After reviewing the written contract between the parties, our experienced attorneys identified several violations of the Home Repair and Remodeling Act (815 ILCS 513/1 et seq.) and other statutes, committed by the company, including, but not limited to:

(1)   Failure to provide the homeowners with the “Home Repair: Know Your Consumer Rights” pamphlet prior to the execution of a home repair and remodeling contract;

(2)   Failure to provide a contract with a total cost for labor and materials;

(3)   Failure to provide a contract with an address other than a P.O. Box;

(4)   Failure to include an Illinois State roofing contractor license name and number on all contracts, bids and advertisements involving roof work;

(5)   Advertising and offering roof work despite having no licenses to perform such work;

(6)   Illegally representing, offering and advertising to represent the homeowners on their insurance claim in violation of the Illinois Public Adjusters Law;

(7)   Illegally offering home repair or remodeling services to be paid from the proceeds of a property and casualty insurance policy without notifying the homeowners of their right to cancel the contract within five business days after receiving written notice from their insurer that all or any part of the claim or contract is not covered; and

(8)   Failure to maintain adequate insurance.

These violations entitled the homeowners to recover their actual damages, fees and costs from the company.  After bringing these violations to the company’s attention, our attorneys negotiated a successful settlement for the homeowners.  The home repair company agreed to drop all of its claims against the homeowners and paid them to have the work finished properly.

The attorneys at DeBlasio Law Group are experienced in construction litigation, consumer fraud litigation, and prosecuting violations of the Illinois Home Repair and Remodeling Act.  To schedule an appointment to speak with one of our attorneys, call us at (630) 560-1123 or contact us via our website at http://DGLLC.net/contact.

The post Successful Representation of Homeowners In Home Repair and Remodeling Claim. appeared first on DeBlasio Law Group, LLC.

Structural design deficiencies led the local Building Department to order the demolition of the hotel before it ever opened, resulting in a $4.2 million loss to the hotel developer.

The district court held that Environs breached its professional standard of care by not employing a registered structural engineer and by failing to make timely inspections during the construction.  However, the district court applied the economic loss rule to bar SAMS’ negligence claim against Environs.  The economic loss rule generally states that a party to a contract cannot be liable under a tort theory (e.g., negligence) for a purely economic loss caused by a breach of the contract unless there was a personal injury or damage to property.  The district court also held that the limitation clause of the contract limited SAMS’ recovery from Environs under its breach of contract claim to $70,000.

On May 31, 2013, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals had to decide whether the clause in the contract limiting Environs’ liability was enforceable.  The court ruled that the parties were sophisticated commercial entities that knew the risks and freely bargained for the terms of the contract, including the limitation of liability clause.  Thus, Environs’ total liability for the $4.2 million in damages was limited to $70,000.  You can read the full decision of the 7th Circuit here.

The trial lawyers at DeBlasio Law Group are experienced in business litigation and construction litigation cases.  Contact our firm at (630) 560-1123 or visit our website at www.DGLLC.net/contact.

The post 7th Circuit Limits Liability of Architectural and Engineering Firm to $70,000 on $4.2 Million Loss. appeared first on DeBlasio Law Group, LLC.

The statutory procedures laid out in the Mechanic’s Lien Act must be strictly followed, otherwise the lien may be invalid.  The lienholder must record its claim for lien with the Recorder of Deeds in the county where the property is located within four months of the last day of providing labor or materials for the property.  In addition, the lienholder must file suit within two years of the last day of supplying labor or materials to the property.  If the lienholder fails to record its claim for lien within the four month period, it may still enforce its lien claim against the owner.  However, the lien claim would not take priority over other parties with an interest in the property, such as mortgagees and other lienholders.

Subcontractors and material suppliers that do not have a direct contractual relationship with the property owner must serve the owner and owner’s lender with a 60 day notice of its intent to lien the property if the property is a single-family occupied home, and must supply the owner and the owner’s lender with a 90 day notice on all other types of property, before it can record its claim for lien.

Once a claim for lien has been recorded against the property, and during the period that the lien is valid, the property owner typically cannot sell or refinance the property.  The owner may even be pressured by its mortgagee to pay the lien claim because a properly recorded lien claim dates back to the date of the contractor’s contract with the owner.  Therefore, it is possible that the mechanic’s lien may have priority over the mortgage if the contractor contracted with the owner for the construction of improvements prior to the date on which the mortgagee recorded its lien against the property. In addition, a mechanic’s lien may take priority over the mortgage to the extent the labor or materials supplied by the lienholder enhance the value of the property beyond the value of the property at the time the mortgage was recorded.  For these reasons, most mortgages contain clauses which provide that the property owner is in default under the mortgage if a mechanic’s lien is ever recorded against the property unless the owner provides the mortgagee with protection from the lien claim.

Click here to view the text of the Illinois Mechanic’s Lien Act.

It is crucial that contractors, material suppliers and property owners understand the proper procedure for perfecting a mechanic’s lien in order for the lien to be valid and enforceable.  To speak with one of our experienced construction litigation attorneys, call us at (630) 560-1123 or visit our website at www.DGLLC.net/contact.  We are here to help.

The post Enforcement of a Mechanic’s Lien in Illinois appeared first on DeBlasio Law Group, LLC.

Following trial, a jury returned a verdict against Halloran Construction and in favor of the Schotts.  On appeal, Halloran argued that the suit was barred by the statute of repose set out in section 13-214 (b) of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, which states that:

“No action based upon tort, contract or otherwise may be brought against any person for an act or omission of such person in the design, planning, supervision, observation or management of construction, or construction of an improvement to real property after 10 years have elapsed from the time of such act or omission.”

The Illinois Appellate Court for the Fifth District found that the 1994 repair did not constitute a “construction of an improvement to real property” and therefore the Schotts’ claims were barred by the statute of repose which began to run when the initial construction of the wall was completed in 1990 – more than ten years before Lawrence Schott fell off the wall in 2001.

The Court wrote “it is clear that an improvement to real property is an addition to real property amounting to more than a mere repair or replacement and which substantially enhances the value of the property.”  While it is clear that when the retaining wall was built in 1990 it was “an improvement to real property,” the Court wrote that it is “just as clear that the work done … in 1994 was not an improvement to real property but was mere repair of an existing structure.”  To read the court’s full opinion, click here.

The attorneys at DeBlasio Law Group are experienced in construction litigation.  To schedule an appointment to speak with one of our attorneys, call us at (630) 560-1123 or visit our website at www.DGLLC.net/contact.

The post Lawsuits Related to the Construction of Improvements to Real Property Are Barred by Illinois Ten Year Statute of Repose. appeared first on DeBlasio Law Group, LLC.

The plumber was insured by West Bend Mutual Insurance Company and Arbor was an additional insured under the same policy.  Arbor asked West Bend to pay the settlement costs, but West Bend denied coverage based on Arbor’s execution of the settlement agreement without West Bend’s consent.  In support of its denial, West Bend pointed to a provision in the insurance policy stating that “No insured will, except at that insured’s own cost, voluntarily make a payment, assume any obligation, or incur any expense, other than for first aid, without our consent.”

The 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (covering Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin) agreed with West Bend and found that Arbor’s failure to obtain West Bend’s consent to the settlement relieved West Bend of any obligation to pay for the damages caused by the plumber’s negligence.  The Court explained that the insurance policy reasonably required West Bend to consent to a settlement because it must have the opportunity to protect itself and its insured by investigating any incident that may lead to a claim under the policy, and by participating in any resulting litigation or settlement discussions.  Yet neither Arbor nor the plumber obtained West Bend’s consent before settling.

This case highlights the importance of notifying your insurance carrier of all claims before any settlement agreement is reached.  The attorneys at DeBlasio Law Group are experienced in insurance and construction litigation.  To schedule an appointment to speak with one of our attorneys, call us at (630) 560-1123 or visit our website at www.DGLLC.net/contact.

The post The Importance of Reporting Claims To Your Insurer. appeared first on DeBlasio Law Group, LLC.

Recently, the Illinois Supreme Court reaffirmed that the scope of a design professional’s duty is limited to the terms of its contract, and will not be expanded beyond those terms, whether by expert opinion or otherwise.  See Thompson v. Gordon, 241 Ill.2d 428, 448-49 (2011) (citing Ferentchak v. Village of Frankfort, 105 Ill.2d 474, 482 (1985)); see also, Tolan and Son, Inc. v. KLLM Architects, Inc., 308 Ill. App. 3d 18, 26 (1st Dist. 1999).  Thus, the terms of a contract for architectural services serves as the cornerstone for defending a claim against a design professional, such as an architect or engineer.

DeBlasio Law Group has extensive experience defending design professionals in real estate and construction litigation cases, including the defense of architects and engineers.  For more information, please visit our website at https://www.DGLLC.net.

The post DeBlasio Law Group Reaches Prompt Settlement For Architect Sued In Cook County Circuit Court. appeared first on DeBlasio Law Group, LLC.

We are a small firm that offers our clients a competitive advantage in the marketplace.  Simply put, our individual, business and government clients have significantly cut their legal costs without sacrificing their need for high-level legal talent.  Our clients benefit from flexible and reasonable fee structures, including fixed fee arrangements. Above all, they appreciate the personal attention we provide to their important personal and business issues.  We put our clients’ interests first.

Experience matters. Our attorneys have proudly served clients in Illinois and in numerous federal and state courts throughout the United States, from individuals to Fortune 500 companies.  The breadth of our experience is evidenced by the representation of foreign clients’ interests in the United States, as well as the fact that its founder has served as a Special Assistant Attorney General on behalf of an Illinois Governor and the Illinois Department of Human Services, as special outside counsel to the Illinois State Board of Education, and as counsel to a receiver appointed by a federal court in an SEC action involving a massive Ponzi scheme.

We have represented clients from a multitude of industry sectors, including, among others, health care, manufacturing, construction, real estate, technology, communications, financial, education, management firms, consulting firms, not for profits, religious organizations, as well as foreign and domestic government entities.

Our breadth of experience in litigation encompasses many areas of law, including, but not limited to:

We are strategically located with offices in Oakbrook Terrace, Illinois, allowing us to efficiently serve clients in Chicago and its surrounding communities, including Cook County (Circuit Court, Federal Court and Bankruptcy Court), DuPage County (Circuit Court and Bankruptcy Court), and Will County (Circuit Court and Bankruptcy Court).

Contact the firm at (630) 560-1123 or visit our website for more information – www.DGLLC.net.

The post Business Litigation Attorneys for DuPage County and Chicago. appeared first on DeBlasio Law Group, LLC.

One of JAK’s employees was injured while working on the project.  Westfield, which issued the insurance policy to JAK, was asked by FCL to defend and indemnify it against claims made by the injured employee in a lawsuit.  Westfield refused to cover FCL, arguing that FCL was not an “additional insured” under the policy issued to JAK.  The JAK policy defined an “additional insured” as an entity: 1) “for whom you [JAK] are performing operations;” and 2) with whom JAK has agreed “in writing in a contract or agreement” to add to the policy as an additional insured. 

Unfortunately for FCL, JAK had no written agreement with FCL naming FCL as an additional insured.  Therefore, the Court found that Westfield had no duty to defend FCL.

This case is a great example of why it is important to carefully read contracts and comply with their specific requirements.  Also, for general contractors, this case  demonstrates the importance of reviewing not only its own contracts and insurance policies, but also the contracts and insurance policies of its subcontractors.

To read the court’s full opinion, click here: http://www.state.il.us/court/opinions/AppellateCourt/2011/1stDistrict/March/1100521.pdf

The post READ THE CONTRACT! appeared first on DeBlasio Law Group, LLC.