Insurance Law

(Haine, D-Alton; Moffitt, R-Galesburg) allows the current court security-fee to exceed $25 for every party in a civil suit if it is set according to an acceptable cost study under the Counties Code. This fee is also added to a plea of guilty or conviction for defendants in traffic, ordinance, and criminal cases. Passed both chambers.

(Biss, D-Skokie; Williams, D-Chicago) will expand the type of information that triggers a breach notification to consumers, including medical information outside of federal privacy laws, biometric data, contact information if combined with identifying information, and login credentials for online accounts. The bill also requires entities holding sensitive information to take “reasonable” steps to protect the information, to post a privacy policy describing their data collection practices, and to notify the Attorney General’s office when breaches occur. Entities will also have to notify the Attorney General’s Office in the event of a breach of geolocation information or consumer marketing information. Passed both chambers.

(Barickman, R-Bloomington; Andersson, R-Geneva) simplifies the procedures to take the deposition of an Illinois person who is subpoenaed for discovery purposes from an out-of-state court. The Act creates establishes a simple, clerical procedure in which a subpoena from an out-of-state court is reissued as a discovery subpoena in Illinois. Passed both chambers.

(Radogno, R-Lemont) makes the following changes to the venue section of the Code of Civil Procedure. (1) Deletes current law that if all defendants are nonresidents of Illinois, and action may be commenced in any county. (2) Makes the residence of an Illinois private corporation or railroad or bridge company and any foreign corporation authorized to transact business in Illinois to be any county in which it is doing business if after due inquiry no other office can be found in Illinois. Any county in which it has a registered office would still be considered to be a county of residence. (3) Deletes current law in which a partnership may be sued in any county in which any partner resides. A partnership may be sued in any county in Illinois in which it is doing business if after due inquiry no office can be found in Illinois. (4) Deletes current law in which an Illinois insurance company or one doing business in Illinois may be brought in any county in which the plaintiff or one of the plaintiffs may reside. (5) Creates a new motion to dismiss for inconvenient venue. It requires the court to dismiss an action in which none of the parties is a resident of Illinois and over which another forum has jurisdiction unless the cause of action primarily arose in Illinois or the interests of justice require that the action proceed in Illinois. Allows the court to award costs and reasonable attorney’s fees in connection with the dismissal. A condition of dismissal is that if the plaintiff elects to file an action in another forum within six months after the dismissal order, the defendant must accept service of process from the court. If the statute of limitations has run in the other forum, the defendant must waive that defense. If the defendant refuses to abide by these conditions, the action shall be reinstated for further proceedings in the court in which the dismissal was granted. If the court in the other forum refuses to accept jurisdiction, the plaintiff may, within 30 days after the final order refusing jurisdiction, reinstate the action in which the dismissal was granted.