|Home||About||Membership||CLE||Publications||Member Groups||Events||Career||Practice Tools||Store||Public||Contact|
New! 2010 Guide to Illinois Statutes for Attorneys' Fee - This handy edition lists provisions in the Illinois Compiled Statutes that authorize the court to order one party to pay the attorney fees of another. No matter what your practice area, this book will save you time – and could save you money! Buy it at http://www.isba.org/store/books/2010attorneysfees
Now every article is the start of a discussion. If you're a member of the Construction Law Section, you can comment on any of the articles that appear below.
Insurance and Surety Bond Issues for Construction Projects
May 2 - East Peoria
Cain v. Contarino
Court properly granted summary judgment in favor of defendant in negligence action for construction accident sustained by carpenter when setting roof trusses on garage, while working for his employer, as subcontractor for the Defendant general contractor. Plaintiff alleged that general contractor failed to ensure that subcontractor maintained safe work practices at jobsite. General contractor owed no duty of care under retained control exception of Section 414, and any such duty would not have required providing subcontractor with a crane to perform truss work. No showing that general contractor was a "possessor" of land where accident occurred which had ability to exclude others or regulate their use of the property. (ZENOFF and JORGENSEN, concurring.)
Krien v. Harsco Corp.
Dist. Ct. erred in granting third-party defendant’s motion for summary judgment in third-party complaint seeking indemnification for $900,000 settlement that third-party plaintiff paid to plaintiff (employee of third-party defendant) in personal injury action arising out of fall plaintiff experienced while using third-party plaintiff’s scaffold at construction site operated by third-party defendant. Third-party plaintiff was entitled to indemnity where operative contract language required third-party defendant to indemnify third-party plaintiff where, as here, third-party plaintiff sustained loss arising out of injuries incurred by employees of third-party defendant who had been using equipment supplied by third-party plaintiff. Moreover, record did not otherwise indicate that third-party plaintiff, which was not at construction site at time of accident, was negligent in “operating” scaffold plank that had broken under plaintiff’s feet. Fact that plaintiff could not directly sue third-party defendant because of Wisc. workers’ compensation law did not require different result.
Disclaimer: This newsletter is for subscribers’ personal use only; redistribution is prohibited. Copyright Illinois State Bar Association. Statements or expressions of opinion appearing herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Association or Editors, and likewise the publication of any advertisement is not to be construed as an endorsement of the product or service offered unless it is specifically stated in the ad that there is such approval or endorsement.