Construction Law
(Barickman, R-Bloomington) provides that if a landlord or the landlord's attorney is unable to personally serve the demand on the tenant, then constructive service of the demand may be used. Senate Bill 758 was just introduced.
(Barickman, R-Bloomington) provides a means for correcting inadvertent failures to name necessary parties in actions for administrative review.
(1) It amends the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to mandate that final administrative orders list all of the parties of record together with their last known address of record. The final order must also include whether there are any agency rules requiring a motion for reconsideration as a part of obtaining a reviewable final administrative decision and, if so, the rules citation.
(2) It also amends the APA to allow service by electronic mail if agreed to by the parties in contested cases.
(3) It amends the Administrative Review Law (ARL) in the Code of Civil Procedure to state that this Article is to be liberally construed in the interests of justice to grant an orderly method of judicial review of administrative agency decisions.
(4) It amends the ARL to prohibit an action for administrative review to be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based on the misnomer of any agency that is properly served with summons issued in the action within the applicable time limits. It also prohibits dismissal for failure to perfectly name an agent if a timely action of administrative review has been filed that identifies the final administrative decision under review and makes a good faith effort to properly name the administrative agency.
(5) It amends the ARL to allow a court to correct misnomers for an erroneous identification of the administrative agency.
Senate Bill 584 was just introduced.
(Hutchinson, D-Chicago Heights) creates the Business Opportunity Tax that imposes a tax on all entities that issue a Form W-2 or a Form 1099 to a resident of Illinois. It imposes a sliding scale of taxation based on the employer’s total Illinois payroll as follows. (1) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is less than $100,000, then the annual tax is $225; (2) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is $100,000 or more but less than $250,000, then the annual tax is $750; (3) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is $250,000 or more but less than $500,000, then the annual tax is $3,750; (4) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is $500,000 or more but less than $1,500,000, then the annual tax is $7,500; and (5) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is $1,500,000 or more, then the annual tax is $15,000.
The following are exempt from taxation under this Act: (1) governmental employers described in Section 707 of the Illinois Income Tax Act; and (2) not-for-profit corporations that are exempt from taxation under Sections 501(c) or 501(d) of the Internal Revenue Code or organized under the General Not For Profit Corporation Act of 1986. Senate Amendment No. 2 becomes the bill and was just filed. It is part of the “grand bargain” being attempted by Senate leaders.
(Court opinion corrected 12/6/16.) Fire occurred during extensive renovation project at casino, resulting in extensive damage to casino. Casino received $81.15 million in insurance payments from 3 separate insurers under 3 separate insurance policies. Waiver of subrogation provision is not limited to negligence actions, but can apply with equal force to contract claims. As parties agreed that loss and damage from fire would be borne solely by casino's property insurance, casino thus waived all claims against contractors arising from such loss. Plaintiffs failed to present facts showing that "time is of the essence" provision was material to contract such that Defendants' failure to complete project within contemplated time frame would negate waiver of subrogation provision. Contract provisions requiring contractor to obtain liability insurance and to indemnify casino for claims arising out of performance of work did not conflict with waiver of subrogation clause, so as to render those provisions an exception to the waiver. (LAVIN and COBBS, concurring.)
Condominium Homeowners Association (HOA) discovered that condominium roof was leaking and filed suit against real estate developer which had hired 2 roofing contractors to do roofing work on building it was constructing. Court erred in finding that 2 roofing subcontractors had no duty to defend developer against HOA's claims of breach of warranty and breach of implied warranty of habitability under indemnity provisions of their contracts. Court properly dismissed developer's counterclaims against 2 roofing subcontractors as to their duties to indemnify it against HOA's fraud claims. Indemnity provisions between developer and roofing subcontractors do not violate Construction Contract Indemnification for Negligence Act, as they do not allow developer to seek indemnification based on its own negligence or wrongdoing.(ELLIS and McBRIDE, concurring.)
(Court opinion corrected 10/25/16.) Parties' subcontract requires Contractor to pay Subcontractor, and does not impose any condition precedent on such a fundamental obligation. Thus, Contractor is liable for amounts due to a subcontractor even if property owner fails to make payment to Contractor for Subcontractor's work.(GORDON and LAMPKIN, concurring.)
Plaintiff construction company brought breach-of-contract and tort claims related to construction project in New York, and filed in Kane County pursuant to forum-selection clause in parties' contract.Court properly found that New York law rendered forum-selection clause void and unenforceable and that New York was the only proper forum. Under choice of law principles, application of Illinois law would be contrary to a fundamental New York policy, and New York has a materially greater interest than Illinois in determination of this issue. Thus, court properly dismissed case so that it may be refiled in New York. (SCHOSTOK and McLAREN, concucrring.)
Court properly entered judgment for $257,765 in favor of general contractor and against real estate developer. Contracts implied in fact arise from promissory expression that may be inferred from facts that show parties' intent to be bound. Thus, existence of contract implied in fact is a question for trier of fact to decide, and court's finding that contract existed is not against manifest weight of evidence. Plaintiff was paid in excess of $18 million by Defendant for its work on other construction projects performed under unsigned draft contracts, as was the case here. Defendant did not reject Plaintiff's work or instruct Plaintiff to cease work at any time. Given ample evidence showing Defendant did not disclose its agency relationship to Plaintiff, court reasonably concluded Defendant is personally liable on contract implied in fact. (LAMPKIN and BURKE, concurring.)
As Defendant roofing company was contracted to perform work on roof, HOA's claim for breach of warranty and breach of implied warranty of habitability arising out of faulty work on roof falls within scope of indemnification agreement that counterdefendant developer entered into with roofing company. Under plain language of indemnity provision between developer and other roofing contractor had duty to defend and indemnify developer as to negligence and breach of implied warranty of habitability claims filed by HOA. Claim based on implied warranty of habitability is a contract claim and roofing company is obligated to defend and indemnify developer under its contract.(ELLIS and McBRIDE, concurring.)
(Mulroe, D-Chicago; Martwick, D-Chicago) allows a board of managers to assign the right of the association to future income from common expenses or other sources and to mortgage or pledge substantially all of the remaining assets of the association by a majority vote of the entire board.
Effective January 1, 2017.