From the Illinois Civil Justice League

Fed up with seeing Illinois transformed from the “Land of Lincoln” into the “Land of Lawsuits,” small business owners and concerned citizens traveled to Springfield today to lobby their legislators to pass common sense lawsuit reforms that will reduce the abuse of Illinois courts by aggressive personal injury lawyers and in turn help create jobs here.

The meetings with legislators were part of the “Rally for Lawsuit Reform” hosted by Illinois Lawsuit Abuse Watch (I-LAW), a grassroots, non-partisan legal watchdog group. Participants kicked off the day with a meeting with Governor Bruce Rauner to tell him personally why they support his proposed lawsuit reforms and to encourage him to keep fighting for these reforms in the face of intense opposition from the personal injury lawyers’ lobby.

Governor Rauner has proposed lawsuit reforms that will stop personal injury lawyers from shopping around for the friendliest court jurisdiction, even if the lawsuit has nothing to do with that jurisdiction.

This practice, often called “venue shopping,” is all too common in Illinois, explained I-LAW Executive Director Travis Akin. “For far too long, Illinois has been a magnet for personal injury lawyers and plaintiffs from all over the country who travel to Illinois and clog our courts with junk lawsuits that have nothing to do with Illinois, all in the hopes of striking it rich playing our state’s plaintiff-friendly lawsuit lottery. Governor Rauner’s call for reasonable lawsuit is a significant step forward in bringing Illinois’ economy back and stopping the flow of jobs to neighboring states.”

Akin spoke at a press conference in the Capitol Blue Room following the rally. He was joined by other lawsuit reform supporters and members of the General Assembly. John Pastuovic, President of the Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL), pointed to a study by ICJL, titled “Litigation Imbalance,” that shows how Madison County, Illinois, is continuing to be unfairly targeted by personal injury lawyers looking to cash in playing the lawsuit lottery.

The study shows lawsuit filings in Madison County average 8.255 per thousand persons, which is double the rate of Cook County; triple the rate of St. Clair County; and six and a half times the rate of the other 99 counties in Illinois combined. Additionally, Madison County handles over one-third all asbestos-related cases filed in the entire United States each year, and last year, less than one half of 1 percent of the asbestos lawsuits in Madison County were filed on behalf of Madison County residents.

“Creating new and meaningful jobs is the solution for nearly every other major issue facing Illinois today,” explained Pastuovic. “Unfortunately, the data detailed in our study, as well as the findings in other national studies, have made small, medium and large companies justifiably gun shy about our state. Businesses cannot and will not reinvest in Illinois until these established, deep-rooted and documented problems are addressed once and for all.”

Sherman Joyce, President of the American Tort Reform Association, said other states have used common sense lawsuit reforms as a way to attract jobs to their states. “The record is clear: common sense lawsuit reforms create jobs. Illinois has an unfortunate national reputation as a state that creates lawsuits, and that is clearly driving away employers and keeping new ones from moving to Illinois.”

Illinois is ranked the third-worst state in the country for legal fairness, according to a report last fall from the non-partisan research company Harris Poll. Commenting on this, Rep. Dwight Kay (R-Glen Carbon), explained, “The reality is companies look to move to states where the legal climate is fair, which is why Illinois’ status as the “Lawsuit Abuse Capital of the Midwest’ is making it extremely difficult to attract new employers. Even worse, Illinois is actually losing jobs, as companies have move across our borders to states like Wisconsin that have recently passed common sense lawsuit reforms to make it less likely that businesses there will be frivolously sued.

“We need to create jobs in Illinois, not more lawsuits, which is why I applaud Governor Rauner for taking the lead to weed out junk lawsuits here and restore fairness to our courts. I urge my colleagues to come together to pass these reasonable, common sense lawsuit reforms that will create jobs and unclog our courts, which will speed the legal process for those with legitimate claims.”

Biggest Campaign Contributions Went to Candidates in ‘Judicial Hellholes’ Counties

Findings Prompt National Watchdog Group to Issue Special Bulletin in Advance of Annual Report

A new study titled Justice for Sale III by the Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL), and released in conjunction with Illinois Lawsuit Abuse Watch (ILAW) and the American Tort Reform Association (ATRA), reveals that campaign contributions by trial lawyers to Illinois politicians and judges topped $35.25 million during the past 15 years.

In addition to the $6 million contributed through the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association (ITLA) legislative political action committee (PAC), the top 25 plaintiffs’ firms and their lawyers and family members collectively invested another $29 million in the campaigns of Illinois office seekers from January 2001 through March 2016. These campaign contributions have gone to legislators, constitutional officers, judges, state’s attorneys, county board chairmen, circuit clerks, county party chairmen, mayors, union leaders and politically allied special interests.

“Our study documents a truly staggering flow of plaintiffs’ bar cash,” observed ICJL president John Pastuovic. “The more than $35 million in contributions equates to roughly $264 every hour of every day for the past 15 years.”

The study also shows that over 98 percent of these trial lawyers’ donations were directed to the most powerful incumbent politicians in Springfield and other Democrats. Furthermore, an outsize portion of this spending benefitted candidates in three counties known for high volumes of civil litigation and plaintiff-friendly outcomes.

“While ITLA’s PAC and plaintiffs’ firms donated millions, policymakers they supported made Illinois’ tort laws even more to the trial lawyers’ liking,” Pastuovic continued. “During the study period, Madison County set an infamous national record for the most new class-action filings in a year, and a statewide medical liability crisis threatened critical care for Illinois patients.

“Meanwhile, lawyers and judges in Madison County built the nation’s largest and most notorious asbestos docket, attracting some 13,220 individual asbestos case filings in 15 years. In fact, sources now estimate that one-quarter of all asbestos cases filed nationwide in 2015 were filed there. With an estimated outcome of $2 million per case, the Madison County asbestos “rocket docket” could be worth more than $1.74 billion annually and could produce nearly $600 million annually in contingency fees for plaintiffs’ attorneys.”

Additionally, just last month, the Illinois Supreme Court, in a 4-3 party line decision led by Justice Thomas Kilbride, derailed a bipartisan movement comprising more than a half-million Illinoisans and various good-government groups who wanted to give voters a chance in November to decide whether an independent committee should draw nonpartisan maps for legislative and judicial districts instead of maintaining the one-party gerrymandered status quo. “It’s no coincidence that the trial lawyer-funded Democratic Party donated $1.5 million to Kilbride’s 2010 retention campaign,” noted Pastuovic.

“Interesting if not surprising is the fact that the biggest trial lawyer donations supported campaigns in Cook, Madison and St. Clair counties – each widely known as once and future Judicial Hellholes,” Pastuovic said. “And when one considers that these counties also host the state’s highest concentrations of lawsuits, it’s fair to ask: Is justice for sale in Illinois?”

The release of Justice for Sale prompted ATRA to issue a special Judicial Hellholes bulletin today, shining its national spotlight on the “trial lawyers’ obvious influence over Illinois’ policymakers and judiciary.” ATRA’s annual Judicial Hellholes® report, established in 2002, documents systemic abuses of the civil justice system throughout the country.

“Madison, St. Clair and Cook counties have been featured regularly in the American Tort Reform Association’s extensively documented reporting on some the nation’s most unfair civil court jurisdictions,” explained ATRA president Tiger Joyce. “So the findings of Justice for Sale, quantifying as they do a disturbing level of influence exerted by the plaintiffs’ bar on the judges in these counties and lawmakers in Springfield, are particularly troubling to us.

“As more jobs- and tax revenue-providing businesses are targeted by often speculative and sometimes fraudulent litigation in the state’s Judicial Hellholes,” Joyce continued, “it will become that much harder for Illinois to solve its mounting debt problems. So we would encourage leaders in Illinois to begin taking meaningful steps to address imbalances throughout the state’s civil justice system.”

ILAW executive director Travis Akin concurred with Joyce’s point about litigation’s impact on jobs in the state.

“It is a fact that our state’s toxically anti-business litigation and political environments have taken a devastating toll on job growth in Illinois,” said Akin. “A clear way to create new jobs in Illinois is for lawmakers to embrace the Governor’s proposed lawsuit reforms, including venue reform that will stop personal injury lawyers from shopping often specious cases to their favorite judges in Illinois’ most plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions.

“This new study proves that personal injury lawyers are gaming the system to their advantage by funneling millions of dollars in campaign contributions to Illinois judges. On Election Day, voters will have a chance to deliver their verdict on judges who take the majority of their campaign funding from these same personal injury lawyers who have turned the ‘Land of Lincoln’ into a job-killing ‘Land of Lawsuits.’ Illinois needs judges who will stand up to the personal injury lawyers and return common sense and fairness to our courts.”

In an effort to better educate voters about choices for judge, the Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL) has released the ratings of judges and judicial candidates running for election and retention in the November General Elections. The ICJL judicial ratings are a part of the most complete and comprehensive voter education initiative of its kind, designed to assist voters in making informed decisions about the judicial candidates on their ballot. The initiative called Judges: Good and Bad-You Can’t Afford to be Indifferent can be found at www.IllinoisJudges.net.

“The ICJL invited judges and judicial candidates running for election or retention to submit answers to questions about their careers and candidacies in their own words which the ICJL then published in unedited form on its website, www.IllinoisJudges.net,” according to John Pastuovic, President of the Illinois Civil Justice League. “In addition to providing this information to voters, the ICJL has evaluated the questionnaire answers, judicial and career records, media accounts, bar ratings, campaign contributions, and other sources of information about each judge and judicial candidate to establish individual ratings,” he said.

Judges and judicial candidates running for election were considered for ratings of Highly Recommended, Recommended, Not Recommended, or No Position. Judges running for retention were rated either Yes or No on retention. “After completing the evaluation process, we are pleased to report that voters, particularly in Cook County, will have the opportunity to vote for a number of candidates who will bring a high level of knowledge and experience to the bench,” Pastuovic continued.

Unfortunately, the ICJL has also been compelled to draw the voters’ attention to a number of judges whose actions disqualify them to serve.

Metro East-area trial lawyers have donated $585,000 to an independent expenditure group supporting two Democratic 5th Appellate Court District candidates, Jo Beth Weber and Brad Bleyer. It has been reported that the group has sent out mailers on the candidates’ behalf, and TV ads are expected. “It is impossible for anyone to believe that any candidate for judge, particularly those running in Madison County, would not be influenced by this much trial attorney cash,” said Pastuovic. “We find their willingness to accept this amount of trial attorney financial support deeply troubling, and based on their action, the ICJL rates Jo Beth Weber and Brad Bleyer as Not Recommended. Conversely, we rate their opponents Randy Moore and John Barberis as Highly Recommended,” he added.

The ICJL also rated St. Clair County Chief Judge John Baricevic and Circuit Judges Robert LeChien and Robert Haida as Not Recommended. All three candidates were facing an uphill retention election, which requires 60 percent voter approval in November, but have purposefully gamed the system. “Instead of running for retention, they subverted the process by turning in their resignations and filed as candidates in the March 15 primary, where they only needed a simple majority to win,” Pastuovic commented. “It is critical that voters in St. Clair County are aware that with this unethical maneuver, these judges ignored the intent and spirit of the Illinois Constitution and are deemed Not Recommended.”

Rhonda Crawford, Candidate for Cook County Subcircuit Judge, has also been rated as Not Recommended. In August, Crawford was job shadowing Cook County Circuit Judge Valarie Turner when Turner had the bright idea to let Crawford preside over three traffic cases. When it was discovered that a fake judge was on the bench, the cases had to be dismissed. Turner was put on administrative tasks for her role in this travesty, and Crawford has since been indicted. “However, short of a conviction or Supreme Court action, Crawford will remain on the ballot, and it is up to the voters to ensure she never presides over a courtroom,” Pastuovic said. “This case has become a major embarrassment for the Cook County judicial system and is just one more example of why Illinois must reform its civil justice system,” he continued.

Chancery Division Judge Diane Larsen retention election could be the most important for Illinoisans this year. Her decisions have been some of the most controversial and newsworthy, showing that one Cook County Judge can wield much power and influence on the State’s political system. “In July, Judge Larsen deemed that Governor Rauner’s second attempt at a ballot initiative for independent legislative map drawing unconstitutional on two grounds: that is was ‘not limited to structural and procedural subjects’ and that it violated the constitutional provision that amendments be limited to one, single topic,” states Pastuovic. “A year earlier, she controversially overturned two preceding rulings to deny state workers’ paychecks while the State waited for a budget, which was ultimately overturned,” he continued.

But, Judge Larsen will be most-defined by her 2007 finding that the bipartisan, comprehensive medical liability reform legislation was unconstitutional. “She is an expert in dousing citizen-initiated reforms, and she is Not Recommended for retention to the Cook County bench,” concluded Pastuovic.

Judges: Good and Bad-You Can’t Afford to be Indifferent can be found at www.IllinoisJudges.net.

Failure to disclose “double dipping” in 92% of cases sampled

A new report released today by the Illinois Civil Justice League - Illinois Asbestos Trust Transparency - reveals systemic manipulation of the timing of asbestos personal injury lawsuits that subject small businesses and other defendants to artificially high legal costs, further eroding the state’s business environment.

Illinois, especially Madison County, has long been “ground zero” for asbestos-related personal injury lawsuits, while only a small percentage of these plaintiffs are residents of the state. “Madison County received almost one-third of all new asbestos cases filed nationwide in 2016, and almost one-half of the highest value cases involving a type of cancer called mesothelioma. Cook and St. Clair Counties also receive significant numbers of asbestos cases,” said John Pastuovic, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League.

In addition to filing asbestos-related lawsuits against increasingly remote defendants, claimants typically file multiple claims against trusts that were created when the major asbestos producers declared bankruptcy years ago. These trusts exist to compensate individuals harmed by exposure to asbestos-containing thermal insulation and other products manufactured or sold by the historically most culpable companies. Through bankruptcy, the companies are now exempt from asbestos-related lawsuits.

“Plaintiffs’ lawyers have learned to exploit a disconnect that exists between the asbestos trust and personal injury lawsuit systems. At the core of this disconnect is the longer time period in which a claimant has to file a claim with an asbestos trust as compared to filing a tort lawsuit.

By intentionally delaying the filing of asbestos trust claims until after a personal injury case is resolved, plaintiffs can withhold information that, if disclosed, could lead a jury to conclude that a bankrupt entity was the sole proximate cause of the plaintiff’s alleged harm and not the small business that was, at most, a peripheral player in the litigation,” Pastuovic said.

Further, “protections created to avoid the double payment of plaintiffs are being avoided, resulting in overpayment of current plaintiffs to the detriment of future claimants,” he added. Additionally, the “lack of transparency between the asbestos trust and tort systems makes it hard to police inconsistent and potentially fraudulent claiming,” Pastuovic continued.

These issues were at the core of a landmark case involving gasket and packing manufacturer Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC. After extensive discovery, the bankruptcy judge determined that Garlock’s payments in the tort system were infected by the manipulation of exposure evidence by plaintiffs and their lawyers. “The findings in Garlock prove that the lack of consistent and timely trust disclosures by plaintiff law firms is not only systemic but impactful in terms of inequitable tort outcomes,” said Marc Scarcella, MA, one of the new report’s authors and Lead of the Economic & Complex Analytics Practice of Roux Associates, Inc.

As part of the new study, the law firm of Maron Marvel Bradley Anderson & Tardy, LLP conducted an asbestos trust review and analysis on a sample of 100 asbestos cases recently filed in Illinois. “The results of the review are similar to those uncovered in the Garlock Data. On average, plaintiffs in the sample could have made sixteen trust claims; thirty-seven plaintiffs could have made more than twenty trust claims. More significantly, of the 100 cases sampled, only eight disclosed having made trust claim submissions,” Scarcella stated.

Perhaps the most critical finding of the Maron Marvel review was their comparative analysis of asbestos trust disclosures in states that currently lack trust transparency legislation, such as Illinois, with states that have adopted such legislation in recent years. “In their experience, cases filed in states with trust transparency legislation disclose an average of ten to fifteen trust claims, whereas more than ninety percent of plaintiffs in the Maron Marvel sample of 100 Illinois cases failed to identify or disclose even one trust claim submission,” study co-author Peter Kelso, a Principal with Roux Associates, commented.

To help illustrate the aggregate findings in both the Garlock Data and the Maron Marvel review, the study also detailed two contemporary Illinois case examples.

“The Illinois cases and evidence from the Garlock bankruptcy provide further examples of the clear need to integrate trust claims into the Illinois civil justice system,” Kelso continued. “Illinois judges and juries should have full information as to the totality of a plaintiff’s exposures to asbestos to decide if trust-related exposures were the sole proximate cause of the plaintiff’s harm. Further, trust claim submissions should be required before trial to preserve the integrity of the set-off mechanism to prevent double recoveries,” he concluded.

“The report shows that Illinois should enact legislation similar to a dozen other states to address the disconnect between the asbestos trust and tort systems by requiring plaintiffs to file their asbestos trust claims before trial,” stated Mark Behrens, a co-author of the report and nationally recognized asbestos litigation expert with the law firm of Shook, Hardy & Bacon, L.L.P.

Added Travis Akin, Executive Director of Illinois Lawsuit Abuse Watch, “Missouri just enacted common sense lawsuit reform legislation. The ‘Show Me State’ is showing Illinois how to make an abused lawsuit system fairer and more attractive to employers. If Illinois doesn’t follow Missouri’s lead, we can expect to see Illinois businesses leaving the ‘Sue Me State’ and crossing the Mississippi River for a state where they won’t have a lawsuit target on their backs.”

View the Illinois Asbestos Trust Transparency Report.

Disclosure and oversight principles must be followed when using outside counsel

John Pastuovic, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League hand delivered a letter to Madison County’s elected officials encouraging them to put taxpayers first when considering whether litigation against the pharmaceutical industry is a proper remedy for addressing opioid crisis. The letter was addressed to County Board Chairman Kurt Prenzler, State’s Attorney Tom Gibbons, County Board Judiciary Committee Chairman Mike Walters, and the members of the Madison County Judiciary Committee.

Pastuovic strongly urged the elected leaders to reject the use of a contingency fee agreement with a plaintiffs’ firm if they pursue litigation. “Much research exists on the abusive relationships that can develop between state prosecutors and plaintiffs’ lawyers when contingency fee arrangements with outside counsel are used,” Pastuovic said. “In fact, the Manhattan Institute Center for Legal Policy in 2011 extensively detailed the potential conflicts of interest that exist in the ‘unholy alliance between attorneys general and the trial bar’ in pursuing this type of litigation,” he added.

The elected leaders were reminded that Madison County residents are familiar with the Illinois’ attorney general’s use of plaintiff attorneys with contingency fee arrangements to sue tobacco manufacturers.

“Plaintiff firms in that case nationwide pocketed $30 billion in lawyers’ fees, estimated at a cost of more than $10,000 per hour,” Pastuovic continued.

If Madison County chooses to pursue a claim utilizing outside counsel through a contingency fee agreement, the ICJL strongly suggests its elected leaders consider the disclosure and oversight principles outlined by the Manhattan Institute Study. It delineates three main factors in avoiding abusive contingency agreements:

• Competitive Bidding, with the inclusion of prohibitions on political contributions between county officials and the chosen firms and their attorneys
• Legislative Oversight, building upon the discussion started between Mr. Gibbons and Mr. Walters and his committee
• Fee Standards, to limit the overall hourly rate charged to taxpayers for the representation

“Madison County elected officials face the challenging issues of public policy and public administration when pursuing these claims,” stated Pastuovic. “Taxpayers deserve to know the details about who is representing them and at what cost,” he concluded.

Today the American Tort Reform Association (ATRA) released its annual Judicial Hellholes report and revealed that Madison and Cook counties in Illinois have once again landed on the notorious list. According to the report, Madison and Cook counties have been identified and documented as places where judges in civil cases systematically apply laws and court procedures in an unfair and unbalanced manner, generally to the disadvantage of defendants.

The Illinois Civil Justice League provided its Asbestos Trust Transparency, Litigation Imbalance and Justice for Sale reports and background information on its work during the Madison County opioid litigation discussion as source information for the Judicial Hellholes study.

“Unfortunately, Madison and Cook counties have become perennial Judicial Hellholes known for disproportionate volumes of litigation and large verdicts. Plaintiff-friendly judges seem to dominate both jurisdictions in which defendants face uphill battles from their very first motions,” according to John Pastuovic, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League.

The report points out myriad problems to explain why Madison County continues to be marked as a Judicial Hellhole. Issues of concern include Madison County’s reign as the national epicenter for asbestos litigation, attracting plaintiffs and their attorneys from all across the country, with the overwhelming majority of cases having absolutely no connection to the county or the state of Illinois; ICJL’s belief in the need for transparency between administrators of asbestos bankruptcy trust funds and civil courts; and ICJL’s concern with if and how the Madison County State’s Attorney intends to proceed with opioid litigation.

ATRA’s Judicial Hellholes report reveals why Cook County continues to share a spot with Madison County on the Judicial Hellholes list. For example, Cook County is the home of a disproportionate amount of the state’s litigation and is known for large verdicts. The report also shows how the Cook County court has been plagued by unqualified and unethical judges, yet somehow most continue to be reelected. It also highlights the exploits of two judges who, thankfully, were removed from the bench for misconduct.

Additionally, the Judicial Hellholes report highlights a 2016 study that shows campaign contributions by trial lawyers to judges and other Illinois office seekers topped $35.25 million during the previous 15 years. In addition to the $6 million contributed through the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association’s legislative political action committee, the top 25 plaintiffs’ firms and their lawyers and family members collectively invested another $29 million. These campaign contributions have gone to legislators, constitutional officers, judges, state’s attorneys, county board chairmen, circuit clerks, county party chairmen, mayors, union leaders and politically allied special interests.

In light of this influence, the report points to the recent preposterous class actions targeting the deep pockets of Walgreens, 7-Eleven and McDonald’s. The three companies have been targeted for erroneously applying the county’s new and since repealed soda tax. It was a simple mistake that the companies promptly corrected, and plaintiffs lost mere pennies. Now defendants will spend dearly to fight these suits.

“While this Judicial Hellholes distinction should certainly make the elected officials in these counties cringe with embarrassment, there is also a very real consequence. The putrid legal environment has made small, medium and large business reluctant to invest in Illinois, costing hardworking families well-paid, meaningful jobs,” Pastuovic concluded.

Read the 2017 Judicial Hellholes report (PDF).

Voters in Illinois have many good options; Cook County voters warned of disqualified candidate

In an effort to better educate voters about choices for judge, the Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL) today released the ratings of judges and judicial candidates running in the March 20th Illinois Primary Election. The ICJL judicial ratings are a part of the most complete and comprehensive voter education initiative of its kind, designed to assist voters in making informed decisions about the judicial candidates on their ballot. The initiative called Judges: Good and Bad-You Can’t Afford to be Indifferent can be found at illinoisjudges.net.

The ICJL judicial ratings show that voters throughout the state have some good options with a number of candidates with Highly Recommended or Recommended ratings. That good news, however, is tempered by the fact that one judicial candidate in suburban Cook County has received a Not Recommended rating due to questions about his integrity.

“The ICJL invited judicial candidates and judges running in the Primary Election to submit answers to questions about their careers and candidacies in their own words which the ICJL then published in unedited form on its website, illinoisjudges.net,” according to John Pastuovic, President of the Illinois Civil Justice League. “In addition to providing this information to voters, the ICJL also evaluated the questionnaire answers, judicial and career records, media accounts, bar ratings, campaign contributions, and other sources of information about each judge and judicial candidate to establish individual ratings,” he added.

Judges and judicial candidates were considered for ratings of Highly Recommended, Recommended, Not Recommended, or No Position.

The rating of Recommended was given to judges or judicial candidates who have demonstrated a satisfactory level of competency in regards to their legal and/or judicial careers, and/or who have demonstrated their commitment to educating the voters about their background, experience and viewpoints on the judicial system.

The Highly Recommended rating was reserved for candidates or judges who have demonstrated a high level of competency based on those criteria.

The rating of Not Recommended was assigned to candidates or judges who have
judicial records or campaigns that have left the ICJL with questions about the integrity, impartiality, fairness, or conduct of the candidate, judge, or their campaign. Additionally, the ICJL reserved the right to take No Position on a candidate or judge who did not return the questionnaire, and/or their candidacy left the ICJL insufficient information to assign a rating.

“We are pleased to report that voters, particularly in Cook County, will have the opportunity to vote for a number of candidates who will bring a high level of knowledge and experience to the bench,” Pastuovic commented.

Unfortunately, the ICJL is compelled to draw the voters’ attention to one judge whose actions disqualify him to serve. In the Thirteenth Subcircuit, Democrat Shannon P. O’Malley, a Schaumburg attorney formerly known as Phillip Spiwak, ran as a Republican candidate for Will County judge in 2010. “In a blatant attempt to improve his electoral prospects, O’Malley is deceiving voters by changing his party affiliation and his perceived ethnic origin,” said Pastuovic. “In our opinion, his cynical attempt to game the electoral process disqualifies him for any office, particularly that of judge,” he concluded. O’Malley aka Spiwak is Not Recommended.

The ICJL’s ratings for judges and judicial candidates are located here.

State’s civil justice system a leading factor in lost jobs and revenue

Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL) today released the 2018 Economic Benefits of Tort Reform, an assessment measuring the impact of excessive civil court costs on Illinois’ economy. The study, conducted by The Perryman Group for Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse (CALA), found that Illinois is losing jobs and revenue because of the state’s civil justice system. The assessment included extensive survey data, industry information and a variety of corroborative source material. The Perryman Group analyzed outcomes in the state of Illinois using Ohio as a control state, which has engaged in notable tort reform in the recent past.

The total current impact of excessive tort costs on the Illinois economy amounts to estimated losses of $4.5 billion in annual direct costs and $7.7 billion in output (gross product) annually. About 81,685 jobs are lost when dynamic effects are considered. All major industry groups are negatively impacted, with total manufacturing, business services, transportation and utilities and financial activities industries showing the greatest losses. The yearly fiscal losses (as of 2018) are estimated at $397.2 million in state revenues and $335.4 million to local governments. These effects are based on the current size of the state’s population and economy and can be expected to rise over time in the absence of meaningful civil justice reforms.

“Reforms to our civil justice system in Illinois must be a priority. Unwarranted lawsuits and enormous plaintiff awards impact all sectors of our state economy and hurt our families, as costs are ultimately passed down to our shoulders in the form of higher prices for goods and services,” said President of Illinois Civil Justice League, John Pastuovic.

Civil justice reforms that have resulted in the greatest reduction in losses are those aimed at reducing frivolous lawsuits, capping appeal bonds, setting negligence standards and limiting non-economic damages. These reforms have been shown to enhance innovation and increase productivity, as well as to improve judicial efficiency and economic performance.

According to the assessment, when working properly, the judicial system provides a critical institutional framework that provides a fair and equitable forum for resolving disputes, compensates plaintiffs who have been legitimately harmed and deters undesirable behavior.

Click here to download a full copy of the 2018 Economic Benefits of Tort Reform study.

In an effort to better educate voters about choices for judge, the Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL) today released the ratings of judges running for retention in the November 6th General Election. Judges running for retention require 60 percent of voter approval.

The ICJL retention recommendations are a part of the most complete and comprehensive voter education initiative of its kind, designed to assist voters in making informed decisions about the judicial candidates on their ballot. The initiative called Judges: Good and Bad-You Can’t Afford to be Indifferent can be found at illinoisjudges.net.

The ICJL judicial ratings reveal that a good number of judges have earned the voters’ trust and deserve to be retained in November. “That good news, however, is mitigated by three judges who are recommended for NO Retention,” according to John Pastuovic, President of the Illinois Civil Justice League. “These three judges have exhibited behavior and judgement so egregious and outside of what should be expected of a judge, that the ICJL has created an entirely new category for them called ‘Judges Behaving Badly.’ These judges should absolutely not be retained.” he continued. “Finally, one former Will County judicial candidate who is now running for judicial election in Cook County should be rejected by voters for his blatant efforts to game the system.” Pastuovic continued.

These four judges recommended for NO Retention/No Election are:

Jeffrey O’Connor – 14th Circuit, Whiteside County

In 2014, Judge O’Connor fell asleep during a trial where the accused was charged with murdering four people. While a jury later convicted the defendant of the slayings, the defendant sought a new trial based on the judge’s nap. In fact, the defense team said the judge repeatedly fell asleep during the murder trial. In 2017, a divided Illinois Appellate Court panel rejected the request for a new trial on the grounds that the judge was not dozing through crucial evidence or motions.

The fact remains that Judge O’Conner’s actions embarrassed the court and gave the defendant an opportunity to an appeal he should never have had.

Patrick O’Shea – 18th Circuit, DuPage County

According to a complaint filed on October 25th by the Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board, Judge O’Shea attempted to retaliate against two female court employees who made “substantiated” claims of sexual harassment against him. The complaint, lodged by Illinois’ Judicial Inquiry Board revealed that investigators, found “credible and substantiated complaints” that Judge O’Shea acted in a manner that “met the definition of sexual harassment” as defined by Illinois Supreme Court rules.

Additionally, Judge O’Shea remains on administrative duties after he was acquitted of reckless conduct charges by a Kane County judge, who found that O’Shea, “accidentally fired a bullet from his revolver through his wall and into a neighbor’s apartment, but that his actions did not meet reckless conduct requirements because his neighbors were not home and, therefore, not in danger.” Since then, Judge O’Shea has sought to have the records of the case expunged.

Beatriz Santiago – Municipal District 3, Cook County

Judge Santiago was censured by the Illinois Courts Commission in 2016 for knowingly deceiving her mortgage lender about where she lives. Medill Watchdog and WGN-TV caught her claiming residence at her parent’s house for purposes of running in a Cook County subcircuit while subsequently claiming the mortgaged house as her primary residence. The Illinois Courts Commission unanimously concluded that “one could reasonably characterize her actions as reckless.”

Shannon P. O’Malley (formerly known as Phillip Spiwak) – 13th Subcircuit, Cook County

Prior to the March Primary Election, the ICJL invited judicial candidates and judges running in the Primary Election to submit answers to questions about their careers and candidacies in their own words which were then published in unedited form on illinoisjudges.net.

In addition to providing this information to voters, the ICJL also evaluated the questionnaire answers as well as numerous other factors and considered the judges and judicial candidates for ratings of Highly Recommended, Recommended, or Not Recommended,” Pastuovic continued.

While voters had many good candidates to choose from in the Primary Election, the ICJL was compelled to draw the voters’ attention to one candidate whose actions disqualify him to serve. Former Will County Republican judicial candidate Shannon P. O’Malley, a Schaumburg attorney formerly known as Phillip Spiwak, won the Primary Election and is on the November ballot running as a Democrat in the Thirteenth Subcircuit. “In a blatant attempt to improve his electoral prospects, O’Malley is deceiving voters by changing his party affiliation and his perceived ethnic origin,” said Pastuovic. “In our opinion, his cynical attempt to game the electoral process disqualifies him for any office, particularly that of judge,” he concluded. O’Malley aka Spiwak is Not Recommended.

View a full list of ICJL recommendations for the November 6th General Election here.

Slew of asbestos-related lawsuits, ‘no-injury’ consumer class actions contribute to poor ranking

The American Tort Reform Foundation has released its annual Judicial Hellholes report and named St. Clair and Madison Counties, Ill. together as the No. 8 Judicial Hellhole in the country.

St. Clair and Madison Counties earned their way to the No. 8 spot due to frivolous “no-injury” consumer class actions, asbestos litigation and judges allowing forum shopping.

These two Illinois counties house a powerful trial bar and are notorious for their disproportionate volume of litigation and large verdicts. Excessive tort costs in Illinois result in $4.5 billion in annual direct costs and 81,685 jobs lost annually, according to a recent study.

The large volume of litigation in these counties’ courts includes no-injury consumer class action lawsuits challenging how food is labeled and advertised, such as whether a product qualifies as “all natural.” St. Clair County has been a magnet for these lawsuits – the Nelson & Nelson law firm has filed 21 such cases asserting that products ranging from cake mix to barbeque sauce are not sufficiently natural.

The Nelson & Nelson law firm in St. Clair County leads the charge and has filed several “unnatural” class action lawsuits over the past few years. In one instance, the firm collected $245,000 and the class received nothing. As is most often the case, plaintiffs’ lawyers walk away with significant legal fees, while consumers receive nothing but higher prices and fewer choices.

This year, the firm filed multiple class action lawsuits on behalf of a St. Clair woman accusing manufacturers of false advertising. Since 2017, that individual has filed at least six false advertisement cases, including four in April and May of 2018 alone. In each of her lawsuits, the plaintiff alleges she was “injured” by paying higher prices for products than she claims they were worth.

The stakes are high for the trial lawyers who bring these suits. St. Clair County Circuit Court held 13 civil trials in 2017, and plaintiffs were awarded a total of more than $4 million in ten of those cases. There were only three defense verdicts in all of 2017.

“For a state with as dire a financial situation as Illinois, these costs are extremely concerning,” American Tort Reform Association President Tiger Joyce said. “In addition to the hyper-litigious culture, the prospects of legal reform are grim despite the state’s desperate need for economic growth and job creation.”

On the other side of the county line and beyond the no-injury lawsuits, Madison County continues to be the preferred jurisdiction by trial lawyers bringing asbestos claims – 1,128 cases were filed in 2017. Madison County had nearly triple the number of filings of the next closest competing jurisdiction, Baltimore, Md. (495).

Between 2014 and 2017, plaintiffs’ lawyers filed 6,071 asbestos cases in Madison County, and 68 percent were on behalf of people who do not live in Illinois, let alone Madison County.

“Plaintiffs flock to the Madison County courthouse because of its plaintiff-friendly reputation, low evidentiary standards, and judges’ willingness to allow meritless claims to survive,” Joyce said.

St. Clair County also suffers as a popular destination for “litigation tourism.” Asbestos filings increased 200 percent in 2017 alone.

“The Daubert standard requires judges to act as ‘gatekeepers’ to prevent ‘junk science’ testimony from being heard at trial,” Joyce said. “This makes it much more difficult for plaintiffs’ attorneys to be successful with dubious asbestos claims. Most of the asbestos lawsuits now filed in St. Clair County allege that exposure to asbestos caused the plaintiff to develop lung cancer, which has a multitude of other known causes outside of asbestos exposure.”

View the entire study at www.JudicialHellholes.org.

From the Illinois Civil Justice League

A new regional analysis of the economic impact of the state’s tort system shows $3.8 billion in annual direct tort costs to Chicago consumers, equaling $811.13 per resident. If the costs were returned to the economy, the amount would equal the salaries of approximately 68,024 jobs in the metro-Chicago area.

“It’s no secret that the State of Illinois, and especially Cook County, is home to an aggressive plaintiff’s attorney bar,” said John Pastuovic, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League. “While Chicago residents have been hit hard this legislative cycle with new taxes and regulations out of the legislative action in Springfield, it is easy to forget that more than two decades of inaction on important civil justice-related reforms is literally taking more than three thousand dollars annually out of each and every family’s pocketbook.”

Pastuovic called for reforms to the State’s civil justice system, calling the decades of inertia by the Illinois legislature harmful to the State’s economic and job-creating environment. “It’s past time for the legislative leaders in the House and Senate to pass common sense legislation to bring Illinois from the very bottom of the Midwest to the middle of the pack,” said Pastuovic.

Pastuovic stated that border communities, like those near neighboring Indiana and Wisconsin, are often hit the hardest when a state’s business climate ranks low compared to its neighbors. Pastuovic stated unfortunately this is also true when it comes to an unchecked trial bar who work to coopt the state’s laws to benefit themselves, instead of consumers and small businesses.

“One great example,” Pastuovic cited, “is the discrepancy between neighbors Wisconsin and Indiana, compared to Illinois, regarding joint and several liability for local businesses.”

“It may sound like an arcane legal term but, in Illinois, a business or resident can be found as little as 25 percent liable for an injury in court and be forced to pay the entire judgement. In Wisconsin, that standard is 51 percent fault. In Indiana, defendants never pay a dime more than the share of their liability. This is a major hurdle in providing a stable legal climate for new business and job growth in Illinois,” said Pastuovic.

“It would take very little in compromise to bring Illinois to a 50 percent standard for joint and several liability, which would still be the lowest standard in the Midwest,” said Pastuovic. “But, doubling the current standard and requiring a defendant to be at least half at fault before paying the entire judgement would signal to job creators that Illinois is trying to bring greater fairness to the system.”

So, while additional new taxes and regulations are burdening Illinoisans, Pastuovic said Chicago consumers should not forget the $3.8 billion in direct costs of excessive litigation in Illinois as detailed in the study of annual tort costs conducted by The Perryman Group.

“The pendulum has swung wildly towards the trial lawyers, at the expense of consumers,” stated Pastuovic. “This year, three or four major trial lawyer-supported legislative initiatives, that further enrich lawyers and take money from consumers, have or will become law. They include an expansion of occupational disease lawsuits (SB 1596) and consumer fraud lawsuits (HB 2472). Money for the oversized settlements and verdicts from these initiatives just doesn’t grow on trees. Ultimately it comes from the increased price of goods and services, or from lost employment opportunities.”

The annual “tort tax” robs more than 81,685 jobs from the Illinois economy, according to the study. Furthermore, the excessive litigation extracts an extra $732 million in revenues from state and local governments, causing additional taxation of Illinois residents. The Perryman Group analyzed outcomes in the state of Illinois using Ohio as a control state, which has engaged in notable tort reform in the recent past. The assessment included extensive survey data, industry information and a variety of corroborative source material.

Asbestos, Data Privacy Lawsuits and Flood of Out-of-State Plaintiffs Make the State a Lawsuit Pariah

From the US Chamber Institute for Legal Reform

Illinois’ lawsuit climate was ranked 50th—the worst in the nation—in a new national survey released today by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform (ILR). In the survey, Chicago/Cook County’s legal climate was also ranked as the worst local jurisdiction in the nation.

The 2019 Lawsuit Climate Survey: Ranking the States, conducted by renowned polling firm The Harris Poll on behalf of the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, questioned senior business executives about the fairness and reasonableness of state court systems.

The poor perception of Illinois’ legal climate is critical because 89 percent of survey participants—an all-time high—said a state’s lawsuit environment is likely to impact their company’s decisions about where to locate or do business.

“Illinois has become a legal pariah for American companies,” said Harold Kim, chief operating officer of the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform. “The state’s lawsuit climate is so bad that some of the country’s largest tech companies have stopped selling their products there because of the very reasonable fear of being sued.”

In recent years plaintiffs’ lawyers have created a whole new lawsuit industry out of Illinois’ unique Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). The law regulates the collection and storing of biometric information and is the only law in the country that allows individuals to file private lawsuits through private rights of action, with damages of $1,000 to $5,000 per violation.

Three hundred BIPA lawsuits have been filed in the last two years, more than 100 of them following January’s Illinois Supreme Court ruling that an individual can bring a private lawsuit under BIPA even if they suffered no injury.

Another major reason for Illinois’ dead-last ranking is that the state is a magnet for asbestos litigation, with more asbestos filings by far than any other state in the country. Ninety-two percent of the Illinois plaintiffs (with residency information provided in the complaint) reside outside of the state.

For the last 15 years Madison County, Illinois has been the most popular single jurisdiction in the country to file asbestos claims. In 2018, 27 percent—or more than one in four new asbestos lawsuits in the country—were filed in Madison County.

The 2019 Lawsuit Climate Survey: Ranking the States is the 12th time The Harris Poll has conducted the survey since 2002 for the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform. The final results are based on interviews with a national sample of 1,307 in-house general counsel, senior litigators or attorneys, and other senior executives who are knowledgeable about litigation matters at public and private companies with annual revenue of at least $100 million.

View the Harris Poll from the US Chamber ILR.

Cook, Madison and St. Clair Counties among preferred jurisdictions for plaintiffs’ attorneys

Illinois’s Cook, Madison and St. Clair Counties finds themselves on the Judicial Hellholes list at No. 7 because they are magnets for no-injury class action lawsuits, have a disproportionate amount of asbestos litigation, and judges allow frivolous lawsuits concerning the Biometric Information Privacy Act to proceed.

The state legislature did not propose legislative reforms to address these issues and instead looked to a liability-expanding agenda in 2019. More of the same is expected in 2020.

The 2019 Judicial Hellholes report of the American Tort Reform Foundation finds that the legal climate in the counties ranks as one of the worst in the country.

“Lawyers flock to these counties because they know they’ll find judges and courts with low barriers of entry for often frivolous lawsuits,” American Tort Reform Foundation President Tiger Joyce said.

Illinois’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) is fertile ground for lawsuit abuse by trial lawyers. The law is unique in that it allows for a private right of action, something not included in other states’ biometric privacy regulation. It also provides for a minimum of $1,000 per violation.

In a case involving Six Flags, the Illinois Supreme Court found that a plaintiff does not need to have suffered actual harm to maintain and win a lawsuit filed under BIPA. This liability-expanding decision quickly led to a flurry of BIPA class action filings. One law firm reported that in the first 5 months after the decision, the Illinois plaintiff’s bar filed nearly as many BIPA class actions as it did during the prior 10 years. An overwhelming majority of these cases were filed in the Cook County Circuit Court.

Madison County specifically is preferred by plaintiffs’ lawyers to bring asbestos claims. In 2018 the county had almost three times the filings than its next closest competing jurisdiction. St. Clair County also continues to rise in the rankings. The county saw a 30% increase in filings in 2018.

Illinois is a magnet for consumer class action lawsuits targeting the food and beverage industry. Its courts are in the Top 3 most popular in the U.S. for lawsuits alleging a product’s labeling or packaging could mislead consumers. They often sue over words on labels like “natural” or “no preservatives.” Other cases include alleged “slack fill” if a consumer thinks the packaging could have fit more of the product.

From 2001 to 2016, trial lawyers donated more than $35 million to Illinois political campaigns. The campaign contributions went to legislators, constitutional officers, judges, state’s attorneys, county board chairmen, circuit clerks, county party chairmen, mayors, union leaders and politically allied special interests.

“The Illinois trial bar is one of the most powerful in the country,” Joyce said. “The legislature pursued an aggressive liability-expanding agenda in 2019 and enacted bills to give their trial lawyer donors more opportunities to sue.”

A recent poll shows that 80% of Illinois residents do not believe lawmakers are doing enough to combat lawsuit abuse.

Excessive tort costs in Illinois resulted in estimated loss of more than 81,000 jobs and nearly $5 billion in personal income as of 2018. In Chicago, nearly 70,000 jobs were lost and $4.4 billion was lost in personal income due to the excessive tort costs.

“Our hope is that this report on Judicial Hellholes will be a loud wake-up call for government officials to stop the abuses,” Joyce said. “Stop creating more ways for lawyers to sue businesses, stop wasting money in court, and stop contributing to job loss.”

The country’s Judicial Hellholes are:

1. Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas
2. California
3. New York City
4. Louisiana
5. St. Louis
6. Georgia
7. Illinois’s Cook, Madison and St. Clair Counties
8. Oklahoma
9. Minnesota Supreme Court and the Twin Cities
10. New Jersey Legislature

The Judicial Hellholes report is released each December by the American Tort Reform Foundation to shine a light on abuses in the civil justice system and in state legislative bodies.

View the full report and read more details on the counties’ designation at JudicialHellholes.org.

###

About the American Tort Reform Association (ATRA): The American Tort Reform Association, based in Washington, D.C., is the only national organization dedicated exclusively to tort and liability reform through public education and the enactment of legislation. Its members include nonprofit organizations and small and large companies, as well as trade, business and professional associations from the state and national level. The American Tort Reform Foundation is a sister organization dedicated primarily to research and public education.

Monday, March 9, 2020 - The Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL) is warning voters to be wary of judicial candidates with Irish surnames who are otherwise unqualified for office. An analysis of candidates running in the March 17th Illinois Primary Election, which falls on St. Patrick’s Day, reveals two judicial candidates of Irish descent playing the role of a stalking horse, trying to siphon votes from other candidates.

“Candidates with Irish surnames have long had a political advantage in cities with large Irish-American populations like Chicago, Boston and New York. You don’t have to look further than names like Daley, Kennedy, and Moynihan to prove the point,” said John Pastuovic, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League. “While those running at the top of the ticket are usually established and well vetted, many running at the bottom of the ticket, particularly those running for judge, are unknown. It is in these campaigns for judge that political bosses or others attempt to use the anonymity of these bottom of the ticket races combined with a candidate’s Irish American heritage to game the system to either benefit or block another candidate,” he continued.

In an effort to better educate voters about choices for judge, the ICJL today released the ratings of judges running for election in the March 17 Primary Election. The ICJL retention recommendations are a part of the most complete and comprehensive voter education initiative of its kind, designed to assist voters in making informed decisions about the judicial candidates on their ballot. The initiative called Judges: Good and Bad-You Can’t Afford to be Indifferent can be found at illinoisjudges.net.

During its analysis, the ICJL has revealed that a good number of judges have earned the voters’ trust and vote. “That good news, however, is mitigated by the fact that two judicial candidates appear to be stalking horse candidates, using their Irish surnames to siphon votes from other credible Irish-American candidates to benefit the candidacies of Cook County Democratic Party insiders,” Pastuovic stated.

Maureen O’Leary is running for the Neville Illinois Appellate Court vacancy against Cook County Circuit Court Judge Carolyn Gallagher and the Democratic Party chosen candidate Cook County Circuit Court Judge Michael Hyman. Circuit Court Judge Sandra Gisela Ramos is also in the race.

Bonnie McGrath is running for Mary Anne Mason’s Cook County Circuit Court vacancy against Jennifer Callahan and the Democratic Party chosen candidate Chris Stacey. Three other candidates are also in the race.

“The O’Leary and McGrath campaigns have much in common. Both used many of the same paid circulators to gather signatures for their nominating petitions and both have reported zero campaign expenditures or fundraising as of earlier this month. Additionally, news reports suggest that their opponents haven’t seen either O’Leary or McGrath at campaign events and neither has campaign websites,” Pastuovic said.

Judge Carolyn Gallagher recently said she sees Maureen O’Leary as a likely sham candidate given her Irish name, her complete lack of qualifications for appellate court, that she’s never attended any candidate functions and that she didn’t disclose payments for her 13,000-plus petition signatures.

“While the actions of Maureen O’Leary and Bonnie McGrath aren’t necessarily illegal, their actions are clearly unethical and for those reasons, both candidates are Not Recommended for Judge by the ICJL,” Pastuovic concluded.

For a list of the Judicial Candidates ratings, click here.

Pritzker’s executive orders may face future court challenges

The Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL) is asking the Illinois General Assembly to consider providing legislative support to Governor Pritzker’s recent executive order that exempts health care workers and others from certain civil liability during a pending or actual disaster while under contract or direction from the government. They are also recommending that legislators study the recommendations put forth by the American Tort Reform Association (ATRA) when considering legislative action.

According to Executive Order 2020-19, hospitals, clinics, community-integrated living facilities, community mental health centers and others cannot be sued “for any injury or death alleged to have been caused by any act or omission by the Health Care Facility, which injury or death occurred at a time when a Health Care Facility was engaged in the course of rendering assistance to the State by providing health care services in response to the COVID-19 outbreak.”

“We applaud Governor Pritzker and his efforts to protect those on the front lines in the fight against this deadly virus from civil liability. He has done the right thing by these heroes; however, we are concerned that once this crisis has passed, plaintiffs’ lawyers and judges will try to invalidate his executive order,” according to John Pastuovic, president of the ICJL. “This type of executive action has not been tested in court, and we fully expect plaintiffs’ lawyers to mount a challenge. If they succeed, our health care providers and facilities will find themselves under attack by an outbreak of lawsuits. New York recognized this potential problem and swiftly enacted legislation to codify their governor’s action to protect health care providers from liability. We are recommending that the Illinois General Assembly do the same,” he said.

ICJL’s recommendation is consistent with guidelines provided by ATRA last week in their white paper titled “Responding to the Coming Lawsuit Surge: Policy Prescriptions for addressing COVID-19 Tort Litigation.”

According to ATRA’s president Tiger Joyce, trial lawyers already are filing lawsuits against businesses providing products or services in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. It will be months, if not years before these lawsuits go to trial, and much will be forgotten in that time.

ATRA outlined the following policy prescriptions to address COVID-19 liability, including legislation:

• Limiting the liability of businesses that design, manufacture, sell, or donate protective equipment, medical devices, drugs, or other products for use by health care providers and facilities (and possibly the general public) in response to a declared public health emergency
• Allowing health care providers greater discretion to make decisions about medical care without the fear of liability during a pandemic or other health emergency
• Prohibiting lawyers from suing employers on behalf of individuals who did not develop COVID-19, were asymptomatic, or experienced common flu-like symptoms

The full white paper, “Responding to the Coming Lawsuit Surge: Policy Prescriptions for Addressing COVID-19 Tort Litigation,” may be viewed online at www.atra.org.

In an effort to better educate voters about choices for judges, the Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL) today released the ratings of judges running for retention and election in the November 3rd General Election. Judges running for retention require 60 percent voter approval.

The ICJL election and retention recommendations are part of a complete and comprehensive voter education initiative designed to assist voters in making informed decisions about the judicial candidates on their ballot. The project called Judges: Good and Bad-You Can’t Afford to be Indifferent can be found at illinoisjudges.net. “The program has proven to be a particularly valuable tool this year with thousands choosing to vote with a mail in ballot. Voters who go to our website are able to review detailed information on each judge or judicial race on the Illinois Ballot,” according to John Pastuovic, President of the Illinois Civil Justice League.

The ICJL judicial ratings reveal that a good number of judges have earned the voters’ trust and deserve to be elected or retained in November. “There are two particularly important Illinois Supreme Court elections this cycle and it’s hard to ignore the massive sums of money being spent by trial lawyers in an effort to win the seats,” Pastuovic said.

Veteran Democrat Third District Supreme Court Justice Thomas Kilbride faces serious questions about his independence. Opponents regularly point out that Kilbride wrote the decision in favor of House Speaker Madigan, and against the state legislative remap challenge after the 2011 decennial redistricting. Opponents are critical of that decision, bringing attention to the millions in contributions that Kilbride has received from Madigan-controlled campaign committees. In fact, opponents are calling Kilbride “Madigan’s favorite supreme court justice.”

This year alone, trial attorneys, democrat donors and others with ties to Mike Madigan have poured over $2 million into Kilbride’s retention campaign. “Illinoisans need and deserve an independent Supreme Court and Kilbride accepting that level of financial contribution from a small cohort of donors is disqualifying. For that reason, we strongly urge the voters of the Third District to vote NO on Kilbride’s retention,” Pastuovic continued.

As if the trial lawyer investments in Kilbride race weren’t enough, contributions are also flowing into the deep Southern Illinois race to replace retiring Fifth District Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Karmeier. The race features Republican Appellate Court Judge David Overstreet and Democrat Appellate Court Judge Judy Cates.

Trial lawyers from Chicago and all across the country are making their preference for Cates known by donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to her campaign. Cates is using those funds in an attempt to present a homespun, down home image. “That manufactured image belies the fact that Cates is a former Illinois Trial Lawyers Association President, who has made a fortune, as a class action plaintiffs’ lawyer,” Pastuovic states.

Her opponent David Overstreet has served two terms as a trial court judge in the Second Circuit and has been an Appellate Justice in the Fifth District since March 2017. A well-respected jurist by his peers, he serves in a variety of judicial leadership roles, including the Supreme Court Committee on Juvenile Justice and the Board of the Illinois Judges Association, among others. He has already served as the Presiding Justice of the Fifth District Appellate Court and is a Past President of the Jefferson County Bar Association. “Overstreet is a constitutional conservative that respects the law, is highly rated on integrity, impartiality, legal ability, temperament, and court management. He is highly recommended in the race to replace Justice Lloyd Karmeier,” Pastuovic concluded.

Find the ICJL’s complete ratings for judges and judicial candidates here. And, for more information on judicial candidates in the 2020 Illinois general election, visit www.IllinoisJudges.net.

Cook, Madison and St. Clair Counties ranked No. 8 due in part to high filing of “no injury” data privacy lawsuits

Cook, Madison and St. Clair Counties are listed as “Judicial Hellholes” yet again.

The American Tort Reform Foundation (ATRF) named the trio of counties to the No. 8 spot this year, down one position from last year. Judicial Hellholes are deemed the most unjust local courts and state civil justice systems in the country. The 2020 report ranks nine Judicial Hellholes while shining a light on lawsuit abuse and its effects.

The three counties are Judicial Hellholes yet again due in part to the amount of lawsuits filed in the counties that fail to claim any actual injury, specifically in the area of data privacy. Madison and St. Clair Counties, near fellow Judicial Hellhole St. Louis, and Cook County, which includes Chicago, are also hot spots for filing asbestos lawsuits. Further, the state’s legislature continues to create new reasons Illinois companies can be sued, increasing the financial burdens of doing business in the state.

“At a time when business is reeling from the economic impact of COVID-19, we would hope to see attempts to ease the economic burden caused by abuses of the state’s civil justice system,” American Tort Reform Association (ATRA) President Tiger Joyce said.

Illinois’s unique data privacy law, the Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), allows people to seek damages if they aren’t informed or given a release when a company uses biometric data, like facial scans to unlock phones. Illinois’s Supreme Court broadly interpreted the law such that actual injury is not required. Trial lawyers often find a business that didn’t follow a small portion of the law, then use that as a basis for their lawsuit, even though their client didn’t suffer any harm or injury. The court’s broad interpretation leaves Illinois businesses vulnerable to potentially massive lawsuits in the state.

“Illinois is ground zero for lawsuit filings where the person suing doesn’t actually claim they suffered any injury, what we call no-injury lawsuits,” Joyce said. “Entrepreneurial trial lawyers saw an opening for business and immediately sought to cash in by targeting businesses and courts allowed it to happen.”

Research polling shows 64.3% of Illinois survey respondents do not believe consumers should sue local businesses over personal data and more than half believe there should be real harm proven in lawsuits related to data privacy.

The state legislature continues to look for innovative ways Illinois businesses can be sued. Prior to adjourning due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Illinois legislature was poised to consider bills that would further expand BIPA and increase data privacy litigation.

These liability expanding policies are expected to be considered again once the legislature resumes normal activity, even though polling data shows 80% of Illinois residents do not believe lawmakers are doing enough to combat lawsuit abuse.

“Trial lawyers and their clients know Madison, St. Clair and Cook Counties’ courts are sympathetic to their causes, have low standards for evidence, and that the judges are willing to allow meritless claims to survive,” Joyce said.

The three Illinois counties are in the Top 10 counties in the US for highest number of asbestos lawsuits filed. Madison County is the top filing location, boasting more than 32% of all new asbestos lawsuit filings nationwide. St. Clair County is the second-most popular with 11% of filings. Cook County looks to be in the Top 6 this year according to mid-year data.

“Lawsuit abuse harms everyone by clogging our court system with meritless and frivolous cases, taking dollars away from researching and developing life-saving drugs, while driving up insurance costs, and driving away jobs,” Joyce said.

Excessive tort costs are a burden for Illinois residents who lose their ability to create a livelihood due to the estimated loss of nearly 100,000 jobs and $6.2 billion in personal income annually. That leads to a “tort tax” of $761.81 per person.

View the full report at JudicialHellholes.org.

From the Madison County Record

A bill that will increase the amount of interest personal injury plaintiffs can collect if successful in court easily passed in the House early in the morning Wednesday, 69-42.

House Bill 3360, sponsored by Rep. Jay Hoffman (D-Belleville) and Rep. Marcus Evans, Jr. (D-Chicago), will lengthen the pre-judgment interest accrual period to when an alleged wrongdoer has notice of the injury versus when a plaintiff files suit. Because of the state’s statute of limitations law, that could add as much as two years of interest at 9 percent a year owed by defendants.

The bill was among a few controversial proposals rammed through just before the legislature’s lame duck session ends Wednesday and members elected in November are seated.

It came together in just a few days. The bill passed the House in April 2019 as a mortgage foreclosure filing fee proposal, but then died in Rules after moving to the Senate. It was resurrected Jan. 11, amended as a pro-trial lawyer bill.

“This legislation further tilts the playing field in the direction of the trial bar,” said critic John Pastuovic, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League.

“House Bill 3360 encourages the expansion of frivolous lawsuits and puts pressure on small businesses and other companies to settle lawsuits or face crushing financial consequences. They are essentially being forced to choose between going to trial or settle to stop the interest meter from running. This is the last thing that business needs to contend with during the ongoing COVID crisis.”

Read the entire article at the Madison County Record.

Earlier this morning, the American Tort Reform Association (ATRA) joined the Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL) in sending a letter to Governor J.B. Pritzker strongly urging him to veto House Bill 3360 which passed the Illinois State House at 3:08am Wednesday.

“We urge the governor to veto this rushed and misguided bill,” ATRA President Tiger Joyce said. “Given the state’s economic standing, we hope the governor will seek solutions to create a stronger economy – and not push the state deeper into disrepair,” he added.

In the letter sent to the Governor, the presidents of the two organizations expressed concern that House Bill 3360 would reverse long-standing Illinois law that generally does not permit personal injury claimants to recover interest on their losses. The legislation would assess prejudgment interest not just on out-of-pocket losses, like lost wages or medical expenses, but also noneconomic damages, which are not devalued by inflation or passage of time.

“Another problem we pointed out is that the bill triggers the accrual of prejudgment interest at an unfair and premature point in time. Additionally, the proposed 9% interest rate is grossly unfair and bears no relationship to current economic conditions. The bill represents nothing more than a shakedown of Illinois employers and a sop to personal injury lawyers,” Joyce suggested.

“House Bill 3360 encourages the expansion of frivolous lawsuits and puts pressure on small businesses and other companies to settle lawsuits or face crushing financial consequences. This is the last thing that business needs to contend with during the ongoing COVID crisis,” ICJL President John Pastuovic continued.

While several aspects of the legislation would brand Illinois an outlier, House Bill 3360 appears to be unique among all states in that it allows the court to seize a portion of the prejudgment interest award and divert it to any agency or department of the State. “This would, in effect, turn Illinois judges into tax collectors and reveals that the purpose of the legislation is not to compensate a claimant for the time value of out-of-pocket losses, but simply to expand the State’s revenue,” Pastuovic concluded.

The legislature has up to 30 days to send the bill to the governor and the governor then has up to 60 days to sign or veto the legislation.

From the Illinois Civil Justice League

Wasteful “over-naming” in asbestos lawsuits leaves innocent businesses bearing high costs

A review of public records compiled for a new article by national asbestos litigation experts Mark Behrens and Mary Margaret Gay reveals that a staggering number of businesses are wrongfully named as defendants in asbestos lawsuits in Illinois, forcing companies to incur costs to be dismissed from cases in which they never should have been sued. The article, published in Mealey’s Litigation Report: Asbestos, reviewed 122 representative cases filed in Illinois by 12 law firms between 2014 and 2020.

According to the article, the average asbestos lawsuit named 70 defendants, though some cases involved over 175 unique defendants. The number of named defendants has been steadily increasing. In 2020, an average of 80 defendants were named in Illinois asbestos cases. The defendant companies are varied and include many Illinois-based businesses. The aggressive pursuit of solvent defendants nets many innocent companies in the process, as reflected in the high dismissal rates. The inclusion of these erroneously sued defendants is known as over-naming.

“We were shocked to discover that asbestos lawsuits are being filed indiscriminately in Illinois—without any connection between the plaintiffs and most of the companies that are sued,” said John Pastuovic, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League (ICJL). “One company was sued 400 times and dismissed in 99% of the cases. One-in-five companies in the sample were dismissed 100% of the time they were sued,” Pastuovic added. “On average, 60% of the defendants in the 122 cases studied were dismissed with no payment or finding of liability.”

Over-naming in Illinois asbestos cases forces innocent companies to bear high legal costs they cannot recoup in the court system. “Money is being wasted that could be spent creating jobs and growing our economy. Businesses cannot afford to waste precious resources, especially in the wake of COVID-19,” said the ICJL’s Pastuovic.

The albatross of over-naming is especially problematic in Illinois because the state leads the nation in asbestos filings. According to Pastuovic, “Illinois continues to be the preferred jurisdiction for people filing asbestos cases from all over the country.”

The new article by Behrens and Gay also highlights the need for Illinois to address the disconnect that presently exists between the civil court system and a separate compensation system that pays claimants through trusts set up by bankrupt former asbestos producers. Currently, asbestos plaintiffs in Illinois have no obligation to file asbestos trust claims in a timely manner. In fact, plaintiffs typically delay these claims until after their personal injury case is resolved. This can allow plaintiffs to suppress evidence that a plaintiff was exposed to asbestos from bankrupt companies and may result in “double dipping” (recovery of an award in a tort case followed by additional recoveries from various trusts for the same injury).

In 2017, ICJL released a report documenting how plaintiffs manipulate the timing of their trust claims. The report reviewed a sample of 100 asbestos cases filed in Illinois and showed that the average plaintiff could have submitted claims with 16 different trusts (each standing in the shoes of a former asbestos producer). Over one-third of plaintiffs in the sample could have submitted 20 or more trust claims. But only 8 plaintiffs in the sample disclosed that they had filed trust claims. The report documented that trust claim filings are being delayed—intentionally—to disadvantage Illinois asbestos defendants.

In Illinois, combined over-naming reform and trust transparency legislation has been introduced this year (see S.B. 40, H.B. 3926). The bills would require asbestos plaintiffs to provide sworn information with the initial complaint detailing the plaintiff’s exposures to asbestos and the connection to each named defendant. This reform would cut down on unnecessary litigation costs, reduce waste, and focus judicial resources on claims with evidentiary support. Further, plaintiffs would have to file and disclose all asbestos trust claims at the outset of an asbestos lawsuit. This will prevent gamesmanship and address instances where plaintiffs have made statements in court cases that are inconsistent with information found in subsequent trust claim submissions. ICJL encourages lawmakers to hold hearings on these proposed reforms.

Click here to view the article.