Attorney Mark Raul Villalobos's Legal Cases

Criminal defense

People v. N.H.

Mar 04, 2016

OUTCOME: Not guilty

Our client was charged with first degree murder and was facing life in prison. During a week long jury trial, we showed that the supposed eyewitnesses had drastically conflicting accounts of the incid ... ent. We also presented surveillance videos that showed a vehicle that matched a description of the shooter's vehicle passed by the scene several times around the time of the shooting. We presented expert testimony that explained several key pieces of evidence that the State could not explain. During our closing argument, we showed a powerpoint presentation that tied together all the questionable details into our theory of what really happened. The jury returned a verdict in just 3 hours.

Real estate

R.V. v. H.L

Nov 30, 2015

OUTCOME: Case dismissed.

Our client was an elderly man who had been tricked into signing a contract to sell his longtime home in a now fashionable part of Chicago to a real estate developer. The developer falsely told him tha ... t an attorney was his lawyer and could cancel the contract. The attorney actually turned out to be the developer's partner and had been disbarred for participating in fraudulent real estate transactions. When our client called the disbarred attorney, he told our client that he couldn't cancel the contract and that the developer would sue if he did not sell his home to the developer. The developer then refused our request to cancel the contract. When the developer sued to force our client to sell his home (suit for specific performance of real estate contract), we filed affirmative defenses and counter claims for fraud in the execution based on the false statements that the developer and disbarred attorney told to our client to trick him into signing the contract. After we filed our affirmative defenses and counter claims, the judge dismissed the developer's lawsuit.

Criminal defense

People v. H.S.

Nov 20, 2015

OUTCOME: Not guilty

Our client was charged with possessing over 200 pounds of marijuana. At trial, several police officers testified that they watched our client park his car in a parking lot and meet with another indivi ... dual. One officer testified that he was parked across the street and had an unobstructed view of our client meeting the other individual, who then took our client's car to a stash house, where he loaded it with marijuana. For our defense, we rented the same model car that our client was driving that day, parked it in the lot where our client was parked, and took pictures from across the street where one officer said he was parked. Our evidence showed that bushes in front of the parking lot would have almost completely obstructed the view of the car. The State countered by presenting inaccurate Google map images that did not show any bushes surrounding the parking lot. However, in rebuttal, we retrieved Google street view images from the same month and year as the incident, which showed the tall bushes that would have blocked the officer's view. The judge found that one officer had a credibility problem when he said that his view was unobstructed. Without his testimony, the State was unable to show that our client had any knowledge of the drugs in the car- that he had been used as a mule by others.

Criminal defense

City of Chicago V. Z.M.

Nov 17, 2015

OUTCOME: Not liable for possession of cannabis

My client was charged with possession of cannabis when police officers found a blunt in the alley behind his house. My client was outside smoking a cigarette when the police pulled up and other people ... in the alley scattered. The police threw him against the police car, searched him, and found his cigarettes and a lighter, confirming that he was indeed smoking va cigarette. Despite this, they charged him because everyone else in the alley fled. At the hearing, my client testified to the facts and I argued that simply being in the vicinity of narcotics does not establish that he had "dominion and control" of the drugs. The judge agreed and found him not liable.

Landlord or tenant

R.B. and R.M. v. E.S.P., LLC

Sep 15, 2015

OUTCOME: Security deposit and attorney's fees paid

Our clients moved out of their apartment and their landlord kept almost all of their security deposit even though there had been no damage to the property. The landlord also mailed them a partial chec ... k and told them that if they deposited the check, they waived any right to dispute the deductions from the deposit. I quickly sent the landlord a demand for the rest of the security deposit plus damages for his failure to comply with various provisions of the Chicago Residential Landlord Tenant Ordinance (RLTO). He responded that the RLTO did not apply to him because he lived in a small apartment in the basement of the property. I then visited the property, took pictures of the building, the mailboxes, and the basement, which showed that the basement was not big enough for a legal apartment. I also obtained City of Chicago water records that showed that the building was recently inspected and did not include a basement apartment. I then drafted a complaint for violations of the RLTO and confronted the landlord with the new evidence that he did not live at the property. After hearing the evidence, the landlord relented and returned all of the security deposit plus attorney's fees.

Copyright infringement

C.S. DMCA Notice

May 15, 2015

OUTCOME: Infringing website was shut down and all infringing content removed.

Our client recently started an online business on Shopify. He and his crew spent weeks developing their product, website, and all of the website content. Shortly after posting all of his store conten ... t, including pictures of his products, customers, employees, and family, someone stole all of his ideas and content and created his own site, purportedly selling the same products. Our client initially tried to fix the problem by contacting the other person directly, but he smugly refused to take down the stolen content. After contacting our firm, I quickly filed a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) take down notice and served it on Shopify. Shopify then shut down the site and forced the owner to remove all of the stolen content.

Mark Raul Villalobos's Legal Cases (6)

People v. N.H.

R.V. v. H.L

People v. H.S.

City of Chicago V. Z.M.

R.B. and R.M. v. E.S.P., LLC

C.S. DMCA Notice