vehicle damage before it could be admitted into evidence. The Peach decision held that expert testimony is not required to admit post-accident vehicle photographs and settle this conflict in the law.

In its holding, the Peach decision expressly overturned DiCosola v. Bowman, 342 Ill.App.3d 530, 538 (1st Dist. 2003) and Baraniak v. Kurby, 371 Ill.App.3d 310, 317-18 (1st Dist. 2007) and held that the proper analysis had been appropriate in the cases of Ford v. Grizzle, 398 Ill.App.3d 639, 648 (5th Dist. 2010), Fronabarger v. Burns, 385 Ill.App.3d 560, 565 (5th Dist. 2008), Jackson v. Seib, 372 Ill.App.3d 1061, 1071 (5th Dist. 2007) and Ferro v. Griffiths, 361 Ill.App.3d 738, 743 (3d Dist. 2005).

In the Illinois Supreme Court decision in Peach, the Court ruled that the question of whether the photographs were admissible depended on whether they were relevant, and that relevancy is tested in light of logic, experience, and accepted assumptions about human behavior. Peach, Id. ¶ 26 (citing Boykin v. Estate of DeBoer, 192 Ill.2d 49, 57 (2000)).

Continue reading

by

This was a negligence lawsuit in which the defendant died two years after his discovery deposition. In this case, the Illinois Appellate Court was unanimous on the dispute about the Illinois Dead-Man’s Act, 735 ILCS 5/8-201. However, justices of the 5th District, Judy L. Cates and David K. Overstreet, disagreed on whether the trial judge misconstrued Illinois Supreme Court Rule 212(a)(5), which was amended in 2011 to permit use of discovery depositions as substantive evidence at trial.

Illinois Supreme Court Rule 212(a)(5) says that a discovery deposition may be used “upon reasonable notice to all parties, as evidence at trial or hearing against the party who appeared at the deposition or was given proper notice thereof, if the court finds that the deponent is not a controlled expert witness, the deponent’s evidence deposition has not been taken and the deponent is unable to attend or testify because of death or infirmity, and if the court, based on its sound discretion, further finds such evidence at trial or hearing will do substantial justice between or among the parties.”

Kevin Eyster sued Kenneth Conrad for allegedly causing an auto crash. The administrator of Conrad’s estate requested summary judgment, arguing the Dead-Man’s Act blocked Eyster from testifying about the incident.

Continue reading

by

Clarisha Benson and Lorenzo Smith each purchased an opaque, seven-ounce box of Fannie May chocolates for $9.99 plus tax. Benson purchased Fannie May’s Mint Meltaways and Smith purchased Fannie May’s Pixies. Although the boxes accurately disclosed the weight of the chocolate within, and the number of pieces in each box, the boxes were emptier than either had expected.

The box of Mint Meltaways contained approximately 33% empty space and the box of Pixies contained approximately 38% empty space.

The plaintiffs eventually sued Fannie May on behalf of themselves and a putative class, alleging violations of Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act and asserted claims for unjust enrichment and breach of implied contract.

Continue reading

by

A 3-year-old child, Doe, was on vacation with his family in a vacation rental home that included a fenced-in swimming pool. After dinner one night, family members found young Doe floating face down in the pool.

Doe was resuscitated and air-lifted to a children’s hospital where he remained for one month before being transferred to an inpatient rehabilitation facility.

Doe is now 7. He suffers from hypoxic brain damage that has resulted in cognitive and physical impairments, including an abnormal gait and speech difficulties. Doe’s medical expenses were $294,000.

Continue reading

by

Barbara Kaiser had surgery to implant the Prolift Anterior Pelvic Floor Repair System, a transvaginal mesh medical device that supports the pelvic muscles. Within a few years of her surgery, she began to experience severe pelvic pain, bladder spasms, and pain during intercourse. Her doctor attributed these conditions to contractions in the mesh of the Prolift.  Kaiser had revision surgery to remove the device, but her surgeon could not completely extract it. The physician informed Kaiser that the painful complications she was experiencing were likely permanent.

Kaiser sued Ethicon Inc., Prolift’s manufacturer, and Johnson & Johnson, its parent company, seeking damages under the Indiana Products Liability Act.

After a two-week trial, a jury found Ethicon liable for defectively designing the Prolift device and choosing not to adequately warn about its complications.

Continue reading

by

Anthony Ellis, 21, was on a highway driving his motorcycle when he entered an intersection.  Emily Trevino was driving in the opposite direction and waiting to make a turn. She turned left in front of Ellis.

Ellis’s motorcycle and Trevino’s car collided and Ellis was thrown into a ditch. He suffered multiple fractures, including to his finger, toes, arm and left knee. He was hospitalized and underwent surgery followed by a course of physical therapy.

Ellis had planned to join the military but is now unable to do so because of his injuries. His medical expenses approached $208,000 with his past lost income of $9,300. Ellis sued Trevino, alleging that she made an improper turn.

Continue reading

by

Joao Junior’s car was stopped in a line of three vehicles when a car driven by Sharon Graham rear-ended the last vehicle in the line. Junior, whose car was destroyed, received treatment for a cervical strain after the crash. He was diagnosed with a herniated disk in his neck and underwent surgery more than a year after this incident. Junior is now 60 and continues to suffer pain related to this incident.

Junior offered to resolve the case with the defendant Graham’s insurer for the policy limits of $100,000. The insurer, however, initially offered $14,500, which Junior rejected.

Junior then sued Graham, alleging that she had caused the crash while under the influence of prescription and non-prescription drugs. The lawsuit did not claim lost income.

Continue reading