logo

CALL US TODAY

toll free: (800) 442-6546
local: (312) 346-8780

protecting the rights of injured workers

THE INJURY LAWYERS YOU WANT

  • Gun Store Law in Chicago

    Despite being forced to allow gun sales by a federal judge, the Chicago City Council approved a legislation that would significantly limit locations at which gun stores could be opened.  Gun store owners are being made aware that the city government will be checking up on them every time they sell a gun.

    Mayor Rahm Emanuel and the Chicago aldermen made it clear that they only allowed the opening of gun shops because a federal judge ruled that the city’s ban on stores that sell weapons was unconstitutional.

    Aldermen have also listed some provisions – many of which will be challenged in court — such as a requirement that all gun sales be recorded on video and another that forces gun owners to open their books for inspection by the law enforcement. There are also restrictions on locations where the gun shops can be opened at, effectively prohibiting them in huge areas of the city; they are confined to specific areas and cannot be opened within 500 feet of schools and parks.

    Unsurprisingly, this does not sit well with gun right advocates. Richard Pearson, executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association, called this law “an ordinance to prevent gun shops”. The City, having fought for decades to keep guns unavailable to its residents, faced numerous lawsuits because of that and will almost certainly face another one.

    The Mayor disagreed, adding that the city’s legal department examined the ordinance and decided that it has a solid legal basis. He claims that the city has written a “solid, tough and enforceable ordinance.” Although he didn’t talk about the provision that requires videotaping, earlier he stated that the practice is not any different than that of photographing transactions at ATMs.

    This ordinance also affects the so called straw purchasers. These are the people who buy guns and transfer them to people who are not allowed to buy or possess firearms. According to the police, that is the major reason of a flood of illegal guns into Chicago and why the Chicago police department seizes more illegal guns than any other city in the country. According to the Alderman James Balcer, “The ordinance, will allow employees to be trained to identify straw purchasers.” The ordinance also does not permit the buyers to purchase more than one gun every 30 days – this is supposed to be a hindrance for straw purchasers who prefer to buy multiple firearms at one time.

    As lawsuits are sure to be filed in response to this the ordinance that was approved in July 2014, Chicago will remain the center of the national debate over gun control. In 2012, a Federal Appeals court in Chicago ruled that Illinois’ last-in-the-nation ban on concealed weapons was unconstitutional. Mayor Emanuel was quoted that, while he’s not welcoming a lawsuit, it is important to pass the toughest possible ordinance, regardless if it prompts a legal challenge. “You have to do what you think is right,”.

     

  • “Arising Out Of” Employment

    The purpose of the Workers’ Compensation Act (Act) is to protect employees against risks and hazards which are particularly characteristics to the specific work they have been employed to do. An injury is compensable under the Act only if it “arises out of” and “in the course of” the employment. The phrase “in the course of” refers to the time, place and circumstances under which the accident occurred. The words “arising out of” refer to the origin or cause of the accident and assume that there is a causal connection between the employment and the injury. An injury “arises out of” the employment if it originates from a risk connected with, or incidental to, her /his job. Both of these elements must be present at the time of the accident or injury to justify compensation.

    Jane Brais worked for the Kankakee County Circuit Clerk’s Office as a child support coordinator. On the day of her accident, Brais was returning to her office at the courthouse from a work-related meeting at a nearby administrative building. Brais and other employees normally used the employee’s entrance at the rear of the courthouse. However, the entrance was locked, which meant she had to use the main entrance instead.

    As she neared the main entrance stairs, she caught the heel of her shoe in a sidewalk defect and fell;  the sidewalk where she fell had huge cracks and was broken up. Brais testified, “You could pretty much see the gravel that they put down underneath the concrete.” She further testified there was a one-half to a one inch difference in the level between the smooth concrete and the crumbled concrete.

    Brais filed her claim against Kankakee County, and the arbitrator denied it. According to the arbitrator, Brais’ accident “occurred when she was walking along a public pathway going in to the county courthouse.” He added, “In doing so, she was not subjected to a risk to which the general public is not exposed or that was peculiar to her work.” The arbitrator found that the risk to the claimant which caused her injuries was no greater to her than to the general public.

    The Brais case found that the employee’s presence on the sidewalk approaching the steps to the courthouse’s front door was based on the demands of her employment, which had required her to attend a meeting in the administration building two blocks from her office. The court noted that her attendance at the meeting was solely for the benefit and accommodation of her employer.

    According to the appellate court, when an employee is injured in an area which is the sole or usual route to the employer’s premises, and there is a special risk or hazard on the route, the hazard becomes part of the employment. The court found that the special hazards or risk encountered as a result of using the sole or usual access route satisfied the “arising out of” requirement in the Act. The appellate court noted that the front entrance to the courthouse “was not only a usual access route for the claimant, it was her sole and only route since the employee entrance was locked.” Because she was required to attend the meeting at the administrative building, Brais’ risk of injury on the defective sidewalk was greater than that of the general public.

    The Brais Court said, “this case does not merely involve the risks inherent in walking on a sidewalk which confront all members of the public. This case involves a cracked and defective sidewalk which was a contributing cause of the claimant’s injury. Because the claimant encountered a special hazard or risk as a result of using a sole or usual access route, her injury arose out of her employment.” The court said “Application of the existing case law to the undisputed facts in this case reveals that the only reasonable inference that can be drawn from the evidence is that the claimant’s injuries arose out of her employment.”

    The appellate court, in writing its opinion, was careful to state that the hazard becomes part of the employment only when an employee is injured in an area which is “the sole or usual route to the employer’s premises, and there is a special risk or hazard on the route.”

     

  • E – cigarettes

    The State of Illinois continues in its efforts to protect nonsmokers, children and students from the dangers of smoking. In the past month, Governor Quinn has signed new laws regulating the way electronic cigarettes can be sold. The new law requires that all e-cigarettes must be sold from behind a counter, in a sealed case or in an age-restricted area. The law will also make it illegal to sell e-cigarettes from a self-service display. That law goes into effect on January 1st 2015. Another law that takes effect on the same day will prohibit the sale of e-cigarettes to anyone under age 18.

    Quinn also signed legislation, which takes effect on July 1, 2015, banning indoors and outdoors smoking on all Illinois public college and university campuses including all state-supported schools. The bill was sponsored by state Sen. Terry Link of Waukegan and state Rep. Ann Williams of Chicago. Several Illinois college campuses, including the University of Illinois at its Champaign-Urbana and Chicago, already have smoke-free policies in place. Smoking would still be allowed inside of privately owned vehicles and during activities protected by the federal American Indian Religious Freedom Act.

    Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, along with 28 other state attorneys general, recently submitted comments to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on its proposed e-cigarette rules. They urged the federal government to strengthen its proposed regulations for electronic cigarettes to include a ban on the sale of flavored products claiming that flavored e-cigarettes attract children and teenagers to the products. They also want the FDA to make e-cigarette advertising and marketing follow the same restrictions as tobacco products.

    Even Congress has become involved with 12 Senate Democrats proposing a law that would require child-proof bottles for the liquid nicotine used for e-cigarettes. The American Association of Poison Control Centers stated that toxic exposure to e-cigarette devices and liquid nicotine has risen from 271 in 2011 to more than 2,300 this year.

    Locally, Mayor Rahm Emanuel is being urged to extend his ban on smoking to include Chicago parks. While Chicago beaches and playgrounds are smoke-free, the parks do not have a similar ban. Chicago has earned a reputation for driving residents to quit, with the ban on e-cigarettes in any location that also bans smoking, disallowing sales to minors and banning all flavored tobacco product sales within 500 feet of schools. These and other measures such as one of the higher national taxes on cigarettes, has worked as smoking by Chicago high school students has gone from 13. 6 percent on 2011 to 10.7 percent in 2013 and the adult smoking rate has dropped to 17.7 percent down from 22.6 percent.

    Health officials have praised these new laws aimed at reducing smoking rates,“Today is really about driving people to quit smoking.”

     

  • General Motors Has Set A New Precedence For Auto Recalls This Year

    General Motors (GM) has set a new precedence for auto recalls this year, as the first cavalcade of auto recalls quickly turned the safety notices into background noise ignored by many of the effected car owners. GM started the avalanche on February 2014, when they announced that they had to fix a fatally flawed ignition switch on some of their small cars. That was quickly expanded twice and now numbers 2.6 million cars worldwide. The defect is linked to 13 deaths and 54 accidents.

    Hoping to clean house and avoid more government fines for recall foot-dragging, GM has announced 38 recalls this year through June, covering 14.4 million U.S. vehicles. GM alone will far exceed the past decade’s annual auto industry average of 21 million cars and light trucks.

    GM’s stepped-up recall pace could continue into midsummer, said GM Executive Vice President Mark Reuss. In the past month, GM had announced four more recalls, with the largest for 464,712 Chevrolet Camaros. The Camaro ignition key can be bumped out of position, a problem linked to three crashes and four minor injuries.

    Meanwhile, other automakers are clearing their cupboards of safety-related issues to stay out of the sights of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which is promising tougher oversight to prevent a repeat of GM’s 13-year dawdling before the switch was recalled. So far this year, other auto manufacturers have announced 47 recalls, covering 8.54 million U.S. vehicles, according to government records. That’s a lot, even though it seems otherwise when contrasted with GM’s overwhelming numbers.

    The millions of recalls that have been issued this year made the situation worse and owner response rates even lower. The typical consumer reaction seems to be, “My car’s running fine. Do I need to bother?” The fact is, car owners should be bothered, but getting them to grasp that fact is a bit like trying to push a piece of string.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) stated that about 75% of recalled vehicles eventually get fixed, depending upon the value and age of the vehicle, how serious the problem seems and how likely the owner thinks that the issue might effect their vehicle. The agency believes toning down recall commotion would hurt, not help; safety is their number one concern and they want to increase and improve ways to reach consumers, not limit the number of recalls.

    It’s easy to see why car companies are quicker to pull the recall trigger on issues now when in the past they might have studied them longer. They do not want lawsuits such as those piling up against GM or a Justice Department criminal investigation such as GM’s or even a Securities and Exchange Commission probe that looked at whether GM was truthful with its investors. So far, GM has announced $1.6 billion in charges against its earnings for the first two quarters in order to pay for the recalls.

    Some less immediately life-threatening issues might takes months to be fixed as dealers wait for the parts needed to repair the problems. Owners must either trust that the problems are not life threatening or leave their vehicles at the dealership for weeks, incurring the expense of rental cars, taxis and altered plans. Affected owners should be aware that they may need to consider seeking legal redress for economic damages including the costs associated with repairs as well as a decline in the resale value of the effected vehicles.

    In a roundabout way, recalls can improve overall auto safety beyond the recalled and repaired cars. Good dealers can turn recalls into sales of new cars with the latest safety features as they have an influx of customers waiting for their recall repairs to be completed. With the assistance of qualified salespeople this can turn a misfortune into a major sales opportunity.

  • Traffic Ticket Quotas

    The policy of assigning quotas for the number of traffic tickets each officer must issue officially ended in Illinois after Gov. Pat Quinn signed legislation in June. This is good news for some drivers but ending the policy could have an effect on how Illinois police are evaluated as well as how much money some municipalities will earn from ticketing motorists.

    In many jurisdictions, ticket quotas were one of those traditions like doughnuts – always around but hidden in a drawer and not on the top of the desk where visitors might be able to see them. Quotas do have an upside for municipalities as traffic tickets generate income through fines. They also serve as an easy performance-measuring device for supervisors in police departments, since ticket numbers are verifiable. But the practice drew the fury of drivers who would often complain – unsuccessfully – that they were victims of an arbitrary rush on the part of police to meet a numerical goal. Some drivers argued that the number of tickets had risen at one point as a means of building public pressure to resolve tense labor negotiations between the police union and the city.

    Quinn was noted as saying that the law, which was overwhelmingly backed by both houses of the legislature, will allow police to exercise judgment when deciding whether to ticket a driver rather than simply pursuing a fixed number of citations during every shift. The law, which immediately went into effect, applies to local, county and state law enforcement officers.

    Law enforcement officers should have discretion on when and where to issue traffic citations and not be forced to ticket motorists to satisfy a quota system the Governor said in a news release; “This new law will improve safety and working conditions for police officers and prevent motorists from facing unnecessary anxiety when they encounter a police vehicle.”

    The Illinois law applies to the range of citations that police issue, including parking, speeding and other functions. It also specifically bars municipalities from using the number of tickets issued by an officer in their performance reviews. In a statement in April, as the measure was still being discussed, John H. Kennedy, executive director of the Illinois Assn. of Chiefs of Police, issued a statement opposing the bill.

    While law enforcement executives strongly agree with eliminating the imposition of arbitrary traffic ticket quotas, the bill also eliminated vital data-driven performance measures used to assist in the performance appraisal of police officers. This bill could essentially strip the ability of law enforcement leaders to establish expectations for officers and to hold officers accountable for certain minimum performance standards. The bill does address the concerns of drivers who felt that law enforcement officers had arbitrarily targeted them in order to maintain their ticket quotas.

     

     

  • Boating Safety Issues

    Most people already knows that drinking alcohol and driving a car is a dangerous combination, however, there is less awareness of the same dangers while operating a boat. Mix water, a boat and throw in alcohol and the results can be deadly.

    That’s why Governor Pat Quinn signed new legislation in July to improve boating safety. “This is something that never should have happened, there should have been more enforcement out there,” Jim Borcia said. Their 10-year-old son Tony was killed two years ago on the Chain-of-Lakes while tubing with his family. A boater, operating his boat while under the influence of alcohol and cocaine, ran the boy over as his family watched in horror. Tony and his family frantically waved their hands to the boater to get his attention, but he never slowed down. Tony’s family used their tragedy to change laws.

    “We know there are other Tonys out there that are in danger every weekend, every day, said Jim Borcia. “Unless things change, the mindset of boats shouldn’t be associated with partying, it should be associated with responsibility.” Since the tragic accident, the family has created the Y-Not Project in Tony’s name, and raised enough money to buy a boat for the Illinois Department of Natural Resources to patrol the Chain-of-Lakes.

    In July, Gov. Quinn signed three new bills into law to increase boating safety. The first law will make punishment for boating under the influence more in line with driving other vehicles under the influence. The next bill will require boaters 16 and younger to pass a boating safety course and have a valid certificate, and the third law will require the operator of any boat to display a bright orange flag if they are towing a person. “From a little boy’s death has come the beginning of reform for boating safety in Illinois,” Morrison said. “Part of your pain has been turned into purpose,” she said to his parents, who have been pushing for changes in boating laws since his death.

    The bills, signed in July, increase the power of law enforcement officials and put new restrictions and requirements on boaters. Under one of them, a persons’ watercraft can be seized after multiple DUI offenses. In another, all people born after January 1998 will be required to take a boater safety course and hold a boater safety certificate before they can operate a boat with an engine over 10 horsepower, according to Quinn’s office.

    The final bill requires any watercraft towing a person to display a bright orange flag no less than 12 inches per side in size. In 2014 so far, there have been 16 boating fatalities reported on Illinois waterways. It is hoped that these new laws will help to reduce that number during the boating season on the local waterways.

  • Juveniles Records Expunged

    Juveniles are now able to get their records expunged because of the new “Clean Slate” law. The new law will now expunge the arrests records of many teens with minor offenses.

    Juveniles who were arrested for non-violent crimes, for less serious reasons or never actually charged, will automatically get a clean slate as soon as they turn 18. Lawyers and state officials say this law will help these kids get into schools and get jobs without arrest records hanging over their heads.

    Private corporations are able to buy or mine data from local jurisdictions all over the country, not just here in Illinois. Employers are using the data from young people with minor offenses in order to turn them down for jobs that are often completely unrelated to their juvenile records.

    The “Clean Slate” law will help keep young adults from being pigeonholed by something they did in their teenage years and that should have remained a part of their juvenile records.

    The legislation stipulates that the teen can’t have been criminally charged, and the arrest can’t be tied to felonies or sex assault cases.

    Youth Courts have been established downstate as a way to keep kids out of criminal court proceedings. The arrest record would be cleared by a person’s 18th birthday if that arrest didn’t result in criminal charges.  Eligible juveniles must also not have any other subsequent arrests or juvenile delinquency petitions.

    This isn’t the first change seen from the State when it comes to juvenile offenders. The entire department is undergoing an overhaul, primarily to cut costs by keeping kids out of the system.

    This bill will give teens a second chance to get onto the right path. It is another tool that gives a minor, and future adult, the ability to be in a positive position as they’re starting college or entering the workforce.

     

     

  • Vehicular Homicide

    Several states have laws referred to as an assault by auto or vehicular homicide as it is considered in Illinois. As the driver of a truck, there is a lot of responsibility; the greatest concern is safety and keeping fatigued drivers off the highway and freeways. There are regulations for when and how long a driver may drive.

    You don’t know when an accident can occur; recently a tractor-trailer rammed into a limousine bus, because the driver dozed off, setting off a chain-reaction crash. The truck driver was charged with death by auto in the crash that killed a man; two people were seriously injured and flown from the accident scene to a local hospital, where they were left in critical condition.

    If a driver unintentionally kills an individual without lawful justification, they commit Involuntary Manslaughter; if their acts, whether lawful or unlawful, cause the death, are likely to cause death or great bodily harm to some individual, and it is performed recklessly, it is considered to be Reckless Homicide. A person commits Reckless Homicide if he or she unintentionally kills an individual while driving a vehicle and uses an incline in a roadway, such as a railroad crossing, bridge approach, or hill, to cause the vehicle to become airborne.  Involuntary Manslaughter and Reckless Homicide are each considered to be a Class 3 felony.

    In cases involving Reckless Homicide in which the defendant drove a vehicle and used an incline in a roadway, such as a railroad crossing, bridge approach, or hill, to cause the vehicle to become airborne and caused the deaths of 2 or more persons as part of a single course of conduct, the penalty is a Class 2 felony.

    In cases involving Involuntary Manslaughter or Reckless Homicide resulting in the death of a police officer being killed while on the job as an officer, the penalty is a Class 2 felony. Reckless Homicide includes cases in which the defendant unintentionally kills an individual while driving in a posted school zone, while children are present or in a construction or maintenance zone. According to the Illinois Vehicle Code, when construction or maintenance workers are present, that fact may infer that the defendant’s actions were performed recklessly especially where he or she was also either driving at a speed of more than 20 miles per hour in excess of the posted speed limit or violating Section 11-501 of the Illinois Vehicle Code.

    Except in cases involving Reckless Homicide in which the offense was committed as result of a violation of a subsection of the Illinois Vehicle Code, the penalty is a Class 2 felony, for which a person, if sentenced to a term of imprisonment, shall be sentenced to a term of not less than 3 years and not more than 14 years.

    Many states hope that increased criminal penalties will act as a deterrent to reckless drivers and make people aware that they need to be alert when operating a motor vehicle.

     

     

  • Home Kitchen / Chloe Stirling’s

    Twelve-year-old Chloe Stirling’s started a cupcake business, called “Hey Cupcake!” in her parent’s kitchen. On June 10th, Gov. Pat Quinn signed a bill in her family’s kitchen in downstate Troy, just east of St. Louis MO, that will allow home bakers to start a business in their home and be freed from some government health and business regulations.

    “Hey Cupcake!” was started by Chloe to sell cupcakes at fundraisers and to friends and family. When the Madison County Health Department got wind of the cottage industry, they shut it down because Chloe Stirling didn’t have the proper business license and the Stirling’s kitchen wasn’t commercially certified.

    Chloe and her mom went to Springfield where they lobbied for a bill to make it easier for small “home kitchen operators” to sell their goods without having to jump through so many government hoops. Lawmakers passed a bill that creates a new state business category for people who make less than $1,000 per month producing food in their own homes to sell by themselves or for a religious, charitable or nonprofit organization.  House Bill 5354 says home kitchen operators cannot be regulated or shut down by local governments or health departments unless there is a complaint or a health safety issue.

    The bill defines a “home kitchen operation” and authorizes the state or county health department to inspect a home kitchen operation only in the event of a complaint or disease outbreak. Chloe Stirling and her mother worked tirelessly to get the law passed so home cooks could do what they love, cook and bake.

    Quinn thanked Chloe for standing up for small entrepreneurs. Quinn has been quoted as saying “Democracy is for everyone and I salute Chloe Stirling for getting involved and making a difference for a cause she believes in.”

     

     

  • Pradaxa and Actos: Is Non-Preservation of Documents an Emerging Trend?

    When a US District Court judge fined Boehringer Ingelheim almost $1 million at the end of last year for failure to preserve documents regarding the blood thinner Pradaxa, the decision served as a precursor to a similar position taken by the Court in regards to the Actos portfolio. The Actos manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, was cited for failure to preserve documents deemed important to legal proceedings. It seems this was the case for Pradaxa lawsuits as well.

    Pradaxa is a new-age blood thinner approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA); it was hailed as a safe and effective alternative to a product that had been on the market for nearly 60 years, a blood thinner that required rigorous and regular monitoring.

    Pradaxa was seen to effectively prevent blood clotting – an important attribute for patients at risk for stroke. However, a problem with Pradaxa bleeding, characterized by uncontrollable bleed-outs that could not be stopped, quickly put Pradaxa under a cloud.

    Unlike the older drug Coumadin, where the side effects of bleeding could be reversed with the intervention of Vitamin K and plasma, there is no known or effective reversal protocol for Pradaxa. When Pradaxa bleeding occurs, from a simple cut or bruise, there is no antidote. More than 500 Pradaxa deaths were attributed to the new-age blood thinner over a two-year period, according to various reports. Plaintiffs in Pradaxa lawsuits, which numbered about 1,700 according to a report in Bloomberg News (12/10/13), but is now thought to be closer to 2,000 – allege that dabigatran Pradaxa manufacturer Boehringer knew about the potential bleeding profile of Pradaxa, but withheld their concern from doctors and patients.

    Pradaxa (generic dabigatran) is a relatively new blood thinner that was introduced as a replacement for warfarin in the prevention of strokes among individuals suffering from atrial fibrillation. However, the potential risk of Pradaxa bleeding side effects has caused serious concern surrounding the drug.

    Symptoms of Pradaxa internal bleeding may include:

    • Unusual Bruising or Bleeding
    • Pink or Brown Urine (which may be a sign of blood in the urine)
    • Red or Black Tarry Stool (which may be a sign of blood in the stool)
    • Coughing up Blood (which may include vomit resembling coffee grounds)
    • Headaches, Dizziness or Lethargy
    • Bleeding from the Gums or Frequent Nose Bleeds
    • Weakness and Swelling of the Arms, Hands, Feet, Ankles or Lower Legs

    Side Effects of Pradaxa

    Pradaxa is part of a class of drugs known as “direct thrombin inhibitors”, which inhibit the enzyme in the blood that causes blood to clot. While the medication is promoted for stroke prevention caused by blood clots for individuals with atrial fibrillation, Pradaxa’s side effects may make it nearly impossible for blood to clot when necessary.

    Research of Pradaxa suggests that there are serious concerns about gastrointestinal bleeding especially among elderly patients and those with kidney problems; they may face a greater risk of Pradaxa bleeding problems as the drug is excreted through the kidneys. When the kidneys are unable to process the drug out of the body, the result may be abnormally high levels in circulation, causing an even greater risk. The risk of GI bleeds with Pradaxa may also be higher for users taking other medications linked to an internal bleeding risk, such as aspirin, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or other blood thinners.

    The FDA approved Pradaxa a few years ago; adverse event reports immediately surfaced that suggest the Pradaxa bleeding side effects may be more significant than first believed. While there has been no indication that a Pradaxa recall will be issued, regulators in the United States and other countries are closely monitoring this new prescription medication.

    According to the Institute for Safe Medication Practices report, more than 307 adverse events involving Pradaxa were filed with the FDA during the first three months the drug was on the market. This exceeds 98.7% of the other drugs monitored by the organization and is 50% more than those associated with warfarin, an older and cheaper blood thinner that Pradaxa was designed to replace.

    While the clinical trials, known as RE-LY, used a double blind method of comparing two doses of Pradaxa, a non-blinded comparison was used between Pradaxa and warfarin, allowing bias and errors to potentially impact the results.

    A few years ago, the FDA issued a drug safety communication to inform the public and medical community that the potential Pradaxa internal bleeding risk was under review as a result of post-marketing reports of problems. While the agency indicated that bleeding is a known risk with all blood thinners, the agency is examining whether there is anything abnormal about the side effects of Pradaxa that could be considered an unreasonable risk to consumers.

    If you suspect that yourself or a family member has experienced a serious injury from Pradaxa bleeding side effects, request free consultation and claim evaluation to determine whether compensation may be available through a Pradaxa lawsuit.

     

     

     

img

  • Subscribe to this blog’s feed

  •   

    RECENT POSTS

    • Gun Store Law in Chicago
      Despite being forced to allow gun sales by a federal judge, the Chicago City Council approved a legi...
    • “Arising Out Of” Employment
      The purpose of the Workers' Compensation Act (Act) is to protect employees against risks and hazards...
    • E – cigarettes
      The State of Illinois continues in its efforts to protect nonsmokers, children and students from the...

    img4

    ankin law office llc

    162 West Grand Avenue
    Chicago, Illinois 60654
    Toll Free: 800-442-6546
    Local: 312-346-8780

    icon icon icon

    Our firm handles workers' compensation and personal injury claims in Chicago, Berwyn, Joliet, Cicero, Waukegan, Chicago Heights, Elgin, Aurora, Oak Park, Oak Lawn, Schaumburg, Bolingbrook, Glendale Heights, Aurora, Niles, Schaumburg, Arlington Heights, Naperville, Plainfield and all of Cook, DuPage, Lake, Will, McHenry, LaSalle, Kankakee, McLean and Peoria Counties.