Geico v. Rowland II
Nov 16, 2005OUTCOME: Case dismissed and costs awarded to the defendant.
The case was dismissed because the plaintiff already lost the case once and improperly filed it again in front of another judge.
Wheaton, IL
Litigation Lawyer at Wheaton, IL
Practice Areas: Litigation, Appeals, Business
OUTCOME: Case dismissed and costs awarded to the defendant.
The case was dismissed because the plaintiff already lost the case once and improperly filed it again in front of another judge.
OUTCOME: Directed finding for Hinsbrook Bank & Trust
The plainitff, the buyer of a costom home pursuant to a written contract, got into a dispute with the seller, who owned title to the house pending the completion of the contract. The seller had mortga ... ged the property for about $2,000,000 to Hinsbrook Bank & Trust. The buyer claimed that their rights under the contract took precedence over the prior mortgage and sued for to put their claim ahead of the morgage. I was brought into the case in April 2005. Hinsbrook won the case after the buyer rested at the trial in August 2005 before Hinsbrook even had to call any witnesses.
OUTCOME: Judgment affirmed
The plainitff appelled from the dismissal of its complaint. The appellate court affirmed.
OUTCOME: Judgment for only $500
The plaintiff sued the defendant for an automobile collision, alleging damages amounting to about $15,000. After a bench trial, the court awarded the plaintiff only $500, the plaintiff's deductible. h ... olding that the remaining damages were not proven.
OUTCOME: Dismissal of the complaint
The trial court dismissed the complaint. The appellate court affirmed. The supreme court denied leave to appeal.
OUTCOME: Jury verdict of acquittal
The defendant was charged with battery.
OUTCOME: Injunction entered
The high school disctrict tried to recover hundreds of thousands of dollars mistakenly remitted to the defendant. He refused, so we sought an injunction freezing the defendant's assets. We received t ... he injunction from the court and then the defendant settled.
OUTCOME: Judgment for the defendant after trial.
The plaintiff, a collection agency, sued to collect commissions it allegedly earned, claiming that the defendant hired it to collect certain overdue accounts. The defendant had no written proof of bei ... ng hired by the defendant, and the defendant denied hiring the plaintiff to collect those accounts. The defendant prevailed at trial.
OUTCOME: Case dismissed.
After getting this case transferred to Wisconsin, the judge dismissed it.
OUTCOME: My motion to transfer venue was granted
Comdisco sued my client, Marc/5R, in federal court in Chicago. I moved to transfer the case to Wisconsin where my client was located. My motion was granted and the case was transferred to Wisconsin, ... where it was later dismissed.