Court clarifies pleading requirements under Consumer Fraud ActFebruary 2013Illinois Law Update, Page 72On November 20, 2012, the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, determined that a defendant's intent to induce reliance by a consumer is a necessary element to proving a section 2 claim under the Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act ("Consumer Fraud Act"), regardless of whether the defendant's action was a misrepresentation or omission of material fact.
Choice-of-law clause does not control applicability of Consumer Fraud ActSeptember 2012Illinois Law Update, Page 464On June 20, 2012, the second district appellate court held that contractual choice-of-law and forum-selection clauses that provide for the application of Illinois law do not automatically permit a party to bring claims under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act ("Consumer Fraud Act"). International Profit Associates, Inc. v. Linus Alarm Corp., ___ N.E.2d ___, 2012 IL App (2d) 110958.
The Dodd-Frank Act's Impact on Consumer LitigationBy Donna M. Goelz and Timothy J. HowardFebruary 2012Article, Page 100Dodd-Frank is the most comprehensive overhaul of the financial services industry in recent history. Here's what it means for businesses and consumer finance litigators.
New lead and mercury labeling requirements PA 095-1019June 2009Illinois Law Update, Page 284The Illinois General Assembly amended section 6 of the Lead Poisoning Prevention Act and added two new sections to the Mercury-added Product Prohibition Act. 410 ILCS 45/6, 410 ILCS 46/22, 23.
Arbitration clause unconscionable where customer does not see agreementSeptember 2007Illinois Law Update, Page 460On July 10, 2007, the Illinois Appellate Court, Fifth District, affirmed the decision of the Circuit Court of St. Clair County finding the Customer Agreement between Charlotte Bess and DirecTV procedurally unconscionable and therefore unenforceable.
No consumer fraud where plaintiff did not rely on allegedly misleading materialApril 2007Illinois Law Update, Page 176On February 2, 2007, the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, affirmed the Circuit Court of Cook County's dismissal of the plaintiff's consumer fraud, breach of warranty, and medical monitoring claims against defendant Bayer Corporation (Bayer), after its recall of the drug Baycol.
Basic "right to privacy" inherently includes interests of secrecy and seclusionFebruary 2007Illinois Law Update, Page 72On November 30, 2006, the Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the decisions of the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, and the Circuit Court of McHenry County, granting summary judgment to the insured, Swiderski Electronics, Inc (Swiderski), and holding that the insurer, Valley Forge Insurance Company (Valley Forge), had a duty to defend a breach of privacy action brought against the insured.
New rules for work-at-home solicitations - PA094-0999December 2006Illinois Law Update, Page 650The Illinois General Assembly has added Section 2XX to the Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (Act), adopting new rules to govern the solicitation of work-at-home employees. 815 ILCS 505/2XX.
A big win for Big TobaccoBy Helen W. GunnarssonFebruary 2006Lawpulse, Page 62The Illinois Supreme Court barred plaintiffs' class action claim and overturned a $10-plus billion award against Philip Morris. But experts doubt the case will have much precedential power outside Illinois.
No state-law claims of usury against a national bankJanuary 2006Illinois Law Update, Page 16On November 10, 2005, the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, affirmed the decision of the Circuit Court of Cook County, granting summary judgment for defendant EquiCredit Corp of America.