- Jury Returns Verdict in favor of Hospital and Emergency Medicine Physicians
- Judge Grants Summary Judgment in favor of Hospital and Emergency Medicine Physician
- Jury Returns Verdict in favor of Health System and Family Practice Physician
- Victory on Claims of Excessive Force Against Task Force Members
- Radiologist not guilty of failing to diagnose lung cancer in a 40-year-old male which resulted in his death and, who was survived by a wife and 4 children
Although we strive for accuracy, the content of our blog is intended for informational purposes only. It is not intended to solicit business or to provide legal advice. Laws differ by jurisdiction, and the information may not apply to every reader. You should not take, or refrain from taking, any legal action based upon the information contained on this blog without first seeking professional counsel.
Your use of the blog does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and LGLJ.
A Cook County judge entered a directed verdict in favor of Bill Weiler’s client, a church in a case in which the plaintiff suffered serious injuries due to a fall on the church’s property. The plaintiff had alleged that her injuries had been caused by the church’s failure to properly maintain its property. Mr. Weiler argued that the plaintiff had failed to submit sufficient evidence to allow the case to go to the jury. The judge agreed and dismissed the case after the plaintiff rested.
A Cook County jury found in favor of Bill Weiler’s client, an automobile manufacturer in a case in which the plaintiff alleged that her vehicle’s engine had failed due to manufacturing defects in the vehicle. The jury found otherwise after Mr. Weiler was able to show the jurors how the damage was actually caused by the plaintiff’s failure to properly maintain her vehicle.
A DuPage County jury found in favor of Bill Weiler’s client, an automobile manufacturer, in a case in which the plaintiff alleged that her vehicle’s engine was defective. Mr. Weiler was able to explain to the jury that there was actually nothing wrong with the plaintiff’s vehicle and the engine did not need to be replaced nor did it need any repairs.
The case involved alleged soil contamination due to leakage of underground storage tanks. Troy Lundquist and Anastasia Hess filed a Motion to Dismiss on behalf of the DefendantTownship, and the trial court granted the Motion.
The plaintiff in this case alleged that his car’s engine failed because it was defective and that Bill Weiler’s client, which had manufactured the car, had failed to repair it. Mr. Weiler was able to show that the damage to the engine was caused by the plaintiff’s abuse of the vehicle, in particular, the fact that he was racing it. Although the plaintiff tried to deny ever racing the car, Mr. Weiler was able to locate enough evidence to convince the jury that the plaintiff was doing so.
The case involved serious injury to young woman who was involved in an automobile accident at a controlled intersection. Troy Lundquist and Anastasia Hess filed a Motion to Dismiss on behalf of the Defendant Township, and the trial court granted the Motion. The Second District Appellate Court affirmed the trial court’s ruling.
Bill Weiler represented an internal medicine doctor in a case in which the doctor accidentally prescribed a medication to which the plaintiff was allergic. The doctor admitted fault, but disputed the extent of the plaintiff’s injuries. In a case where the only issue was the amount of damages, a DuPage County jury awarded the plaintiff less than 7% of the amount sought by her attorney and only 25% of the amount he demanded immediately prior to trial.
Plaintiff alleged an alleged change in the roadway surface caused a single car automobile accident. Troy Lundquist and Anastasia Hess filed a Motion to Dismiss on behalf of the Defendant Township, and the trial court granted the Motion. On appeal, the Fourth District Appellate Court agreed with the township’s arguments and upheld the trial court’s ruling.
A Cook County jury found in favor of Bill Weiler’s client, an automobile manufacturer, in a case in which the plaintiff claimed that the manufacturer failed to comply with the terms of its warranty and refused to repair his defective brakes. Mr. Weiler was able to effectively demonstrate to the jury that there was nothing wrong with the vehicle’s brakes and that the manufacturer complied with all of the terms of its agreement.
Mohammed A. Nofal successfully tried and defended an electrical contractor in a construction negligence case pending in WillCounty. After seven days of testimony, and at the close of the trial, the Plaintiff requested an award in excess of $4 million. After deliberating for less than an hour, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the electrical company.