Plaintiff was volunteering to help a workout facility relocate their business when he fell off a 20+ foot ladder, injuring himself. He sued the workout facility, alleging negligence and claimed an owed duty under various legal principles. Among other claims, plaintiff claimed that the workout facility was negligent in failing to coordinate the relocation work in an appropriate manner and provided him with a defective ladder.
Plaintiff was walking to her place of employment at a strip mall in Indiana, where she alleged that she tripped and fell on rocks that were displaced from a large decorative rock bed. Plaintiff sued the business and property owner alleging negligence and premises liability counts. Brian Brenn took up defense of the property owner, and was skeptical of the circumstances of the fall. He aimed to set the case up for a motion for summary judgment and took multiple depositions with this in mind.
2017-L-423 (Illinois, Will County)
Plaintiff, an elderly man tripped on a small staircase at a daycare when coming to pick up his granddaughter. He sued the daycare, bringing negligence and premises liability counts against the daycare. Plaintiff also claimed that the stairs were not up to code and hired an expert to support the claim.
Shipra Mehta defended the child care facility, and after multiple depositions, filed a motion showing that there was no defect the plaintiff or their expert could point to in the staircase, and that the stairs were an open and obvious hazard. As such no reasonable jury could find for the plaintiff. The judge granted Shipra’s motion, but the plaintiff appealed the decision to the 3rd District of Illinois Appellate Court. Shipra continued to defend her client at the appellate level, drafting a brief and defending her motion in oral argument. The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s granding of the motion for summary judgment, resulting in a full defense verdict.
2017-L-010958 (Illinois, Cook County)
Plaintiff slipped and fell on what he alleged was an “oily substance” at a gas station, fracturing his ankle and requiring surgery with an estimated total value over $200,000. However, Erin Cannon, representing the gas station, pushed plaintiff to multiple admissions at his deposition including that it was raining during the incident and plaintiff stepped through puddles on his way into the gas station. After depositions and extensive discovery Erin used these admissions to show in a motion for summary judgment that plaintiff could not make a prima facie case for negligence. The court agreed and granted the motion, ending the matter before a lengthy trial.
2017-L-002318 (Illinois, Cook County)
An employee of a national grocery chain store location in Chicago was putting carts away when he fell in the parking lot, claiming to have fallen on an unnatural accumulation of ice and snow. The grocery chain, after settling the matter with the employee, filed a subrogation case on the employee’s behalf against the property owner and the snow removal contractor, alleging that they allowed a negligent accumulation of ice and snow that caused the employee’s injury.
Attorney Erin Cannon of Costello Legal took up defense of the property owner, and ultimately filed a motion for summary judgment claiming the landowner was not negligent in any way, as there was no evidence of an unnatural accumulation of ice and snow, that the landowner had no notice of any defect on the premises, and to the extent there was any defect it would have been open and obvious. Erin focused on inconsistencies in the plaintiff’ deposition testimony that made it clear the plaintiff could not meet their burden to show that an unnatural accumulation of ice and snow existed and the judge agreed, granting the motion and dismissing the property owner.
2014-L-12244 (Illinois, Cook County)
When a family went to visit our client’s cemetery to visit family graves, one of the children in the family grabbed a gravestone for support, whereupon the gravestone fell on the child, injuring his leg. The parents brought suit against the cemetery on behalf of their son. As trial approached, plaintiffs made a demand of $95,000. However, Costello Legal drafted a motion for summary judgment on the issue that the duty to maintain gravestones belongs to the individual plot owners, not the cemetery, and the court agreed, granting the motion and dismissing the case.
Daniel P. Costello & Associates is continuing a very successful 2016 with two more complete defense verdicts at trial. Combined, these plaintiffs asked for nearly $1.5 million at trial.
Jones v. West Cook YMCA
The 68 year-old Plaintiff broke her wrist when she slipped and fell on a pool deck. Plaintiff retained a parks and recreation expert with over 40 years of experience to contend that the West Cook YMCA was negligent in eight different ways. Among other allegations, Plaintiff argued that the defendant should have installed rubber mats, abrasive stripping, or handrails on the pool deck. After six witnesses testified over four days, Plaintiff requested nearly $400,000.00 in damages. For the defense, Jessica Biagi from Daniel P. Costello & Associates, LLC, fought zealously to deny fault and prove the Defendant's affirmative defense of contributory negligence. Both YMCA employees and a professional engineer testified that the floor was sufficiently slip-resistant and reasonably safe. Within fifteen minutes of deliberation, the jury returned a complete defense verdict.
Sustek v. First Choice Landscaping
After the Plaintiff, a 53 year semi truck driver injured his knee after falling into a 10" x 10" hole in the parkway while removing fallen leaves, he filed suit against Peoples Gas, Northern Pipeline, Jacobs Engineering, and First Choice Landscaping. Prior to trial, Plaintiff settled with all the other entities, leaving only the premises liability claim against First Choice Landscaping. Plaintiff requested $1,081,110.05 million at the end of a jury trial, including $83,527 in past medical bills, $9,436 in lost wages and future medical for a possible knee replacement. The trial lasted 8 days and included fifteen witnesses, including three experts, one of which was an expert in soils. For the defense, Susan Bledsoe of Daniel P. Costello & Associates fought zealously to deny fault and prove that First Choice landscaping had no knowledge that a void created by another defendant was festering under the surface of the new sod, only coming to light after 2 weeks of excessive watering by the plaintiff. The jury properly returned a verdict of not guilty in favor of Defendant First Choice Landscaping.
Illinois has just passed the Snow Removal Service Liability Limitation Act (Public Act 099-0889), which applies immediately to any contracts entered into on or after August 25, 2016. This bill affects certain clauses in contracts between snow and ice removal providers and any party they contract with (usually property owners/managers) for snow and ice removal. Any clauses that contain indemnification, duty to defend and hold harmless language are now void, unenforceable and against public policy. This is similar to legislation in the construction industry where there is an anti-indemnification statute based on public policy. The idea being that those in power, property managers/owners should not be able to shift their risk to snow removal contractors. The snow and ice removal company cannot be required to indemnify, hold harmless or defend the property manager/owner and vice versa. Instead, liability is to be apportioned based on each party's proportionate negligence.
This means that the parties can no longer go after each other for indemnification and defense costs when the party initiating the action for indemnification or defense costs was negligent themselves, and that negligence led to some type of injury. Some likely effects of this act will be:
1) Impacting insurance rates for snow removal companies and property owners (overall, good for snow removal companies, bad for the property owners/managers who used to include these kinds of provisions)
2) Alleviating insurance carriers' concerns about contract language
3) Increasing the value of professional snow and ice management services as property owners will want a good service since they cannot pass on their liability onto the removal service anymore.
The importance of the act should be significant to snow removal contractors. With this change, contractors will be on the hook for only for their negligence, and not that of those who hired them. It will also vastly impact the insurer of these contractors. It will help to take frivolous lawsuits to trial which would otherwise settle due to the costs of litigation both on behalf of its named insured, but also on behalf of additional insureds. For those on the property management or ownership side, the risks associated with slip and fall cases has increased, and a key tool in risk transfer has been eliminated. We expect that the early cases will test the validity of the statute, and breach of contract claims.
Link to the Snow Removal Service Liability Limitation Act: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/fulltext.asp?Name=099-0889
In March, Daniel P. Costello & Associates won two large cases with a combined value of over $5.6 million on motions for summary judgment.
Personal Injury Case- Janitorial Company
Plaintiff, a 32 year old resident of a condominium complex, was attempting to dispose of glass shelves into a dumpster when a mirror fell onto plaintiff’s foot causing severe injuries which necessitated an amputation of his left leg just below the knee. The plaintiff was seeking a settlement in excess of $4 million for his injuries. Plaintiff sued a number of defendants in Illinois federal court including our client who was the janitorial company allegedly responsible for garbage pickup, common area cleanup, and maintenance around the dumpster coral. Plaintiff alleged that the Janitors were negligent in placing the mirror on the dumpsters and/or failing to remove it. The defense team at Costello Legal headed by Managing Partner Dan Costello vigorously defended the janitorial company. Mr. Costello argued that not only was our client not responsible for creating the hazard but that they also had no notice of the hazard and therefore owed plaintiff no duty of care. The federal court agreed, and granted the motion on all counts and dismissed the case with prejudice.
Construction Defect Case
Dan Costello and Andrew Smith were able to obtain summary judgment and dismissal of all counts against their clients in a high stakes construction defect case. Mr. Costello defended handling the claim from the inception, including coordinating the investigation, coordinating coverage, bring in the third party defendants, and defending the Developer and General Contractor. The plaintiff’s in this case demanded over $1.6 million for alleged construction defects that went back to the construction of the building in 2002. Cook County Judge Mitchell ruled that the claims were barred under the statute of limitations/statute of repose as the plaintiff’s had direct knowledge of the minor water intrusions issues shortly after construction, and had a duty to investigate this claims. After several years of litigation and numerous depositions the Costello team were able to get all of the counts including breach of warranties, and fraud. The case is now subject to appeal.
Attorney Jessica Biagi helped to start the firm off on a good note for 2016 by winning the firm's first trial of the year.
Thompson v. Ajax Uniform Rental, Inc.
Thompson marks Jessica Biagi's fourth straight jury trial win in a row! The 89 year-old Plaintiff tripped on a floor mat while leaving a bank, sustaining a C2 fracture as well as a 18cm scalp laceration. Within minutes of jury selection, Plaintiff settled with the bank and property manager and went to trial solely against the floor mat rental company. Plaintiff claimed that Ajax Uniform Rental, Inc., placed a curled mat at the entryway and thereby created a dangerous condition. Plaintiff requested $790,000 at the end of the trial, which included claims related to $90,000 in medical expenses, a two week hospital stay, and permanent neck pain. Ten witnesses testified over four days, including two treating physicians and Plaintiff's trip and fall prevention expert. For the defense, Jessica Biagi from Daniel P. Costello & Associates, LLC, fought zealously to deny fault and prove the defendant's affirmative defense of contributory negligence. Within two hours, the jury returned a complete defense verdict.
2014-L-3716 (Illinois, Cook County)
After walking into a major banking chain, plaintiff a 92 year old woman, slipped on a rubber mat in the bank’s entrance. She sued the bank, the property manager, and the maintenance company that provides the mats. She alleged multiple potential theories against defendants alleging that the mats were defective and/or installed improperly and made arguments implicating products liability, premises liability, and general negligence theories. Plaintiff’s final demand was $980,000 and ultimately the case went to trial. Despite plaintiff being very sympathetic, Partner Jessica Biagi made it clear that there was nothing wrong with the mat or the installation, and the jury agreed returning a full defense verdict.
Costello Legal has just won three jury trials this winter, marking 10 wins so far for 2015 and a very successful year. Congratulations to all the attorneys and support staff who worked hard and made this possible!
2013-L-11132 (Illinois, Cook County)
The Plaintiff, a 48 year old special education coach, was involved in a low-speed rear end collision in Evanston, Illinois, and sued the car that struck him. Plaintiff insisted on taking the matter to trial, claiming $80,000 in damages including outstanding medical expenses, the need for future medical care, lost wages from the incident, and permanent injury to his lower back. Partner James Barrow, representing the defendant at trial, showed the jury that this low speed collision could not have possibly caused the damages the plaintiff claimed, which were all the result of a pre-existing medical condition and an intervening work related injury. The trial lasted 3 days and included 5 witnesses, including a treating physician, independent neurosurgeon, and a biomechanical engineer. After deliberating for 90 minutes, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant.
2010-L-6503 (Illinois, Cook County)
After the Plaintiff, 39 year old health instructor, fractured her larynx while working out on a glute-ham machine, she filed suit against the gym, the manufacturer and the retailer. Prior to trial, Plaintiff settled with the manufacturer and retailer, leaving only her premises liability claim against Quad's Gym, Inc. Plaintiff requested $1.16 million at the end of a jury trial, including $130,000 in past medical bills, scarring and permanent changes to her voice. The trial lasted three and a half days and included eleven witnesses, including two laryngologists and one expert biomechanical engineer. For the defense, the team of Daniel Costello and Jessica Biagi fought zealously to deny fault and prove the defendant's affirmative defense of contributory negligence. Within 90 minutes, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty in favor of Defendant Quad's Gym, Inc.
2012-L-11088 (Illinois, Cook County)
The Plaintiff, a 53 year old nurse, fell while roller skating backwards in a roller rink, resulting in a fractured wrist that required surgery. She claims her fall was caused by an object on the ground, and filed a premise liability and negligence claim against the roller rink for failure to maintain and inspect the floor of the roller rink. The trial lasted three days and included seven witnesses. At the end of trial, Plaintiff asked for $125,000. Jessica Velez from Daniel P. Costello & Associates vigorously defended the roller rink and made it clear not only that Tinley Park Roller Rink properly supervised and maintained the roller rink, but also it was not possible the object on the floor could have caused the plaintiff's fall. After only 40 minutes of deliberation, the jury agreed and returned a complete defense verdict.
2014-L-335 (Illinois, DuPage County)
Plaintiff, an 11 year old girl, was playing on gym equipment on top of a set of bleachers in a gym when she fell and injured herself. At the time two local schools in DuPage County organized a tournament shootout with their women’s basketball teams and the gym equipment was moved onto the bleachers to make space but was not intended to be played on. Plaintiff’s parents brought suit on their daughters’ behalf, suing the schools and the company that operated and put on the tournament.
Attorneys Jessica Biagi and Jessica Velez defended the organizing company and eventually filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on the grounds of lack of notice that any hazard existed, lack of control over the bleachers in question, and that any hazard would be open and obvious. Jessica Velez argued the motion in oral argument and the motion was granted on all three grounds and the judge made an extensive record detailing his reasoning, effectively preventing an appeal.
a proud member of:
